There is no disguising the floods in Spain as anything other than a jaw-droppingly extreme weather event. The worst affected areas saw more than 400 liters of rain per square meter fall in just eight hours on Tuesday last week. As rescue and cleanup missions continue, the carnage is a small taste of what climate change has in store for us.
The death toll has surpassed 200 people, a number that is likely to increase as relief efforts continue. A rapid partial analysis of the deluge by World Weather Attribution, an academic collaboration examining extreme meteorological events, estimates that human-caused climate change made the rainfall about 12 percent heavier and doubled the likelihood of a storm of such intensity.
There is justified rage over a slow response from the Spanish authorities, along with conflicting accounts of the timing of alerts.
The civil protection agency in the Valencia region failed to send an alert to residents’ phones until after 8pm, by which point some streets were already underwater and people in grave danger.
Maribel Albalat, the mayor of Paiporta, a town in the affected region, described the situation as “a trap” because many residents decided to enter underground garages at the worst possible time in an effort to move their cars to higher ground.
Rather than taking responsibility for mistakes, leaders of regional and central governments are pointing fingers at each other. When Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and Spanish King Felipe VI finally visited Paiporta, the reception was hostile.
We would not know exactly what went wrong in Spain unless there is an inquest, but this is not the first time that flood warnings and responses have been found lacking in Europe. In July 2021, flash floods in Germany killed 189 people.
An analysis of the flood alert system found it to have serious weaknesses, with survey data indicating that many residents did not receive a warning, or underestimated the magnitude of the deluge, while up to 50 percent of those who were warned did not know what steps to take to protect themselves and their property.
As the report says, warnings are only helpful if the people in flood-prone areas and civil protection agencies “receive and notice the warning in time, trust the warning, understand its content, and know how to respond and behave adequately.” That was not the case in Germany; the shortcomings were clearly repeated in Spain.
Providing effective forecasts and warnings can be challenging. While weather models these days are fairly accurate, it remains extremely difficult to predict precisely where thunderstorms would strike and whether the rain would translate into flash floods, as it depends on many local variables such as topography, infrastructure and surfaces.
It is made more difficult by the fact that we are seeing rare events more often because of climate change. It is hard to predict what the impact of a year’s worth of rainfall in just eight hours is when it has never been observed before. That is true for both forecasters and the public.
While generating more precise forecasts would be helpful, we are also often not communicating the information we already have effectively enough. Improving messaging is quicker and easier than developing new weather models, but requires coordination between multiple stakeholders — meteorologists, local authorities and even businesses, who can all play an important role in passing on threat information.
This is a growing area of science. As behavioral economists have found, people do not always behave rationally. For instance, during a deadly 2013 tornado outbreak in Oklahoma, thousands of people fled their homes in cars despite years of messaging about the dangers of encountering twisters in a vehicle.
Weather warning systems are now being reviewed. Should there be a new category of alert above red for really serious events? How explicit should messaging be in terms of telling people what to do? How should risks be communicated? The prospect of life-threatening flash floods is more readily understood than predictions of 400mm of rain, but there is a balance to be struck: Being overly cautious and sending too many alerts might lead to distrust or warning fatigue.
Typically, forecasting, warning and response systems would see a burst of funding after an event like the Valencia floods. For a while, people would pay more attention: The response to the flooding in Barcelona this week might have been very different had people not just seen how serious the situation was a few days prior.
INVESTMENT
On Tuesday, Sanchez pledged a relief package of 10.6 billion euros (US$11.4 billion), including direct aid for households and funds for city governments to pay for repairs and reconstruction.
However, what is needed is investment to ensure Spain is ready for future rainfall extremes. After all, to stay resilient, communities need to prepare for these events before they strike. People should know whether they are at risk from flooding before rain is even forecast. Authorities should have action plans for road closures and emergency service responses. Cities need to be built with space for water to reduce the risk of flooding in the first place.
Integrating alerts with other platforms — Google Maps, for instance — could help nudge people toward safe and protective behaviors; warning systems and those who run them need sufficient investment.
When a densely populated urban area is deluged by rain, the impacts are going to be large, but well-functioning forecast and alert procedures can save lives and reduce damage from extreme weather events.
The climate crisis is not going away; the disaster in Spain should be a wake-up call. We need to be equipped for the next time — and the next and the next.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
Republican candidate and former US president Donald Trump is to be the 47th president of the US after beating his Democratic rival, US Vice President Kamala Harris, in the election on Tuesday. Trump’s thumping victory — winning 295 Electoral College votes against Harris’ 226 as of press time last night, along with the Republicans winning control of the US Senate and possibly the House of Representatives — is a remarkable political comeback from his 2020 defeat to US President Joe Biden, and means Trump has a strong political mandate to implement his agenda. What does Trump’s victory mean for Taiwan, Asia, deterrence