I recently finished reading On The Move by Abrahm Lustgarten which is about how climate change migration is already happening and how it will unfold in the US specifically.
It’s a scary but interesting book.
every fall I dread the coming winter with super short days and I want to move back to a southern, high desert climate. But then I remind myself the SW is rapidly running out of water and so on.
Has anyone here already moved somewhere at least in part because of climate change? or are you planning to?
the author lives in California and says people are already moving away due to the wildfires (especially the smoke) and that migration due to climate change is going to ramp up as people lose the ability to insure their homes and it becomes more clear how bad things are going to get.
I was reading the 2013 thread and it feels like that was SO long ago: a lot has changed in the 11 years and we are now in a place where it’s no longer “if” massive change in the climate is coming, it’s when and how do we deal with it.
I actually moved closer to the water but made sure I was up fairly high. We’re about 32’ high. Our neighborhood is on a wide ridge, between 2 creeks and near the bay. Any house less than 10’ high was rejected in our search as they are already in extreme storm danger and it will get worse over the next 10-15 years.
We probably won’t get a house in Florida thanks to climate change, maybe somewhere in the Carolinas instead and not too close to the Atlantic.
We are in the process of moving from central Arizona to West Virginia. Last summer was brutal and included 5 straight weeks of record breaking heat and this summer is forecast to be even worse.
We live perilously close to high tide line, and we could easily lose our home if climate change isn’t abated in the next 10 years. I’m not moving, though. It’s paradise for now. (I’m in denial I guess.)
My in-laws’ beach house on the Jersey shore was walloped by superstorm Sandy (which also destroyed by flooding a lot of real estate in my own home town). Moving back in after fixing it up would have required raising the house or buying prohibitively expensive flood insurance. It was easier to sell the property. But I suspect that they could also see the handwriting on the wall about the future of beach homes along that stretch.
Back in my home town they bulldozed most of those homes, and did their best to dissuade people from fixing them up and staying, although there were a few diehards who are still living in the flood plain.
Sandy was an outlier, admittedly, but it drove floodwaters higher than they had ever been in the historic record, and it’s hard not to see it as a harbinger.
it astonishes me that people are still moving TO Arizona - have they thought about what that would be like if the power goes out and they don’t have AC? I don’t think they have!
When I relocated in 2004 to Oregon, we had a choice of places we could go. We discussed climate change at length and decided it was best to move where the water is.
Wildfires are a continuous threat here, but they are, and continue to be, in any locale we were considering at the time.
Just to be clear, the SW is running out of water for farming in the desert, not for the cities that are there. As the cities grow they do need water, and with a limited supply, the first things to be cut will be fields of cotton and hay that can be grown elsewhere, but the cities will not run out of water any time soon. The heat, however, is a factor related to climate change - people may move away for that reason, but the water supply is not going to chase people away.
Also, in CA the cancellation of home insurance is not statewide, but mainly limited to high-risk fire areas (e.g. mountains and rural towns in and near the forest). Homes in urban areas are still being insured where the risk of catastrophic wildfire fire risk is less (but still there). The smoke from wildfires IS a big issue, and that too, is related to climate change (and forest mismanagement), and that may chase people away more than the home insurance thing.
We are in interior northern CA and have no plans to move at this point, even with the fire/smoke/heat risks.
I’ve been trying to hold off on a timber harvest for another few years, but increasing insurance premiums may force my hand. Fortunately, the timber that most threatens the home is the most mature and ready for harvest. If I have to go ahead, doing just 5 acres should satisfy any insurance company.
I would have considered moving to warmer climes but the winters are getting warmer here while the summers not as much. Also, while very close to the ocean, I’m still around 300ft. above sea level so my property value will rise along with the water.
I may have to relocate eventually, since I am currently at 20’ above sea level in an already-warm state. But at that point, having to relocate will be the least of my problems.
If I do move, I will have to keep climate change in mind even outside of the coastline. Upstate New York for instance is getting hotter heat waves, so I would need to make sure I had air conditioning. I was reminded of this when I mulled renting a cabin there in August but it turns out that it doesn’t have electricity, which would normally beat camping, but not if the outside is in the 90s like I experienced a decade or so ago.
When I read the thread title I thought “of course not”, but then I remembered that last year I was looking at a house in the coast that was lovely and extremely cheap, but then I thought “how close to the the river/estuary is this suspiciously cheap house?” turns out is right in a stretch of land that is currently in danger due to erosion, I mentally added climate change to the equation and said “nope”.
I’m currently in the process of buying a house at about 3 to 5 meters in elevation, still too close for complete comfort but not doomed.