Over two days last week, from February 18 to 19, Storm Eunice battered its way through the UK and Northern Europe leaving a trail of destruction. Producing record breaking wind speeds of up to 122 mph in the UK, the storm left behind an estimated $476 million in damages in just the UK alone. Though the UK bore the brunt of the storm, it also struck Ireland, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, Lithuania, and Germany. In total, 16 people have now died as a result of the storm.
Eunice comes on the heels of Storm Dudley that carried 80 mph winds and took a similar path through the UK and Northern Europe. The much less destructive Dudley resulted in an estimated $102 million in damages for the UK. In the wake of Dudley and Eunice, another storm named Franklin hit the UK and Northern Europe with a comparable destructive force to Dudley.
“We had Dudley on Wednesday, Eunice on Friday, and Franklin today (Sunday).” - Meteorologist Becky Mitchell
This was the first time the Met Office had recorded three major storms in a week since the naming system was introduced seven years ago.
Within the span of 5 days, the UK has already amassed an estimated $578 million in damages which will inevitably increase further in the aftermath of Franklin. The Netherlands has reported an estimated $573 million in damages while Germany warns the total cost of damage could come in at over $1 billion from the three storms.
“Even in disasters, underlying systemic inequities result in disproportionate disaster impacts and response. This is a globally repetitive pattern which thrives in situations of inequality, from which Europe is not immune.”
For developed countries with a history of high emissions, colonialism and accumulation, climate change impacts have far fewer destabilizing effects on entire systems and societies compared to developing countries. The impacts tend to be measured by economic metrics, which in proportion to the climate crisis, are increasingly costly for developed countries as well.
If the scenario were flipped and this happened in some developing nations, back-to-back disasters like this would require disaster relief and humanitarian support due to higher incidents of displacement, loss of livelihoods, even greater loss of life. Longer lasting effects would linger, triggering food insecurity, increased poverty, development setbacks and economic losses.
“The UK and Europe storms are opportunity for these developed country citizens to recognize the pattern of loss and damage they’re starting to witness at home as well”
The contrast in these two narratives is stark. Much of the initial media coverage around the European storms has been focused on damage to infrastructure, power outages, and travel delays. Evacuations must have been a major reality in these storms, but even that coverage is associated with the economic costs such forced evacuations pose, rather than the immediate human costs these increasing climate disasters impose.
Compare that to the stories of Bangladeshi citizens who must contend with more frequent and intense climate-induced cyclones and storms, where poverty, conflict, displacement and underdevelopment are all part of their narrative of climate change. This narrative is not altogether inaccurate, but it is missing important context, which fortunately some media are increasingly providing. That which is missing is also helpful because Bangladesh is doing a lot to help its citizens adapt to climate change, including disaster risk reduction and facilitated internal migration, which high-emitting developed countries would be wise to emulate.
Bangladesh and other Global South countries are also rightly classifying these increasing climate-induced events and their impacts on populations as “loss and damage” – impacts that cannot be avoided by mitigation and adaptation – and calling for establishing a separate climate fund to help countries deal with the growing costs.
“Bangladesh is doing a lot to help its citizens adapt to climate change, which high-emitting developed countries would be wise to emulate. ”
The same link must be drawn in developed countries as well. The UK and Europe storms are opportunity for these developed country citizens to recognize the pattern of loss and damage they’re starting to witness at home as well, and to hold their elected leaders to account for historic and continuing global emissions despite the dire warnings from the science community.
Within a few days, the projected view of life in the UK and Europe risks appearing as having returned to normal. Schools will reopen, public transit will resume, and the countries will be viewed as back on their feet. But of course, not everyone will “return to normal” and be “back on their feet.” One need only look to the United States’ many hurricanes that have struck impoverished and marginalized communities in New York, Louisiana, Texas, and the Gulf Coast to know that some displaced by Hurricane Sandy in 2012 and Hurricane Katrina in 2005 continue to be among America’s climate displaced. To understand this is to recognize that even in disasters, underlying systemic inequities result in disproportionate disaster impacts and response as detailed below. This is a globally repetitive pattern which thrives in situations of inequality, from which Europe is not immune.
Eunice is considered the worst storm in over 30 years to hit the UK, and combined with back to back severe storms, concerns over the country’s resilience and even its climate resilience have not been a major focus. While the cumulative costs of increasing climate-induced disasters will eventually weigh heavy, it’s not part of the established narrative for powerful developed countries to be cast in vulnerable lights. This of course has also paved the way for such countries to delay policies and practice that take responsibility for averting the worst of the climate crisis.
The climate crisis is not an isolated issue. Wealthy nations historically developed through the expansion and extraction of colonialism, growing economically through a strong carbon dependency. These gains have come at the expense of others. It is those development gains and robust economic stature directly linked with fossil fuels, that grants the UK and Europe such high adaptive capacities in which they can face hundreds of millions of dollars in storm damage that might cripple a developing nation that has contributed almost nothing to global emissions.
Future headlines may lack news of Europeans displaced, jobs lost, and other lingering impacts, but they will likely miss the stories of impacts on immigrants, impoverished people, costs and widening inequalities even for middle-income communities, that will leave some to bear disproportionate losses and damage that portray a much bigger picture.