Well, the first two weeks of 2015 have already brought a jarring handful of ominous tidings for our near future here. As residents and stakeholders in an Island community, we would do well to mark the occasion by taking that next step in self-education regarding our changing energy needs and changing climate. Maybe even enough to begin connecting the dots, or the blots, on the horizon of anything like a smooth next 10 years.

This newspaper brought us word that our biggest opportunity to move toward a non-polluting, stably priced and locally generated electricity source is in trouble after years of careful work and thought by folks on both sides of the Cape Wind question. The big utilities have canceled their promise to buy power from the project because of a legal technicality. But what becomes of our healthy community-wide debate on the relative merits of the idea — when, as reported by the Gazette in quoting the key spokesman for Cape Wind: “It would be a travesty if delays caused by an interest group funded by one of the Koch brothers could stop a project that would make Massachusetts a leader in offshore wind and create good jobs and help mitigate climate change.”

Should these decisions be made here, by the communities most affected or by one man’s cash and the relatively narrow interests it represents? That’s one of the huge questions that stand out along the sticky web that connects the dots. You can just see its reflection in the news last week that the new governor of our state has apparently begun a reversal of his predecessor’s careful policies put in place to protect us — from mandating transitions to sustainable energy to long overdue initiatives to protect our coastline from the new reality of potentially devastating storm surges. The Boston Globe broke the story this way: “An unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress who campaigned against government regulations, a former lobbyist for the region’s fossil fuel industry, and a senior executive at one of the state’s largest power companies will oversee energy policy for Gov. Charlie Baker, administration officials said Monday.”

A very different storm surge picture, unquestionable rising sea levels, erratically shifting precipitation patterns — yes, as one of the biggest financial digests in the world put it after Hurricane Sandy, “It’s Global Warming, Stupid,” then went on to say that despite the doubters still clouding the issue at the time: “Clarity, however, is not beyond reach. Hurricane Sandy demands it: At least 40 U.S. deaths. Economic losses expected to climb as high as $50 billion. Eight million homes without power. Hundreds of thousands of people evacuated. More than 15,000 flights grounded. Factories, stores, and hospitals shut. Lower Manhattan dark, silent, and underwater.”

Here in the first month of 2015 if you’d like a reality check on the whole world’s new attitude re the seriousness of global warming and its implications, just check in with the really big players in the financial markets. Among other news there, in less than two years the gofossilfree divestment movement is already liquidating more than $50 billion of the oil, gas and coal assets owned both by individuals and institutions like colleges, major cities and dioceses.

However, one of our most influential regional institutions, Harvard University, revealed last week that they are stubbornly bucking that prudent trend, having bought close to $80 million late last year in additional fossil fuel stocks. “We are saying that investment in fossil fuels amounts to mismanagement of public charitable funds,” said Alice Cherry, one of the law students pressing Harvard to divest. Meanwhile, at the same time scientists working though Harvard facilities revealed in the Harvard Gazette the findings of a stunning report on more accurate measurement of rising sea levels. The news is spreading around the world — very fast. It is the still rising emissions of carbon and methane, which Harvard’s investments help to drag on, that are driving the threats along our coastline.

The implications of the new sea level math are still being worked out, but it seems very likely to mean that the year-to-year rate of acceleration in increasing sea level height is much faster than the rate used to predict our risk here on Martha’s Vineyard until now. Those maps of the Island, with the different colors indicating inundation risk, that many of us have seen and which were updated by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission last year, will have to be checked again — very carefully. And this new information may finally be the impetus for the folks in Vineyard Haven visualizing new development strategies for their harbor, to prioritize these facts in their thinking.

In the midst of all this we have just found that in the search for a new commission executive director, the job description formulated by the commissioners on the search committee and the recruiting firm they have engaged has what many Islanders may see as a glaring omission. After graciously inviting public comment at the opening stage of their search, the MVC heard from qualified and experienced Island voices that the job obviously required a director already up to speed on the concerns forced on an Island community due to the realities of climate change. On finding that the posted job description lacked any mention of these concerns it was noted that a qualified, professional planner would see the lack of climate change language — on an Island off the northeast U.S. coast — as a glaring oversight. One that could cause a planner to not apply due to the lack of foresight and courage on the MVC’s part, or to take it as a challenge and focus on climate change in the interview process. But the developments in the next stages of that interview process are not open to the public.

Since it is likely that the new MVC director may be required in the next year, for instance, to spearhead a top-notch vulnerability assessment for all the Island towns, the search committee may have more work to do in the area of self-education and more clarity to bring to the next phase of the selection process. All the towns but one. Oak Bluffs is in the lead as their professional climate change vulnerability assessment is now underway, and will have to factor in the new sea level rise rate calculations mentioned above.

Chris Riger lives in West Tisbury.