|
Yellowknife |
Once in a while I get a book in the
mail that I haven't purchased. This is often a pleasant surprise,
since I rip through books the way most people go through salted
peanuts, and having more reading matter laying around rarely hurts. I
do eventually read most of them. The exceptions so far have been a
few self-published books sent to me by batshit-crazy authors who have
zero chance of getting published. And when the book is a recent
release sent to me by a publisher, I incur a debt of gratitude which
I discharge by writing a review. And although the publisher is
looking to pick up a ringing endorsement from me, I feel free-ish to
actually express what I think.
Such is the case with my book du jour,
sent to me by my contact at New Society Publishers:
Gilles Slade's American Exodus,
published just three months ago, cheerfully subtitled
Climate
Change and the Coming Fight for Survival. To get the unpleasantly
honest part out of the way, let me just say that it is an uneven
work—written well, edited badly. The same good points are made
repeatedly in eerily similar ways throughout the book. Each chapter
reads like a conversation with Slade, focusing on some specific
topic, but meandering to encompass the rest along the way. A good
editor would have taken a scalpel to this manuscript, eliminating the
repetitions.
That said, the book is quite interesting. It is the result of an
attempt by Slade to answer a simple question: Where should his son
live should he wish to survive? You see, after absorbing a large
volume of information on the expected results of climate change,
Slade came to the conclusion that his options for survival will be
*cough* circumscribed. But he does arrive at answer. Slade looks at
rising ocean levels, at fossil aquifer depletion, at the
disappearance of glaciers and of rivers fed by glacial melt, at the
probability of various extreme weather events, and, taking it all in,
makes a recommendation: his son should resettle in Yellowknife,
capital of Canada's Northwest Territories. The 2011 Canadian census
puts its population at 19,234. With the addition of Slade's son, that
would make it 19,235. Where the rest of our children should move to
should they wish to survive is left as an exercise for the reader. I
have worked that out for myself, by the way, but I will save that bit
of good news for last.
Slade is a West Coast Canadian who
loves California, and his focus is the northern half of Western
Hemisphere. He does mention the heat wave in Europe that killed
thousands, and another in the Moscow region, but these are tangential to
his pursuit. When he says “we,” he means “we the North
Americans.” His world view consists of two slices of whole grain
bread—Canada and Mexico, with a fat, juicy slice of baloney
sandwiched between them. According to his research the climate of the
future does not bode well for the lower slice or the baloney.
Bottom
to top, Mexico will turn into a scorched desert where no food crops
can be grown. The prairie states of the US will likewise turn into an
unproductive dustbowl raked flat by ever-larger tornados, and the
depletion of the Ogallala aquifer will spell the end of agriculture
even in places where climatic conditions permit. Agriculture in the
Central Valley of California, where much of the country's produce is
grown, is likewise going to shut down due to lack of water for
irrigation. Meanwhile, rising ocean levels coupled with increasingly
energetic North Atlantic hurricanes will destroy much of the East
Coast, where half the population and much of the wealth is
concentrated. Similar effects will be felt in Canada: the Maritimes
will partially submerge, and the prairie provinces will wither in the
summer heat and blow away. But Canada, being the country with the
second largest amount of land (after Russia), with much of it far to
the north, where temperatures will remain moderate, will, Slade
thinks, remain survivable longer; hence his plug for Yellowknife.
In case you believe that nothing
particularly dramatic will happen within your or your children's
lifetime, perhaps you should look around. I have: above is a picture
of what a part of Boston waterfront looked like during the New Year
nor’easter: Boston is becoming like Venice, where Piazza San Marco
is routinely awash during winter storms. A few more feet of sea level
rise, and seawater will circumvent Charles River Locks, at which
point high tides will inundate Back Bay, making Downtown into an
island once again. The problem is much the same up and down the
coast. In 2012 we had pictures of cars smashing about in the storm
surge in Lower Manhattan and the Jersey Coast transformed into a pile of
debris by Hurricane Sandy. Manhattan, where a great deal of wealth
and activity is concentrated, is connected to the mainland by
tunnels; rising sea levels will put the tunnel entrances below the
high tide line, putting a damper on the activities. Further down the
coast, Charleston is perhaps just one major hurricane away from being
wiped out.
Taking all of this in, Slade makes an
important point that goes beyond just anticipating all of this
destruction: he thinks that as each part of the North American
continent ceases to be survivable, their populations will relocate to
more survivable places—hence the term “exodus.” First, Mexicans
will flee to the US, in a well-rehearsed pattern. Then California and
the prairie and desert states of the US will lose the rest of their
populations (they have been depopulating for some time already, and
this trend will only accelerate). Finally, all of this displaced
humanity will slosh across the border into Canada, completely
overwhelming the relatively tiny Canadian population.
Slade avoids
discussing the practicalities and the mechanics of these mass
migrations—what sort of military action will accompany the opening
of the US-Mexico border, for instance—but the outline is visible. Projections are
that 2050 US will be a majority-Hispanic country. That majority is
unlikely to favor maintaining the Great Wall of Mexico. As far as
Canada's chances of controlling immigration, they are scant: most
Canadians live along the indefensible US border, well within
artillery range of it. Most of their trade is cross-border. Faced
with a crisis of the magnitude Slade foresees, the idea of making a
stand for Canada's sovereignty will no doubt come to be seen as
silly.
Most life forms tend to be preoccupied
with the continuation of their blood line, and I assume that you are
no exception. You may or may not concur with Slade's dire prognosis,
but if you don't then I assume that you have done your own research
and, if it happened to be fact-based, inevitably came to similar conclusions, in which case your disagreements
with Slade's analysis are likely to be minor. And in that case you would
probably like to know where to resettle your children before entire
countries set of on a death march to lands unknown.
I do have such a plan, and it is
simple. My son has a certain piece of paper, which I have gone
through some pains to secure for him, and which grants him the
birthright to some 17 million square kilometers of prime real estate,
much of it quite far to the north (compared to Canada's paltry 5.4
million square kilometers). That piece of paper is called a Russian
passport.
Slade's analysis concentrates just on
North America, but I think North America will be a basket case and
find it more worthwhile to look at the planet as a whole, and sort countries into three columns: “destroyed,” “devastated” and “damaged.” A lot of countries definitely belong in the “destroyed” column: island nations like Palau or Kiribati that are in
the process of becoming ocean shoal nations, as well as nations
irrigated by rivers that are fed by rapidly disappearing glaciers,
like Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Pakistan, Bangladesh and quite a few others. They will experience a decade of floods as the glaciers rapidly melt, followed by permanent drought. Next are the “devastated” countries; these are perhaps survivable, but for a much smaller and much more miserable population. I
suppose that Slade is right and that Canada will be “devastated” because of incursions by its
“destroyed” neighbors to the south across its long and
tactically indefensible southern border. Russia, I believe, will be “damaged:” yes, there will be huge environmental problems—peat bogs
and boreal forests on fire, gigantic floods, loss of coastal cities
(St. Petersburg won't be able to hide behind its dam forever)—but
Russia will, by and large, remain survivable for a great many people. Nor is it likely to be
invaded: every invasion attempt since Genghis Khan's has gone badly
for the invader. There will be large numbers of people moving into
Russia's vast empty spaces from abroad, but only to the extent
permitted by the Federal Migration Service.
If you don't like this analysis, or if
my plan doesn't appeal to you, then do your own analysis, and make
your own plan. And if you don't know where to start, then maybe
Slade's book will get you started.