The funding needed by UN climate disaster appeals has soared by more than 800% in 20 years as global heating takes hold. But only about half of it is being met by rich countries, according to a new report by Oxfam.
Use an organisation more efficient than the UN then.
I thought that natural disasters, or at least the effects of natural disasters has lessened over the decades. The costs might be going up, but that’s due to damage to physical things, not lives. Lives lost due to disasters have gone down.
I was chatting with someone and whinging, as usual, that charities took 50% of the loot.
He claimed it was actually 90%. Could this be the cause of the problem?
Funding needs only ever increase.
Not “global heating,” you bad, bad Guardianista. It’s “climate-caused [fill in blank].”
May 2022 temp = 0.17c above 91-20 average.
May 2022 temp = 0.23c below 2016.
https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Temp-Global_May-2922_RS.png
And as Tim has noted in other topics, how do we know 350 ppm of CO2 is THE correct amount?
SadButMad they know it’s all bullshit. But to say so is a bad career move: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/05/21/hsbc-senior-banker-spanked-after-dissing-the-climate-crisis/
“The funding needed by UN climate disaster appeals has soared by more than 800% in 20 years as global heating takes hold.”
Except… there has been no heating for 25 years and slight cooling for the last ten. And the number of lives lost in natural disasters has diminished significantly in the last 50 years.
The 800% increase needed will be to cover the cost of the grifters in this racket.
Addollff: I’m current reading about England in the 14th century, temperatures then were about 1.2C higher than the 1990 holy grail base point. Agricultural disasters happened when the climate cooled and the “medditeranean” crops failed, agriculture didn’t really recover fully until cooler-temperature things like potatoes were imported from the new world.
there must be a correlation between funding outlandish zero carbon policies and the country becoming poorer!
“global heating”
I still makes me chuckle that their “global warming” brand became so tarnished that they felt the need to change it.
My wife spent a year working in the Yukon, the temperature range was from -58 to +28, amazingly she survived this terrible transition
The “funding needed” is a useless number without the “funding used” and “ROI” numbers to accompany it.