A Remote Pacific Nation, Threatened by Rising Seas
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Scientists: We're here to warn you about the flood. Locals: No thanks, god will provide. International aid workers: We're here to save you from the flood. Locals: No thanks, god will provide. Rescue workers: Quick, get in, it's your last chance! Locals: No thanks, god will provide. Drowning Locals: God! why have you forsaken us? God: I tried to save you three times. What more do you want?
If the islands of Kiribati are underwater, other governments may come to challenge their claim to vast amounts of the Pacific [1]
[1] Maritime boundaries and claims: https://imgur.com/KbGj1mC
The EEZ would then be turned into a conversation zone. The USN would use it as an MOA to keep out the tuna fleets.
Once Kiribati is under water, those EEZs would turn into international waters. It has been a few years, but IIRC there isn't much impingement of other nations' EEZs on that of Kiribati.
Nearby is Jarvis Island, with the sorry story of Squire Flockton that I was drawn to for some reason: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=470596...
For example, in Russian pronunciation, you might definitely confuse 'ti' for 'si'. If Russian wouldn't have the real 's' consonant (or 'ц'), it would make sense to transliterate 's' as 'ti'.
But english is (more or less) a phonetic language. If you're romanizing a foreign language, and it doesn't come out more or less phonetic, then.... try again. It doesn't cost anything to keep an "s" in the prospective alphabet.
the "s sound" (IPA [s]) is essentially an allophone of their "t sound" (IPA [t]) before 'i'. Since they don't perceive them to be distinct phonemes, there's no need for a separate letter.
And 'z' sound in Italian means two different consonants; in English it also means two different consonants, both also different from both Italian ones. Both are "phonetic".
A not entirely irrelevant fact about "Kiribati" is that is the same word as Gilberts -- as in Gilberts Islands.
It's interesting in 30+ years that island's might disappear.
But I'd be surprised if it isn't solvable with 30+ year tech. (It's solvable with current tech, just expensive)
60%[0] of greenhouse emissions don't come from the worst of developing countries, so I doubt that many are in those countries are "dying" from a lack of access to cheap energy. 6000 people is a small number. You do risk losing a culture and people, but is the convenience of billions worth the culture of few thousand? I suppose that is a judgement call.
Regardless, it's not like climate change won't affect the billions, it will. It's more like the islanders here will be the first victims.
[0] Added up the numbers from the top ten emitters for greenhouse gases. Brazil and Indonesia are included in this list for their aggressive burning of forest for farmland. Indonesia and Brazil aren't quite "old world" countries, but I doubt access to petrol is the least of their problems.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/21/countrie...