Olympia is reminding community members to participate in the Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (CRVA) survey on the city’s website to help the city determine its vulnerability to climate change.
Pointing out that assessing vulnerability and risk is the first step to building resilience to climate impacts, Olympia said, “The CRVA will lay the foundation for future climate adaptation projects and planning in Olympia.”
According to the city, the CRVA will involve three steps:
There will also be a Community Project Team, composed of Olympia community members, who will participate in the CRVA’s development.
“The purpose of this team is to share a diverse range of perspectives and insights on potential impacts of future climate hazards in our community,” the city explained.
Olympia is also offering to meet local communities and organizations to discuss the survey.
Community members may contact Climate Program Specialist Hannah Ljunggren at 360-753-8377 or hljunggr@ci.olympia.wa.us for more information.
4 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Southsoundguy
Apparently my previous post was deleted so I will restate it: climate change is fake and a wealth redistribution scam. To be clear, I am referring to the notion that ongoing human activity is somehow causing the earth to get hotter, or colder, or whatever else Jay Inslee says, is total bunk. The physics says otherwise. Here is a link to an article in which a Nobel winning physicist says as much.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/cancellations-start-john-clauser-after-nobel-physics-laureate-speaks-out-about-corruption
Monday, July 24, 2023 Report this
JohnGear
What does Dr. Clause’s opinion on climate have to do with anything? Clauser’s Nobel was for work done on quantum particles 50 years ago, in 1972; he is a theoretical physicist, not a climate scientist. No doubt a smart enough guy, but there are a lot of very smart people studying the climate intensely, actively, and with all the motivation in the world to find any holes in the models. If climate science is what you claim, there would be abundant wealth and fame for any scientists who would hardly have to break a sweat to push over what you claim is a hollow edifice of nonsense. The fact that the body of evidence keeps going against you, year after year, temperature record after temperature record, inch by inch of sea level rise, mile after mile of ice cover lost, and flood after flood in coastal regions, suggests that the total bunk is the idea that we should simply ignore the evidence of our senses in favor of a philosophical commitment to the status quo.
You can find contrarians in every field, particularly old guys pontificating about subjects they’ve not specialized in, but the way to bet is with the overwhelming consensus, especially when the consensus keeps making more and more predictions that are (sadly) being proved more and more correct all the time.
Monday, July 24, 2023 Report this
Southsoundguy
There is more ice, it’s getting warmer some places and colder others, and the fact is the alleged process by which CO2 supposedly increases the greenhouse effect is wrong. The fact that his work was in quantum physics doesn’t mean he doesn’t understand physics or the scientific process generally, which is what he commented on. Where’s your science degree?
Tuesday, July 25, 2023 Report this
KarenM
Many of the things we should do to prevent climate disaster are also just plain good ideas anyway. So why fight them?
More efficient homes are more comfortable and cost less to operate. How is that bad?
Having more options for people to walk and cycle makes for a friendlier and healthier community. How is that bad?
Having less air pollution from cars and trucks means we all breath easier and can see Mount Rainier on clear days. How is that bad?
Making buildings more resistant to fire or flooding prevents future losses. How is that bad?
Tuesday, July 25, 2023 Report this