Monday, February 25, 2013

Here Today, Dune Tomorrow

Climate change is real, here to stay and certainly likely to get a whole lot worse.  Superstorm Sandy, Hurricane Katrina, and whatever climate-related land-slam is likely to be next will unequivocally generate structure-destroying and earth eroding storm surges followed inevitably – over time – by rises in oceans and permanently inundated coastal communities. We did it to ourselves, and there is little strong evidence that global cooperation will diminish the greenhouse gasses that are the cause of it all.
So why do we have flood insurance for homes that are in harm’s way, when there is another practical way out? Why should we encourage rebuilding when we know for an almost virtual certainty that these homes will be hit again, and the flood insurance policies (backed or issued by the government) will be called upon again, that FEMA’s resources will be tapped as usual. Engineers build for structural demands up to but excluding the “once in a hundred years” events. But if someone erects a building, exactly when is that event going to occur? Tomorrow? In a hundred years? Never? Or…..?
Given the realities of climate change, all those “hundred year assumptions” on coastal flooding are simply wrong. Where temperature and fire stress factors have been determined on past historical events, they too are now wrong. How many other engineering assumptions are not completely wrong? And exactly how should we readjust?
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has seen the folly of rebuilding structures that are exceptionally likely to be severely damaged or destroyed again in this new “climate change” universe. Though the short term costs of buying out those homes may be high, the longer term costs of allowing that rebuilding may no longer be sustainable. His proposed solution? “Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo is proposing to spend as much as $400 million to purchase homes wrecked by Hurricane Sandy, have them demolished and then preserve the flood-prone land permanently, as undeveloped coastline.
“The purchase program, which still requires approval from federal officials, would be among the most ambitious ever undertaken, not only in scale but also in how Mr. Cuomo would be using the money to begin reshaping coastal land use. Residents living in flood plains with homes that were significantly damaged would be offered the pre-storm value of their houses to relocate; those in even more vulnerable areas would be offered a bonus to sell; and in a small number of highly flood-prone areas, the state would double the bonus if an entire block of homeowners agreed to leave.
The land would never be built on again. Some properties could be turned into dunes, wetlands or other natural buffers that would help protect coastal communities from ferocious storms; other parcels could be combined and turned into public parkland.” New York Times, February 3rd. The governor is right, not just for New York but for every region of the nation in severe climate change jeopardy.
But we have a huge budget deficit, and we cannot afford to buy out all those homeowners! So we still issue government-sponsored flood insurance for homes that we know will be damaged or destroyed? Are we nuts? But if homeowners don’t have an alternative, exactly what are they supposed to do? It’s pretty clear that in the longer term, we would be saving gobs of cash and that we really need to come to grips with the inevitable. We also need to prioritize an infrastructure that has both decayed and was designed in a different era with different disaster assumptions that have now multiplied. Or we can wait for the next disaster… and the next… and the next… and watch that deficit balloon and average Americans cope with tragedy… again and again… and again.
I’m Peter Dekom, and the only reason we won’t implement such a massive buyback is because having common sense is a disqualifier for most elected representatives.

No comments: