# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The central Pacific nation of Kiribati has a few claims to fame. Its flag-bearer at the past two summer Olympics won international attention and became a meme because of his memorable dancing. The country - known under British colonial rule as the Gilbert Islands (the name Kiribati, pronounced KI-ri-bahss, is a local transliteration of "Gilberts") - has 33 islands spread over more than 1.3 million square miles, making it one of the world's largest nations in terms of sea area, though one of the smallest in terms of land. But what it gets the most attention for these days is its impending doom: The nation may be one of the first in line to be wiped out by the effects of climate change.
Joshua Keating, a staff writer and editor at Slate, is the author of "Invisible Countries," from which this essay is adapted. Follow @joshuakeating
In the century to come, we're likely to see dramatic alterations to the physical shape of the world as we know it, thanks to rising sea levels and other environmental changes. But the immediate challenges faced by most countries pale in comparison to those of Kiribati, which has an average elevation of less than six feet. The atoll of Tarawa, where nearly half the country's 110,000 residents live, could soon be substantially underwater. "By 2050, 18-80% of the land in Buariki, North Tarawa, and up to 50% of the land in Bikenibeu, South Tarawa could become inundated," the government told the United Nations in 2015. Kiribati's smaller outlying islands could be wiped out even sooner. "The results of sea level rise and increasing storm surge threaten the very existence and livelihoods of large segments of the population," officials wrote.

Small island states like Kiribati and the Maldives have become symbols of the potential impacts of global warming. At the 2015 Paris climate summit, they pressured larger countries to accept the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, rather than two degrees, over preindustrial levels. (It was mostly a symbolic victory: Barring unforeseen circumstances, particularly since the Trump administration pulled the United States out of the accord, both targets will be exceeded.) They are also working to develop first-line defenses against the effects of sea-level rise, including planting mangroves to prevent coastal erosion and improving rainwater-collection systems to protect water quality.

But if none of that works, they may have to consider more drastic options. And so, in 2014, Kiribati purchased about eight square miles on the Fijian island of Vanua Levu for a little less than $9 million, potentially for the purpose of moving its population there one day. "We would hope not to put everyone on one piece of land," the country's then-president, Anote Tong, said. "But if it became absolutely necessary, yes, we could do it." Fiji would become the new home of the nation's inhabitants, known as the I-Kiribati.

The relocation of people due to climate change isn't unprecedented. Papua New Guinea has already begun moving the population of the Carteret Islands, a group of low-lying atolls, to the mainland. But this would be the first time an entire country had to relocate because the land on which it was built no longer existed. This raises a new and frightening question: If a country no longer exists in physical form, can it still exist as a political entity? Can a nation just up and move?

I knew Tong by reputation from the impassioned speeches he delivered at U.N. General Assemblies and climate change conferences during his time as president, from 2003 to 2016. So when I visited Kiribati in 2016 to research a book about border changes and the future of the world map, I called him. When we met one afternoon in Tarawa, he had just come in from fishing and was relaxing in shorts and a sleeveless T-shirt in the maneaba, or meeting house, outside his family's home in a crowded residential neighborhood. John Denver played softly from a Bluetooth speaker. But the former president was troubled. "One of the most difficult things I've had to expect is planning for the demise of my country," Tong told me.

He wants the I-Kiribati to stay if it's even remotely possible. But, he rued, relocation is probably unavoidable. "The science is pretty clear: zero emissions, we'll still go underwater. Unless some drastic work is undertaken, there will be no option. That's the reality. It's not a hope. It's not a desire. It's the brutal reality."

Yet no one's quite sure what that reality will look like. When I visited Secretary of Foreign Affairs Akka Rimon, she cracked the joke I'd been afraid to make: "Climate change really put us back on the world map. The irony is that we're being erased from the world map." Rimon had tried to think through what relocation could entail, though she didn't really know how Kiribati's nationhood could be preserved. "We don't have the answer. There doesn't seem to be any entity that looks after that. Sovereignty exists within the borders of your nation, but what happens when that changes? Nobody has the answer," she said.

Historically, countries are not physically destroyed; they simply become other countries, the land they occupy controlled by someone else. But at a minimum, to exist, a country needs a government, a population and a piece of real estate within a defined territory - the boot of Italy, the hanging triangle of India, the narrow strip of Chile. The shape of a nation has long been defined by two kinds of lines: the borders that separate it from other countries and the coasts that separate it from the sea. We may understand why political borders are subject to change, but in an era of rising seas and increasingly extreme weather and natural disasters, we have to get used to the fact that coastal boundaries can't be taken for granted, either. Indeed, our land-water borders are changing quickly and significantly, and in ways that will probably never be reversed.

Environmental-law scholars have begun to discuss the notion of " ex-situ nationhood," under which governments, with some financial support from the international community, would continue to represent their populations on an international level at bodies like the United Nations, without any connection to a physical territory. Under one model, the I-Kiribati would retain some rights as citizens, even as they dispersed around the globe. As Maxine Burkett of the University of Hawaii, who has written extensively on the political dilemmas facing small island states, told me in 2014: "A number of us understand the modern notion of citizenship, where people have ties to more than one country. But the notion of that happening without a physical territory is quite novel."

We're not even close to being prepared for the rising waters

America is the worst polluter in the history of the world. We should let climate change refugees resettle here.

The military paid for a study on sea level rise. The results were scary.

In a 2013 essay, Jenny Grote Stoutenburg, a law professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, recommended that, to maintain international recognition, island states facing destruction should reinforce their territory to keep at least some physical structure above water and keep a small group of inhabitants behind, even if the bulk of the population has relocated. The Kiribati of the future, in other words, may be little more than a skeleton crew, a reinforced platform with a flag perched in the open ocean after the rest of the population has moved to another piece of land or to several of them. This is a very different notion of national sovereignty than anything the world has seen before.

There are understandable motivations behind plans like these: The people of small island states want to continue to have political representation in the international community, and they have economic interests to protect - rights to fisheries and natural resources in their territory, for instance. But these plans also offer a version of cartographical stasis taken to the point of parody: the erection of a fig-leaf physical presence in the middle of the ocean just so that maps showing a country in a particular place will be technically correct.

Still, a nation ending entirely, with no successor, might be a wholly new event in human history. In grappling with the possibility, some scholars have dusted off models and concepts that predate the modern nation-state.

One is the Sovereign Order of Malta - a Catholic order that controls no physical territory but has existed in multiple locations, including Jerusalem, Cyprus, Malta and Rome, throughout its nearly 1,000-year history. In an odd geopolitical quirk, despite controlling no territory today, the order has diplomatic relations, including embassies, with dozens of countries and observer status at the United Nations.

The order's sovereign status makes it a throwback to an earlier, more fluid era of international politics, when sovereignty was tied more closely to ruling families or dynasties than to territories with fixed locations. Today, for instance, the historical kingdom of Burgundy is associated with the central French region of that name. But in his book " Vanished Kingdoms," British historian Norman Davies identifies 15 kingdoms of Burgundy dating back to 410 and occupying locations from the west bank of the Rhine to what is now Switzerland to the Netherlands. Describing the disintegration of Burgundy in the 13th century, Davies writes: "The typical Burgundian count was no longer the ruler of one straightforward fief dependent on one overlord. More often he was head of a complex clutch of lands, titles and claims, assembled over the generations by the combined efforts of his family's knights, wives, children and lawyers."

If the vanishing countries of the future are to survive in any form, they're likely to look less like contemporary nation-states and more like the Knights of Malta or medieval Burgundy, political creations set up to represent a group of people, and their political interests, who will be increasingly dispersed geographically and culturally.

These are not scenarios you're likely to hear much about in Kiribati. For all that countries like Kiribati have done to bring urgency to the fight against climate change, many locals seem no more troubled about the issue than people in the United States are. When I visited on my reporting trip, people for the most part agreed that the climate was changing, pointing to shifting rainy seasons and irregular fishing patterns. But they usually didn't believe that the islands would come to an end.

I heard several odd pseudoscientific arguments from Kiribati people during my time there, including that hotter weather would evaporate all the water released by the melting polar ice caps and that the coral in the Kiribati atolls would help the islands float as the water rose. Many people pointed out, correctly, that the shape of the islands regularly shifted before sea-level rise - and that the impacts of climate change so far had been difficult to disentangle from other factors. Most people I met weren't making plans to relocate anytime soon. In contrast to Tong, the new government has not made the evacuation of Kiribati a priority, even a theoretical one.

Instead, I heard a lot of frustration that the rest of the world seems to take notice of the I-Kiribati only to tell them they're doomed. Several people I spoke with had already given interviews about climate change to foreign reporters. "In my case, you are the fifth person," remarked Teewata Aromata, the director of Te Toa Matoa, an organization for people with disabilities. "People come and ask us the same questions. They see pictures of us and think we are drowning in the ocean."

Yet the stubborn facts remain. Countries like the Maldives and Kiribati are probably disappearing - and not that long from now. I came to Kiribati expecting to find a place planning for its own destruction, but instead I found something more dispiriting: a place that, with a few exceptions, wasn't even contemplating that destruction. "Who wants to believe that their home won't be here?" said Tong. It was an understandable sentiment. "People here don't even like to plan for next week. But we've got to be hardheaded about it."

The mental block that prohibits thinking about what will happen when the islands are no longer inhabitable seems to be a major impediment to planning for that eventuality. In this regard, too, Kiribati is a microcosm of the world's unwillingness to face the reality of the future. A nation disappearing off the map is something that's never happened before and, so far, is something people seem unable to imagine.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This is what happens when climate change forces an entire country to seek higher ground

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The central Pacific nation of Kiribati has a few claims to fame. Its flag-bearer at the past two summer Olympics won international attention and became a meme because of his memorable dancing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Countries at risk of disappearing due to climate change | Sustainability for all

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Global warming and rising sea levels seriously threatens the survival of many SIDS (small island states). We compile some of them in this gallery

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The deadly landslide in Freetown, Sierra Leone on Monday morning was undoubtedly partly the result of deforestation. During the rainy season, Sierra Leone is one of the wettest places on earth, statistically. And from that point of view, it is a surprise that such disasters don't happen more often.

It looks as though the changing climate may make the future risk even greater as more frequent and more violent rainy season events such as this are a measurable consequence.

In tropical Africa, much of the seasonal rain comes from thunderstorms and often these cluster together, creating mesoscale convective systems (MCS). In simple terms, these are arcs of giant thunderstorms that can cover half a country.

Since the start of satellite observations, these have been observed and recorded with rather more reliability than is possible over the sparsely populated area of the Sahel. The systems grow and and move to the west, usually leaving West Africa trough Guinea or Sierra Leone. (Tellingly they are the start of most Atlantic hurricanes.)

You may be surprised to hear that African thunderstorms are among the most intense on earth. That finding came from a scientific paper published in 2006, a study using a worldwide database. A more recent investigation has found that the number of these storms has increased in sub-Saharan Africa, by a factor of three, since 1982.

That latter conclusion came from another scientific paper, published this year, discovering evidence that looks like a clear link to a warming climate. It is a well-established expectation that temperatures will rise, as a global average, and that local variations will be vastly different.

That leads to an increase in the energy available for hurricanes, thunderstorms, tornadoes and simple rain showers. We see and measure this change. However, in sub-Saharan Africa and particularly in the Sahel, the change has been more dramatic.

The Sahara Desert has heated up as predicted with a warming globe but the edge of the desert, the Sahel, during the wet season, has not. As a result, the temperature gradient from desert to tropics is now steeper. It is differences in temperature that cause weather - they create a reason for air to move.

And as you cannot change the laws of physics, the resulting thunderstorms, grouped as mesoscale convective systems, now have more vigorous construction. They also have the necessary shear in wind direction and strength within the thunderheads to create an efficient up- and downdraught circulation.

This increase in the intensity of these major storm systems looks like a result of climate change. The climate forecast sees the Sahara warming more which leads directly to a future of more intense rainfall events, especially in the Sahel. Resultant devastating flooding and landslides will become more common.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The deadly landslide in Freetown, Sierra Leone on Monday morning was undoubtedly partly the result of deforestation. During the rainy season, Sierra Leone is one of the wettest places on earth, statistically. And from that point of view, it is a surprise that such disasters don't happen more often.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Risk Profile: Sierra Leone | Global Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This profile provides an overview of climate risk issues in Sierra Leone, including how climate change will potentially impact agricultural production

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) of 1992 was launched following the release of a sobering report on global warming and the greenhouse effect published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1990. Since then, 183 of 197 parties have signed the Paris Agreement to limit the increase in global temperatures to 1.5 °C. Russia is currently in the process of ratifying the Agreement.

According to a poll conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center in 2017, 86% of Russians have noted serious changes in climate and 51% believe that global warming is a severe problem that should be addressed immediately. At the same time, 27% of Russians expect positive impacts and 39% believe it is merely a speculative topic.

Russia is experiencing major changes in its ecosystem and is warming 2.5 times faster than the average global rate. In addition to melting ice in the Arctic and the loss of drinkable water due to depletion of the ozone layer, snow is thawing in Siberia and in northern regions of Russia. Some people believe these changes will positively affect Russia by producing a more hospitable climate for agriculture and by increasing total acreage available for farming.

However, Alexey Kokorin, Director of the Climate and Energy Program at World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Russia, warns that any positive effects from global warming will only be short-term. Extensive rainfall caused major flooding in Russian regions in 2013, including Khabarovsk Krai, Amur Oblast, and the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. Only three years prior in 2010, high temperatures in the summer caused massive forest fires, and the resulting smoke killed tens of thousands of Russians. Lake Baikal, the deepest lake in the world, has recently experienced a smaller percentage of water inflow due to increasing lake temperatures. Even animal species in Russia have not been spared-some are being pushed into extinction while others are experiencing an increased birthrate or unusual migration patterns. For example, dangerous ticks are growing in numbers and have moved to new regions in Russia. This is even more concerning, statistically, because 1 out of 1,000 ticks carry encephalitis.

These startling effects of climate change have not gone unnoticed in Moscow. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology has estimated that by 2030, climate change in Russia will result in an average loss of 1-2% of GDP per year and in some regions, 4-5%. Even Anton Kulbachevsky, Minister of Moscow Government and Head of the Department for Environmental Management and Protection, has estimated the damage to Moscow alone to reach $4.3 billion per year. In an effort to offset some of these negative outcomes, Russia has set a goal to reduce emissions by 25%-30% below 1990-levels by the year 2030.

Such details should remind Americans and Russians alike that we co-exist on the same planet, and as such, we face many common challenges. Working together to achieve sustainable solutions to combat climate change is a mutual responsibility we share for both ourselves and future generations.

-Celeste

A special thanks to Valeriy Gataullin for research assistance on this blog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Effects of Climate Change in Russia - USRF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) of 1992 was launched following the release of a sobering report on global warming and the greenhouse effect published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1990. Since then, 183 of 197 parties have signed the Paris Agreement to limit the increase in global temperatures ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As immigration issues along the US southern border continue to roil the country, one driving force of migration from troubled Central American countries has received relatively little notice: climate change.

Author and journalist Todd Miller, who has written a new book called, " Storming the Wall: Climate Change, Migration, and Homeland Security," says climate change is a key factor forcing families to flee from Central America and Mexico - and deadly droughts, hurricanes, floods and mudslides are projected to intensify further in the region as global warming increases, which will hit small farmers especially hard.

Miller says statistical data already document the devastating effects of NAFTA and CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) on small farmers who were suddenly put into direct competition with highly subsidized US agribusinesses and grain movers. Around 2 million small farmers, particularly in southern Mexico, were displaced or could no longer make ends meet, Miller says.

During his research, however, he encountered farmers fleeing for ecological, not just economic, reasons. He heard stories from farmers who had faced drought or damaging hurricanes that devastated local communities, and some people told him that natural disasters and changing climate situations were the primary reason they were heading north.

"In the region that extends from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras into Nicaragua, which is filled with many poor, small farmers who depend on seasonal rainfall, the farmers were expecting rain and there was no rain," Miller says. "One mayor in a nearby town where these farmers are from said, 'We are facing an unprecedented calamity.'"

A climate scientist who studies the area told Miller the drought conditions were not an anomaly, but had been occurring for 10 years and were connected to a warming globe. "So, we're looking at a situation in Central America, which already has a number of factors that are displacing people, and we have to look at this ecological aspect to give a holistic analysis of it," Miller says.

The climate scientist called Central America "ground zero" for climate change in the Americas, Miller says. It is an isthmus, meaning it has large bodies of water on two sides, so it is more vulnerable to sea level rise, powerful storms, hurricanes and large swings between too much and too little rain.

A report on Mexico showed the potential for an equally unstable future. The report predicted that by the year 2050, 1 in 10 Mexicans would be displaced due to climate-related hazards such as sea level rise, hurricanes and drought.

Water scarcity also presents severe problems for Central America and Mexico. Northern Mexico and Arizona, where Miller lives, are in a severe drought already and "the projections for drought going forward are dire," he says. "Some people don't have running water most of the day or it will run only for a couple hours a day, so they're already adjusting to really awful situations."

During his research, Miller looked at "a binational ... water harvesting project" happening on the US-Mexico border. Guides took him to Silver Creek, which is what's known as a "dry wash:" no water runs through it for much of the year and then it flows strongly during the monsoon or rainy season. The guides showed him a series of gabions embedded in the stream bed.

A gabion is essentially a steel cage filled with rocks that acts as a kind of sponge, Miller says. The gabions slow down the water during the rainy season and release it at a lower rate while allowing the surrounding landscape to soak in the water and sediment.

Around these gabions, desert grasses and willows and other trees were growing back. Wildlife is also returning to the region. "They told me the most amazing thing that I had ever heard - that [while] this region of Arizona and Sonora was in a 15-year drought, they had raised the water table, due to these gabions, by 30 feet," Miller says. "They were literally reversing a drought in a very small-scale sort of way."

Miller believes the US would do well to invest in these kinds of projects in the countries that are sending environmental refugees north in search of a means to survive, rather than spending $25 billion building a wall to keep them out. Otherwise, there is no stopping what could be a uniquely troubled future.

Global projections for the number of people displaced by climate change by 2050 range from about 150 million to 1 billion, Miller notes. The precise numbers are still a matter of debate among scientists who do empirical research connecting climate with displacement, but, Miller says "one of the researchers told me, 'Whatever it is, it's going to be staggering, and it's going to be without precedent in human history.'"
This story is based on an interview that aired on PRI's Living on Earth with Steve Curwood.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change is contributing to the migration of Central American refugees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As immigration issues along the US southern border continue to roil the country, one driving force of migration from troubled Central American countries has received relatively little notice: climate change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Latin America's climate is changing. Precipitation patterns are shifting, temperatures are rising, and some areas are experiencing changes in the frequency and severity of weather extremes such as heavy rains. The impacts range from melting Andean glaciers to devastating floods and droughts.

The two great oceans that flank the continent-the Pacific and the Atlantic-are warming and becoming more acidic while sea level also rises.

Unfortunately, greater impact is in store for the region as both the atmosphere and oceans continue to rapidly change. Food and water supplies will be disrupted. Towns and cities and the infrastructure required to sustain them will be increasingly at risk. Human health and welfare will be adversely affected, along with natural ecosystems.

This photo story shows the devastating impacts across Latin America.

Changes in climate and extreme events have severely affected Latin America. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 613 extreme climate and hydro-meteorological events occurred between 2000 and 2013. Hydro-meteorological events include typhoons and hurricanes, thunderstorms, hailstorms, tornados, blizzards, heavy snowfall, avalanches, coastal storm surges, floods including flash floods, drought, heatwaves and cold spells. This has resulted in the displacement of people, numerous fatalities and significant economic losses.

Tropical storms originating in both the Atlantic and Pacific have devastated parts of Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Beyond the damage the storms have caused in coastal areas, their torrential rains inland have accounted for much greater devastation. According to the IPCC, in 1998, Hurricane Mitch alone affected 600,000 people- mostly because of the floods and landslides from heavy rains.

Researchers are moderately confident that Amazonia, northeastern Brazil, Central America, the Caribbean, and some parts of Mexico will see increased drought conditions. Of particular concern is the prospect of more frequent extreme droughts in the Amazon, which could push the region to a "tipping point," increasing the likelihood of a large-scale dieback of the Amazon forest.

Notable recent droughts are those that afflicted the Amazon in 2005 and 2010 and a drought in Southeastern Brazil that has extended from 2012 to late 2015. In addition, existing drought conditions in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean may be intensified by the ongoing strong 2015-2016 El Niño occurring against a backdrop of rising temperatures associated with global warming.

After four years of below normal rainfall São Paulo, Brazil was experiencing its worst drought in over 80 years by mid-2015. The city's main water system, the Cantareira reservoir, supports the water needs of 5.3 million people, but by August 2015 it was at record low levels with less than 17% of its normal water capacitydown from the 9 million before the drought. Officials in August 2015 declared the city's water situation "critical," and Moody's Investors Service in early September estimated that the Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de São Paulo had roughly five months of stored water supply remaining.

The situation illustrates the vulnerability of some Latin American cities to drought as climate change alters the frequency and/or severity of drought in the region.

Oceans expand as they warm and they rise further as they receive huge amounts of freshwater from melting glaciers and ice sheets. The sea level is rising and is rise in sea level will continue do so at an accelerated pace in the future. By 2100, sea level could rise another one to four feet.

The IPCC states sea levels threaten the Latin American population-a large proportion of which lives on the coast-by contaminating freshwater aquifers, eroding shorelines, inundating low-lying areas, and increasing the risks of storm surges, according to one assessment.

Sea level rise & ocean acidification

Much of the coastal area surrounding the Mesoamerican reef and nearby islands is low-lying and vulnerable to sea level rise from climate change. Eroding shorelines have already been documented, which can affect nesting and reproductive success of marine turtles. Rising water temperatures cause more episodes of coral bleaching, which is devastating to reefs and the wildlife that depend on them. Ocean acidification, caused by increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the water, also threatens the coral reefs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Change Impacts in Latin America | Descubre WWF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latin America's climate is changing. Precipitation patterns are shifting, temperatures are rising, and some areas are experiencing changes in the frequency and severity of weather extremes such as heavy rains. The impacts range from melting Andean glaciers to devastating floods and droughts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Germany is the largest national economy in Europe and the fourth-largest in the world. It is a well-known and innovative manufacturer, a center of art and culture, home to Alpine vistas and thriving cities, and one of the globe's great beer-makers. And it's in trouble.

Climate change is transforming Germany's environment and future - and for the nation's nearly 83 million citizens, making climate solutions a priority could mean the difference between a bright, sustainable future... and something very different.

From extreme heat and powerful storms to related public health and food security concerns, this world leader is far from invulnerable to the impacts of our warming world. Read on to see what the climate crisis looks like in Germany.

RISING TEMPERATURES

Like so much of the planet, Germany has seen its number of extremely hot days increase across the last several decades, with the number of days where temps exceeded 30 degrees Celsius (86 degrees Fahrenheit) rising from three per year to eight.

And its major cities, including Berlin, Hamburg, and Cologne, cannot escape the "urban heat island effect." This happens when natural landscapes are replaced with buildings and asphalt streets that absorb and store more heat, making cities warmer than surrounding areas. In the summertime, temperatures in German cities can climb as much as 10 degrees Celsius (18 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than in the country's rural areas.

But even in those rural or mountainous areas of the country, like Bavaria and the Rhineland, where temperatures are rising more slowly, the consequences of even a fairly minor increase may ultimately be disastrous.

"Mild temperatures will mean the end of Alpine glaciers by the end of this century. They will melt away due to the higher temperatures, causing flooding at that time," according to Deutsche Welle, Germany's international public broadcaster. "But rivers like the Rhine, which depend on glacial melt, will turn into a trickle of their former strength."

Major rivers shrinking could have a serious impact on everything from German agriculture to energy production. Power plants extract water from nearby rivers as part of their necessary cooling systems. However, if river water is already too warm - or the water levels in summer are too low (more on that below) - a lack of sufficient cooling water could result in functionality problems for power plants across the country.

FLOODING AND DROUGHT

So while heat itself is a concern for the EU nation, that problem is in many ways dwarfed by the resulting changes in precipitation.

A study by the Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS) discovered, according to Phys.org, that "precipitation in Germany has increased by 11 percent since 1881 - and according to the forecasts, this trend is set to continue. It now rains considerably more in winter almost everywhere in Germany; in some cases, precipitation volumes have increased by as much as 30 percent in the cold season. In contrast, summers in many Federal States have become dryer."

Those dryer summers - particularly at a time of overall warming - could be a major concern, because below-average rainfall naturally increases the probability and duration of forest fires.

This is a particular worry for areas like the Alps, where snowpack is melting ever-earlier as unseasonably warm temperatures begin earlier in the spring and creep deeper into the fall. Keeping in mind that forests are considered combustible about a month after the snowmelt ends, the result is a much longer than usual period of time when forests are vulnerable to fire. And, with less predictable rains, it's harder to stop these fires once they begin.

It's no surprise then that climate change-driven drought and all that comes with it have led to an increased risk of wildfires in the Alps.

At other times of year, however, Germany has suffered from the flip side of what we just described. This was especially true just last year:

"So far the summer has been, at least in terms of weather, one thing above all: extreme. As a result, the German Meteorological Service (DWD) declared July 2017 the rainiest month Germany has seen since measurements thereof began back in 1881."

Elsewhere, sea level rise and increased storm surge height may cause flooding along the country's North Sea and Baltic Sea coasts, allowing salt water intrusion into inland areas, potentially contaminating ground and surface freshwaters. The result: Without adaptation, by the 2080s, total losses due to sea level rise in Germany may top 2.6 billion Euros per year.

PUBLIC HEALTH

Extreme heat elevates the rate of death from illnesses like heart attack, heat stroke, organ failure, and more. But in Germany, a more pressing concern will come from diseases spreading as insects travel farther and farther as our climate changes.

"With increasing temperatures, disease carriers (vectors) can migrate into new habitats and thereby extend the regional scope of the diseases they transmit," writes the nation's federal environment agency, Umweltbundesamt. "This includes, inter alia, vectors such as mosquitoes, ticks or bugs. ... In Germany, especially the generally rising temperatures favor the growth and spread of vectors. Mild winters increase the survival rate of many disease vectors. They cause accelerated generation successions and prolonged annual activity periods."

In some regions in southern Germany, even truly tropical vectors like the Asian tiger mosquito are spreading - and they're bringing severe diseases like malaria or dengue fever with them.

Because of the climate crisis, Germans should also expect to see an uptick in asthma and allergies. The science here is true in many places around the globe: With rising temperatures, pollen seasons will start earlier and last longer, and concentrations of ozone and particulate matter in the air will increase.

"The direct health effects caused by higher ozone concentration include irritation of mucous membranes, respiratory reactions such as reduced lung functions, cardiovascular diseases, as well as an impaired physical performance," according to Umweltbundesamt.

FOOD AND WATER SECURITY

If we keep burning fossil fuels at our current rates, food may become harder and harder to grow in many places. Fresh drinking water could become more and more scarce as polluted floodwater runoff contaminates rivers, lakes, and reservoirs - or drought and warming combine to simply dry it all up.

Like so much of climate change's story, the threat to food and water security in Germany is a tale of rising temperatures' impact on the water cycle - something understood all too well by the nation's government:

"In the context of climate change, the amount of rainfall and its distribution is changing in Germany. This has a direct effect on the temporal and regional availability of water. Altered precipitation leads to fluctuations in soil water and groundwater levels. Thus, the soil quality and productivity of agricultural land are affected. If the temperatures rise at the same time, the consequences for the agricultural production will be even more severe."

Decreases in summer precipitation by up to 30 percent are expected across Germany by 2080, potentially leading to problematic heat and drought conditions in some areas and resulting in reduced crop yields and poor harvest quality. And with the rising heat and changes in precipitation patterns, previously uncommon plant diseases could become more common.

"As a result of rising temperatures, it is expected that plant diseases and pests so far only found in warmer regions will spread. This has effects on fruit production, for example," climate scientists in Germany have found. "Thus, the fungal disease apple scab has already led to high quality and yield losses, especially in south-west Germany. Infected plants are less resistant to water and temperature stress and thus more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change."

BE PART OF THE CHANGE WE NEED

The point is, climate change touches every aspect of our lives - in Germany and all over the world. But there's plenty of good news too: With clean energy solutions like wind and solar getting more affordable, batteries getting better, and buildings becoming more efficient every year, the solutions to this crisis are available to us right now. The sustainable future we want is finally in our hands. And at Climate Reality, we won't let it slip away.

We're working to accelerate the global shift from the dirty fossil fuels driving climate change to renewable energies, so we can power our lives and economies without destroying our planet.

If you're ready to join us, apply to join the Climate Reality Leadership Corps at our upcoming training in Berlin from June 26-28! You'll gain the practical skills, knowledge, and network to organize and lead your community in the fight against climate change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Is Climate Change Affecting Germany?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Germany is the largest national economy in Europe and the fourth-largest in the world. It is a well-known and innovative manufacturer, a center of art and culture, home to Alpine vistas and thriving cities, and one of the globe's great beer-makers. And it's in trouble.