activists in West Oakland, California demand reparations for 'climate justice

[glorybebe]

• San Francisco Bay community of West Oakland faces an environmental threat caused by toxic waste lurking in soil as water levels rise due to climate change
• Residents, predominantly people of color, are advocating for climate justice as a means of reparations as buried contaminants will likely rise to the surface 
• There is an urgency with human-induced climate change already causing groundwater levels to rise in West Oakland and other parts of the Bay Area

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12141815/Race-activists-West-Oakland-California-say-rising-sea-levels-not-fault-demand-reparations.html

Come on, where is it going to stop?  

[Hawken]

Bill Gates & Barrack Obama better get rid of those beachfront homes if sea levels are to rise. 

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, glorybebe said:

Come on, where is it going to stop?  

I think that depends on just how much effort the media puts into propaganda around it.  I could easily see splinter groups becoming violent as a means to "encourage" government to "do the right thing".

[acidhead]

1 hour ago, Hawken said:

Bill Gates & Barrack Obama better get rid of those beachfront homes if sea levels are to rise. 

Please don't criticize Obama  

 

 

 

[acidhead]

Just curious... Exactly how high has the sea risen so far?

[psyche101]

48 minutes ago, acidhead said:

Just curious... Exactly how high has the sea risen so far?

At San Francisco roughly 16 centimetres rise over eighty years. 

https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/high-tide-claim-sinks-under-weight-of-evidence/

 

 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, acidhead said:

Please don't criticize Obama  

 

 

 

 

 

I thought you would have been a FOX fan? 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Hawken said:

Bill Gates & Barrack Obama better get rid of those beachfront homes if sea levels are to rise. 

Whatever for? Way to increase value 

 

 

 

[acidhead]

50 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

 

I thought you would have been a FOX fan? 

Not sure what you mean there buds

[psyche101]

9 minutes ago, acidhead said:

Not sure what you mean there buds

They debunked the Obama butt glance. 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/07/no-obama-wasnt-checking-out-womans-ass/

Not sure about the failed submarine salesman though. 

[Tatetopa]

It has happened before. Love Canal is an example.  It will happen again.  When all of the desirable areas have been taken,  the undesirable ones get developed into affordable, middle class housing.   These people won't get much.  Doesn't mean they are wrong though.  Communities and land have been poisoned all across the US.   The long term  goal might be to stop this behavior.  A little publicity might help, so let them demand billions.  Doesn't mean they will get it.

 

[acidhead]

34 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

They debunked the Obama butt glance. 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/07/no-obama-wasnt-checking-out-womans-ass/

Not sure about the failed submarine salesman though. 

No they covered for him looking at that 16 year old. The media has always had Obama's back.  The video doesn't lie. 

[pellinore]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

At San Francisco roughly 16 centimetres rise over eighty years. 

https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/high-tide-claim-sinks-under-weight-of-evidence/

 

 

16 centimetres? Less than two courses of bricks, then. The "concerned residents" should be given a trowel and a pallet of bricks each-they'll get the flood defences finished in a week.

[itsnotoutthere]

Just give me the money....

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, acidhead said:

No they covered for him looking at that 16 year old. The media has always had Obama's back.  The video doesn't lie. 

Seen the full video? I'm guessing not? 

[psyche101]

44 minutes ago, pellinore said:

16 centimetres? Less than two courses of bricks, then. The "concerned residents" should be given a trowel and a pallet of bricks each-they'll get the flood defences finished in a week.

It's not the rise of the sea over the land that is the problem. The rising sea levels are pushing groundwater up into contaminated soil and running off. The models suggest that the problem will become a serious health threat. 

@Tatetopa mentioned Love Canal. A good example. What happened there is what rising sea levels will do to San Francisco according to the models. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal

[pellinore]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

It's not the rise of the sea over the land that is the problem. The rising sea levels are pushing groundwater up into contaminated soil and running off. The models suggest that the problem will become a serious health threat. 

@Tatetopa mentioned Love Canal. A good example. What happened there is what rising sea levels will do to San Francisco according to the models. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal

I know. I'm joking.

[odas]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Seen the full video? I'm guessing not? 

Guess Obama should have looked at Sarkozy's butt instead? Acid is just jealous.

[Zebra3]

10 hours ago, glorybebe said:

•  

Come on, where is it going to stop?  

LOL. The question is, what's the next ridiculous demand?

[Essan]

So, climate change - due to human activities - is causing them issues and they demand compensation?

I suggest they be given that compensation so long as they can prove that at no time in their lives have they used any form of fossil fuel or product made from fossil fuel.  

(It's a bit like those "Stop Oil" idiots here in the UK wrecking "sustainable" gardens in order to protest that we shouldn't use oil - whilst all the time waving plastic banners and dressed in fleece and polyester clothing ....)

[Zebra3]

[Myles]

33 minutes ago, Essan said:

So, climate change - due to human activities - is causing them issues and they demand compensation?

I suggest they be given that compensation so long as they can prove that at no time in their lives have they used any form of fossil fuel or product made from fossil fuel.  

(It's a bit like those "Stop Oil" idiots here in the UK wrecking "sustainable" gardens in order to protest that we shouldn't use oil - whilst all the time waving plastic banners and dressed in fleece and polyester clothing ....)

Yep, these same people contributed to the environmental damage.

[Doug1066]

11 hours ago, glorybebe said:

• San Francisco Bay community of West Oakland faces an environmental threat caused by toxic waste lurking in soil as water levels rise due to climate change
• Residents, predominantly people of color, are advocating for climate justice as a means of reparations as buried contaminants will likely rise to the surface 
• There is an urgency with human-induced climate change already causing groundwater levels to rise in West Oakland and other parts of the Bay Area

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12141815/Race-activists-West-Oakland-California-say-rising-sea-levels-not-fault-demand-reparations.html

Come on, where is it going to stop?  

This is an orphan site.  We do not have funds to clean up orphan sites.  We used to.  That's what the Superfund was.  But Republicans, in their wisdom, decided that they didn't want to interfere with profits, so they did away with it.

Oklahoma has a fund for orphan oil wells.

Paying reparations will do nothing to clean up the mess.  This is what needs to be done to keep the problem from spreading.  This may mean condemning the site, scooping up the soil and disposing of it in a proper landfill.  That would mean taking houses, maybe destroying the entire neighborhood - we have demolished entire towns to clean them up, so this is not much different.  The people affected would recover some of their loss during condemnation, but they'd still have to move.

Doug

[darkmoonlady]

Disregarding previously ridiculing comments this isn't much different than the Hinkley case with PG+E. The toxic waste wasn't put into a predominately black neighborhood by accident. It never is. First black people are relegated to redlined areas and can't usually move elsewhere, the land is devalued as white people see it as where they won't live (usually 60s, 70s, but it can go farther back), so land is cheap, companies use land in black neighborhoods either as dumping grounds or use it as dumps first and sell off land to black families as tract housing knowing the toxic waste is there. It's happened all over the country. It isn't a debate it was policy. It happened in poorer white neighborhoods too we usually see those stories make the headlines. It's like for some of you, that you think racism and systemic racism never existed when white people absolutely enacted racist policies not just because they didn't care about black people (or native people they dumped toxic waste on reservations too) out of expediency and cost cutting. 

The bay area like all coastal areas is experiencing rising sea levels as well as sinking from using up ground water due to drought. The combined effect makes sea level rise worse. The Bay Area as a whole has much lower areas, estuaries and places built on fill, some with toxins from multiple sources. It's easy to google Superfund sites and cross reference with where a lot of people live now, and a lot of black people live who now finally thought they had some generational wealth with land being sky high in the Bay area, only to see toxic waste now threatening it. Not seeing the controversy of wanting to be compensated just like the folks in Hinkley did with PG+ E. Saying "where does it stop" is just another bullsh** way of saying black peoples concerns don't matter and that supposedly no harm was done when we know it was. 

[acidhead]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

Yep, these same people contributed to the environmental damage.

Climate alarmism is a religion for the Progressives. It parallels perfectly. Everybody is a sinner and unless each individual repents and acknowledges their sins by changing their carbon behavior they and everyone they love will perish in a ball of fire.