Plan B From Outer Space  

One of the problems with taking a break is trying to absorb all the news when you get back online. So far tonight I've got that unpleasant feeling of information overload, but instead of trying to read everything and then post the interesting bits I'll just have to link to some random samples while I slowly catch up.

First up, Tim Lambert takes a look at Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds plan to get the oil price down - seize Iran and Saudi Arabia. Glenn's lunatic "Plan B" isn't to be confused with Lester Brown's rather more sensible version. Its not even original - Henry Kissinger thought this up many years ago (and the idea even featured in a movie). Tim has follow up posts on Why Glenn Reynolds is not a libertarian (which also applies to a lot of other supposed libertarians who have no problems with enormous budget deficits and massive police states) and the Big Bang of Wrongness - plus the unrelated Zombie Lurch. Mobjectivist alos takes a swing at the nanopundit (check out the comments to see him wax lyrical).

Glenn Reynolds:

Of course, if we seized the Saudi and Iranian oil fields and ran the pumps full speed, oil prices would plummet, dictators would be broke, and poor nations would benefit from cheap energy.

Yeah, because that's pretty much the way it worked out in Iraq.

One reader asked which oil companies have interests in Sudan - in particular Darfur. Oil was originally discovered there back in the early 1970's by Chevron, but they eventually had to abandon the country, with the Chinese largely filling the gap. Companies now involved in the region include - CNPC, Petronas, ONGC, Sudapet, Gulf Petroleum and Al-Thani - French company Total also have some licences but I don't think they are producing anything - and there seems to be some conflict with English minnow White Nile, backed by ex-England cricketer Phil Edmonds, over who owns it.



There seems to be lots of energy news in the local media lately (though maybe it just seems that way when I spend the weekend reading the papers instead of online - plus the APPEA conference is on). The Weekend Australian commented on the conference (not online unfortunately), with a report called "WA gas hope sparks debate" that examined proposals by some members of the WA government that a proportion of local natural gas resources be reserved for local use (which would be handy to power all those flashy new natural gas fueled buses that Perth is blessed with, for example). A less interesting follow-up article decries government meddling in the gas market. The weekend report was twinned with a slightly reworded version of Exxon's anti-peak oil advertisements titled "peak oil theory has heavyweight opposition", which is a harsh, but fair, assessment of Jabba's weight problem - even if their take on peak oil is far from the unpleasant reality. Bloomberg also has a report on oil and gas industry angst of possible future restrictions on gas exports (perhaps these guys should instead be grateful Evo Morales or ">Hugo Chavez aren't WA premier - though I'm sure future Morales clones will pop up all over the place in energy rich regions if energy shortages start to bite - hopefully we'll head down the conservation and renewables path before then though).

Western Australia's proposal to require LNG projects to reserve a share of their natural gas for use within the state may threaten Australia's reputation as a supplier, the nation's oil industry body said.

The proposal, put forward for discussion by the Western Australian state in February, would result in increased prices and fewer rather than more gas suppliers, Belinda Robinson, chief executive officer of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, said. It may also exacerbate supply shortages, she said.

Australia's output of liquefied natural gas may jump almost fourfold to about 50 million metric tons a year by 2015, the government said in March. The A$19 billion ($15 billion) North West Shelf venture is expanding its Karratha plant, while ConocoPhillips is seeking to expand its Darwin plant and new LNG projects are proposed by Chevron Corp., Inpex Holdings Inc. and others.

``We do not believe that mandating gas reservation is the answer,'' Robinson said in an address to be given tomorrow on the opening of the Australian oil industry association's 2006 conference on the Gold Coast, Queensland. ``It could affect Australia's reputation as a reliable supplier of LNG. It will inevitably lead to higher-than-necessary prices in the long-term and potential shortages.''

LNG is natural gas chilled to liquid form, reducing it to one-six-hundredth of its original volume, for transportation by tanker to destinations not connected by pipeline. On arrival it is turned back into gaseous form for delivery to users such as power plants. A copy of Robinson's address was e-mailed in advance to Bloomberg News.

...

Australia, which currently lags Indonesia and Malaysia in LNG production, has the potential to become the largest producer of the fuel in the Asia-Pacific region, Citigroup Inc. said in an October report.

Indonesia won't extend some contracts to sell LNG after 2010 because it wants to use the gas domestically to reduce industries' dependence on imported oil, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said in March. That may discourage investors from expanding their gas operations in the country, Christopher B. Newton, chairman of the Indonesian Petroleum Association, said in a March 29 interview in Jakarta.

The Western Australian proposal ``would create another market distortion and disincentive to domestic gas exploration and development,'' Australia's petroleum industry association said in a report released today.

The SMH's take on the conference was that the "Lucky Country is running out of oil", and reported Claude Mandil as saying the time has come for Australia to begin preparing a strategic oil reserve.

Declining self-sufficiency in oil could force Australia to increase its strategic stockpile to meet International Energy Agency obligations. Member countries are required to hold the equivalent of 90 days of net imports.

As a net exporter of oil in the past, Australia has not had to build a strategic reserve, other than account for products held at refineries, which the Federal Government, through the IEA, would control during times of serious supply disruptions.

IEA executive director Claude Mandil said yesterday the day was fast approaching when Australia would have to build a strategic reserve. About 4 billion barrels of oil are held in global strategic reserves. Governments hold about 1.5 billion barrels of that.

After a production increase in 2008-09 because of developments, Australia's output is forecast to fall sharply, with the nation's annual oil import bill predicted to soar from just under $4 billion to more than $20 billion by 2015. Apart from the cost, Australia will be more susceptible to oil supply shocks, making a strategic reserve a priority.

...

"The market forgets that in cases of supply disruption, there is a tool that exists: the strategic stocks which the industrialised countries have and which are managed by IEA. They forget that it works," he said. "It worked in September when we released 60 million barrels to cope with the supply disruption caused by the hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. "But that is only part of the answer. It would be better if there was more capacity." But investments in capacity now would not take effect for two to three years.

Mr Mandil said that, failing an end to geopolitical tensions, the best way to lift capacity was to decrease consumption. "So, in the short term, the best way to give some margins of manoeuvre is to be more energy efficient and increase the share of alternatives to oil," he said.

The ABC's report on the conference noted "oil supplies set to decline" and talks about peak oil as a possible reason for this.

TONY JONES: Billionaire retailer Gerry Harvey said today that if the price of petrol reached $2 a litre, he'd start selling rickshaws. Well he might have to get used to that idea if, as some are predicting, oil prices continue to rise. That's of particular concern to Australia, which is quickly using up its known oil reserves according to alarming figures released today at an oil conference.

Tom Iggulden reports.

TOM IGGULDEN: When it comes to oil, Australia's one of the lucky ones. We produce about two-thirds of the 700,000 barrels of oil we consume a day. But our luck may be running out. Australia used to produce about 80 per cent of its demand for oil. Today at a conference on the Gold Coast, it was predicted dependence on foreign oil is in for a dramatic increase.

BELINDA ROBINSON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, APPEA: Australian petroleum liquids production declined 29 per cent since it peaked in 2000, and by 2015 our production will represent less than 30 per cent of our consumption. In the last year, no liquids finds in Australia exceeded 10,000 barrels. There are massive implications - economic implications - associated with a decline like this, including a potential trade deficit in oil and condensate in excess of $20 billion. To give you some sense of proportion, Australia's total trade deficit at present is around $19 billion, total.

TOM IGGULDEN: Australia's dilemma is part of a global problem - ever-expanding demand, and a failure by the oil industry to keep pace. Matthew Simmons is a former vice-chairman of President Bush's energy task force, who believes the world has reached the so-called "oil peak".

MATTHEW SIMMONS, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR: We are now out of spare capacity. We used up every scrap of wellhead capacity, refinery capacity, refining capacity, tanker capacity, rig capacity, so now we are really stuck in a jam.

TOM IGGULDEN: But it's not just infrastructure that's putting a block on increasing supply. Mr Simmons accuses the oil industry of misleading the world about how much oil is left. According to his research Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil producer, hasn't found a major new reserve of oil for more than 40 years and it's known reserves are running out faster than it's letting on.

MATTHEW SIMMONS: At the highlight of Saudi Arabia's peak production, they had individual wells that were producing 40,000 barrels a day. Now they are talking about hundreds of wells. They aren't individual wells, they are actually multiple-branch high-tech wells with up to 10 different entry spouts so it's really the equivalent of 10 wells, that to get 2,000 or 3,000 or 4,000 barrels a day and then it doesn't last very long.

TOM IGGULDEN: But Simmons also accuses Western oil companies of deliberately inflating their reports of new oil finds to keep their numbers looking good.

MATTHEW SIMMONS: The CEOs of the major oil companies - they're now being endearingly called 'Big Oil' every day - are in such denial. We don't have good data - without data you can believe anything you want to.

TOM IGGULDEN: But the industry continues to argue there's plenty of oil to be found and that the oil peak isn't due until some time between 2020 and 2050 - an argument reiterated at today's conference.

DR ANDREW LATHAM, OIL GEOLOGIST: Broadly, most are agreed that the ultimate yet-to-find potential of the planet is still fairly large. We expect over the next couple of decades more than 10 billion barrels of oil-equivalent resource will be found in new fields.

TOM IGGULDEN: But whether we're running out of oil or not, from a political point of view it's already beginning to look like a crisis. Last week in the US, Democrats desperate to win votes in the upcoming mid-term elections announced they'd make America "energy independent" in 10 years. Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi, was visiting the US to try and calm fears of high oil prices, and immediately attacked the plan accusing Democrats of fostering fear.

ALI AL-NAIMI, SAUDI OIL MINISTER: There is no truth whatsoever to the popular belief that the dependence on foreign crude oil leads to higher prices for gasoline at the pump.

While the WA government is talking about an indirect version of the nationalisation of energy resources that drove the nanopundit into a state of militant mercantilist mania, it doesn't seem to be enough to deter multinational companies from exploiting gas reserves for now - with Exxon looking at ramping up production of Bass Strait gas.

BASS Strait may be on its last legs as an oil producer but ExxonMobil plans a bigger and brighter future for its remaining gas reserves: supplying gas-fired power stations.

But the operator of the 50:50 joint venture with BHP Billiton first wants the Federal Government to remove tax "distortions" that result in offshore gas being taxed at more than six times the rate applied to coal.

More than 7 trillion cubic feet of gas remains in Bass Strait after the production of about 5 trillion cubic feet since production began about 40 years ago. On the other hand, more than 90 per cent of Bass Strait's oil reserves have been produced.

Expanding the gas business at a time when oil production is tailing off - output is now 70,000 barrels a day, down from 550,000 barrels a day in the strait's heyday - would maximise returns from the region.

And ExxonMobil says it would also have environmental benefits because gas-fired power generation produces about 70 per cent less greenhouse gas than does the coal-fired option.

The PNG to Australia gas pipeline is moving ever closer to reality, with the ACCC removing one more hurdle.

The PNG pipeline needs to carry 150 petajoules of gas a year to be viable and to date it has five major customers. The five include Alcan, which has agreed to take 43.5 petajoules of gas a year for its Northern Territory alumina refinery.

AGL has also agreed to take about 75 petajoules to supply its retail gas networks throughout Australia. AGL and Malaysian group Petronas will also build the pipeline and receive fees for operating it. A final go-ahead for the pipeline is expected later this year.

The pipeline will deliver gas to a vast area of coastal Queensland and, as a result, is expected to boost industrial development there.

The Gorgon project offshore WA is hitting new difficulties however, as project costs soar. This seems to be increasingly common for the spate of projects going on in WA - one Woodside guy I spoke to on the weekend said he has a couple of billion dollars of business to spend on project development with one company and he can hardly get their attention.

A FINAL investment decision on the Gorgon gas project has been put off amid speculation that construction costs for its processing facility have blown out by half. But delay in the commitment will not affect construction or delivery schedules.

Mark Nolan, chief executive in Australia of Exxon Mobil, a 25 per cent Gorgon partner, said yesterday a decision would not be made in 2006. Speaking outside the APPEA conference on the Gold Coast, he refused to comment on speculation the construction costs for the 10 million tonnes a year plant proposed for Barrow Island had escalated by more than 50 per cent.

Industry analysts say all major construction projects in Australia face massive cost increases on original estimates because of high material costs and substantially higher labour charges.

Shell has reported that their oil reserves continue to fall.

ROYAL Dutch Shell has said it may miss its target of fully replacing oil and gas it pumps in coming years, adding to concerns over its future prospects. Since downgrading its energy reserves by around a third two years ago, the Anglo-Dutch energy group has been struggling to replace its oil and gas stocks.

Investors see the reserve replacement ratio as a key indicator of future value of oil companies. Shell had promised to raise its reserve replacement ratio between 2004 and 2008 to 100 per cent, from an industry-lagging 72 per cent average over the past five years. But chief executive Jeroen van der Veer admitted the company might not achieve that, citing the tight market for materials and contractors to build new projects. Mr Van der Veer said the company would drop the commitment and focus instead on the value that projects delivered to investors.

Warren Buffett's bet against the US$ is paying of as the greenback runs out of friends. This has prompted a rare interruption in the litany of economic disaster that Steven Roach subjects us all to - with the falling dollar making him almost bullish about the future for a change. While I enjoy Steve's gloomy missives I think Mr Buffett has a better track record of predictions.

Legendary investor Warren Buffett says his negative view of the US dollar has strengthened as US current account and fiscal deficits have continued growing.

The chairman of Berkshire Hathaway told 24,000 shareholders gathered in Omaha, Nebraska, for the company's annual shareholder meeting over the weekend that he expected the US dollar to weaken over time, and he expressed scepticism that the "soft landing" predicted by some economists would come about.

Mr Buffett said his emphasis was shifting away from direct currency bets to investments in overseas companies. The notional value of Berkshire's direct non-dollar exposure declined to $US5.4 billion ($6.9 billion) on March 31 from $US21.8 billion a year before.

"We like the idea of developing earnings power in other currencies," he said.

The Financial Review's pro-nuclear campaign continues unabated, with yesterday's paper taking a novel tack - lobbying for the introduction of nuclear science courses in universities in a pair of articles in the Education section (as part of the nuclear industry's lobbying program to address some of the major roadblocks - the lack of any qualified nuclear engineers in the country apart from a small and aging contingent at ANSTO's research reactor in Sydney being but one obstacle). Meanwhile Greenpeace is warning Peter Costello not to ignore expert warnings on nuclear energy.

Treasurer Peter Costello must pay attention to expert warnings on nuclear energy, Greenpeace said today.

Mr Costello weighed into the re-emerging debate on nuclear power driven electricity last week, saying Australia should consider it if the power source became commercially viable. Australia was obliged to because of atomic power's attraction in an unnaturally warming world and because it already sold uranium to other countries, he said.

A clutch of energy experts today told Fairfax newspapers that Australia could not develop a domestic power industry in time to stave off the effects of climate change and, in any case, it would be prohibitively expensive.

Among those scientists were Chris Reidy, a research principal at the Institute for Sustainable Futures, Dr Mark Diesendorf, a senior lecturer in environmental studies of New South Wales University and Dr Iain McGill, research coordinator with the Centre for Energy and Environmental Markets at NSW University.

Greenpeace campaigns manager Danny Kennedy said Mr Costello should heed the scientists' warnings and not become carried away with the Government's campaign to sell uranium to China. "Mr Costello needs to heed the warnings of scientists that nuclear power is not a practical source of power for Australia," he said.

"The Treasurer has an opportunity in next week's budget to provide proper support for clean, safe renewable energy that can be brought online now to replace coal."

The SMH has an excellent article on global warming, warning that we should "Wake up while you can still smell the roses".

The proof of climate change is convincing, writes Peter Doherty. Now we owe it to ourselves to learn more, and do more, about it.

Is this whole global-warming scenario real or is it, as some newspaper columnists like to suggest, a massive conspiracy by self-serving scientists and self-appointed environmentalists who are trying to maximise their own resources, influence and power?

Interestingly, we are starting to see prominent political figures of the right, and even some of the international energy companies, moving to the left of the more reactionary media on this issue.

Any newspaper editor will tell you bad news sells. My sense is that many, if not most, of us are buying into the idea that global warming is real. Television presents us with an endless catalogue of disasters: the frogs are dying, the bushfires are getting worse, we're recording the hottest days on record.

The problem is not so much to persuade people that we have a problem as to work out how to do something about it. When living in Memphis, Tennessee, I had to have my car exhaust checked annually at a municipal testing station. If your car didn't pass, it cost money to make it comply.

Also in Memphis, the double-hung windows of our 1903 house were made more energy efficient by the addition of external, triple-track storm windows, which the previous owner fitted as part of a government-supported initiative. The triple glass/flyscreen windows represent a simple, relatively cheap and effective "bolt-on" technology available in all big US hardware stores, but I can't find them in Australia.

We could do a lot to conserve energy in the way we build and use our living spaces but, because it costs money, it will take a carrot-or-stick approach to make most of us react. Everyone has a part to play. We need to focus as much on "me" as "them and they" when it comes to climate change.

The "prosperity", in terms of access to consumer durables, international travel and so forth, that most middle-class Australians and Americans enjoy certainly wasn't the reality for other than a small minority only 50 years ago. There is nothing immutable about our lifestyle, and no divine right that it can or should continue.

Even so-called conservative politicians, though, can run enormous risks if they try to introduce just the smallest element of a reality check. Look at what the 1980 oil crunch did to the US president Jimmy Carter, who, as a born-again Christian from the American south, was hardly a radical.

President George Bush tried to make the point in his 2006 State of the Union address that it's past time for the US to kick its dependence on Middle East oil. Many of us had hoped to hear that from him immediately after September 11, 2001 - but better late than never. His statement went down like a lead balloon. Conspicuous, mindless consumption of this non-renewable resource is broadly seen as an entitlement.

...

Science is all about measurement, and numbers matter a great deal. What numbers should we look for? The fact atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been rising rapidly since we started burning large quantities of fossil fuels at the beginning of the industrial revolution seems incontrovertible. Much of the "back information" has come from the measurement of gas levels in, for example, air bubbles trapped in ice formations. Everyone is aware of this, and we should expect to continue seeing such numbers published.

The evidence that mean water and air temperatures around the world are increasing also seems valid, but this can be a confusing area, even for the experts. My naive perception is that cloud effects can cause confounding, and unpredicted, consequences.

As the warming of the deep ocean proceeds, the "tractor" of the Gulf Stream that makes life more temperate for much of Britain and north-western Europe may stop, leading to a transient "ice age" in those areas.

A key factor to monitor for the oceans is evidence of species loss, particularly corals that are likely to bleach and die if mean water temperatures rise more than two degrees. We can expect Australia's marine biologists to watch this closely.

The other parameter affecting the health of the oceans is acidity. Ocean acidity gives an objective measurement that is directly related to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and thus human activity, which is why people who argue that global warming is a scam never mention acidity. Atmospheric carbon dioxide combines with water to give carbonic acid, a "weak" acid that, in turn, initiates further acidification pathways. We are familiar with this from acid-rain scenarios. The consequences can be disastrous for many ocean life forms, such as corals, that need to make calcified shells.

Again, Australia's marine biologists and climate scientists, working from the tropics to the Antarctic, are incredibly important monitors of this situation. The melting of glaciers, the northern and southern polar icecaps and the Greenland icesheet also provides a spectrum of parameters that can readily be measured by, for example, satellite mapping.

Again, as a society, we must ensure this information is freely available and, as individuals, we need to keep these numbers in our consciousness. If you are a young person reading this, I would like to persuade you that one of the best things you can do is to spend at least a little of your time learning biology and some of the chemistry and physics that affect the environment. It's your future, and the future of the children who come after you, that we are talking about. Strength comes through knowledge and insight.

The Australian reports that electricity prices in south-eastern Australia are predicted to fall after the Basslink interconnector between Tasmania and Victoria was finally switched on. Why they think this is a mystery to me as Tasmanian prices are traditionally well over double those in Victoria - and lack of rain has been hampering Tasmanian power companies ability to generate hydroelectricity in any case. Maybe they mean Tasmanian prices are expected to fall (while the rest of the grid's rise marginally).

The $780 million project, turned on last night, allows electricity to flow to Victoria during summer peaks, and into Tasmania during its peak in winter.

National Grid Australia spokesman Jon Richards said a study showed electricity prices should drop by 2.7 per cent through increased competition from the Basslink works. "It basically provides security of supply for the south-eastern region during summer peaks," Mr Richards said. National Grid, the British company that managed the works, began the Basslink project more than seven years ago.

But Greens leader Bob Brown, a Tasmanian senator, said power bills in Tasmania would rise as a result of Basslink due to an average $92 million that would be paid to National Grid annually for the next 25 years.

Mr Brown said said Tasmania would lose its "clean hydro power" image now that electricity could be sourced from Victorian coal-burning power plants. "The ultimate insult to be considered here is to charge a premium to those Tasmanians who want to buy clean hydro power as they have in the past," Senator Brown said in a statement.

Rigzone has a report on Australia releasing 36 New Petroleum Exploration Areas.

With oil prices still soaring, Australia opened the bidding for 36 new offshore petroleum exploration areas Monday. "The release of these exploration areas is key to the government's strategy to encourage more petroleum exploration in Australia's vast offshore sedimentary basins," Resource Minister Ian Macfarlane said in a statement. "We're already seeing strong interest in Australia's offshore petroleum basins but they remain under-explored."

The Australian government has already granted 180 exploration permits in Commonwealth waters, with another 15 due to be allocated in coming months.

...

Macfarlane is hoping Australia will become one of the world's top five exporters of liquefied natural gas with projects under development expected to increase LNG production capacity to more than 50 million metric tons a year in the next decade as demand for clean energy grows in Asia and North America.

The Resources Minister is also hopeful Australian LNG producers, such as Woodside Petroleum Ltd. (WPL.AU) and BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP), will be able to tap into the developing energy markets of Korea, China, India and Mexico. Australian production of LNG is forecast to reach 13.1 million metric tons in the fiscal year ended June 30.

Exports of LNG are expected to leap 29% to A$6.4 billion by 2010-11, from A$5.0 billion in 2005-06, according to the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Exports of crude oil and condensate, meanwhile, are expected to fall 9% to A$7.8 billion in 2010-11 from A$8.5 billion in 2005-06, ABARE predicted in its March quarter commodities outlook.

The Washington Post says that if you want a decent energy policy, don't look to congress.

Congress thinks we're stupid. Maybe we are. We, most of us, refuse to accept that we are living in a world of rapidly increasing demand for declining fossil fuel resources.

We believe more oil is to be found around the corner, in the next country, beneath the ocean, under or in the next rock. Maybe it is.

But people who have spent much of their professional lives looking at this issue say it really does not matter that more oil is waiting to be found somewhere. They believe there will never be enough of the stuff to fuel, feed, clothe, house and move a constantly growing global population.

Those people include Vice President Cheney, White House energy adviser Matthew Simmons and, believe it or not, President Bush.

For some time now, Cheney and Simmons, an energy investment banker, have been telling Bush that oil as we know it is about to go away. Their advice largely is why the president in his State of the Union address in January warned that America has become "addicted to oil." That is why the president, a scion of the Texas oil patch, uncharacteristically chided his fellow Republicans in Congress for offering yet another tax break for the nation's oil companies, this one facilitating quick write-offs of the costs of resource exploration.

"Record oil prices and large cash flows also mean that Congress has got to understand that these energy companies don't need unnecessary tax breaks like the write-offs of certain geological and geophysical expenditures," the president told the White House media corps.

That does not mean Bush is no longer a bosom buddy of Big Oil. It does mean, at least on this issue, that he is significantly smarter than Congress.

People enjoy poking fun at Bush, portraying him as something of an errant fraternity boy. But this president is nobody's dummy. He fully understands the concept of "peak oil," the high point of the bell curve at which 50 percent of the provable reserves in any oil field have been recovered.

See - I can quote people who say nice things about Bush as well as some who say not-so-nice things...

In his latest Viridian Note, Bruce reports that Florida Is Becoming Uninsurable.

As Hurricanes Loom, Many in Florida Keys Flee

US: May 5, 2006
"KEY WEST, Florida == Spiralling living costs, lingering trauma from past evacuations and fear that one day million-dollar homes could be reduced to rubble or again flooded are driving people out of the vulnerable Florida Keys as another hurricane season looms.

"While most of Florida experiences one of the country's fastest population growths, the number of people living in the low-lying 180-km (110-mile) island chain at the southern tip of the peninsula is slowly dwindling.

"In the last two years, residents have been ordered to evacuate six times up a narrow, mangrove-fringed 200-km (126-mile) road, the Overseas Highway, linking the Florida Keys to the mainland.

Where in Florida do you imagine they're supposed to re-settle?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0420_040420_earthday.html
http://www.geo.arizona.edu/dgesl/research/other/climate_change_and_sea_level/sea_level_rise/sea_level_rise.htm

"When Hurricane Wilma swept by on Oct. 24, it flooded about 3,700 of 15,000 homes in Key West with a foot or more of water and destroyed 1,000 cars. Most residents were stunned.

"'We're seeing adjustment disorders, post-traumatic stress,' said Betsy Langan, assistant director of Womankind Inc., a health services provider. 'Because of the hurricanes, people are exhibiting sleeplessness, difficulties in concentration and are feeling hopeless and overwhelmed.'

"On top of that, property values have soared beyond the reach of most working families. Home insurance rates are sky-rocketing. And salaries can't keep pace.

"'You pay US$400,000 for a trailer that's going to be junk soon. It's incredible,' said Jose Cuevas, a moving company manager who commutes to work in Sugarloaf Key from Miami each day == a 490-km (300-mile) round trip.

(((Do you suppose he drives a big truck?)))

"The moving-out business is booming. "Clients are worried about insurance. One said, 'They only want rich folks,'" Cuevas said. "They don't want to go, but they have to."

...

Subject: Viridian Note 00021: The World Is Becoming Uninsurable, Part 1 Key concepts: Weather violence, insurance costs
http://www.viridiandesign.org/notes/1-25/Note%2000021.txt

Subject: Viridian Note 00022: The World Is Becoming Uninsurable ...
We are fast approaching the situation where some parts of the world are becoming uninsurable,' he said. The map shows where rising sea levels and more ...
http://www.viridiandesign.org/notes/1-25/Note%2000022.txt

Subject: Viridian Note 00023: The World is Becoming Uninsurable ...
A world map of Involuntary Parks would be an interesting and perhaps enlightening addition to new maps of our newly uninsurable world. ...
http://www.viridiandesign.org/notes/1-25/Note%2000023.txt

Viridian Note 00289: The World Is Becoming Uninsurable, Revisited. Bruce http://www.viridiandesign.org/notes/251-300/ 00289_the_world_is_becoming_uninsurable_revisited.html

Viridian Note 00403: Przwalski Chernobyl As we Viridians have pointed out on a number of occasions, the world is becoming uninsurable...