Example collocations logo

Disasters in sentence

576 examples of Disasters in a sentence

Many countries and regions are already under severe water stress, which will only intensify as climate change causes natural disasters and extreme weather events like droughts to become increasingly common.
Most significantly, it would commit signatories to protecting “those displaced by natural disasters and climate change.”
This type of regulatory language reaffirms what at-risk populations around the world already know: droughts, natural disasters, desertification, crop failure, and many other environmental changes are upending livelihoods and rendering entire communities uninhabitable.
But what is the alternative, other than accelerating chaos, mushrooming security risks, and serial humanitarian disasters?
All deaths from disasters are a tragedy, but the fact that this number was not much higher attests to the efforts that the Philippines has made to prepare for natural disasters.
As Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, I have seen firsthand the devastation and heartbreak caused by disasters around the world.
Since the beginning of the century, more than a million people have died in storms like Hagupit and other major disasters, such as the 2010 Haitian earthquake, with economic damage totaling nearly $2 trillion.
Over the last decade, the country’s authorities have raised awareness, established and strengthened disaster-management institutions, and worked on recovering from past disasters, including Typhoon Haiyan.
The end result has been nothing short of a transformation of how the Philippines reacts to disasters.
Vietnam, for example, has reported that natural disasters, some of them exacerbated by climate change, have caused annual losses equivalent to 2% of its GDP.
The two recent natural disasters in Burma and China have put this idea to a severe test.
Natural disasters strike with greater fury, and in greater numbers, than ever before.
The really important concern for policymakers everywhere is to prevent disasters – that is, the outlier events that matter the most.
Even America’s Federal Emergency Management Agency, responsible for providing relief after natural disasters and man-made catastrophes, was in the hands of inept political cronies rather than professionals.
Great as the death toll, physical and emotional suffering of survivors, and property damage caused by the tsunami were, even greater losses could be inflicted by other disasters of low (but not negligible), or unknown, probability.
Already, natural disasters are becoming more frequent and intense.
And, despite catastrophic natural disasters, nuclear saber-rattling on the Korean Peninsula, escalating power politics between oil producers in the Middle East, worries about Chinese debt, and the slow-motion collapse of Venezuela, the global economic recovery continued to gain steam.
The struggle to mold our future, to stave off the humanitarian disasters of war, disease, and starvation leaves little room to be philosophical about our place on this crumb of cosmic dust.
This principle leads people to advocate enormously costly actions to prevent disasters that are even more enormous but whose likelihood highly uncertain.
It is easy to imagine disasters so severe that drastic action to prevent them would be reasonable, and advocates of drastic action can easily scare the public with imagined disasters.
It appears to be a statement of the obvious: unacceptable disasters require extraordinary counter-measures.
The world in which we live is a small garden of well-explored territory surrounded by a dim and dark forest of disasters.
Disasters lurking in the distance are legion: asteroids and comets; world-wide pandemics and plagues; nuclear and non-nuclear wars; droughts, famines, and floods; volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tsunamis; human over-population and extinction of non-humans; rising temperatures and sea-levels; falling temperatures and spreading ice ages; exhaustion of clean air and water; disappearance of forests, farms, and fish.
All these disasters – and many others still to be imagined – are possible, and many of them are unacceptable.
No matter what we do or fail to do, the risk of unacceptable disasters will persist.
Some disasters are less likely than others, and some remedies are more costly than others.
Catastrophic disasters associated with climate change are easy to invent, but the effects of remedial actions may be difficult to predict.
Beyond increasing the vulnerability of Brazil’s natural resources to commercial exploitation, the inevitable cuts to the environmental budget under Bolsonaro’s leadership will undermine the country’s ability to respond to disasters like forest fires.
The same is true, over time, with financial disasters.
But the risks that seaside reactors like Fukushima face from natural disasters are well known.
BackNext