An island elder (73), Tuu, is less determined to stay. “It is a better idea to run for my life than worry about my culture or my piece of land” (Corlett 34).
So, who is to blame, who is going to ‘save’ Tuvalu, and is climate change really the problem? The answers to these questions are difficult. Some people think the biggest contributors to carbon emissions should pay; others argue that locals are responsible for their own environmental destruction (Corlett 22). Is it possible that this problem Tuvalu is faced with is exaggerated by activists to sell the idea of going green or the media selling you a sensationalized newspaper that will make them more money(Corlett 23)? Since Tuvalu was selected as the poster child for small island nations sinking in to the…show more content… From 1996 to 2014, New York’s registered lobster landings dropped
97.7%-from 9.4 million pounds in 1996 (the state’s most profitable year) to
215,980 pounds in 2014. The stories much the same in Connecticut, where landings fell 96.6% from the most profitable year, and in Rhode Island, which saw a 70.3% drop from its most profitable year (Greenhalgh par. 6).
People who have been fishermen for many years have had to look into starting other jobs.
“Former lobstermen in Connecticut, many of whom were formerly fishermen, had to switch to clam and oyster farming. A few are also farming seaweed as a second crop”(Greenhalgh par. 7).
Fishermen are adapting to new opportunities presented by climate change, just like the lobster.
Conclusion
At this point climate change is inevitable. Ocean changes due to climate change are having visible effects on fisheries and ecosystems. These in turn are weakening food security.
We are living outside our planetary limits. So by 2100 what will happen? We are most likely looking at the future of a changed planet. Whether this new landscape will have enough food to support our population remains to be
