Time has some informative climate coverage, but I say this because in the Time magazine 23-30 May 2022 edition there is an article about the investment opportunities that climate change will bring to the Alaskan port of Nome, it will be able to profit from the opening up of the sea routes across the arctic and have easier access to raw materials as ice retreats
“Nome may yet be able to surf the looming disruption with minimal loss if it gets ahead of the change”.
In many respects the article covers climate issues well, but the relentless corporate optimism that sees everything, even 'looming disruption', as an opportunity for making money and calling it adaption, rings a false note for me
“seeking opportunities in in a rapidly changing region, whether its better access to mineral resources, more efficient shipping routes, or new fishing grounds, is simply the newest – and, some would say, the most practical- form of adaption”
The article goes on to say this is to be welcomed, provided it won’t make things worse for the people who live there, which might be as useful as the second pat of the Balfour Declaration. Given the influx of people, money and things on the scale that these developments would likely entail, it is difficult to see how it could actually make things better. It would be more unsustainable developments at worst, and more materialism with less quality of life at best, and if this is happening in the Arctic just imagine whats going on for people living nearer the equator and in Oceana, perhaps they can build build submarines and do dive based tourism.
BTW on the aside - the second part of the Balfour Declaration says; "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"