3 thoughts on “Enviro: Obama Arctic development strategy a ‘climate time bomb’”

  1. The NJ storm is now being called A SUPER STORM? yes the high tides caused massive damage but then so did the same thing harm the New Orleans under seal level housing areas flood.

    The NJ people built on land that was to low to be safe – our Forefathers did not build cites in flood prone areas. More evidence that our education system is failed.

  2. First and foremost, any policy or advocacy that starts with “climate change” is guilty until proven innocent. Climate change has been very slight, perhaps beneficial on net, and not related to human activity. The evidence of a “climate time bomb” or any other climate harm potential has always been weak and it’s been weaker than ever over the last ten years.
    However — any major policy that depends on continued reduction of Arctic sea ice in summer may be built on sand.

  3. I suspect that new technologies will allow much more exploration and exploitation of arctic resources whther or not there is a retreat of sea ice. It’s good to plan. Glad the President is looking at it sensibly (apparently)

Comments are closed.