Serious addendum: Sweden, Norway and Finland have population densities lower than Brasil, and I think we should all expect to take in at least 100 million climate refugees during the next few decades. Another reason why we need to keep the countryside communities alive.

I also heard anecdotally - from someone who came to Sweden last week to escape the heat in the Mediterranean - that hotels and restaurants in Sweden are seeing more people coming here to escape the heat.

In September we'll get statistics for April-June from this official website that will confirm or refute that anecdotal data: https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/handel-med-varor-och-tjanster/inrikeshandel/omsattning-inom-tjanstesektorn/pong/tabell-och-diagram/restaurangindex/restaurangindex-utveckling-totalt-och-per-restaurangkategori/

@Loukas I think the vast majority of people have yet to start understanding this.
The largest human migration ever is starting. And the response needed isn't machine guns at the borders & telling the coast guard to sink ships with refugees on them.
The action needed is the plan for the growing cities and growing need for (sustainable) logistics.
@Gurre yes I agree. Unless we enter this migration period with the right ideas and policies we will see Europe trying to commit genocide with borders.
@Gurre @Loukas 100% agreed, and adding the urgent need for the cultural framing at every level of migration as an actively positive and good thing as opposed to a "threat"
@mothninja @Gurre yes we need to see good migration policies as part of saving the world. A change in residency laws is more effective than a hundred billion spent on charging stations for electrical cars.

@Gurre @Loukas I'd say the vast majority of people understands the pressure of human migration.

Only the solutions are easier said than done. Politically and in practice.

@Loukas Why do you need to keep rural communities alive for this? Migrants move to the cities whenever they have free choice; build extensive housing in the capitals, not in places that have not much housing demand and are full of people who want to keep their white villages white.
@Alon I don't think it's possible to scale up the present five small cities of Sweden, Norway and Finland to fit an extra 100m people.
@Loukas It's not possibly to scale anywhere to take this population influx, but the influx that can be scaled is one that the capitals can handle - they're rich and people are trying to migrate to the Nordic countries anyway (and many succeed, Sweden is not the dictatorship of Jimmie Åkesson). The housing growth target in all Nordic capitals should be on the order of 12/1,000 people annually: the Seoul region and Tokyo are just below that and have way worse long-term prospects.
@Alon ok, but I'm just talking about a situation with 100m.
@Loukas @Alon And there is nowhere near enough agriculture capacity for 100m people. Even tripling current population to 60 million seems impossible. Maybe by getting rid of all cattle that could be done but not with 100m...
@lotneuv @Loukas Europe exports food, as we're seeing with the Ukraine grain deal - and global warming means higher yields here and lower ones elsewhere.
@Alon @Loukas Not necesserily. Climate change doesn't increase the amount of light. Violent rains can ruin harvests in minutes at least locally. Plant diseases and insects are moving North too. I think that even keeping current yields is not at all guaranteed. Alle that and ofc we'll loose large parts from Southern european crops.
@Loukas they should move to my town, i want this to be bigger so we'd actually have stuff. 🧐
@Loukas Hahah i Nynäshamn är det kallt idag. Haha