Japan Spent Mightily to Soften Nature’s Wrath, but Can It Ever Be Enough?

Radioactive decontamination garbage flowed out by this flood. Japanese authorities always try to overstate safe than actual state. Japan's Abe government's interest to natural disaster is lower than national security. Japan's shelters have not yet privacy,sometime even refuse homeless person. Japanese society is dominated by oppressive atmosphere that silence criticism to authorities. and,where is responsible is always obscure.

Toronto has had problems with its storm drains: they were constructed to deal with 1950s rainfalls, not superstorms we see now. These problems will be ever greater in years to come. Expect infrastructure like drains, roadways, even softly sloping hillsides to be adversely impacted by climate change. Then there are increasing winds in those storms. Can wooden buildings be expected to cope with sometimes hurricane-force gusts?

Japan should consult with the Netherlands to learn from their engineers on best and most cost effective ways to adapt to climate changes.

The population of Japan is 125 million, a little over a third of the entire population of the US. The land they live on is about the size of CA, and most of it is mountainous. Short of restricting growth from coasts and rivers, I don't understand how this island in the path of typhoons forever, can engineer itself from floods.

“...I want to move to a place where my family can live without worrying....” Best thought in article: try not to live in a area prone to flooding: New Orleans, The Rockaways, Missouri River basin, Atlantic coast beaches, etc. etc. Government should be first encouraging relocations BEFORE any big-ticket engineering is done. Whatever it takes: cash buyouts, or legal ordinance, get them out of harm's way.

This is just the preview of coming attractions folks, wait until you see the feature! A country with the primitive infrastructure the US has should be particularly afraid of what is to come and yet we elect corrupt politicians who call climate change a hoax and do nothing. The Trump administration is even worse, acting as a cheerleader for the fossil fuel industry. Even if the whole world got onboard right now and took drastic actions, events such as this, or worse will still occur far into the future. With the lack of action we see today we are guaranteed to see much, much worse in the years ahead.

Local newscasts leading up to Typhoon 19 compared it to a decades earlier typhoon that killed 1200. Assessments of the effectiveness of Japan's spending start with the 1100-death difference between the two.

Just a single observation on what I see in Japan in the photos, but really presented as a message to the America I visit for 3-4 weeks each summer. I was surprised to see all those old-fashioned telephone poles with wires all over the place, surprised since the emphasis is on Japan's concern with infrastructure. Here in my city in Sweden, Linköping about the size of Burlington VT, all service lines are buried even quite far out into the countryside. Never had a power outage in my 23 years here. For comparison, drive around Albany NY some time to see some of the astonishing interwoven lines and tree branches. No walls or levees will do the hoped-for job so evacuation must become the norm as pointed out in the article. Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com Citizen US SE

I grew up along the confluence of the Mississippi and Missouri rivers. Experiencing the Monarch levee breach first hand. Before, during and afterwards, working to get the grid back up. We can only do little against the force of nature and overwhelming water. We build and develop too heavily in flood plains. In my humble opinion we should restore natural buffers, and not damage what's still in place. My heart goes out to the good people of Japan. I'll do what I can to help.

I wish the phrase “one-hundred” year flood/hurricane/typhoon/earthquake/fire [or Five-hundred year etc.] were rephrased to what they actually are. Replace hundred-year flood by “There’s is a 1% probability that a flood of this magnitude will occur this year.” Relying on old data to predict future events is not helpful. Climate change will most probably increase both the severity and frequency of these events. Instead of building infrastructure to mitigate the effects, consider moving whoie communities away from danger. Buying them out may be less expensive in the long run than building and maintaining bthese projects. The interventions may in fact cause more harm [unintended consequences]. This’ll is exactly why dams are being removed. Do not try to change the things you cannot change. Accept them. Man pales in comparison with nature.

I was in Japan for the first time in the summer of 2018. The heat was record breaking. It was so hot, it was hard to walk, and for many reasons, Japan doesn't have air conditioning like the US does. I'm in good health, but some of the people I was traveling with found it hard to move and even to breathe because the air felt so heavy. In larger countries, there's at least an illusion you can escape the heat by going somewhere else. I don't know what Japan will do as intense storms and weather extremes continue.

This article does not deal with the most important points. In the 1950s, after 1200 were killed in a storm, Japan went on a spending spree for levees and channelization of rivers. There is no way that such a plan could work long-term, but it does maximize the area free for development...for a while. Japan made the wrong choice, as did we, climate change is hardly relevant. The article cites a wooden marker with a flood mark from more than 250 years ago. From the way the text is, it seems this flood did not equal that old one. So, every few centuries, there is a whopper of a storm, and people are just noticing..?

It is a question of available "safe" land Population Density (# of people per square mile) US : 91 Japan : 869 - ten times the population density of the US Japan's basic problem is overpopulation. There is only so much safe land. The same is even more true of Bangladesh, regularly subjected to "killer" floods It's population density: 2,862 - 31 times that of the US

As a long-term resident of Japan I can attest to the ubiquitous infrastructure, the vast majority of which appears to be designed by engineers stridently opposed to aesthetics and the natural environment. That said, there's 125 million people crammed into a country not much bigger than California and mostly mountainous, and the government does an amazing job of protecting its citizens from the forces of nature. I would expect if a similarly sized storm hit a major metropolitan area in the US the devastation would be worse than Katrina.

And they say wealthier nations can manage climate change better. It's too late. We are doomed. Enjoy your gas guzzling SUV while you can.

Unfortunately, the most likely prognosis seems to be that we will keep rebuilding until the money runs out, and nature will keep sending in more extreme events until about 100 years after the money runs out and the earth has had a chance to recover from our current era of energy extravagance and technological overkill. Whether the reset is peaceful and equatable or turbulent and violent is up to us and how we pick our leaders.

Any approach that seeks to counter something is operating at a severe disadvantage. An approach which begins with determining what will avoid whatever threatens is the best starting point. To solve rising seas move higher. To solve congestion remove cars. To avoid the ill effects of destructive invasive health procedures, perfect non-invasive efforts based on frequencies and sound. Conflict solves nothing.

During this spring in summer, I've been listening to some of the hearings held by the Congressional Committees with climate change jurisdiction. This is what we have instead of the Standing Select Committee on the Green New Deal which Speaker Pelosi vetoed. From what I have heard, the dominant mood is precisely the one that has failed in Japan: trying to build structures to resist the rising seas and sinking coastlines. No talk of prohibiting future building within - say five miles of the present shoreline, just to keep the costs and dangers down to those already in the wrong place. In most cases, the billions for structural defenses don't make sense, will be outflanked by the growing turbulence, virulence and unpredictability of storm events. Put the money instead into curbing the gases flowing into the atmosphere, and finding ways to take out the quantities already there. And reviving the old tradition of American regional land-use planning that will find places to retreat to and where we need to protect what's left of biodiversity that have some chance of lasting in the climate chaos we have called upon our own heads. Retreats for people and nature; they may not be, probably will not be in the same jurisdictions.

I hope that NY City Council Members Rivera, Chin, and Powers read this article before they vote to destroy 83 acres of East River shoreline-- to build a flood-wall.

Earthlings are going have to come to grips with the fact that weather disasters like this one are becoming routine. At the same time we have "leaders" like Donald Trump who continue to lull the populace into believing that such storms are very rare, there have been a bunch of rare coincidences in the last 20 years, and nothing has to be done. People really want to hear that and do nothing. Engineering solutions must include the idea that 65 feet of water needs a simple relatively straight flow path. It will mean big swaths of water channel must be built through the middles of cities and no permanent buildings can be built there. Those areas will remain dry 98% of the time so they can be used for orchards, farm stock, parks or other easily recovered uses. Southern California had build such a system after massive storms in the 1930's. I doubt that it is big enough for the recent Japanese inundations of rain, but it has eliminated home and business buildings in large areas and leaves huge water catch basins to slow the effect of a huge rainfall. That system has not been pushed to its limits. In SoCal, unfortunately climate change predictions suggest bigger and more severe droughts and wildfires and not floods. But the idea is still valid. "Huge waterways" depends entirely on the size of the problem whether it is the lower Mississippi or a minor creek in Appalachia. In either case, big is big in comparison to what is presently used.

This has nothing to do with climate change. The western Pacific has typhoons. Always has. Japan has a poor history of preparation for known hazards. The Fukushima reactors melted down because their auxiliary power units were placed below known (past) tsunami levels, so the tsunami knocked them out, letting the reactor cores overheat.

One has to look no farther than the mislaid trust in government to withhold the forces of natures than Louisiana. Why FDR decided that civil engineering could remedy this and a misplaced workforce is still being studied, that and the WPA are some of the most misguided programs ever enacted.

A few weeks ago I saw the dramatic aftermath of climate change. Glaciers had melted leaving behind lakes, forests, and meadows. The new vegetation was of course, pulling carbon dioxide out of the air. The glaciers in northern Minnesota had melted over 6000 years ago and the sea levels had risen several feet every hundred years. No one has explained what early humans did to cause the glaciers to melt and vegetation to flourish.

Japan has spent a fortune trying to deal with the consequences of extreme weather - and cannot keep up. Much of the US remains at risk as recent flooding in the Midwest showed. I doubt the Northeast is better prepared for a huge storm now compared to before Hurricane Sandy. If wealthy nations are having issues dealing with more extreme weather what are poor nations to do? Bangladesh has build shelters for its population that have reduced deaths but much of that nation ends up under water during a major typhoon.

Japan spent but much of the infrastructure is sub par and driven by graft rather than need.

From the article: “huge engineering projects had often provided a false sense of security“. The worst wouldn’t be a major city wiped out by a strong cyclone. Worse would be spending billions of dollars on a coastal defense then building expensive infrastructure behind it under the mistaken impression we can hold back the rising ocean.

It is inordinately expensive to plan for the worst possible event. Usually a facility is designed for, say, a 95% event. Sort of like planning for a 100 year flood, not a 1000 year flood. Going the extra 5% is often more money than it's worth. At least that's the cold hard calculation. But as with any safety system, the wise thing to do is act like it's not going to work when you need it because it may not. (This also applies to driving.)

Why the supposed link to climate change? Japan has had a regular typhoon season for as long as history recalls. This is , unfortunately, a common occurrence as are earthquakes (it is situated at the junction of 3 tectonic plates) and subsequent tsunamis. However the Japanese are resilient and watching how they learn about strengthening defences or mitigating losses will be a lesson for all. Has California learned how Japan has largely earthquake proofed it's major new buildings and applied these lessons? Hope so.

“Today, we’re struggling with 3 millimeters [0.1 inch] per year [of sea level rise],” says Robert DeConto at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, co-author of one of the more sobering new studies. “We’re talking about centimeters per year. That’s really tough. At that point your engineering can’t keep up; you’re down to demolition and rebuilding.” We’re already up to 5 millimeters of sea level rise per year. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/abrupt_sea_level_rise_realistic_greenland_antarctica/2990/