| | Advanced Search

 

Friday Financial Five - August 29, 2014—The Tax Foundation has put together a helpful…

5 Live Music Musts - August 29, 2014—We’ve got Rhythm and Roots and a whole…

The Cellar: Late Summer Values—While this week saw some fantastic weather there…

URI Ranked in Top 50 of LGBTQ-Friendly Universities in the Country—The University of Rhode Island has been ranked…

RI Politicians Who Sought Redemption from Misdeeds—See the Rhode Island politicians who have bounced…

Fall’s Best Foodie Events—Something that's different now -- much different than…

Brian Counihan Joins Iron Works Tavern as Executive Chef—Chef Brian Counihan has joined the team at…

Narragansett Bay Ranked #5 as Best for Boaters in US—Providence has ranked as the #5 best region…

newportFILM To Present Last Two Outdoor Screenings of the Summer—newportFILM will host their last two outdoor screenings…

Trinity Rep to Debut Great Writers Series for 2014-2015 Season—Trinity Rep will present the Great Writers Series…

 
 

John Perilli: I Wish Climate Change Were a Hoax, But It’s Not

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

 

We need to accept that climate change is real so we can start to debate how to respond to it, believes John Perilli.

Even in the midst of an unseasonably cold March, it’s important to remember that climate change is still real.

I say this only because it has become fashionable to use this year’s wintry weather as an excuse to poke fun at one of the world’s most terrible scientific truths. The ever-wise Donald Trump took to Twitter earlier this year to mock the idea of climate change, and Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, his fiery breath chilled by the frost, quipped: "It’s cold. Al Gore told me this wouldn’t happen.

Laugh all you want, but the people saying these things are not without influence. They run some of the world’s largest businesses, control billions of dollars worth of natural resources, and hold the power to vote for or against a possible climate change solution. And worse, their dismissals of climate change as a “hoax” and a “conspiracy” have the chance to gain a deadly bit of traction.

Look. No one would be happier than me if climate change were a hoax, or if a group of scientists emerged from behind the green screen, Wizard-of-Oz style, and said, “Gotcha! It’s all been a deception.” The world would be rid of one of its greatest problems, saving time, money and millions of lives.

But as Founding Father and President John Adams once said, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The fact of climate change is beyond the longest shadow of a doubt. The challenge, then, is not to prove climate change exists, but to change hearts and minds into accepting it, and to dismiss those last lingering counter-arguments so we can move onto the more important debate about what should be done.

Defining a Disaster

To start, I’ll define “climate change” the same way the United Nations does: as a measurable and significant change of climate that is attributable to human behavior. In other words: The world is rapidly warming, and it's most likely because of us. Global warming could pose all sorts of problems, from rising sea levels, to food shortages, to widespread population displacement. The scientific academies in every industrialized country of the world believe this is true. And there my case rests.

However, facts without action are dead on the page. The United States has taken many measures to combat climate change, but a lack of support has kept some truly effective solutions, like a carbon tax, off the table. Our House of Representatives is controlled by a Republican party whose official platform barely mentions climate change at all.

So how can this be bettered? How can one of America’s two major political parties be brought to the table to discuss difficult yet meaningful policy proposals?

Some are doing this just by talking. Rhode Island’s own Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse gives a speech on climate change before the Senate every week, and yesterday he participated in a massive all-night climate change “talkathon” to encourage Congress to act.

Others are taking direct legislative action. One group, the Rhode Island Student Climate Coalition, has been fighting to get the climate change issue on the General Assembly’s radar. Could a comprehensive environmental bill be Rhode Island’s ticket to national renown?

Whatever the method, it seems the effort to change Republicans’ minds might be working. GOP doubtfulness about the immediacy of climate change is cautiously receding. As the effects of climate change become more apparent, as massive out-of-season hurricanes and climbing average temperatures become harder to ignore, skepticism will hopefully decline even further.

Dismissing the Last Defense

Still, the “hoax” reaction remains an easy and tempting way out of a tough discussion. In the face of some of the frightening evidence for climate change, such as the infamous “hockey stick graph,” many doubtless find it less troubling to consider climate change a scam than to think about what the evidence implies. In fact, it’s a sign of just how alarming the evidence is that this reaction is so common.

I would like to respond to the hoax defense.

Some minds cannot be changed. I accept that. But to anyone who might doubt where they stand, consider this: Why would scientists want to perpetuate such an elaborate ruse? Why would all the world’s leading academics support using so much money and effort to combat climate change if it were not real? If climate change were a hoax, the billions of dollars spent fighting it could go toward research, or economic development, or ending poverty. For example, it would only take $17.5 billion, mere nickels compared to the cost of a global climate change initiative, to double the budget of NASA and send us off exploring the universe. Why wouldn’t scientists rather do that?

Again, I would love if climate change were a hoax. I would love if I could just wake up one day and not have to worry about a pressing global crisis that will happen within my lifetime. But I can’t. My generation and I have to own up to our peculiar burden, and answer one of the most important questions of our time: What should we do about it?

Creating Action from Inaction

Even if everyone accepted climate change as fact, the problem would not be over. There would still be an equally intense debate over how to counter it.

Some would support a more gradual response, such as infrastructure projects that could lessen the impact of rising seas and farming initiatives that could ease a catastrophic strike to our food supply. Others would insist upon all-or-nothing action. This debate would be angry, and it would be lengthy, and if no consensus emerged, we’d be just as doomed as we ever were.

However there is still some hope. The world has come together once before to deal successfully with a global environmental crisis. Back in the mid-twentieth century, pollutants called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) from aerosol cans and refrigerators were tearing a hole in our ozone layer. In response, the United Nations came together in 1987 and passed the Montreal Protocol, which phased out the legal use of these chemicals. In the years since, our ozone layer has made a remarkable recovery.

Climate change will be a much harder struggle. The costs will be higher, and the timeline for action longer. Can the whole world sit down at the bargaining table, dismiss the last “hoax” arguments, and get something done? Our limited time will tell.

 

John Perilli is a native of Cumberland, RI and a junior at Brown University. He is the Communications Director for the Brown University Democrats and works for Magaziner for Treasurer. The opinions presented in this article do not represent those of the organizations of which John Perilli is a member. You can follow John on Twitter @JohnPerilli.

 

Related Slideshow: Natural Disasters: RI’s Most At Risk and Vulnerable Communities

The below slides show what communities are at greatest risk and most vulnerable to a particular natural disaster, such as another hurricane, or a less-common disaster, such as an earthquake or a tornado. Higher scores correspond to a higher risk and vulnerability for that community. Cities and towns are listed starting with those that have the least risk and vulnerability, ending with the most at-risk and most vulnerable. Because flooding is a particular concern to Rhode Islanders, additional information on the threat of flooding from a major 100-year storm is shown.

Scoring method

The score for each type of hazard was determined by multiplying two separate scores together: the hazard risk score and the vulnerability score. The hazard risk score was calculated by multiplying three scores together: the score for frequency (how often something happens), the score for area impact (area that would be affected), and the score for intensity (such as the depth of a flood or the wind speed of a three-second gust in a hurricane). Higher scores mean a higher risk. The vulnerability score was derived using a similar multi-layered calculation that takes into account the population size and characteristics (for example, elderly and low-income populations are more vulnerable), the economy, the environment, and the number and importance of critical facilities like hospitals or power stations. Higher scores mean a greater vulnerability.

The scores are not against any scale. Instead they are relative in nature, showing how risk and vulnerability for a natural disaster is distributed throughout the state. A community with a higher score has a greater share of risk and vulnerability than one with a lower score. Scores and method information are from 2011 State Hazard Mitigation Plan. (A 2014 updated plan has been recently released, but numerical scores are not provided for each community.) For a detailed description of the entire scoring method, see PDF pages 123 to 145 on the 2011 plan.

Prev Next

#39 Little Compton

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 160

Flood Score: 18

Earthquake Score: 60

Tornado Score: 16

Snow Score: 50

Total Score: 424

Flood Damage

Rank: 14

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,516

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 16.78%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 1,160

Number of Buildings at Risk: 187

Photo: Flickr/Al Carmadella Jr.

Prev Next

#38 Richmond

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 200

Flood Score: 18

Earthquake Score: 90

Tornado Score: 24

Snow Score: 75

Total Score: 587

Flood Damage

Rank: 24

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,945

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 11.35%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#37 Exeter

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 240

Flood Score: 0

Earthquake Score: 90

Tornado Score: 24

Snow Score: 75

Total Score: 609

Flood Damage

Rank: 36

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,190

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 5.78%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/UCL Mathematical

Prev Next

#36 West Greenwich

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 240

Flood Score: 0

Earthquake Score: 90

Tornado Score: 24

Snow Score: 75

Total Score: 609

Flood Damage

Rank: 39

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,197

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 3.62%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/born1945

Prev Next

#35 New Shoreham

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 300

Flood Score: 27

Earthquake Score: 90

Tornado Score: 24

Snow Score: 75

Total Score: 696

Flood Damage

Rank: 13

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,220

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 17.3%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 840

Number of Buildings at Risk: 20

Photo: Flickr/Al Camardella Jr.

Prev Next

#34 Foster

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 180

Flood Score: 18

Earthquake Score: 120

Tornado Score: 32

Snow Score: 200

Total Score: 790

Flood Damage

Rank: 28

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,659

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 7.94%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/US Geological Survey

Prev Next

#33 Jamestown

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 480

Flood Score: 54

Earthquake Score: 180

Tornado Score: 48

Snow Score: 150

Total Score: 1,272

Flood Damage

Rank: 20

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 766

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 11.95%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 3,910

Number of Buildings at Risk: 108

Photo: Flickr/NASA Goddard

Prev Next

#32 Hopkinton

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 600

Flood Score: 54

Earthquake Score: 210

Tornado Score: 56

Snow Score: 175

Total Score: 1,515

Flood Damage

Rank: 21

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 3,412

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 11.86%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#31 North Smithfield

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 480

Flood Score: 27

Earthquake Score: 210

Tornado Score: 56

Snow Score: 350

Total Score: 1,543

Flood Damage

Rank: 26

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,727

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 10.63%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/ilovemypit

Prev Next

#30 Charlestown

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 680

Flood Score: 144

Earthquake Score: 210

Tornado Score: 56

Snow Score: 175

Total Score: 1,685

Flood Damage

Rank: 4

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 9,276

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 34.08%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 2,510

Number of Buildings at Risk: 838

Prev Next

#29 Glocester

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 500

Flood Score: 27

Earthquake Score: 240

Tornado Score: 64

Snow Score: 400

Total Score: 1,711

Flood Damage

Rank: 34

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,271

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.2%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/Michael Dolan

Prev Next

#28 East Greenwich

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 720

Flood Score: 63

Earthquake Score: 270

Tornado Score: 72

Snow Score: 225

Total Score: 1,890

Flood Damage

Rank: 17

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,500

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 14.03%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 1,240

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/Sean Naber

Prev Next

#27 Scituate

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 500

Flood Score: 99

Earthquake Score: 270

Tornado Score: 72

Snow Score: 450

Total Score: 1,931

Flood Damage

Rank: 11

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 6,368

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 17.98%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/US Geological Survey

Prev Next

#26 Middletown

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 800

Flood Score: 36

Earthquake Score: 300

Tornado Score: 80

Snow Score: 250

Total Score: 2,066

Flood Damage

Rank: 37

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 499

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 5.63%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 2,012

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Photo: Flickr/Ani Carrington

Prev Next

#25 Central Falls

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 740

Flood Score: 36

Earthquake Score: 300

Tornado Score: 80

Snow Score: 500

Total Score: 2,256

Flood Damage

Rank: 16

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 121

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 14.58%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#24 Tiverton

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 880

Flood Score: 54

Earthquake Score: 330

Tornado Score: 88

Snow Score: 275

Total Score: 2,287

Flood Damage

Rank: 22

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,335

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 11.51%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 3,080

Number of Buildings at Risk: 191

Prev Next

#23 Warren

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 800

Flood Score: 198

Earthquake Score: 330

Tornado Score: 88

Snow Score: 275

Total Score: 2,351

Flood Damage

Rank: 5

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,431

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 33.99%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 7,520

Number of Buildings at Risk: 534

Prev Next

#22 Lincoln

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 740

Flood Score: 45

Earthquake Score: 360

Tornado Score: 96

Snow Score: 600

Total Score: 2,561

Flood Damage

Rank: 35

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 752

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.12%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#21 Narragansett

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,180

Flood Score: 198

Earthquake Score: 390

Tornado Score: 104

Snow Score: 325

Total Score: 2,977

Flood Damage

Rank: 2

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 4,224

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 39.2

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 9,030

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#20 Portsmouth

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,120

Flood Score: 216

Earthquake Score: 420

Tornado Score: 112

Snow Score: 350

Total Score: 3,058

Flood Damage

Rank: 7

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 4,238

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 26.64

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 6,530

Number of Buildings at Risk: 1,078

Photo: Flickr/Core Burn

Prev Next

#19 Smithfield

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 920

Flood Score: 72

Earthquake Score: 420

Tornado Score: 112

Snow Score: 700

Total Score: 3,094

Flood Damage

Rank: 30

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,201

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.74%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#18 Barrington

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 860

Flood Score: 243

Earthquake Score: 420

Tornado Score: 112

Snow Score: 600

Total Score: 3,066

Flood Damage

Rank: 1

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,417

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 40.97%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 13,890

Number of Buildings at Risk: 784

Prev Next

#17 Bristol

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,200

Flood Score: 135

Earthquake Score: 480

Tornado Score: 128

Snow Score: 400

Total Score: 3,303

Flood Damage

Rank: 8

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,745

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 26.28

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 5,330

Number of Buildings at Risk: 483

Prev Next

#16 Coventry

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,160

Flood Score: 81

Earthquake Score: 480

Tornado Score: 128

Snow Score: 550

Total Score: 3,359

Flood Damage

Rank: 38

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,147

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 5.26%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#15 Burrillville

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 906

Flood Score: 63

Earthquake Score: 510

Tornado Score: 136

Snow Score: 850

Total Score: 3,539

Flood Damage

Rank: 32

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,394

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.39

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#14 Johnston

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,180

Flood Score: 18

Earthquake Score: 510

Tornado Score: 136

Snow Score: 850

Total Score: 3,714

Flood Damage

Rank: 25

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,677

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 10.7%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#13 South Kingstown

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,580

Flood Score: 171

Earthquake Score: 540

Tornado Score: 144

Snow Score: 450

Total Score: 3,965

Flood Damage

Rank: 6

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 12,168

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 29.51

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 7,310

Number of Buildings at Risk: 1,315

Prev Next

#12 Cumberland

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,180

Flood Score: 117

Earthquake Score: 600

Tornado Score: 160

Snow Score: 1,000

Total Score: 4,257

Flood Damage

Rank: 23

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,098

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 11.46%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#11 Westerly

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,880

Flood Score: 189

Earthquake Score: 570

Tornado Score: 152

Snow Score: 475

Total Score: 4,406

Flood Damage

Rank: 9

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 5,604

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 26.15%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 7,120

Number of Buildings at Risk: 1,342

Prev Next

#10 West Warwick

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,480

Flood Score: 99

Earthquake Score: 660

Tornado Score: 176

Snow Score: 925

Total Score: 4,660

Flood Damage

Rank: 19

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 629

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 12.21%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#9 North Providence

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,400

Flood Score: 81

Earthquake Score: 690

Tornado Score: 184

Snow Score: 1,150

Total Score: 4,885

Flood Damage

Rank: 33

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 238

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.3%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#8 North Kingstown

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,760

Flood Score: 297

Earthquake Score: 690

Tornado Score: 184

Snow Score: 575

Total Score: 4,886

Flood Damage

Rank: 10

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 5,538

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 19.12%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 7,820

Number of Buildings at Risk: 850

Photo: Flickr/Jessica Merz

Prev Next

#7 Newport

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 1,880

Flood Score: 306

Earthquake Score: 720

Tornado Score: 192

Snow Score: 600

Total Score: 5,138

Flood Damage

Rank: 3

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 2,078

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 37.24%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 10,590

Number of Buildings at Risk: 993

Photo: Flickr/ChalkyLives

Prev Next

#6 Woonsocket

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 2,260

Flood Score: 99

Earthquake Score: 1,110

Tornado Score: 296

Snow Score: 1,850

Total Score: 7,835

Flood Damage

Rank: 29

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 356

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.95%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: N/A

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#5 East Providence

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 2,720

Flood Score: 225

Earthquake Score: 1,410

Tornado Score: 376

Snow Score: 2,350

Total Score: 9,901

Flood Damage

Rank: 12

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,610

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 17.37%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 7,430

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#4 Cranston

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 3,820

Flood Score: 360

Earthquake Score: 1,950

Tornado Score: 520

Snow Score: 3,250

Total Score: 13,800

Flood Damage

Rank: 27

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,541

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 8.25%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 2,330

Number of Buildings at Risk: 640

Prev Next

#3 Pawtucket

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 4,880

Flood Score: 117

Earthquake Score: 2,160

Tornado Score: 576

Snow Score: 3,600

Total Score: 15,653

Flood Damage

Rank: 31

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 392

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 6.7%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 1,150

Number of Buildings at Risk: N/A

Prev Next

#2 Warwick

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 5,400

Flood Score: 684

Earthquake Score: 2,400

Tornado Score: 640

Snow Score: 2,875

Total Score: 16,799

Flood Damage

Rank: 15

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 3,923

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 16.51%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 28,760

Number of Buildings at Risk: 2,594

Prev Next

#1 Providence

Natural Hazard Scores

Wind Score: 10,980

Flood Score: 486

Earthquake Score: 5,850

Tornado Score: 1,560

Snow Score: 9,750

Total Score: 40,326

Flood Damage

Rank: 18

Acres at Risk of Flooding: 1,669

Percent of Total Acres in Community at Risk: 13.58%

Hurricane Coastal Flooding

Number of Residents in Evac. Zone: 1,010

Number of Buildings at Risk: 481

 
 

Related Articles

 

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Comments:

Climate Change is a agenda driven HOAX..You may get real climate change very soon with a hot war if we don't keep our nose's out of Russia's business...and lets not forget Fukashima's China syndrome problem and the coming radioactive wave headed toward our west coast this year..also our own leaking radioactive waste disposal repository's and our problematic aging nuclear power plants..you need to focus your energy on real proven man made problems,not the unproven bull crap of global warming. Mother nature,mother earth and the sun are the real players when it comes our climate..and that's the way it is.

Comment #1 by LENNY BRUCE on 2014 03 12

Hey guess what? There has been "climate change" for millions of years. Its funny that its gone from global warming to climate change. and the scientists agree that there is a such thing as climate change... but no definitive evidence to prove that humans are the cause. Fuck global warming. we need to drill for oil and gas. The sooner you people realize this the sooner our country can be better again. sorry about the language but it irritates me that people could be so dumb.

Comment #2 by dylan onken on 2014 03 12

It's funny--why, all of a sudden, the full court press by Dems and their sycophant press/progressive allies on global warming--I mean, climate change? After one of the worst winters in the US? Could it be because they need an excuse to fund the Dem's Green Energy cronies with government money so that they can, in turn, push this funding back into the Dem coffers in time for the Nov elections?

Comment #3 by Jimmy LaRouche on 2014 03 12

FACT: the Sun is a star. The sun is a dying star. Someday it will go SUPERNOVA and destroy the Earth.

Put that in your hookah and smoke it!

Comment #4 by C B11 on 2014 03 12

John, you are not old enough to remember the scientific community in the 1970's. They were speaking of an imminent ice age. They were convinced of it. As convinced as the global warmers are now. They were passionate about it. It was on the cover of Time magazine, back when Time meant something. You can look it up. Please explain to me how the scientists were so sure then and so wrong then and maybe you can understand why some of us don't buy the 'evidence' now.
Also, what can be done to stop it? How much of the warming is man made versus natural? How much do we spend and what effect would it have? All questions no one can answer.

Comment #5 by Dave Barry on 2014 03 12

You can all just talk among yourselves since you have no interest in actually learning about the subject other than what you hear on your favorite agenda-driven talk show. Answer me this, what do the thousands of scientists who have provided evidence to support climate change have to gain by engaging in a massive conspiracy?

Comment #6 by John Onamas on 2014 03 12

Thousands? Really? Where's your proof of that number? I bet I can come up with my own list of "thousands" that would debunk it. Many of those so-called experts have come forward to admit the data was manipulated, the data was entered wrong, the computer models themselves were incorrect - heck, some have admitted data was even taken from college essays that they saw posted on the internet!

What do they have to gain? Are you really that naïve?
MONEY! $$$$$$ Grants from the government for further studies, from environmental lobbyists to skew the data, from corporations to get their cool submarines and gadgets. From anyone to prevent them from having to get a real job!

Bottom line, when the weatherman, with all their fancy and sophisticated equipment, can predict the weather for one entire week CORRECTLY, maybe I'll listen to what their predictions are for the next 100 years! Right now, it's all speculation and alot is just plain B.S.!

Comment #7 by C B11 on 2014 03 12

@Jojo - Human induced climate change is real. Your fear-mongering approaches regarding Russia and Fukashima can't will away the reality of climate change. Fukashima doesn't seem so bad when you consider that the U.S. repeatedly tested nuclear weapons in the pacific ocean in the 1950s and 1960s. Google "Pacific Proving Grounds." The contamination from these intentional events (totalling 210 megatons) would easily surpass hundreds of Fukashimas.

Comment #8 by Rich B on 2014 03 12

C B11, you are just repeating the same old conservative propaganda. There are about 2,500 accredited universities in the US alone, and about three times that many world-wide. You can extrapolate a lot from that alone. There are about 12,000 peer-reviewed articles on climate change and global warming published between 1991 and 2011. Over 97% agreed that humans are causing it.

The key phrase is "peer-reviewed." Or judged and assessed by their peers. There have been mistakes--do you know why we know this? Because their work is peer reviewed. A conspiracy of governments, NGOs, and scientists on the scale you imagine is impossible. Science simply doesn't work that way. While there are some grants provided for research, this is not income for real scientists--it's for expenses. University faculty make more than enough money so they don't have to go grubbing to Greenpeace to pay their mortgage. Get real.

If CO2 and other green house gases are not creating climate change why would members of Congress, scientists and NGOs focus so many of their resources on this, when they could easily adopt another environmental cause that would fund them equally well? What's to gain? On the other hand, it's very easy to see what's to gain with the Deniers.

Comment #9 by John Onamas on 2014 03 12

global warmer's propaganda is the science of money making.

Comment #10 by LENNY BRUCE on 2014 03 12

What's to gain by those that actually desire some shred of evidence, John O? Perhaps we don't want our utility costs to rise? Perhaps we don't want Democrat coffers to fill up with our tax dollars by funding their green-energy invested cronies? Perhaps we don't want jobs going overseas because their energy costs are much less than ours?

These are just some of the reasons that we would like some proof vice the unsupported opinions of climate scientists. Some of which are invested in green energy/carbon fixing schemes. Research, if you will, the carbon-fixing company the so-called climate scientist that got stuck in the non-existent sea ice in antarctica...

Comment #11 by Jimmy LaRouche on 2014 03 12

John, great to hear you'll be doing your part by riding your bicycle everywhere you go! And please, don't exhale too hard when you're pedaling up College Hill as we can't afford any more CO2 loading.

Comment #12 by Art West on 2014 03 13

Despite being chastized by every dumocrat scuzzbucket on the planet, it looks like healthy skepticism remains among the "unbelievers" in "global warming, or whatever it is fashionable to call this tax justification. You know when politicians who wouldn't know a BTU from a bidet, like Dirty Harry Reid, begin to hector the "heretics" that scientific justification is the LAST thing on their minds.

Comment #13 by G Godot on 2014 03 13

This guy Branson, leader of the "out of my our way unbelievers" climate change religion owns 7 houses, 10 private jets, a fleet of cars, and an AIRLINE which dumps 170,000 tons of "climate change gasses" into the atmosphere every year. And WE are wrong to raise an eyebrow????

Comment #14 by G Godot on 2014 03 13

And Al "oceans rising" Gore just bought a beachfront house in Malibu. Go figure.

Comment #15 by G Godot on 2014 03 13

John Perilli - I will start by saying the climate has been changing for longer than modern man has been around. About 25,000 to 15,000 there were glaciers covering the area where the northern U.S. is now. The Great Lakes were under 3 km of ice.

That said I will accept your premise that for the sake of a few questions. What exactly will a carbon tax do other than send more taxpayer money to the Government? What would they possibly do against a changing planet? Will they be able to stop the Moon from moving away from the Earth?

Comment #16 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 16




Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.