Empirical Data Refutes Media Claim Climate Change Putting Growing Cities ‘At Risk’


by Thomas Richard

An article in Bloomberg, titled “Climate Change Is Putting Swelling Cities at Risk,” with the subtitle,A warming world is putting Bangladesh, Niger, Pakistan, and other countries more at risk for extreme weather,” makes some false claims refuted by real-world data and by scientific research that examines the impacts of growth and the densification of cities. [emphasis, links added]

The authors, Dorothy Gambrell and Brian Kahn say this:

Weather events exacerbated by climate change will threaten many places in the coming years, and many of these locations are also projected to gain a lot of new inhabitants. In the world’s largest cities, governments will have to do more to protect the millions of people in danger from a hot planet.

The article provides a graphic, seen below, which purports to show where the urban populations are “most vulnerable to climate change.”

What is most telling is that the Bloomberg map shows clearly the at-risk urban cities have the lowest per-capita income and lower access to inexpensive energy.

It is no surprise that most of the economically depressed areas of Africa, [as well as Asia and India] are shown to be the most “at risk.”

They go on to cite specific examples:

None of these points are climate change-related or even “extreme weather”-related as Bloomberg’s headline claims, rather they are indications that these cities are experiencing resource overuse related to population growth, a “Tragedy of the commons” as described below:

According to the concept, should many people enjoy unfettered access to a finite, valuable resource such as a pasture [or water], they will tend to overuse it and may end up destroying its value altogether. Even if some users exercised voluntary restraint, the other users would merely supplant them, the predictable result a tragedy for all.

This is purely an issue of increased populations in a small area, not climate change.

A second problem related to the increase in population and expansion of cities is called the expanded bullseye effect, which occurs when population and development increase in areas or regions prone to natural disasters, as discussed in numerous Climate Realism posts here and here, for example.

Some of the claims, such as those of Mexico City’s drinking water issues and Jakarta sinking due to groundwater withdrawal are simply laughable to blame on climate change.

The Bloomberg article references no proof that the problems are being caused by climate change – because there simply isn’t any.

The article suggests that rising temperatures in cities in Asia/India are at the greatest risk.

However, recent data on the Urban Heat Island effect (UHI) by climatologist Roy Spencer, Ph.D., shows that the heat in cities and suburbs, in Asia and elsewhere like Phoenix, is a direct result of increasing populations and infrastructure boosting the UHI.

In the side-by-side map below listed as Figure 1, compare the amount of UHI effect difference between April 1850 and April 2023 in India’s most populous region:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Back in the 1970’s it was Global Cooling and a New Ice Age the very same Leftists Rags Time and Newsweek was giving it Front page Coverage and episode of In Serach Of was all about the Hard Winter of 1976/77 in Buffalo New York

Yet the left wants everyone (not hyperbole… EVERYONE) to live in huge, tightly packed cities.

06/06/24: No, gain of function research DID NOT cause COVID-19:

Since the first cases of COVID-19 were first identified in early 2020 and dated back to late 2019, many questions have been raised concerning the origin of the virus that causes the illness: SARS-CoV-2. Many have claimed the virus originated from a lab and was created through irresponsible gain-of-function research. They claim that deceitful scientists, rather than nature and poor human management, caused the pandemic. However, the truth of the virus’s origin is written in the genome of the virus itself, and the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 has definitively proven, since 2021, that it’s of natural origin. Here’s how…

Last edited 25 days ago by Greg

Um… what does this have to do with climate?

Fortunately, the science very clearly points to one conclusion: that of a natural origin for SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 infections it causes in humans.

Well… no it doesn’t. If COVID-19 evolved from non-infectious to HIGHLY infections, why did it evolve back to far less infectious?

and then an unreported infection event occurred where this virus actually infected a human,

There WAS a reported infection event at the lab.

Both have to do with denialism and conspiracy theory.

Both have to do with denialism and conspiracy theory.

Two of the three things you would know a lot about, since you obsess on them all.

06/22/24 – Everything’s About to Get a Hell of a Lot More Expensive Due to Climate ChangeIntensifying hurricanes, floods, and heat waves are wreaking havoc across the US—and on everyone’s bank accounts.

Tell it to the sun.