Perhaps climate change will go away if we ignore it?

22 comments on “Perhaps climate change will go away if we ignore it? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Robert Guyton 1

   11 April 2017 at 8:35 am

   Ask Bill what the term, “managed retreat” means.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1

     11 April 2017 at 9:05 am

     He struggles with the definition of “Dipton” so that’s obviously a non-starter.

     In practice, managed retreat means that people who can afford to move (like businesses* and those with insurance) will move and everyone else will be made homeless. A competent government would plan so that this doesn’t happen. Bill English will pretend the market will do it, then blame Labour and the RMA.

     *an expensive hassle, yes, but do-able if you’re leasing premises.
2. michelle 2

   11 April 2017 at 9:00 am

   That seems to be Bills position on most issues ‘shall be right’ we just carry on and do the same old same old the economy is doing well who cares about the people in it the market will provide.
3. marty mars 3

   11 April 2017 at 9:28 am

   Bill is the worst seat warmer PM we’ve ever had. He is slow, dim and inadequate and they are his good points.
4. Jenny Kirk 4

   11 April 2017 at 9:33 am

   But look here, Bill does have the answer. Let local government sort it out – the govt has now given local authorities the ability to do so – via the “reformed” resource management act. Without any extra funding too. Local govt can do it. Its not a problem for central govt – they’re not affected by it at all.
5. saveNZ 5

   11 April 2017 at 9:55 am

   “Asked if some areas of New Zealand would eventually need to be abandoned because of climate change, English said changes in the Resource Management Act meant councils would be much more careful about locating new developments in areas prone to natural hazards.”

   Like hell it will!

   The changes to the RMZ will be the opposite, people will be building on land that is completely unsuitable and those buying will be unaware and carry the can long after the developer has taken off. Then he council will be the last one standing for litigation which is of course is the rate payers.

   Already happened with the earthquakes in Christchurch. Pre earthquake, Developers wanted to build on unstable land, council said no, developers took it to environment court and won and the houses were built. Then surprise surprise, after the earthquake it was full of liquefaction and was unable to be built on again and the government paid out to the residents.

   But it was never suitable to build on, in the first place.
   • dukeofurl 5.1

     11 April 2017 at 11:21 am

     I dont think the Councils were all that reluctant over the land in Christchurch
     http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/8072545/Report-scolds-councils-over-subdivisions

     “Christchurch mayor Bob Parker had to apologise last week after he wrongly said the council opposed such subdivisions because of concerns over land quality, taking cases to the Environment Court.

     There was no court case, and it was Bexley residents who opposed plans by the council, which had proposed more of the wetland for housing.”
     http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4168338/Quake-hit-residents-may-sue-council

     But very high flood risk from the location of those suburbs as well. It never was going to end well, except good profits for some and ruination for most living there.
6. dukeofurl 6

   11 April 2017 at 11:15 am

   Edgecumbe had a managed solution, a floodway that by passed the town.
   Obviously that didnt work.

   Technical solutions can only do so much. Im pretty sure they will have another major flood in the next 5 years or so.
   • tc 6.1

     11 April 2017 at 11:57 am

     Next tropical cyclone mate….get used to them smashing the east coast and generally dumping massive rain all over in short time frames.

     Bullets we used to dodge will hit us more frequently herein.
   • ropata 6.2

     11 April 2017 at 12:41 pm

     “Technical” solutions cough cough

     Monbiot pins environmental destruction on the usual suspects. “This flood was not only foretold – it was publicly subsidised”

     http://www.monbiot.com/2015/12/08/a-storm-of-ignorance/
     https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/29/deluge-farmers-flood-grouse-moor-drain-land

     Hat tip
     https://twitter.com/shaxhuxmo/status/851576304293916672
7. Cinny 7

   11 April 2017 at 12:12 pm

   A wise leader would look at relocating any vulnerable towns due to the reality of climate change. After all such moves would take quite some time until completion and involve much planning. Look to the future, tech towns safe from flooding and erosion.

   It must be horrendous for those in Edgecumbe, but with advances in science and technology, better understanding of geology and climate we now know such a location would be undesirable for any town. And there will be other towns in NZ that could be just as vulnerable, am sure the residents of Edgecumbe wouldn’t want anyone else to experience what they are going through.
   • dukeofurl 7.1

     11 April 2017 at 1:17 pm

     Previous earthquake dropped levels in Edgecumbe by 2.5 m, and thats for a place that mostly is below the river level anyway. The only high ground is along the river bank and thats only relative to the farmland which is lower.
   • Sabine 7.2

     11 April 2017 at 1:28 pm

     and where would you relocated these people too? to our Cities already run over with homeless people?

     Seriously, where would you relocate the people too?

     why not rather invest in deichs and infrastructure that will manage? The dutch can do it, and they have a complete country below sea level.

     Oh you mean that would be hard work, and one thing we don’t do is hard work? Nah, we want easy resource extracting kind of work, boom and bust kind of work, build shitty roads and repair them every six month kind of work, build houses with no insulation, no double glazing, no central heating kind of work?

     yeah, i can see why we get nothing much done of substance.

     https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deich
     • Cinny 7.2.1

       12 April 2017 at 7:37 am

       Never thought of a deich.

       Seems to be a common solution to relocate towns due to the effects of climate change. Not sure how it would be executed successfully considering our housing crisis, but it is an idea.

       “It was decided they would take disaster prevention measures in the short term but also build a new town on an adjacent mainland where the population will be moved in stages”

       Another example…
       Throughout 2012, these Fijian villagers have been in the process of moving from their current home village – a tract of land overlooking Natawa Bay, the largest bay in the South Pacific, to their new home which they named Kenani, Fijian for Canaan, the biblical “promised land.” Last month, I visited both sites – the seaside village that is now uninhabitable and the mountaintop site of their intended new home. I talked with the villagers about their feelings, hopes, and fears, as they become one of the very first villages in the world to be wholly relocated as a result of the effects of climate change.
       • Sabine 7.2.1.1

         12 April 2017 at 8:41 am

         the question again needs to be asked, can you repeatedly relocate towns and when will you run out of ground high enough, considering that businesses and the likes will also relocate.

         or can you build deichs and look for solutions that will allow you long term to ‘flood’ proof our areas prone to flooding.

         what is cheaper. I guess uprooting people and then not doing anything – which is what would happen here if our current homeless situation is anything to go by.

         but yeah, how many times can you relocate people and how many at ones can you relocate, and where would you relocate them too?
8. Sabine 8

   11 April 2017 at 1:24 pm

   My Mother in laws house had two meters of rain water. Two meters.

   luckily she has 2 tiny mezzanine room where they, their grand child (homeless ex aucklander who lost his caravan in the flood) who lives with them and the three dogs huddled until Son2 came with the canoe. Btw, that is where they still huddle.

   We came next day, everything was to be thrown out, three cars, dead. carpet? dead. 32 chickens, dead. Kitchen, living room, office, all fucked.

   their neighbors? Same boat – houses fucked, cars fucked, agricultural equiment fucked, lifestock fucked.
   No this is not Edgecumbe, this is Tane Atua. But does anyone really give a shit?

   I doubt.
   As for Bill English, he should just go away. Maybe go to a seminar and learn again what that faith that he professes to adhere to is actually about. Cause i don’t think he remembers much. But, that i guess is a National Party disease.
   • tc 8.1

     11 April 2017 at 1:35 pm

     Bills one of those catholics that goes to confession to be purged of his sins so he can go out and do it all again.
   • dukeofurl 8.2

     11 April 2017 at 3:30 pm

     It would ideal if they could stay near their existing communities. Queensland has a lot of houses that are 2m + off the ground, thats for various reasons but it makes a difference in floods.
     It could be the sort of thing locals could be involved in with a few experts, raising the houses of those that want to stay.
9. johnm 9

   11 April 2017 at 1:34 pm

   If people simply ignore and not comment on the Climate Change nuisance, well of course it’ll go away. Out of sight and out of mind doesn’t exist! Solved! Stands to reason doesn’t it!? Same policy on housing and the homeless! Yes, I am a genius, off to church now to worship the real reality! 🙂
   • johnm 9.1

     11 April 2017 at 5:11 pm

     Noah had to cope with excessive rainfall! ? I suppose we can have an Ark building program instead. It’s not as if humans haven’t coped with this stuff before!? 🙂

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOjfxEejS2Y
10. Sabine 10

    12 April 2017 at 8:38 am

    And we are evacuating the family, the dogs, and what is left of the chickens.

    well for what its worth, the next flood can’t do much damage anymore considering that only the bare house is standing, everything else went to the tip already.

    Hoping that all goes well for those in the way of the rains.
11. Philj 11

    12 April 2017 at 11:07 am

    Which towns/cities in NZ are at risk from rising water levels over the next say 50 – 100 years? Arks or mobile homes are looking increasingly attractive. Do we have any capacity currently for futures research in NZ? I remember now, we did once, and the government stopped its support. I wonder why they did that?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS