I’ve said this for years. People would rather risk extreme weather than deal with winter (which is milder now than ever). I live in Wisconsin. I’m staying put.
Sounds about right. My brother is getting restationed to Utah from Florida and he’s been complaining about the cold non-stop despite never experiencing the dry cold of the West vs the wet cold of the East. I moved to CO from the SE and I’ll never go back to the SE.
I lived in South Florida for 31 years and I watched the migration speed up, as well as the cost for insuring both my home and car. I now live in Oregon, where we have a small population and minimal migration, and the insurance rates are a lot easier. I moved to be closer to my son and to stop living like a canned sardine because the population is being squeezed because of the limited real estate that can be developed, without destroying The Everglades. I am a tree hugging believer in Climate Change and destroying so much of our wildlands is insanity.
I have a suspicion that somewhere in the distant future, if humanity manages to make it first and then wake up, we might dedicate entire continents to wildlife refuge. North and South America are obvious choices due to still relatively low population, and the fact that vast swaths of populated area in North America are going to become uninhabitable anyway.
I live in Flathead County in Montana and I had the local fire department do a free wildfire risk assessment of the property and house. I remodeled the yard and entrance and built a “defensive zone” with gravel and also cut down and trimmed some trees around the house. Next summer I will install 1/8 inch vent covers to make the attic ember proof I absolutely love this show and it also helped me to think about natural disasters and prevention in different ways :) Thank you for your great content!!!
And then there's the issue of the Southern states turning into little theocratic dictatorships. Not wanting to live in Gilead is one hell of a motivator for some of us.
Living in Georgia, you’re not wrong. Plenty of crazies here. And weirdo militia types deep in the mountains apparently. I have far too many relatives that are homeschooling, anti-evolution crackpots. I’m really thankful I went to decent public schools.
I'm loving this Weathered series. Blunt truth. No waffling, gentle, maybe-yes/maybe-not mumbo jumbo to placate the deniers, as almost all other coverage seems to do. Thank you. That stuff infuriates me so much. We are literally seeing people die, in increasing numbers, already. It ain't getting better anytime soon, even if we actually do what needs doing. And, holy crap, we are not doing that! Kind, normalizing language is part of the problem. You know the phrase 'you should act like your hair is on fire'? Well, it is morbid to say it, but if we don't ACT like it, we can look forward to it becoming a growing actuality. It's already happening.
News and reporting has such a need to appear "fair and balanced" that they give equal credence to scientists who say the sky is blue and crazies who say the sky is purple in the name of "balance".
I'm from Kansas, but a year and a half ago we moved to Wisconsin. Everyone I've met has asked me WHY, and I always say "climate change". I'm 71 years old and have been an environmental activist for decades. It was a no-brainer for me. Ironically, since we moved, Kansas Ctiy has had way more snow than here in Wisconsin.
People from the Cities used to make fun of us with our cold and extreme winter storms. Now, the worst of the winter weather goes through Central and Southern Minnesota and we have better weather than they do. The temperatures are lower, but not that much any more
@@classified022 The difference is that in the other G7 countries, health care is actually care, not milking people for every penny before they are allowed to survive. When you take health care costs out of the equation, even with a small increase in taxes (if we taxed billionaires on their assets, there wouldn't have to be any tax increase for almost anyone) and regulate the rent & mortgage systems to help the regular people instead of 'increasing shareholders value' by jacking up costs because they can and effectively keeping people extremely poor, along with actually tying wage increases to inflation and limiting how much CEO pay packages can be compared with the average worker, then the housing costs wouldn't be so out of whack with what people can afford.
I started putting together a disaster kit yesterday, I feel like were are getting close to the point of no return with climate change. I live in central Oregon we have wildfires all the time and seeing what’s happened in LA is horrible and I want to be ready
I always said I’d live if Louisiana my entire life. Not because I like it but because my family is here and my work opportunities are great. Unfortunately after having my first child I finally decided to do my own research on climate change to hopefully disprove it and give myself some reassurances, obviously the truth of the matter changed my perspective on everything and I am now planning on moving. I was considering Minnesota but I am afraid of the cold that might come with an AMOC collapse so I’m going to wait for more data and continue to learn, buy equipment, and plan for a future of unpredictable weather patterns.
New England isn’t bad. We’ll be getting some of the hurricanes and such, but not nearly as badly as the southeast. We’ve also got a lot more local governments that are receptive to planning for climate change, and our temperate to cold climate will likely shift to just temperate or warm. Also, there’s a high quality of life here and plenty of career opportunities. Best of luck, so sorry that your home is becoming unsafe.
The AMOC collapse will bring extreme cold weather to Europe, not so much to North America. No where will be 100% safe from climate change but IMO the Great lakes region is one of the safest. Lots of fresh water which is going to become scarce in other parts of the country. Just make sure you get a house with a fireplace and have wood on hand in case you get power outages in the winter
i’d suggest looking into connecticut. much lower climate risk than many areas even with amoc collapse. great education and infrastructure, but expensive. winters are kinda cold but have gotten much milder as we have only seen 2 inches of snow this year
Any AMOC change will have minimal to no effect on the America's and almost exclusively impact Europe where I am, so you should be good. Imho if I lived in the states anywhere around the great lakes would be my preferred destination as the lakes mitigate climate extremes. While upstate New York for example (around Buffalo area) is shrinking currently, in 20 years it'll be booming and land values will skyrocket. Best of luck.
I live in Asheville, NC. To be precise, I live in Swannanoa, which is basically East Asheville. Here at our house, we had four large oak trees come down, but none of them caused any damage. We were lucky. The remaining oak trees that could cause damage will be cut down soon, just to be safe. We have well water, we're getting solar asap, we have Starlink in a box in case we need it, and we don't need to cross any bridges to get in and out. Where we live is as climate-safe as any place in the US. But across the road from us is nothing but devastation.
I live in north-central PA. Devastating climate risks in our county are mostly from flooding, generally caused by remnants of huricanes. Occasionally we get microbursts with straightline winds, and super-rarely we get a tornado (that breaks up quickly due to our topography) . wildfires happen occasionally, but are small and easily contained. the snow and cold people complain about are nothing to worry about. Stock your pantry and have a generator and you'll be fine. All roads are generally passable within 8 hours of the storm end.
It doesn't matter how much you insist that the winter in the northeast isn't a problem. Your personal acceptance of the cold doesn't change how other people feel about it. The reality is, most people would rather live in a place where the temperature never gets so cold it can snow. I live in Boston, so I'm not one of those people. But Northeastern folks need to realize that "no snow at all" is the standard that most people want, and stop trying to convince them that the occasional blizzard is no big deal.
Extreme cold plus loss of power is dangerous. If storms in northern and mountain states keep getting worse, and lasting longer, as we're told they will, periods of no power will last longer, too. Most of us can't afford a generator system connected to natural gas or propane -- if you're snowed in, how long will your gas generator keep even one room warm? Once you used up all the gasoline, you're in BIG trouble. I went through the long power loss in west Texas a few years ago -- it was bad. Luckily the western tip of the state supplied through El Paso refused to join the new Texas-is-independent power grid that failed, and I had a refuge with friends. That kind of thing is not s minor inconvenience, believe me!
@@JoshJones-37334 that’s not the problem we’re looking at, is it? “It’s under a mile of ice, Hurr.” Yeah and the whole planet was molten rock before that.
Leaving places with cold winters for places with hot summers? I can always put on more clothes in the cold. Once I'm naked, I can't get any cooler. Especially with hot+humid places, where wet-bulb temperatures are getting very hot. If I was in a place with "nice weather," I'd want to spend it outside. If it's too hot to actually spend it outside, what's the point of living in a place with "nice weather."
Yep, this. I grew up in South Texas, and lots of folks here say they love the heat, but no, they actually don't. They're not going outside to play and hike in 90 degree heat ( which is most of the year), they just don't want to be cold ( less than 80 degrees indoors). They stay indoors, with the AC set to 80-85, and they only go outside to walk to their car. It's unhealthy, and people don't care. I'd rather live someplace a little chillier (and wetter) and have fun outdoors than broil for 9 months of the year.
@@MailleGrace I went to the beach last weekend. It was sunny…. and 45°F. No, I wasn't going to go swimming, but it was an enjoyable couple hours walking, playing with the dog, etc.
It's crazy that we so often plan for short term. Many people don't seem to care about what happens a few decades down the road. Construction reflects this - houses are built with flakeboard and other poor, non-lasting materials (which just happen to have lots of formaldehyde) and aren't build nor expected to last more than fifty years. Why is housing so poorly planned?
Real estate markets care more about increasing profit margins than building quality homes. The only way that changes is if government steps in to force companies to build according to the natural disaster risks etc
I have lived in South Florida for 40 years I just retired and I’m packing to leave. The summers are too hot and too long and the annual hurricane season stress is enough.
I really did a lot of research before moving to where I'm at now but now that I've been here six years I've had three home insurance claims. I didn't realize that I'm in a small part of the region that experiences more extreme weather. I get much more rain than the rest of the region and much more intense wind. It's all been very expensive even with insurance covering so much. And I still have expensive problems to solve to protect my property. Luckily flooding isn't a risk. Fire maybe. Earthquake for sure. Unfortunately, it would triple my annual insurance rate to add earthquake coverage. That's the big one I didn't know before moving. I really wish there was an easier way to get the full picture of what problems you might have in different areas.
Part of the problem is that lots of folks, both private citizens and political leaders alike, are emotionally connected to the false premise that there is no climate change. Facts won't budge emotions, so you can't reason and logic and argue to change their minds. You have to change their emotional response to climate change. That's a huge task. Their identity and their "tribe" that they identify with will change, and convincing folks to self-ostracize is an even bigger task. You have to create a community that will welcome them first, because without that, the climate deniers will choose to hang out with other deniers before they choose isolation. It's our human need for community and to be part of a "tribe" that needs to be addressed first, if we're going to de-program anyone caught in any conspiracy, climate or otherwise.
I live in SoCal, where wildfires and earthquakes are the greatest risk. I previously lived in far West Texas -- first in the Davis Mts. where wildfire and loss of power in winter storms threatened, then in El Paso, where flooding from the Rio Grande and wildfires were threats. I have also lived in IL(tornadoes & winter weather), NJ (hurricanes & flood), the piedmont of SC (flooding from rivers), VA (flooding from rivers), Long Island (flooding, hurricanes) and MI (extreme winter weather, lowland flooding). There's not a single place that doesn't carry risk from weather events. BUT you have to look at trends before deciding to move to someplace like coastal FL, and hurricanes do damage inland as well. And deciding to go without insurance -- not being recently cancelled, but consciously deciding you won't pay for it -- should mean NO assistance beyond immediate help. This trend is just another facet of the feeling of entitlement so prevalent today. I'm happy for my tax money to help people who came to harm through events beyond their control. I don't want to help pay to rebuild for folks who chose not to be insured, deliberately laying the burden on the rest of us. And particularly if that rebuilding is in a flood zone!
@@philippemiller4740 If nothing is done yes, it will get worse, globally. Say goodbye to Maldives. They have know about this almost my entire life but getting people in the beginning to believe in something that they could not see, feel or touch was like telling them the tooth fairy was real. In the beginning it was just a bunch of black ink on a page. The merchants of doubt began a campaign for the sake of profits long ago without much to refute what they were saying with. We like to pretend as a species we are all so facts oriented but we make our decisions with our emotions and our instincts first. Then add in trust biases and it really is amazing that "we" have made the advaces that we have. We pay some athletes millions to play a game and our scientists and teachers bupkiss. Kinda proves the point.
@@philippemiller4740 If nothing is done yes, it will get worse, globally. Say goodbye to Maldives. They have know about this almost my entire life but getting people in the beginning to believe in something that they could not see, feel or touch was like telling them the tooth fairy was real. In the beginning it was just a bunch of black ink on a page. The merchants of doubt began a campaign for the sake of profits long ago without much to refute what they were saying with. We like to pretend as a species we are all so facts oriented but we make our decisions with our emotions and our instincts first. Then add in trust biases and it really is amazing that "we" have made the advaces that we have. We pay some athletes millions to play a game and our scientists and teachers bupkiss. Kinda proves the point.
Stop subsidizing insurance, and people will be less inclined to move to those places. CNN had a story this year in how Florida's last resort insurance (CPI Corp.) is one big storm away from insolvency, which will result in other Florida citizens having to shoulder the losses. So long as lawmakers keep the price of insurance less than the risk, people will live in risky places.
I left the SE due to the rising humidity/heat. I couldn’t breathe, couldn’t go outside, couldn’t enjoy the beauty of the region due to the escalating temperatures suffocating me. I now am in an area that has fire risks (tho not nearly to the extent of CA 😢), but I don’t live in suffocation, can go outside, and don’t live under the threat of tornadoes in the night. When no place is truly safe, I’ll take the better option and live a better life.
Our biggest "climate" issue (Willamette Valley, NW Oregon) is fire, and it's nothing new. Despite climate change making things worse, it's really been the main issue here for millennia. The entire west coast ecosystem has co-evolved with fire. It's part of the deal of living in this part of the world. We had an offer in on the land back in 2020, when the Beachie Creek fire crept ever closer to "our parcel." As it turned out, it came within about a mile and a half of the property so it was spared...for the time being. Now we're building our house on that land, and to do our best to mitigate the fire risk, we're clearing about 3.5 acres around the house site of all trees (currently all conifers) and will be planting a relatively lush veggie garden in that area, as well as some deciduous trees. There will be 3' of stone siding at the base of the house and at least 5' of paved patio or rock garden around the entire sides of the house with no plantings in that 5' zone. In addition, the rest of the house "siding" will be a lime plaster over light straw clay walls (which basically do not burn). We're installing fiberglass or aluminum windows (TBD) and a metal roof with no valleys, as well as installing a sprinkler system with heads along the peak of the roof and all around the sides of the house to water down the sides of the house and the 20" surrounding the house thoroughly in the event of any fires/firebrands in our area. We're also putting in ceiling sprinkler heads inside the house that will be triggered should a fire start inside the house. These are normally only required in commercial buildings, but we'll get a discount on our home owners insurance and peace of mind by installing them. The water supply for that combined sprinkler system is a spring 160' up slope that keeps a 5,000 gallon water tank up there topped up. In the case of a power outage which would keep our well pump from operating, that water will gravity feed down to that sprinkler system by opening a valve down by the house. We'll try to figure out how to automate this in case we're not at home to open the valve ourselves. Additionally, there's a LOT of dry dead standing trees and dead branches in the forest on the property. It's PACKED with fuel just waiting to go up like a torch the moment there's a lightening strike or some idiot throwing their cigarette butt out the window! So we're in the process of systematically reducing that fuel load by heavy thinning and are also applying for both state and federal grants to get some financial help with with this ongoing project in the forest on our land, which basically hasn't been maintained for about 20 years since before we bought it. We're getting up in years, so we can only do so much so fast. If we can get some additional funding we'll be able to hire some help with this to make it go much more quickly! If we can weed out and chip up all the dead trees and branches in those overgrown forest areas, when a fire comes through (WHEN, because it's only a matter of time), it will hopefully stay on the ground and not get up into the crown of the trees to get totally out of control.
You are obviously aware of the risks. I have those same risks, mitigation is expensive as you have outlined but as long as I can afford insurance I'm OK. If/when I rebuild it will be to new standards that will achieve what you are planning. There is a lot of discussion about forest maintenance, the accepted practice is simply to have proscribed burns, but this may be wrong as it promotes subsequent fires racing through the tree tops. That type of fire is a bad as you can get.
@@paulc6766 Frankly, if we tried to prescribe burn our way through the worst stretch of forest on our property we'd have a full blown canopy fire within minutes. It's that bad! It's one of those mono crop plantings of noble fir for Christmas trees that never ended up getting harvested or thinned whatsoever, and now their between 20 - 35' tall. At least a third of the trees in there are standing dead trees, and ALL of the trees in there that are still alive have dead branches from ground level up to about the top 25% of their canopy. They're spaced every 4-5', covering about 25 acres...and that's only one of the stands on the property. Granted, it's the largest problem stand of trees on the land by a good bit, but there are a couple other problem stands that are much younger with mostly live trees. In the case of that particular stand of trees, it's a complete disaster waiting to happen and needs MAJOR thinning and removal/reduction of the fuel load; definitely NOT a prescribed burn situation!
Seeing the cost of disasters in the south really makes you wonder how republican politicians think they have ground to stand on with their accusations of bad governance against California. I’m grateful that people in the South never had to question if their fellow Americans would help them. I’m disgusted and saddened that Californians now have to live with that fear while still running for their lives.
We have lived in southern Louisiana for 20 years, and we're recently hammered by hurricanes Laura and Delta. We moved to the area for work, which is a huge incentive for a lot of migration. Recently retired, the incentive to stay has dwindled and we are considering moving back to western PA. But dang will I hate shoveling snow in the bleak damp winters!
When we stop subsidizing their insurance costs. Either with private insurance spreading risk to low risk areas, or with direct payments with Tax dollars
My family and I live in Asheville, and I have to disagree about the comment that people are foregoing insurance because they expect to be bailed out, or this idea that relief has an unintended consequence of discouraging insurance. I think it's a cost calculation people can't make work out, and with the state of the insurance industry and government relief arms like FEMA (neither of which is equipped to do the job folks need them to do to the extent needed given these extreme weather events), I just think boiling that down to individual irresponsibility is misleading. I love this series though and this was a great clip otherwise.
James Howard Kunstler addressed this same issue in his 2005 book "The Long Emergency." Now, he was talking about Peak Oil rather than climate change, but he said that areas like the South and Southwest are heavily dependent on things like air conditioning and should that go away or not be as available as it is now, those areas will basically become unlivable. He pointed out that solar and wind are intermittent and not as reliable as fossil fuels and that we cannot keep up our current standard of living based on renewables alone. These technologies simply cannot produce enough electricity to meet the demand; and demand keeps rising all the time.
Most people in the colder North use fossil fuels to heat their homes and businesses. Without fossil fuels the North will become unlivable in the winter.
All of these are showing me that where we live right now is a pretty awesome spot. We moved here for many reasons, but climate change wasn't actually on that list, so knowing that we picked well is reassuring. I only hope that people wise up and move to more stable climate regions before it becomes far more difficult and expensive than it already is. If we discovered that we were in an unstable location, like south Florida, we would be finding a way out already, not waiting to see it get more extreme.
I'm from Los Angeles (I'm fine), and housing situation is crazy. It doesn't help that insurance companies are currently CANCELING fire insurance policies when we need them most. We literally had to make a rule a few days ago that companies couldn't cancel people when their houses are in an active fire zone!
While it is bad thing to do, one understands insurance side (up to some amount) - when local management is making situation more risky and on top not allowing to increase payments, no wonder they wanted to get out of there. Now loses will be covered by other customers elsewhere (insurance always works with using most customers money to pay few. Minus profit ofcourse)
I live in Louisville Co, where the Marshall fire surprised us all 3 years ago, burning more than a thousand homes, in a firestorm similar to what LA is dealing with now. What have I done? I have relatively fire resistant siding (hardboard) and a resistant roof, and defensible space around the home. I will be moving in 18 mos or so to a senior coop building, which is about 7 miles east, and less likely to be in a fire. Hail, wind will remain challenges, as will drought, here in the west. Were I to move away, it is likely to be towards the upper midwest, or New Zealand!
If you have ever lived in Iowa, you would understand. The urge to live ANYWHERE that has decent weather, something to do, and any form of natural beauty at all is overwhelming.
I live in northern Minnesota and I really feel I live in one of the safest parts of the nation as far as climate and geology go. We don't have volcanoes, we don't have much earthquake risk, we don't have mountains or oceans to roil the weather, we don't have hurricanes, with all the farming going on around us we don't have wildfire risk, most tornadoes don't impact us much. The worst case scenario is if there is a cold snap with either a blizzard or ground blizzard and the electricity fails for several days. Keeping warm will be a problem. It happened in April of 1997, but luckily it wasn't very cold (relatively) so we were able to use our generator to power our fridge, furnace and TV, alternating with our sump and lift pumps. No power for 3 days, but we survived. I wouldn't want to do that when it is -20 degrees, though.
the old ppl drives the home price up and leave, they went south cuz old joints hurt with the cold up north.... their homes that they bought for 300k are mostly 1-2 millions nowadays, selling it & they buys 2 houses at where they move to, driving the price of those area up as well while have an extra home they can rent out.
I've been complaining about how they keep rebuilding disaster areas for decades, often to be ridiculed for my opinion that if you get hit with a disaster in an area that is prone to disasters the relief you get isn't to rebuild, but to relocate, rebuilding shouldn't fall on insurance companies or national relief funds if you are in a disaster area, if you want to rebuild, you do it on your own dime, if you want assistance from others, you need to move to someplace safer.
I just left Southeast Louisiana for Tennessee. Its so many things. Opportunity, cost of living, loss of infrastructure and lack of access to entertainment venues - Louisiana has music and food, sure but not much else. The heat the year before I left made it prohibitive to be outside in the summer at all - we had 100 days straight of 100+ heat index days. Summer is stifling. There is no point in the year where its just comfortable. Sure, my homeowners insurance doubled from 2017-2024 but that alone wouldn't have made me move. Louisiana's schools are atrocious. The crime ... so much crime ... Its all of it. I will *always* regret moving. I will always want to move back. My family has been there since the 1730's. Its just not tenable anymore.
I moved to eugene oregon because climate risks are lower around the pacific northwest. Eugene has two major rivers that run through the city, so I bought a house on a hill and out of flood zones. there is wild fire risk in western oregon, but it's relatively mild as the rain is consistent, even in "drought" years it still rains significantly, and the native vegetation does not dry out like it does in California.
When I lived in Humboldt County, California and experienced strong earthquakes and realized we were at risk for tsunamis, it scared me, but I loved living there. I eventually moved for employment and opportunity to a slightly safer location in California that has a slightly higher risk of wildfires. I chose not to move to a much riskier area that was prettier because of the risk of fire and knowing that climate change was going to make that worse. I admit that a nice community, family, employment and services are very important factors in selecting a place to live. I wish I could believe that I would move if I felt my house was at risk of a catastrophe, but I honestly don't know. It is also expensive and difficult to relocate. We tell ourselves all sorts of things to justify our decisions.
As someone who moved to NC piedmont region, the tone of the video and the assertion that I was insipid or wasn't thinking about the future kind of hurt. I can't afford to live further north. Also, I looked at the weather patterns. My area was not at risk. Yeah, I got some of Helene, but there hadn't been a hurricane in Shelby, NC in 50 years. Yes, it gets hot, but in 2100, this area is supposed to be like the Paris, TX of today. And we all have insurance, but we are not typically eligible for flood insurance since we don't live on a floodplain. Overall, good video, but please watch how you characterize a state as long and ecologically diverse as North Carolina.
The big takeaway I got from this is Nevada is the best place to set down your roots as it ranks low in natural disaster risk, it doesn't cost much to repair, the state can capable afford repairs, and much of it isn't getting price gouged by insurance
Federal government needs to stop giving money to rebuild in disaster prone areas. Instead have that money help relocate people to less hazardous areas.
It's one thing to expect individuals to understand, but why do insurance companies insure these places and banks give mortgages? Aren't the banks the ones who will lose out as well when homes are destroyed and no one can afford to build back?
I'm from Latvia, and living near volcanoes, under 2 moving tectonic plates, or places with high tornado and tsunami risk seems dangerous already, because when winds here reach 100km/h, it's already leaving bad outcomes, there should be a better reason to why a lot of people goes to live in those places, and i think most of the time, it's lack of research and money, and those who already live there, just doesn't want to leave everything behind, not everyone can sell and buy home when ever they want, not even talking about integration.
I need an app to tell me that things are capable of burning next to my house, thanks random business guy who has already run multiple separate businesses on this show
A national strategy is needed, to support and encourage movement to safer more climate resilient places. The federal government will go bankrupt if it bails out cities every time a climate disaster strikes in areas at high risk of them.
Why would people worry about that? They don't believe in science, climate change, flood warnings or listening to the gov't. Let them learn the hard way
Hi, I live in France and was wondering were you found the data that you use on this show. I'm really interested in the data like days above 100°, fire risk,... but in Europe. Could you tell me how to find it or even better, could you do an episode like this one but about Europe ? Anyway, thanks for the great show.
When climate change makes people lose their home, the following home in short period of time and when their families loe their homes/lives then they'll take it more seriously. The other part is low taxes and a low cost of living isn't worth the higher insurance rates, losing insurance, losing a home, being unable to settle down for a long time without constantly moving.
Well this is not an easy topic. I sometimes think that people who move to the high risk areas for natural disaster think same like people who smoke or vape that nothing bad is going to happen to them if it happens to someone else for the same reason. Well a good thing for me is that my country especially the central mountainous region where i live is not prone ti extreme weather. For me the trigger would be if water was hard to come by.
I would love to know some resources you and your team would recommend for someone who is looking to move soon to hopefully mitigate climate change related challenges in the future.
That's all well and good, but people, including me, have had to leave NoVa due to the absurd cost of living. Also, by 2100, the heat you feel will be equivalent to the Paris, TX of today.
Most people won't make a move until staying in place is more painful than moving. When you're a victim or financially can't handle the pain, you'll move. Until then enjoy the game of Russian Roulette.
This kinda reporting that talks about peripheral options need to stop. 🛑 We need to act against climate change. We need massive action to reduce it. And we needed it 20 years ago. If media doesn’t raise massive awareness to help humans, homes would be the last thing to worry about.
I get a certain satisfaction from knowing that people with lots of money but who do not accept the truth of human caused climate change or it's inveitable consiquences will loose a great deal. Kind of fitting don't you think.
I’ve said this for years. People would rather risk extreme weather than deal with winter (which is milder now than ever).
I live in Wisconsin. I’m staying put.
Sounds about right. My brother is getting restationed to Utah from Florida and he’s been complaining about the cold non-stop despite never experiencing the dry cold of the West vs the wet cold of the East. I moved to CO from the SE and I’ll never go back to the SE.
Yup.
Mom used to say winter keeps the crazies out.
Enjoy Canada
I live in Indiana and we've nearly completely lost the winters I remember as a child. I'm highly considering moving up north.
@ I hear Ontario is lovely. Good luck
I lived in South Florida for 31 years and I watched the migration speed up, as well as the cost for insuring both my home and car. I now live in Oregon, where we have a small population and minimal migration, and the insurance rates are a lot easier. I moved to be closer to my son and to stop living like a canned sardine because the population is being squeezed because of the limited real estate that can be developed, without destroying The Everglades. I am a tree hugging believer in Climate Change and destroying so much of our wildlands is insanity.
I have a suspicion that somewhere in the distant future, if humanity manages to make it first and then wake up, we might dedicate entire continents to wildlife refuge. North and South America are obvious choices due to still relatively low population, and the fact that vast swaths of populated area in North America are going to become uninhabitable anyway.
As a USFS wildland firefighter who has lived and worked in Oregon for 30 years. I can tell you made the same short sighted mistake. Sorry
Right, 👍 Rock on 🙂.
You made the best decision! Things are getting worse by the hour here in Florida.
Without destroying the everglades? Wake up dude, theyre gone. Whats there now is a joke.
I live in Flathead County in Montana and I had the local fire department do a free wildfire risk assessment of the property and house.
I remodeled the yard and entrance and built a “defensive zone” with gravel and also cut down and trimmed some trees around the house.
Next summer I will install 1/8 inch vent covers to make the attic ember proof
I absolutely love this show and it also helped me to think about natural disasters and prevention in different ways :)
Thank you for your great content!!!
And then there's the issue of the Southern states turning into little theocratic dictatorships. Not wanting to live in Gilead is one hell of a motivator for some of us.
Another reason to stay in New England
Living in Georgia, you’re not wrong. Plenty of crazies here. And weirdo militia types deep in the mountains apparently. I have far too many relatives that are homeschooling, anti-evolution crackpots. I’m really thankful I went to decent public schools.
Yet another reason to flee South Texas.
I'm loving this Weathered series. Blunt truth. No waffling, gentle, maybe-yes/maybe-not mumbo jumbo to placate the deniers, as almost all other coverage seems to do. Thank you. That stuff infuriates me so much. We are literally seeing people die, in increasing numbers, already. It ain't getting better anytime soon, even if we actually do what needs doing. And, holy crap, we are not doing that!
Kind, normalizing language is part of the problem. You know the phrase 'you should act like your hair is on fire'? Well, it is morbid to say it, but if we don't ACT like it, we can look forward to it becoming a growing actuality. It's already happening.
News and reporting has such a need to appear "fair and balanced" that they give equal credence to scientists who say the sky is blue and crazies who say the sky is purple in the name of "balance".
Living in Chicago with the winter's getting more moderate and plenty of fresh water in the great lakes
I'm from Kansas, but a year and a half ago we moved to Wisconsin. Everyone I've met has asked me WHY, and I always say "climate change". I'm 71 years old and have been an environmental activist for decades. It was a no-brainer for me. Ironically, since we moved, Kansas Ctiy has had way more snow than here in Wisconsin.
People from the Cities used to make fun of us with our cold and extreme winter storms. Now, the worst of the winter weather goes through Central and Southern Minnesota and we have better weather than they do. The temperatures are lower, but not that much any more
My family acts like I am speaking Simlish when I tell them I don't want to move to a giant hurricane fiesta.
Enjoy Ohio
Tornadoes, floods, heat and hailstorms in Ohio. Not safe either.
@freeheeler09
Florida has all that plus hurricanes.
I moved yo the Caribbean in 2010. Only had 1 hurricane. They all go around me to pummel Florida.
Ah, docka morpher.
$229,900 is a steep discount? Your routine reminder how broken the US housing situation is!
That is very cheap when compared to most of the G7
@@classified022 The difference is that in the other G7 countries, health care is actually care, not milking people for every penny before they are allowed to survive. When you take health care costs out of the equation, even with a small increase in taxes (if we taxed billionaires on their assets, there wouldn't have to be any tax increase for almost anyone) and regulate the rent & mortgage systems to help the regular people instead of 'increasing shareholders value' by jacking up costs because they can and effectively keeping people extremely poor, along with actually tying wage increases to inflation and limiting how much CEO pay packages can be compared with the average worker, then the housing costs wouldn't be so out of whack with what people can afford.
I started putting together a disaster kit yesterday, I feel like were are getting close to the point of no return with climate change. I live in central Oregon we have wildfires all the time and seeing what’s happened in LA is horrible and I want to be ready
I always said I’d live if Louisiana my entire life. Not because I like it but because my family is here and my work opportunities are great. Unfortunately after having my first child I finally decided to do my own research on climate change to hopefully disprove it and give myself some reassurances, obviously the truth of the matter changed my perspective on everything and I am now planning on moving. I was considering Minnesota but I am afraid of the cold that might come with an AMOC collapse so I’m going to wait for more data and continue to learn, buy equipment, and plan for a future of unpredictable weather patterns.
New England isn’t bad. We’ll be getting some of the hurricanes and such, but not nearly as badly as the southeast. We’ve also got a lot more local governments that are receptive to planning for climate change, and our temperate to cold climate will likely shift to just temperate or warm. Also, there’s a high quality of life here and plenty of career opportunities. Best of luck, so sorry that your home is becoming unsafe.
The AMOC collapse will bring extreme cold weather to Europe, not so much to North America. No where will be 100% safe from climate change but IMO the Great lakes region is one of the safest. Lots of fresh water which is going to become scarce in other parts of the country. Just make sure you get a house with a fireplace and have wood on hand in case you get power outages in the winter
i’d suggest looking into connecticut. much lower climate risk than many areas even with amoc collapse. great education and infrastructure, but expensive. winters are kinda cold but have gotten much milder as we have only seen 2 inches of snow this year
Any AMOC change will have minimal to no effect on the America's and almost exclusively impact Europe where I am, so you should be good. Imho if I lived in the states anywhere around the great lakes would be my preferred destination as the lakes mitigate climate extremes. While upstate New York for example (around Buffalo area) is shrinking currently, in 20 years it'll be booming and land values will skyrocket. Best of luck.
I'll stay in the Great Lakes area, thanks.
I live in Asheville, NC. To be precise, I live in Swannanoa, which is basically East Asheville. Here at our house, we had four large oak trees come down, but none of them caused any damage. We were lucky. The remaining oak trees that could cause damage will be cut down soon, just to be safe. We have well water, we're getting solar asap, we have Starlink in a box in case we need it, and we don't need to cross any bridges to get in and out. Where we live is as climate-safe as any place in the US. But across the road from us is nothing but devastation.
I live in north-central PA. Devastating climate risks in our county are mostly from flooding, generally caused by remnants of huricanes. Occasionally we get microbursts with straightline winds, and super-rarely we get a tornado (that breaks up quickly due to our topography) . wildfires happen occasionally, but are small and easily contained. the snow and cold people complain about are nothing to worry about. Stock your pantry and have a generator and you'll be fine. All roads are generally passable within 8 hours of the storm end.
The area around the Great Lakes will be the most stable refuge from the climate disaster.
@@aluisiouslol!! It was under a mile of ice
It doesn't matter how much you insist that the winter in the northeast isn't a problem. Your personal acceptance of the cold doesn't change how other people feel about it. The reality is, most people would rather live in a place where the temperature never gets so cold it can snow. I live in Boston, so I'm not one of those people. But Northeastern folks need to realize that "no snow at all" is the standard that most people want, and stop trying to convince them that the occasional blizzard is no big deal.
Extreme cold plus loss of power is dangerous. If storms in northern and mountain states keep getting worse, and lasting longer, as we're told they will, periods of no power will last longer, too. Most of us can't afford a generator system connected to natural gas or propane -- if you're snowed in, how long will your gas generator keep even one room warm? Once you used up all the gasoline, you're in BIG trouble. I went through the long power loss in west Texas a few years ago -- it was bad. Luckily the western tip of the state supplied through El Paso refused to join the new Texas-is-independent power grid that failed, and I had a refuge with friends. That kind of thing is not s minor inconvenience, believe me!
@@JoshJones-37334 that’s not the problem we’re looking at, is it? “It’s under a mile of ice, Hurr.” Yeah and the whole planet was molten rock before that.
Leaving places with cold winters for places with hot summers?
I can always put on more clothes in the cold. Once I'm naked, I can't get any cooler. Especially with hot+humid places, where wet-bulb temperatures are getting very hot.
If I was in a place with "nice weather," I'd want to spend it outside. If it's too hot to actually spend it outside, what's the point of living in a place with "nice weather."
Yep, this. I grew up in South Texas, and lots of folks here say they love the heat, but no, they actually don't. They're not going outside to play and hike in 90 degree heat ( which is most of the year), they just don't want to be cold ( less than 80 degrees indoors). They stay indoors, with the AC set to 80-85, and they only go outside to walk to their car. It's unhealthy, and people don't care. I'd rather live someplace a little chillier (and wetter) and have fun outdoors than broil for 9 months of the year.
@@MailleGrace I went to the beach last weekend. It was sunny…. and 45°F. No, I wasn't going to go swimming, but it was an enjoyable couple hours walking, playing with the dog, etc.
This is such a great series.
It's crazy that we so often plan for short term. Many people don't seem to care about what happens a few decades down the road. Construction reflects this - houses are built with flakeboard and other poor, non-lasting materials (which just happen to have lots of formaldehyde) and aren't build nor expected to last more than fifty years.
Why is housing so poorly planned?
Because government fully regulates housing and the insurance market.
WTF is flakeboard? Do you mean MDF?
Real estate markets care more about increasing profit margins than building quality homes. The only way that changes is if government steps in to force companies to build according to the natural disaster risks etc
Thanks for the videos and information. Education on the issues we face is so important
Housing should absolutely not be rebuilt in areas of high risk for repeated climate events. Let the stupid end.
I have lived in South Florida for 40 years I just retired and I’m packing to leave. The summers are too hot and too long and the annual hurricane season stress is enough.
I really did a lot of research before moving to where I'm at now but now that I've been here six years I've had three home insurance claims. I didn't realize that I'm in a small part of the region that experiences more extreme weather. I get much more rain than the rest of the region and much more intense wind. It's all been very expensive even with insurance covering so much. And I still have expensive problems to solve to protect my property. Luckily flooding isn't a risk. Fire maybe. Earthquake for sure. Unfortunately, it would triple my annual insurance rate to add earthquake coverage. That's the big one I didn't know before moving.
I really wish there was an easier way to get the full picture of what problems you might have in different areas.
It’s always baffled me that Americans are still moving to places we know will be under water soon. I just don’t understand.
Part of the problem is that lots of folks, both private citizens and political leaders alike, are emotionally connected to the false premise that there is no climate change. Facts won't budge emotions, so you can't reason and logic and argue to change their minds. You have to change their emotional response to climate change. That's a huge task. Their identity and their "tribe" that they identify with will change, and convincing folks to self-ostracize is an even bigger task.
You have to create a community that will welcome them first, because without that, the climate deniers will choose to hang out with other deniers before they choose isolation. It's our human need for community and to be part of a "tribe" that needs to be addressed first, if we're going to de-program anyone caught in any conspiracy, climate or otherwise.
Great video. Thanks.
Superb data presentation and storytelling in this clip, well done!
Florida has the extreme weather and endless natural disasters. But the biggest issue with Florida is that it's full of Floridians.
I live in SoCal, where wildfires and earthquakes are the greatest risk. I previously lived in far West Texas -- first in the Davis Mts. where wildfire and loss of power in winter storms threatened, then in El Paso, where flooding from the Rio Grande and wildfires were threats. I have also lived in IL(tornadoes & winter weather), NJ (hurricanes & flood), the piedmont of SC (flooding from rivers), VA (flooding from rivers), Long Island (flooding, hurricanes) and MI (extreme winter weather, lowland flooding). There's not a single place that doesn't carry risk from weather events. BUT you have to look at trends before deciding to move to someplace like coastal FL, and hurricanes do damage inland as well.
And deciding to go without insurance -- not being recently cancelled, but consciously deciding you won't pay for it -- should mean NO assistance beyond immediate help. This trend is just another facet of the feeling of entitlement so prevalent today. I'm happy for my tax money to help people who came to harm through events beyond their control. I don't want to help pay to rebuild for folks who chose not to be insured, deliberately laying the burden on the rest of us. And particularly if that rebuilding is in a flood zone!
0:01 - That property also includes the other three mansions on the point. Yacht not included.
Do everything but prevent climate change !
I think you mean halt and reverse it it is already here.
That’s what the idiots voted for
@@mikjb Well we've just seen the beginning of it.
@@philippemiller4740
If nothing is done yes, it will get worse, globally.
Say goodbye to Maldives.
They have know about this almost my entire life but getting people in the beginning to believe in something that they could not see, feel or touch was like telling them the tooth fairy was real.
In the beginning it was just a bunch of black ink on a page.
The merchants of doubt began a campaign for the sake of profits long ago without much to refute what they were saying with.
We like to pretend as a species we are all so facts oriented but we make our decisions with our emotions and our instincts first.
Then add in trust biases and it really is amazing that "we" have made the advaces that we have.
We pay some athletes millions to play a game and our scientists and teachers bupkiss.
Kinda proves the point.
@@philippemiller4740
If nothing is done yes, it will get worse, globally.
Say goodbye to Maldives.
They have know about this almost my entire life but getting people in the beginning to believe in something that they could not see, feel or touch was like telling them the tooth fairy was real.
In the beginning it was just a bunch of black ink on a page.
The merchants of doubt began a campaign for the sake of profits long ago without much to refute what they were saying with.
We like to pretend as a species we are all so facts oriented but we make our decisions with our emotions and our instincts first.
Then add in trust biases and it really is amazing that "we" have made the advaces that we have.
We pay some athletes millions to play a game and our scientists and teachers bupkiss.
Kinda proves the point.
Stop subsidizing insurance, and people will be less inclined to move to those places. CNN had a story this year in how Florida's last resort insurance (CPI Corp.) is one big storm away from insolvency, which will result in other Florida citizens having to shoulder the losses. So long as lawmakers keep the price of insurance less than the risk, people will live in risky places.
A good point.
I left the SE due to the rising humidity/heat. I couldn’t breathe, couldn’t go outside, couldn’t enjoy the beauty of the region due to the escalating temperatures suffocating me. I now am in an area that has fire risks (tho not nearly to the extent of CA 😢), but I don’t live in suffocation, can go outside, and don’t live under the threat of tornadoes in the night. When no place is truly safe, I’ll take the better option and live a better life.
Our biggest "climate" issue (Willamette Valley, NW Oregon) is fire, and it's nothing new. Despite climate change making things worse, it's really been the main issue here for millennia. The entire west coast ecosystem has co-evolved with fire. It's part of the deal of living in this part of the world. We had an offer in on the land back in 2020, when the Beachie Creek fire crept ever closer to "our parcel." As it turned out, it came within about a mile and a half of the property so it was spared...for the time being.
Now we're building our house on that land, and to do our best to mitigate the fire risk, we're clearing about 3.5 acres around the house site of all trees (currently all conifers) and will be planting a relatively lush veggie garden in that area, as well as some deciduous trees. There will be 3' of stone siding at the base of the house and at least 5' of paved patio or rock garden around the entire sides of the house with no plantings in that 5' zone. In addition, the rest of the house "siding" will be a lime plaster over light straw clay walls (which basically do not burn). We're installing fiberglass or aluminum windows (TBD) and a metal roof with no valleys, as well as installing a sprinkler system with heads along the peak of the roof and all around the sides of the house to water down the sides of the house and the 20" surrounding the house thoroughly in the event of any fires/firebrands in our area. We're also putting in ceiling sprinkler heads inside the house that will be triggered should a fire start inside the house. These are normally only required in commercial buildings, but we'll get a discount on our home owners insurance and peace of mind by installing them. The water supply for that combined sprinkler system is a spring 160' up slope that keeps a 5,000 gallon water tank up there topped up. In the case of a power outage which would keep our well pump from operating, that water will gravity feed down to that sprinkler system by opening a valve down by the house. We'll try to figure out how to automate this in case we're not at home to open the valve ourselves.
Additionally, there's a LOT of dry dead standing trees and dead branches in the forest on the property. It's PACKED with fuel just waiting to go up like a torch the moment there's a lightening strike or some idiot throwing their cigarette butt out the window! So we're in the process of systematically reducing that fuel load by heavy thinning and are also applying for both state and federal grants to get some financial help with with this ongoing project in the forest on our land, which basically hasn't been maintained for about 20 years since before we bought it. We're getting up in years, so we can only do so much so fast. If we can get some additional funding we'll be able to hire some help with this to make it go much more quickly! If we can weed out and chip up all the dead trees and branches in those overgrown forest areas, when a fire comes through (WHEN, because it's only a matter of time), it will hopefully stay on the ground and not get up into the crown of the trees to get totally out of control.
You are obviously aware of the risks. I have those same risks, mitigation is expensive as you have outlined but as long as I can afford insurance I'm OK. If/when I rebuild it will be to new standards that will achieve what you are planning.
There is a lot of discussion about forest maintenance, the accepted practice is simply to have proscribed burns, but this may be wrong as it promotes subsequent fires racing through the tree tops. That type of fire is a bad as you can get.
@@paulc6766 Frankly, if we tried to prescribe burn our way through the worst stretch of forest on our property we'd have a full blown canopy fire within minutes. It's that bad! It's one of those mono crop plantings of noble fir for Christmas trees that never ended up getting harvested or thinned whatsoever, and now their between 20 - 35' tall. At least a third of the trees in there are standing dead trees, and ALL of the trees in there that are still alive have dead branches from ground level up to about the top 25% of their canopy. They're spaced every 4-5', covering about 25 acres...and that's only one of the stands on the property. Granted, it's the largest problem stand of trees on the land by a good bit, but there are a couple other problem stands that are much younger with mostly live trees. In the case of that particular stand of trees, it's a complete disaster waiting to happen and needs MAJOR thinning and removal/reduction of the fuel load; definitely NOT a prescribed burn situation!
Seeing the cost of disasters in the south really makes you wonder how republican politicians think they have ground to stand on with their accusations of bad governance against California.
I’m grateful that people in the South never had to question if their fellow Americans would help them. I’m disgusted and saddened that Californians now have to live with that fear while still running for their lives.
We have lived in southern Louisiana for 20 years, and we're recently hammered by hurricanes Laura and Delta. We moved to the area for work, which is a huge incentive for a lot of migration. Recently retired, the incentive to stay has dwindled and we are considering moving back to western PA. But dang will I hate shoveling snow in the bleak damp winters!
The answer is always $$$
Yes, which is why wealth is good. Poverty is death.
When we stop subsidizing their insurance costs. Either with private insurance spreading risk to low risk areas, or with direct payments with Tax dollars
My family and I live in Asheville, and I have to disagree about the comment that people are foregoing insurance because they expect to be bailed out, or this idea that relief has an unintended consequence of discouraging insurance. I think it's a cost calculation people can't make work out, and with the state of the insurance industry and government relief arms like FEMA (neither of which is equipped to do the job folks need them to do to the extent needed given these extreme weather events), I just think boiling that down to individual irresponsibility is misleading.
I love this series though and this was a great clip otherwise.
I was wondering why people should live in the south when its so endangered by hurricanes...
James Howard Kunstler addressed this same issue in his 2005 book "The Long Emergency." Now, he was talking about Peak Oil rather than climate change, but he said that areas like the South and Southwest are heavily dependent on things like air conditioning and should that go away or not be as available as it is now, those areas will basically become unlivable. He pointed out that solar and wind are intermittent and not as reliable as fossil fuels and that we cannot keep up our current standard of living based on renewables alone. These technologies simply cannot produce enough electricity to meet the demand; and demand keeps rising all the time.
Most people in the colder North use fossil fuels to heat their homes and businesses. Without fossil fuels the North will become unlivable in the winter.
All of these are showing me that where we live right now is a pretty awesome spot. We moved here for many reasons, but climate change wasn't actually on that list, so knowing that we picked well is reassuring. I only hope that people wise up and move to more stable climate regions before it becomes far more difficult and expensive than it already is. If we discovered that we were in an unstable location, like south Florida, we would be finding a way out already, not waiting to see it get more extreme.
My house is made out of block, cement and rebar. In the last 30 years it survived a small tornado and a small wildfire.
I'm from Los Angeles (I'm fine), and housing situation is crazy. It doesn't help that insurance companies are currently CANCELING fire insurance policies when we need them most. We literally had to make a rule a few days ago that companies couldn't cancel people when their houses are in an active fire zone!
Insurance is pure evil.
While it is bad thing to do, one understands insurance side (up to some amount) - when local management is making situation more risky and on top not allowing to increase payments, no wonder they wanted to get out of there. Now loses will be covered by other customers elsewhere (insurance always works with using most customers money to pay few. Minus profit ofcourse)
I live in Louisville Co, where the Marshall fire surprised us all 3 years ago, burning more than a thousand homes, in a firestorm similar to what LA is dealing with now. What have I done? I have relatively fire resistant siding (hardboard) and a resistant roof, and defensible space around the home. I will be moving in 18 mos or so to a senior coop building, which is about 7 miles east, and less likely to be in a fire. Hail, wind will remain challenges, as will drought, here in the west. Were I to move away, it is likely to be towards the upper midwest, or New Zealand!
I love Louisiana, and it pains me that I can't live where I grew up because the climate messes us up every year.
If you have ever lived in Iowa, you would understand. The urge to live ANYWHERE that has decent weather, something to do, and any form of natural beauty at all is overwhelming.
I live in northern Minnesota and I really feel I live in one of the safest parts of the nation as far as climate and geology go. We don't have volcanoes, we don't have much earthquake risk, we don't have mountains or oceans to roil the weather, we don't have hurricanes, with all the farming going on around us we don't have wildfire risk, most tornadoes don't impact us much. The worst case scenario is if there is a cold snap with either a blizzard or ground blizzard and the electricity fails for several days. Keeping warm will be a problem. It happened in April of 1997, but luckily it wasn't very cold (relatively) so we were able to use our generator to power our fridge, furnace and TV, alternating with our sump and lift pumps. No power for 3 days, but we survived. I wouldn't want to do that when it is -20 degrees, though.
It’s also got to be pretty safe as far as the crime rate too, yes?
the old ppl drives the home price up and leave, they went south cuz old joints hurt with the cold up north.... their homes that they bought for 300k are mostly 1-2 millions nowadays, selling it & they buys 2 houses at where they move to, driving the price of those area up as well while have an extra home they can rent out.
I've been complaining about how they keep rebuilding disaster areas for decades, often to be ridiculed for my opinion that if you get hit with a disaster in an area that is prone to disasters the relief you get isn't to rebuild, but to relocate, rebuilding shouldn't fall on insurance companies or national relief funds if you are in a disaster area, if you want to rebuild, you do it on your own dime, if you want assistance from others, you need to move to someplace safer.
I live in Switzerland and 'm not planning to move.
Switzerland will stay nice so long as it stays European. Please don’t become like the UK.
I just left Southeast Louisiana for Tennessee. Its so many things. Opportunity, cost of living, loss of infrastructure and lack of access to entertainment venues - Louisiana has music and food, sure but not much else. The heat the year before I left made it prohibitive to be outside in the summer at all - we had 100 days straight of 100+ heat index days. Summer is stifling. There is no point in the year where its just comfortable. Sure, my homeowners insurance doubled from 2017-2024 but that alone wouldn't have made me move. Louisiana's schools are atrocious. The crime ... so much crime ... Its all of it.
I will *always* regret moving. I will always want to move back. My family has been there since the 1730's. Its just not tenable anymore.
I moved to eugene oregon because climate risks are lower around the pacific northwest. Eugene has two major rivers that run through the city, so I bought a house on a hill and out of flood zones. there is wild fire risk in western oregon, but it's relatively mild as the rain is consistent, even in "drought" years it still rains significantly, and the native vegetation does not dry out like it does in California.
Florida is already a hell hole. I can't imagine living anywhere on the gulf coast.
When I lived in Humboldt County, California and experienced strong earthquakes and realized we were at risk for tsunamis, it scared me, but I loved living there. I eventually moved for employment and opportunity to a slightly safer location in California that has a slightly higher risk of wildfires. I chose not to move to a much riskier area that was prettier because of the risk of fire and knowing that climate change was going to make that worse. I admit that a nice community, family, employment and services are very important factors in selecting a place to live. I wish I could believe that I would move if I felt my house was at risk of a catastrophe, but I honestly don't know. It is also expensive and difficult to relocate. We tell ourselves all sorts of things to justify our decisions.
with freedom comes responsibility, with choice comes consequences🙂
As someone who moved to NC piedmont region, the tone of the video and the assertion that I was insipid or wasn't thinking about the future kind of hurt. I can't afford to live further north. Also, I looked at the weather patterns. My area was not at risk. Yeah, I got some of Helene, but there hadn't been a hurricane in Shelby, NC in 50 years. Yes, it gets hot, but in 2100, this area is supposed to be like the Paris, TX of today. And we all have insurance, but we are not typically eligible for flood insurance since we don't live on a floodplain. Overall, good video, but please watch how you characterize a state as long and ecologically diverse as North Carolina.
When people no longer enjoy peace and quiet….never.
The big takeaway I got from this is Nevada is the best place to set down your roots as it ranks low in natural disaster risk, it doesn't cost much to repair, the state can capable afford repairs, and much of it isn't getting price gouged by insurance
Apparently Duluth is the place to be.
In the future, anyway
Federal government needs to stop giving money to rebuild in disaster prone areas. Instead have that money help relocate people to less hazardous areas.
It's one thing to expect individuals to understand, but why do insurance companies insure these places and banks give mortgages? Aren't the banks the ones who will lose out as well when homes are destroyed and no one can afford to build back?
I'm from Latvia, and living near volcanoes, under 2 moving tectonic plates, or places with high tornado and tsunami risk seems dangerous already, because when winds here reach 100km/h, it's already leaving bad outcomes, there should be a better reason to why a lot of people goes to live in those places, and i think most of the time, it's lack of research and money, and those who already live there, just doesn't want to leave everything behind, not everyone can sell and buy home when ever they want, not even talking about integration.
Remember: While you are in Florida, you are surrounded by Florida Men.
Thank you 🙏🏼
Life is a risky business
I need an app to tell me that things are capable of burning next to my house, thanks random business guy who has already run multiple separate businesses on this show
I hope to stay put in New England. Sure the weather sucks, but I don’t have to deal with natural disasters
Thumbs up for Daryl’s board game collection!
A national strategy is needed, to support and encourage movement to safer more climate resilient places. The federal government will go bankrupt if it bails out cities every time a climate disaster strikes in areas at high risk of them.
Where is safe?
Why would people worry about that?
They don't believe in science, climate change, flood warnings or listening to the gov't.
Let them learn the hard way
Hi, I live in France and was wondering were you found the data that you use on this show. I'm really interested in the data like days above 100°, fire risk,... but in Europe. Could you tell me how to find it or even better, could you do an episode like this one but about Europe ?
Anyway, thanks for the great show.
When climate change makes people lose their home, the following home in short period of time and when their families loe their homes/lives then they'll take it more seriously.
The other part is low taxes and a low cost of living isn't worth the higher insurance rates, losing insurance, losing a home, being unable to settle down for a long time without constantly moving.
More research needs to be done on making modern homes more robust without being priced sky high.
From now on, I think anyone moving to a risky area should shoulder the risk, not me.
Well this is not an easy topic. I sometimes think that people who move to the high risk areas for natural disaster think same like people who smoke or vape that nothing bad is going to happen to them if it happens to someone else for the same reason.
Well a good thing for me is that my country especially the central mountainous region where i live is not prone ti extreme weather. For me the trigger would be if water was hard to come by.
stupid question
when socio-economic conditions allow it
The people of Florida don't believe in climate change, but the insurance companies do. Like they always say, the market will sort it out.
Insurance payouts and disaster relief are are huge economic subsidies to the coasts while the destruction of homes supports housing inflation.
Instead of panning, you should have reset the 2100 Coastline projections for each chunk of the South East.
I’ve always wanted to move to the panhandle of florida but now my SC don’t seem so bad 😆
It won't matter where you live. If your neighbors are starving they'll be heading your way to join you.
I would love to know some resources you and your team would recommend for someone who is looking to move soon to hopefully mitigate climate change related challenges in the future.
I’m sitting pretty here in Northern VA, but I think if stuff really gets bad, I might pack up and head for NYC or Cleveland, OH.
That's all well and good, but people, including me, have had to leave NoVa due to the absurd cost of living. Also, by 2100, the heat you feel will be equivalent to the Paris, TX of today.
The climate will force the change in time
Right now I'm suffering in super cold temps in the polar vortex. Give me a hot flood and some fire please.
I did move. To Irvine, California. Nice, safe college town with glorious weather and lots of Chinese influence.
It's listed at 300 million but it will not sell.
Shhhhhhhhhh let them. Just. Let them.
Hmmm, never. They will just move incrementally inland until winter is essentially gone.
Yeppers 👍, insurance corps just working day and night to keep our insurance rates affordable 😅
Thank you for your service 🤮🤮🤮
In a few years there are no safe spaces to live. So why not move somewhere nice now?
Its not that bad in Norway btw
Never.. disasters always happen to other people.......
300 million for a house is a perfect example of the housing bubble. Its actually worth less than half that. Prob a fifth. 🤠
I love this
Most people won't make a move until staying in place is more painful than moving. When you're a victim or financially can't handle the pain, you'll move. Until then enjoy the game of Russian Roulette.
why do these people choose to stay in/move to high risk areas without insurance? i know it's expensive but surely the better choice is to move, right?
I feel like I'm dumber having listening to the people in this video
This kinda reporting that talks about peripheral options need to stop. 🛑
We need to act against climate change. We need massive action to reduce it. And we needed it 20 years ago. If media doesn’t raise massive awareness to help humans, homes would be the last thing to worry about.
I get a certain satisfaction from knowing that people with lots of money but who do not accept the truth of human caused climate change or it's inveitable consiquences will loose a great deal. Kind of fitting don't you think.
Just look at all the completely mobile van lifers out there ? We're completely gone !