News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Edmonton's National Standing

I get that those retiring to sun belt locations may have much shorter term horizons, so I understand that, but younger people moving there to work, not so much.

Yes, they have air conditioning to keep temperatures inside pleasant when it is unbearable outside, but I imagine the bills for that in the hot months can be quite high, perhaps not unlike winter heating bills here.
 
erudyk_29 said:
There is an ideal average temperature/climate for human civilization to flourish. Currently that niche is quite far south of us, however, it is expected that in the not too distant future, Toronto and southern Ontario will fall directly in that niche. Edmonton will be just slightly colder than ideal rather than far too cold. Keep in mind global climate is a multifaceted system that is very difficult to predict with exact certainty (not that we don't know that earth is warming deniers, but that we don't know by how much). This is map I could find that illustrates the poleward migration of the human niche from now to 2070, and a map showing the change in suitability as well.
pnas.1910114117fig04.jpeg

Safe to say Canada in general and Alberta in particular is one of the biggest winners along with Russia and Eastern Europe in general. Expect to see climate refugees coming not only from places like Africa and Latin America but also the south and southwestern USA. It's frankly absurd to me that so many people are moving to the sunbelt considering how badly it is expected to be effected by climate change, very short sighted decision making to move to Phoenix or Houston which are expected to become death zones of oppressive heat (and in many ways already are).

Expect to see Canada become far more populated in the coming decades, the territories could see a population explosion in not too long as the climate becomes less frigid and more and more suitable for agriculture and other human activities. The Sun Belt will have millions of climate refugees who will move either to the Midwest or Canada to escape rising temperatures.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing these. I don’t think there will be a mass exodus in a decade from places within developed countries that are already hot, but if you’re under 55-60, it’s likely coming in your lifetime.

I do think that people from Arizona or Texas or Louisiana, if they’re migrating north, for now, it’ll likely be within that country. Alberta’s great for climate comfort (relatively), but so is Minnesota, and no immigration required. There’s already a trend of reverse migration during summer vacation for folks from the Sun Belt escaping the heat with a cabin in Michigan or a trip to Maine. It’s becoming very common for those with the means.

I don’t completely fault people for moving to warmer places in the Southern US though. It’s more of a structural failing than an individual one. The most climate resilient regions in the US are either the most expensive or most economically depressed. So most seeking opportunity are stuck with Charlotte and Phoenix.

Regardless, I can definitely see basically every Canadian city booming heavily through the climate crisis. Especially those on the Prairies. I wonder if Red Deer, Lethbridge, and Grande Prairie will blossom into Alberta’s K-W, London, and Windsor, size-wise.
 
Probably 60-70% of those fleeing the Sun Belt will end up in northern Midwestern States (Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, etc). Maybe around 20-30% will head to the West Coast states (Northern and Coastal California, Washington, Oregon). The rest will probably look north to Canada and I'm guessing Alberta would be high up on these migrants lists of Canadian Provinces, due to economic opportunity, natural beauty etc. Those who do end up in Canada will probably mostly go to Alberta, BC and Ontario. I would guess Alberta and BC would proportionally get more of these migrants though.
 
erudyk_29 said:
Probably 60-70% of those fleeing the Sun Belt will end up in northern Midwestern States (Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, etc). Maybe around 20-30% will head to the West Coast states (Northern and Coastal California, Washington, Oregon). The rest will probably look north to Canada and I'm guessing Alberta would be high up on these migrants lists of Canadian Provinces, due to economic opportunity, natural beauty etc. Those who do end up in Canada will probably mostly go to Alberta, BC and Ontario. I would guess Alberta and BC would proportionally get more of these migrants though.
Click to expand...

I can definitely see Manitoba and Saskatchewan getting a lot of migrants, and potentially Nova Scotia as well. Manitoba will be even more climate resilient than Alberta (better freshwater access) and Nova Scotia is close-ish to highly populated parts of the US.
 
Nova Scotia has had hurricanes, flooding and forest fires recently. Southern Manitoba already has quite hot summers compared to here, so I'm not sure they will be more climate resilient than Alberta.
 
I doubt people will leave the Sun Belt. Cheap, ubiquitous AC and widespread solar deployment will make indoor cooling pretty affordable and climate won't be a big reason to move.
 
They're running out of water. Expect Vegas, Phoenix (basically all of Nevada and Arizona as well) and to a lesser extent LA to see declining population as they rapidly deplete the Colorado Basin, exacerbated even further by an ever drier climate. The southeast is going to be devastated by ever worsening hurricanes not too mention the unbearable heat.

Also It's not going to remain as cheap as it has been in recent years. People were moving to Texas a lot because of high wages and cheap land. The same thing happened with California, people flocked there for warm weather, cheap housing and land and jobs aplenty. Now it's become extremely expensive. It won't be long before that happens to Arizona, Texas, Florida etc and in a lot of cases it already has. So the economic incentive will be much less in the near future.
 
Last edited:
archited said:
California has plenty of water -- it just needs to work out how to apportion it properly.
Click to expand...
Very true, Cali's in a decent position water wise despite the shortages. The problem is that all the water's in the north and all the people are in the south so large aqueducts and other water moving projects will be necessary to keep LA hydrated. AZ and NV on the other hand... are living on borrowed time as the various reservoirs and basins they've created themselves being to drain much faster than they're replenished and the climate only gets drier.

Also I apologize, this thread is supposed to be about Edmonton's National Standing and is somehow now become about the climate instability and water shortage in the southwestern USA and I think I'm mostly to blame for that.
 
There are existing aqueducts from the North to the South -- the flow volume needs to increase. There is also discussion re supplying Nevada and Arizona from Northern Cal (which on a typical year is drowning in water). It is a problem that needs attention and a "fix plan" -- it will come. Edmonton is the City of the 21st Century -- climate change and other factors (too many to list here) are going to make Edmonton a star city (regardless of what the negs on this site say).
 
erudyk_29 said:
They're running out of water. Expect Vegas, Phoenix (basically all of Nevada and Arizona as well) and to a lesser extent LA to see declining population as they rapidly deplete the Colorado Basin, exacerbated even further by an ever drier climate. The southeast is going to be devastated by ever worsening hurricanes not too mention the unbearable heat.

Also It's not going to remain as cheap as it has been in recent years. People were moving to Texas a lot because of high wages and cheap land. The same thing happened with California, people flocked there for warm weather, cheap housing and land and jobs aplenty. Now it's become extremely expensive. It won't be long before that happens to Arizona, Texas, Florida etc and in a lot of cases it already has. So the economic incentive will be much less in the near future.
Click to expand...
With cheap electricity you could use compressors to capture atmospheric water. Or large aquaducts from other states. US is in a reshoring phase and building a lot of infrastructure, so I wouldn't be too surprised if they do some large scale water engineering. There are a lot of options to deal with this issue.
 
occidentalcapital said:
With cheap electricity you could use compressors to capture atmospheric water. Or large aquaducts from other states. US is in a reshoring phase and building a lot of infrastructure, so I wouldn't be too surprised if they do some large scale water engineering. There are a lot of options to deal with this issue.
Click to expand...
With a hot dry climate, the large reservoirs nearby being low, electricity production from them is going down and increasing demand for EV's, there will be no cheap electricity there in the future.

A large part of the western US that is already dry will get dryer, so those aqueducts will have to come from further and further away, which won't be cheap or easy either.

Between unbearable temperatures outside for weeks on end, higher costs for air conditioning and water, it won't be so cheap or nice to live there in the future.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top