News
Colonialism’s legacy has left Caribbean nations much more vulnerable to hurricanes
Farah Nibbs, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Long before colonialism brought slavery to the Caribbean, the native islanders saw hurricanes and storms as part of the normal cycle of life.
The Taino of the Greater Antilles and the Kalinago, or Caribs, of the Lesser Antilles developed systems that enabled them to live with storms and limit their exposure to damage.
On the larger islands, such as Jamaica and Cuba, the Taino practiced crop selection with storms in mind, preferring to plant root crops such as cassava or yucca with high resistance to damage from hurricane and storm winds, as Stuart Schwartz describes in his 2016 book “Sea of Storms.”
The Kalinago avoided building their settlements along the coast to limit storm surges and wind damage. The Calusa of southwest Florida used trees as windbreaks against storm winds.
In fact, it was the Kalinago and Taino who first taught the Europeans – primarily the British, Dutch, French and Spanish – about hurricanes and storms. Even the word ‘hurricane’ comes from Huracán, a Taino and Mayan word denoting the god of wind.
But then colonialism changed everything.
I study natural disasters in the Caribbean, including how history molded responses to disasters today.
The current disaster crisis that the Caribbean’s small islands are experiencing as hurricanes intensify did not start a few decades ago. Rather, the islands’ vulnerability is a direct result of the exploitative systems forced upon the region by colonialism, its legacies of slave-based land policies and ill-suited construction and development practices, and its environmental injustices.
Forcing people into harm’s way
The colonial powers changed how Caribbean people interacted with the land, where they lived and how they recovered from natural hazard events.
Rather than growing crops that could sustain the local food supply, the Europeans who began arriving in the 1600s focused on exploitative extractive economic models and export cash crops through the plantation economy.
They forced Indigenous people off their lands and built settlements along the coast, which made it easier to import enslaved peoples and goods and to export cash crops such as sugar and tobacco to Europe – and also left communities vulnerable to storms. They also developed settlements in low-lying areas, often near rivers and streams, which could provide transportation for agricultural produce but which became flood risks during heavy rains.
Today, more than 70% of the Caribbean’s population lives along the coast, often less than a mile from the shore. These coastlines are not only highly exposed to hurricanes but also to sea-level rise fueled by climate change.
Legacies of slave-based land policies
Colonialism’s legacy of land policies has also made recovery from disasters much harder today.
When colonial powers took over, a few landowners were given control of most of the land, while the majority of the population was forced onto marginal and small areas. The local population had no legal right to the land, as the people did not possess land certificate titles or deeds and were often forced to pay rent to landlords.
After independence, most island governments tried to acquire land from former plantations or estates and to redistribute it to the working class. But these efforts, mainly in the 1960s and ’70s, largely failed to transform land ownership, improve economic development or reduce vulnerability.
One colonial legacy perpetuating vulnerability to this day is known as crown land, or state land. In the English-speaking Caribbean, all land for which there was no land grant was considered property of the British crown. Crown land can be found in every English-speaking island to this day. https://www.youtube.com/embed/YTckM-cNeII?wmode=transparent&start=0 How colonial powers controlled the Caribbean over time.
For example, in Barbuda, all land is vested in the “crown in perpetuity” on behalf of Barbudans. This means that an individual born on the island of Barbuda cannot individually own land.
Instead, land is communally owned, which limits access to the credit and development opportunities that were sorely needed to reconstruct the island after Hurricane Maria in 2017. Most Barbudans were unable to insure their homes because they had no title deeds to their property.
This and other collective land tenure systems created by colonialism places Caribbean residents at greater risk from a variety of natural hazards and limits their ability to seek financial credit for disaster recovery today.
The roots of poor construction
Vulnerability to disasters in the Caribbean also has roots in post-slavery housing construction and subsequent failures to institute proper building codes.
After emancipation from slavery, freed people had no right nor access to land. To build houses, they were forced to lease land from the former enslavers who at a whim could terminate their employment or kick them off the land.
This led to the development of a particular type of housing structure known as chattel houses in countries such as Barbados. These houses are tiny and were constructed in a way in which they could be easily taken apart and loaded onto carts, should the residents be forced out by their former enslavers. Many Bajans still live in these houses today, although quite a few have been converted to restaurants or shops.
In Aruba, Bonaire and Curaçao, owned by the Dutch, slave huts were built along the coast, on land not suitable for agriculture and easily damaged by storms. These former slave huts are now tourist attractions, but the colonial patterns of settling along the coast has left many coastal communities exposed to hurricane damage and rising seas.
The vulnerability of such houses is not only a result of their exposure to natural hazards but also the underlying social structures.
In many islands today, poorer residents can’t afford protective measures, such as installing storm shutters or purchasing solar-powered generators.
They often live in marginal and disaster-prone areas, such as steep hillsides, where housing tends to be cheaper. Houses in these areas are also often poorly constructed with low-grade materials, such as galvanized sheeting for roofs and walls.
This situation is made worse by the informal and unregulated nature of residential housing construction in the region and the poor enforcement of building codes.
Due to the legacy of colonialism, most housing or building standards or codes in the Commonwealth Caribbean are relics from the United Kingdom and in the French Antilles from France. Building standards across the region lack uniformity and are generally subjective and uncontrolled. Financial limitations and staffing constraints mean that codes and standards more often than not remain unenforced.
Progress, but still a lot of work to do
The Caribbean has made progress in developing wind-related building codes to try to increase resilience in recent years. And while damage from torrential rain is still not properly addressed in most Caribbean building standards, scientific guidance is available through the Caribbean Institute for Meteorology and Hydrology in Barbados.
Individual islands, including Dominica and Saint Lucia, have new minimum building standards for recovery after disasters. The island of Grenada is hoping to guide new construction as it recovers from Hurricane Beryl. Trinidad and Tobago has developed a national land use strategy but has struggled to use it.
Construction standards can help the islands build resilience. But work remains to be done to overcome the legacy of colonial-era land policies and development that have left island towns vulnerable to increasing storm risks.
Farah Nibbs, Assistant Professor of Emergency and Disaster Health Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Lifestyle
Newsweek Names Delta Dental of California One of America’s Greatest Workplaces for Diversity 2025
Annual ranking recognizes companies fostering inclusion and championing diversity based on anonymous employee feedback, public data, and third-party research.
SAN FRANCISCO /PRNewswire/ — Delta Dental of California and Affiliates, the leading dental insurance provider, has been recognized by Newsweek as one of America’s Greatest Workplaces for Diversity in 2025. This distinguished award is presented by Newsweek and Plant-A Insights Group to recognize U.S. companies across industries that prioritize fostering diversity and inclusive workplace cultures.
“Our people are our greatest asset,” said Brian Sherman, executive vice president and chief people officer of Delta Dental of California and Affiliates. “This recognition reflects our deep commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs that support and celebrate the unique perspectives and contributions of our employees.”
America’s Greatest Workplaces for Diversity is an annual ranking determined by a rigorous evaluation of public data, HR insights, and anonymous employee surveys. The list honors organizations with over 1,000 employees that demonstrate a meaningful commitment to offering distinctive company cultures inclusive of backgrounds and demographics, including age group, race, cultures, and sexual orientations. Research suggests about 80 percent of U.S. workers believe it’s important for companies to create inclusive cultures.
“As companies in the United States continue to navigate the evolving dynamics of the workplace, diversity remains a cornerstone of organizational success and social responsibility,” said Nancy Cooper, global editor in chief of Newsweek. “Newsweek and market-data research firm Plant-A Insights are proud to introduce ‘America’s Greatest Workplaces for Diversity 2025,’ highlighting companies committed to building inclusive workplaces.”
Delta Dental of California received a rating of 4.5 out of 5 stars for its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion practices in 2024. The company has also been recognized with other Newsweek accolades, including America’s Greatest Workplaces 2023, America’s Greatest Workplaces for Diversity 2023, and Americas Greatest Workplaces for Parents and Families 2023.
Delta Dental is committed to providing consistent, quality access to oral health care, improving education and driving lasting policy changes to address systemic issues. To learn more about what makes Delta Dental of California and Affiliates one of the best employers in the U.S., visit our career page.
About Delta Dental of California and Affiliates
Since 1955, Delta Dental of California and Affiliates has offered comprehensive, high-quality oral health care coverage to millions of enrollees and built the strongest network of dental providers in the country. The Delta Dental of California enterprise includes its affiliates Delta Dental Insurance Company, Delta Dental of Pennsylvania, Delta Dental of New York, Inc., as well as the national DeltaCare USA network, and provides dental benefits to more than 31 million people across 15 states and the District of Columbia.* All are members of the Delta Dental Plans Association based in Chicago, Illinois, the not-for-profit national association that through a national network of Delta Dental companies collectively covers millions of people nationwide. Delta Dental is a registered trademark of Delta Dental Plans Association.
For more information about Delta Dental of California and Affiliates, please visit www.deltadentalins.com
*Delta Dental of California and Affiliates’ operating areas encompass Alabama, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and the District of Columbia, as well as Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
SOURCE Delta Dental of California
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Earth
The US natural gas industry is leaking way more methane than previously thought. Here’s why that matters
Research reveals that methane emissions from U.S. natural gas operations are significantly underestimated, with a leak rate of 2.3 percent, which poses serious climate concerns and challenges in accurate measurement.
Anthony J. Marchese, Colorado State University and Dan Zimmerle, Colorado State University
Natural gas is displacing coal, which could help fight climate change because burning it produces fewer carbon emissions. But producing and transporting natural gas releases methane, a greenhouse gas that also contributes to climate change. How big is the methane problem?
For the past five years, our research teams at Colorado State University have made thousands of methane emissions measurements at more than 700 separate facilities in the production, gathering, processing, transmission and storage segments of the natural gas supply chain.
This experience has given us a unique perspective regarding the major sources of methane emissions from natural gas and the challenges the industry faces in terms of detecting and reducing, if not eliminating, them.
Our work, along with numerous other research projects, was recently folded into a new study published in the journal Science. This comprehensive snapshot suggests that methane emissions from oil and gas operations are much higher than current EPA estimates.
What’s wrong with methane
One way to quantify the magnitude of the methane leakage is to divide the amount of methane emitted each year by the total amount of methane pumped out of the ground each year from natural gas and oil wells. The EPA currently estimates this methane leak rate to be 1.4 percent. That is, for every cubic foot of natural gas drawn from underground reservoirs, 1.4 percent of it is lost into the atmosphere.
This study synthesized the results from a five-year series of 16 studies coordinated by environmental advocacy group Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), which involved more than 140 researchers from over 40 institutions and 50 natural gas companies.
The effort brought together scholars based at universities, think tanks and the industry itself to make the most accurate estimate possible of the total amount of methane emitted from all U.S. oil and gas operations. It integrated data from a multitude of recent studies with measurements made on the ground and from the air.
All told, based on the results of the new study, the U.S. oil and gas industry is leaking 13 million metric tons of methane each year, which means the methane leak rate is 2.3 percent. This 60 percent difference between our new estimate and the EPA’s current one can have profound climate consequences.
Methane is a highly potent greenhouse gas, with more than 80 times the climate warming impact of carbon dioxide over the first 20 years after it is released.
An earlier EDF study showed that a methane leak rate of greater than 3 percent would result in no immediate climate benefits from retiring coal-fired power plants in favor of natural gas power plants.
That means even with a 2.3 percent leakage rate, the growing share of U.S. electricity powered by natural gas is doing something to slow the pace of climate change. However, these climate benefits could be far greater.
Also, at a methane leakage rate of 2.3 percent, many other uses of natural gas besides generating electricity are conclusively detrimental for the climate. For example, EDF found that replacing the diesel used in most trucks or the gasoline consumed by most cars with natural gas would require a leakage rate of less than 1.4 percent before there would be any immediate climate benefit.
What’s more, some scientists believe that the leakage rate could be even higher than this new estimate.
What causes these leaks
Perhaps you’ve never contemplated the long journey that natural gas travels before you can ignite the burners on the gas stove in your kitchen.
But on top of the 500,000 natural gas wells operating in the U.S. today, there are 2 million miles of pipes and millions of valves, fittings, tanks, compressors and other components operating 24 hours per day, seven days a week to deliver natural gas to your home.
That natural gas that you burn when you whip up a batch of pancakes may have traveled 1,000 miles or more as it wended through this complicated network. Along the way, there were ample opportunities for some of it to leak out into the atmosphere.
Natural gas leaks can be accidental, caused by malfunctioning equipment, but a lot of natural gas is also released intentionally to perform process operations such as opening and closing valves. In addition, the tens of thousands of compressors that increase the pressure and pump the gas along through the network are powered by engines that burn natural gas and their exhaust contains some unburned natural gas.
Since the natural gas delivered to your home is 85 to 95 percent methane, natural gas leaks are predominantly methane. While methane poses the greatest threat to the climate because of its greenhouse gas potency, natural gas contains other hydrocarbons that can degrade regional air quality and are bad for human health.
Inventory tallies vs. aircraft surveillance
The EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory is done in a way experts like us call a “bottom-up” approach. It entails tallying up all of the nation’s natural gas equipment – from household gas meters to wellpads – and estimating an annualized average emission rate for every category and adding it all up.
There are two challenges to this approach. First, there are no accurate equipment records for many of these categories. Second, when components operate improperly or fail, emissions balloon, making it hard to develop an accurate and meaningful annualized emission rate for each source.
“Top-down” approaches, typically requiring aircraft, are the alternative. They measure methane concentrations upwind and downwind of large geographic areas. But this approach has its own shortcomings.
First, it captures all methane emissions, rather than just the emissions tied to natural gas operations – including the methane from landfills, cows and even the leaves rotting in your backyard. Second, these one-time snapshots may get distorted depending on what’s going on while planes fly around capturing methane data.
Historically, top-down approaches estimate emissions that are about twice bottom-up estimates. Some regional top-down methane leak rate estimates have been as high as 8 percent while some bottom-up estimates have been as low as 1 percent.
More recent work, including the Science study, have performed coordinated campaigns in which the on-the-ground and aircraft measurements are made concurrently, while carefully modeling emission events.
Helpful gadgets and sound policy
On a sunny morning in October 2013, our research team pulled up to a natural gas gathering compressor station in Texas. Using an US$80,000 infrared camera, we immediately located an extraordinarily large leak of colorless, odorless methane that was invisible to the operator who quickly isolated and fixed the problem.
We then witnessed the methane emissions decline tenfold – the facility leak rate fell from 9.8 percent to 0.7 percent before our eyes.
It is not economically feasible, of course, to equip all natural gas workers with $80,000 cameras, or to hire the drivers required to monitor every wellpad on a daily basis when there are 40,000 oil and gas wells in Weld County, Colorado, alone.
But new technologies can make a difference. Our team at Colorado State University is working with the Department of Energy to evaluate gadgetry that will rapidly detect methane emissions. Some of these devices can be deployed today, including inexpensive sensors that can be monitored remotely.
Technology alone won’t solve the problem, however. We believe that slashing the nation’s methane leak rate will require a collaborative effort between industry and government. And based on our experience in Colorado, which has developed some of the nation’s strictest methane emissions regulations, we find that best practices become standard practices with strong regulations.
We believe that the Trump administration’s efforts to roll back regulations, without regard to whether they are working or not, will not only have profound climate impacts. They will also jeopardize the health and safety of all Americans while undercutting efforts by the natural gas industry to cut back on the pollution it produces.
Anthony J. Marchese, Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, Walter Scott, Jr. College of Engineering; Director, Engines and Energy Conversion Laboratory; Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University and Dan Zimmerle, Senior Research Associate and Director of METEC, Colorado State University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, University of Michigan
An Arctic blast hitting the central and eastern U.S. in early January 2025 has been creating fiercely cold conditions in many places. Parts of North Dakota dipped to more than 20 degrees below zero, and people as far south as Texas woke up to temperatures in the teens. A snow and ice storm across the middle of the country added to the winter chill.
Forecasters warned that temperatures could be “10 to more than 30 degrees below normal” across much of the eastern two-thirds of the country during the first full week of the year.
But what does “normal” actually mean?
While temperature forecasts are important to help people stay safe, the comparison to “normal” can be quite misleading. That’s because what qualifies as normal in forecasts has been changing rapidly over the years as the planet warms.
Defining normal
One of the most used standards for defining a science-based “normal” is a 30-year average of temperature and precipitation. Every 10 years, the National Center for Environmental Information updates these “normals,” most recently in 2021. The current span considered “normal” is 1991-2020. Five years ago, it was 1981-2010.
But temperatures have been rising over the past century, and the trend has accelerated since about 1980. This warming is fueled by the mining and burning of fossil fuels that increase carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere. These greenhouse gases trap heat close to the planet’s surface, leading to increasing temperature.
Because global temperatures are warming, what’s considered normal is warming, too.
So, when a 2025 cold snap is reported as the difference between the actual temperature and “normal,” it will appear to be colder and more extreme than if it were compared to an earlier 30-year average.
Thirty years is a significant portion of a human life. For people under age 40 or so, the use of the most recent averaging span might fit with what they have experienced.
But it doesn’t speak to how much the Earth has warmed.
How cold snaps today compare to the past
To see how today’s cold snaps – or today’s warming – compare to a time before global warming began to accelerate, NASA scientists use 1951-1980 as a baseline.
The reason becomes evident when you compare maps.
For example, January 1994 was brutally cold east of the Rocky Mountains. If we compare those 1994 temperatures to today’s “normal” – the 1991-2020 period – the U.S. looks a lot like maps of early January 2025’s temperatures: Large parts of the Midwest and eastern U.S. were more than 7 degrees Fahrenheit (4 degrees Celsius) below “normal,” and some areas were much colder.
But if we compare January 1994 to the 1951-1980 baseline instead, that cold spot in the eastern U.S. isn’t quite as large or extreme.
Where the temperatures in some parts of the country in January 1994 approached 14.2 F (7.9 C) colder than normal when compared to the 1991-2020 average, they only approached 12.4 F (6.9 C) colder than the 1951-1980 average.
As a measure of a changing climate, updating the average 30-year baseline every decade makes warming appear smaller than it is, and it makes cold snaps seem more extreme.
Conditions for heavy lake-effect snow
The U.S. will continue to see cold air outbreaks in winter, but as the Arctic and the rest of the planet warm, the most frigid temperatures of the past will become less common.
That warming trend helps set up a remarkable situation in the Great Lakes that we’re seeing in January 2025: heavy lake-effect snow across a large area.
As cold Arctic air encroached from the north in January, it encountered a Great Lakes basin where the water temperature was still above 40 F (4.4 C) in many places. Ice covered less than 2% of the lakes’ surface on Jan. 4.
That cold dry air over warmer open water causes evaporation, providing moisture for lake-effect snow. Parts of New York and Ohio along the lakes saw well over a foot of snow in the span of a few days.
The accumulation of heat in the Great Lakes, observed year after year, is leading to fundamental changes in winter weather and the winter economy in the states bordering the lakes.
It’s also a reminder of the persistent and growing presence of global warming, even in the midst of a cold air outbreak.
Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, Professor Emeritus of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
-
Urbanism1 year agoSignal Hill, California: A Historic Enclave Surrounded by Long Beach
-
News2 years agoDiana Gregory Talks to us about Diana Gregory’s Outreach Services
-
Senior Pickleball Report2 years agoThe Absolute Most Comfortable Pickleball Shoe I’ve Ever Worn!
-
STM Blog2 years agoWorld Naked Gardening Day: Celebrating Body Acceptance and Nature
-
Senior Pickleball Report2 years agoACE PICKLEBALL CLUB TO DEBUT THEIR HIGHLY ANTICIPATED INDOOR PICKLEBALL FRANCHISES IN THE US, IN EARLY 2023
-
Travel2 years agoUnique Experiences at the CitizenM
-
Automotive2 years ago2023 Nissan Sentra pricing starts at $19,950
-
Senior Pickleball Report2 years ago“THE PEOPLE’S CHOICE AWARDS OF PICKLEBALL” – VOTING OPEN