Orrin Pilkey is a scientist who has been studying and documention the shores of the United States for decades, creating the Duke University Press series "Living with the Shore" that any coastal person should take a look at.
https://sites.nicholas.duke.edu/orrinpilkey/
The series began before the unmistakable signal of our greenhouse emissions made sea-level rise what we now know will continue well beyond 2100, as the heat we're adding grows the ocean. He and his son, Keith, wrote a primer on climate change in 2011, and now have a new book on sea level rise that I'll be reading.
https://www.dukeupress.edu/sea-level-rise
People can point to various other things that affect local sea level - groundwater pumping, soil compaction, shifts in ocean currrents, loss of silt deposits when rivers are constrained, and those are all contributers to local sea level changes.
But "and greenhouse warming" is an additive factor we have to manage as well because it rises the ocean and intensifies precipitation. The difficult thing is doing it even though our changes now will only affect conditions in the future. Time to learn a bit of societal generosity towards people in the future.
6
Land subsidence in the Houston area due to groundwater withdrawal is a silent major contributor to flooding. As Houston continues to grow, it's insatiable demand for more drinking water exacerbates now and future doomsday flooding scenarios for its residents.
4
"After Hurricane Harvey hit in 2017, Houston jumped to the front of the pack in… locking the barn door after they drowned the horse."
There, fixed it fer ya'. Too little, too late, folks.
"Some of them were angry,
At the way the earth was abused
By the men who learned how to forge her beauty into power.
And they struggled to protect her from them,
Only to be confused,
By the magnitude of her fury in the final hour…"
Jackson Browne, "After the Deluge". (check it out, peeps).
8
“Cope with climate change”...like, staying in an abusive relationship, you can “cope” or you can ACT. we don’t have to be the victim.
4
Climate Change is real and the wolf is at the door. The conservative predictions by scientists made years ago have erred on the low side and the world has not changed its ways, so expect that trend to continue.
A couple of years back, the National Geographic Magazine published a map and article called what if all the ice melted. Here is a short video animation:
https://youtu.be/VbiRNT_gWUQ
The Gulf of Mexico would start near Pine Bluff Arkansas not far south of Little Rock. We all know what that would mean for New Orleans and Houston.
4
Hurricane Harvey, a tropical storm cost Houston and Southeast Texas, $125 billion. Sen. Sanders 16 trillion dollar programs sounds like a pretty sound investment in the long run.
4
Definition of insanity:
Repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. Rebuilding in a flood plain falls into this category, many of the people trapped by their economic circumstances in this cycle will eventually lose their minds.
9
"Mitigate" has become a sick joke. We've done so little, for so long, that it looks about the same as doing nothing, ever. Every year, while we talk about "mitigating" world carbon emissions actually climb higher. Every.Single. Year.
We're like smokers that talk about quitting while we chain-smoke the night away.
Mitigation is a train that's long left the station.
What's left is to see how humanity - as well as other species - adapt.
It will not be easy.
Is denying climate change so you can vote for polluters - the strategy so far - really a good strategy moving forward?
People need to start asking themselves some hard questions that may not have feel-good answers.
9
The good news here, if you look for it, is that if Christopher's points are reflected in Houston government and within its population then they have at least partially reversed their obsolete anti-planning mindset, something usually very hard to do. Of course, their recent historical painful experiences had a lot to do with that. I don't see a lot of denial left here, and that also is one of the largest "forces of nature." Same for the usually automatic "Re-build we must" mindset. So they have at least partially accepted reality, seem to be taking at least a partially comprehensive view about what they must do, putting money on the table in what I assume is an anti-tax region, and are not deluding themselves about the timing steps will take. And they are asking some of the right questions. Hopefully they will now see what they must do even better, such as significantly speed-up the buy-out process. Bigger picture, we need these "test cases," and as we move into this new more mature societal phase, must learn from them and others. Of course, like other readers, I wonder how long it will take for them to begin to also question the "petroleum culture," and how their voting choices helped put them into this bind and need to be re-directed. I suspect we will be seeing more stories about this topic, so thank you Christopher for getting it rolling. Addressing climate change will take many more personal and professional questioning of "business-as-usual" assumptions and mindsets.
4
@Matt Polsky The worst action you can take that insures no effective action will be taken to address climate change is to vote for Donald Trump. How many Houstonites understand that?
3
What part of "Built On A Flood Plain" don't you understand?
Here's another "New Orleans Is Below Water Level."
Here's a third "You Can Educate Ignorance, But There Is No Cure For Stupid."
Nature is doing her part on the education side, both cities flood on a regular basis. We are taking care of the stupid part, we keep rebuilding.
5
When a 1 in 500 year event occurs, then two years later a 1 in 100 year event occurs, I think you have a serious problem on your hands.
6
@David Binko Let me ask you -- if you're playing poker and you get four of a kind in one hand and then a couple of hands later you get a full house -- what do you think? Do you think the dealer is trying to make you rich, do you think you're a genius, or do you think it's an anomaly that you got two great hands with low probabilities of occurring so close together? Or do you run out and take all of your money and put it on the next hand certain that there's a trend here and you are going to walk away rich?
Well, if you're smart you say to yourself, statistical anomaly. I got lucky, but over many many hands I won't get two hands like that so close together this often (in 7 card poker where you pick the best five the odds of 4 of a kind are 1 in 594 hands, full house is 1 in 37.5). The point is, rarely occurring events sometimes cluster -- it's only over a very very large number of hands that the frequencies of specific hands (assuming an honest deck) will conform to the statistical odds of occurrence.
Ditto hurricanes and floods. Now, Houston may have it's own special circumstances where due to geographical location, subsidence, etc., it's odds of getting more heavy flooding is greater than expected. It might be akin to flipping a coin that isn't quite honest. Over 100 flips you would expect 50 head, 50 tails --- or close) but if the coin is weighted it might be 80-20.
2
@Ralphie - physics applies to human greenhouse emissions just like other greenhouse emissions. Waters warm, air warms, moisture content of air increases, rains fall harder.
Here it is again, Ralphie - a very clear picture of the increasing trend in intense 1-day precipitation events in the contiguous states since 1910.
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heavy-precipitation
You can (and do) go on and on trying to make reality go away, yet reality continues to happen.
We are changing the statistical climate patterns around the world. This happens when energy balances change. Our greenhouse gases are changing the energy balance.
2
Since I'm in the oil business, I enjoy telling people that, "I've served my Houston prison sentence...2.5 long years." Last week a friend who has been so unfortunate to have lived there since 1983 phoned me to share that she is at wit's end and sick of the place, but doesn't know how to muster the energy to get out. I always enjoy visiting friends in the Big H and of course look forward to the great food. That said, after having lived all over the U.S. and overseas, H is probably the most miserable place I've ever lived short of Dubai...which I refer to as the "Houston of the Middle East!" I find it amusing that my many colleagues who are stuck there due to career demands will jump through so many hoops to rationalize their miserable lives in this hot, humid, dirty, polluted, crime-ridden city. I've never forgotten the day several years ago when a long-time Houston friend phoned me and starting chanting, "we're number 1!" That year H was declared the American Leading City: 1) #1 obese population, #1 industrial pollution, and #1 murders.
4
@rd
of course, working for the oil business from Denver is a much more sensible arrangement...
3
I feel so bad for the people that got flooded in Hurricane Harvey
1
Hope that you voters in Texas don't forget that's there's no climate change according to trump.
4
Don’t Republicans believe climate change is a hoax? And isn’t Texas controlled by Republicans?
Therefore why should any taxpayer living outside of Texas contribute a single cent for climate mitigation within that state?
All these 100 and 500 year floods that’s happened in the past couple of years—it’s all just coincidence! Texan Republicans thinks climate change is a giant hoax, therefore Texas needs absolutely no federal assistance! It’s going to be clear skies and gentle rains for Houston from here on out!
2
@Scott actually no. As a republican in Houston, I can say that we don't think climate change is a hoax. What is a hoax is that people are told that the world is going to end in a decade and the same people who believed it the last 14 times they were told that are still buying into it. Per Al Gore and others, we should already all be dead.
Of course climate change exists. It has been happening long before humans roamed the earth. No republican I know questions that. What is being questioned is exactly how much of an impact can be blamed on emissions produced by humans vs climate change that would take place anyway. I have yet to see ANY evidence that definitely shows this. If all scientists agreed on this then it should be easy to produce. It isn't and scientists actually don't agree. They can't even agree what the weather will be two weeks from now, let alone 100 years from now.
Even if we could agree on that, you would then have to convince me that it is a problem we can fix. Even if we spend trillions, what about China and India doing nothing to mitigate their emissions? What about all of the illegals coming here that will expect to benefit from our electricity in the future? Are you willing to give up the device you typed your comment on and allow people to die from exposure to heat when it is 100 degrees outside? We couldn't run lifesaving equipment in hospitals. That is what would be required if we fully eliminated fossil fuels today. Not realistic.
1
"a Rash of Storms Tests the Limits of Coping With Climate Change"
It's much , much , much simpler
It tests the limits of irresponsible development - by greedy land developers enabled by lack of regulation
Read
Houston's Flood Is a Design Problem
The Atlantic Aug 28, 2017
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/08/why-cities-flood/538251/
4
Let's admit it. As nice as certain places may be not everyplace is fit for human habitation.
5
<< “Things are moving forward,” said Stephen Costello, Houston’s chief recovery officer. “We just obviously didn’t anticipate that you would have something pretty close to a Harvey two years later.” >>
Amazing that someone in his position has such as lack of understanding of what the 100- and 500-year flood numbers mean.
3
Where was it that they repair or replace once? Repair to the new reality 20 feet high or move to higher ground once.
climate change? poor urban planning more likely. development in flood plains, over development pretty much everywhere. to much concrete and asphalt. misguided levee systems. it all adds up to people living in water far more often. its always rained, sometimes a lot. its always flooded . more people than ever live where it floods and it floods in more places cause the ground is covered and can't soak it up.
yes the climate is changing . but it's not responsible for ever stupid thing we do!
2
The tendency for media to describe any unusual event as a result of climate change is just wrong. There is no evidence and the IPCC again has said that there is little data to connect the two. Just fear mongering.
1
The only way to save what is left of Houston is to end the federal support of flood insurance. As soon as that happens no one will build in a flood plain. Of course denying climate change will just allow an extension of flood plains to even more lower lying areas. You can fool people but Mother Nature is no dope.
3
Unbridled development is a major contributing factor to Houston's flooding problem. Hundreds of the homes that were flooded during Harvey were built behind a dam in a reservoir. New developments regularly cause flooding in adjacent neighborhoods that never experienced flooding before. We have a lot of problems that can be solved by politicians with spines and engineers.
4
Give me a break. This season only two hurricanes touched the US mainland and those just brushed the coast and did minimal manage. While there may be some effect if climate change it's not a crisis. When is Climate Derangement Syndrome (CDS) going to be recognized for what it is?
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/29/scientists-tell-un-global-climate-summit-no-emerge/
1
Yup, the 'ol "environmental permitting" bogeyman, a favorite whipping boy..
I actually work in this field and the vast majority of project ideas never get to environmental permitting. Why? Because every site you select to do something is someone else's favorite idea for the next car dealership, the next marina, the next anything but an infrastructure project to ameliorate these issues.
Then, some projects are just environmentally stupid, as in let's dredge and straighten this river, so the people along it can stop getting flooded, but the people downstream get flooded worse. And, we destroy the river in the process.
And, before you can get off "go" with any idea whatsoever, city and / or county planners want detailed local studies of water behavior before and after project. If anyone gets their ox gored in the "after project" scenario, well... then just forget it.
All those issues are very legitimate in someone's minds, but the result is total stasis. So, let's not blame the environment for the messed-up environment we've created, and continue to sustain.
6
There are some realities we are going to have to face. Houston was built on a flood plain, nature has been trying to teach us that lesson, but we keep rebuilding.
As another example of our inability to learn, take New Orleans. It is below water level, the only thing that keeps New Orleans in existence are massive levees and huge pumps. Even with all of that New Orleans floods regularly.
So the question is: Are we going to learn? Particularly with rising ocean levels, some cities, even big ones, are in the wrong location.
8
@Bruce1253 So is the Netherlands. And yet, they cope well. I would suggest the question is not "When will we learn?" but "When will we do what we must do?"
3
Alabama has had over 100 days above 90 degrees already this year. It should be 80 degrees now; we’re still in the high 90’s and suffering from another drought.
The big storms collect the water and dump it somewhere. Meanwhile, other places don’t get enough rain to sustain agriculture.
Climate change is bad and it’s getting worse faster than we thought it would.
13
@Bamagirl
Things the liberal press will never tell you:
-Glaciers were Already Retreating Before 1900
-Ice ages have been coming and going for eons.
-The last 20 years have shown zero warming (hence the switch to 'climate change').
-Man produces less than 1/2 of 1 percent of C02 on the planet.
-It was warmer in the 15th century than it is now.
-The greatest warming in the 20th century was between 1935 and 1950.
-NASA confirms: Sea levels FALLING across the planet in 2016 and 2017.
-NASA Data: Earth Cooled by Half a Degree Celsius From '16-'18
-Scientists have been caught manipulating and hiding data.
-None, NONE, of their prior predictions have come true.
-In 1995 Al Gore said by 2005 Miami will be under water "due to Global warming". Miami is NOT underwater.
-The highest record temperature ever reported was 136 degrees Fahrenheit in Libya in 1922. The record high temperature for the United States was 134 degrees Fahrenheit in Death Valley, California in 1913.
-Excavations in the Antarctic have shown vegetation use to cover the continent.
-If all the C02 was removed from the atmosphere, we would die. Plants need C02 to live and we need plants to live.
1
In a Republican controlled State, I wonder how the politicians will respond? Texas due to climate change has been more vulnerable inland and coastal. Weather patterns are off the charts. Recently my plane was redirected, we waited almost two hours until we were given green light.
1
One flooding problem in Houston could have been solved with 4 billion. It never was and after a storm it caused 80 billion in damage. No one is standing up and asking why. True Houston is Blue but they don't their taxes raised.
How do we get our government to sit down and come up with a realistic plan focused on improving this countries infrastructure. I know the there's a NGD but I said a realistic plan.
1
It's pretty much a cautionary tale to accept that climate change is happening, to know that it will keep getting worse, and never to vote Republican again.
If these people want to keep blinding themselves to reality and voting for Republican candidates who are dead set on destroying the environment so that oil and coal companies can continue to profit, then I have zero sympathy for them. Maybe they can talk themselves into trying to evolve gills. I'll be happy to offer thoughts and prayers for their efforts.
6
While some may choose not to believe in climate change, the fact remains the more CO2 in the atmosphere, the more water the atmosphere can hold, so when it rains, it certainly pours. Quite simple.
17
I'm glad that my hometown put their foot forward on climate change during Harvey and put some changes into effect immediately. My only complaint is the wait on FEMA. Why does it have to take so long for those who were effected to get assistance? It shouldn't take more than 5 years! They also need to allow environmental permits to be acquired faster so that things can move along! Storms don't wait and neither should citizens of the city who need help!
4
@Dan They did? So they have zoning law now and nobody can build on the flood zone anymore? Seriously, it's hard to believe that they put their foot forward like you said as the same time they do not have zoning law against building in flood zone.
2
Pure nonsense. Note that so far this year our hurricane activity is about average and no different from years in the 19th century. Also note that before satellites we wouldn't have identified some of the storms that occured this year that never approached land -- nor would we know about their intensity.
The Houston area has rapidly developed over the last several decades and subsidence is a huge issue. It's also FLAT, so any major storm can easily lead to flooding.
Further, while it is unusual to have two major floods so close together, anomalies happen. If Imelda had gone a little further West let's say, no one would be talking about it.
They only have precip data going back to 1947, but the most precip (rain, it don't snow in Houston as a rule, spoils the BBQ) occurred in the 70's and 80's.
So let's not jump to conclusions. If you live in Houston, you better expect a tropical storm or hurricane will hit you. Or you'll get heavy rains.
3
@Ralphie - Houston's in Harris County which has rainfall records in Climate At A Glance back to 1895. Annual rainfall trends up, at a rate of +8.17 inches a century. Link at end.
It makes sense. Physics says warmer air lifts more water, and the air is warming.
NOAA also reported this a year before Harvey: "In late April 2016, record rainfall fell in the Houston area, and some areas received nearly a season’s worth of rain in one night. The deluge led to deadly flooding, and nine counties were declared to be in a state of disaster."
That was just rain, no cyclonic storm.
Feb 26, 2016, the Texas State Climatologist posted: "During 2015, Texas had its wettest calendar year on record, as well as its wettest month ever (May). Between the wet spring and wet fall, Texas had a brief but intense drought, and now we’ve had another unusual dry spell."
Oh, regarding hurricanes. Current understanding is not more storms, but more of the intense ones, as hotter oceans compete with wind shear.
10/18/15 on Weather.com: "A record 22 hurricanes or typhoons have reached Category 4 or 5 strength in the Northern Hemisphere this year."
And read this about Lorenzo and Cat5 storms in the Atlantic:
https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Lorenzo-Muscles-Its-Way-Category-5-Strength
Link on Harris County.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/county/time-series/TX-201/pcp/12/12/1895-2019?base_prd=true&begbaseyear=1901&endbaseyear=2000&trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=1895&endtrendyear=2019
7
So it seems your take on this is, you choose not to believe in climate change, so Houston can just get flooded and hit by hurricanes, so what. Hugely helpful and utterly unconvincing to anyone who accepts the truth about climate change, which is most educated people. Put your money where your mouth is then, and move to the coast.
3
@b fagan You might note that the time series correlation with precip for texas climate div 8 is not significant and the correlation between annual avg max temp and precip is negative. Time series with max temps is non significant. If you go around through all the climate divisions that face the coast, you'll see that the div that Harris county is in is by far the one with the greatest increase in rain, the rest are marginal increases, and non significant. All across FL there is no increase in precipitation even though Florida is the only gulf state that shows significant warming (probably due to heavy growth and urbanization).
So, at least for the gulf states, Texas Div 8 appears to be an anomaly in terms of precip. Which means that we're looking at something like a statistical anomaly, any of these storms might have bobbed and weaved in the gulf and hit anywhere, or perhaps Houston due to its location is more likely to be hit by hurricanes and TS (haven't investigated that)
As far as Lorenzo, so? One weather event means nothing. Moreover, when they say the most powerful in the northern Atlantic this late blah blah -- we might not even know about Lorenzo and it's powerful without satellites. So, it's really a short chunk of weather history to measure against.
Houston, is by far, one of the worst planned cities in America. Heedless of good zoning, allowing housing developments to be built in a major flood zone, and the huge urban sprawl has made this city of looping expressways a nightmare, especially when confronted with the results of global climate change. It is a poster child for everything that happens with you have uncontrolled growth, greed, and a population that is at the mercy of incompetent city government.
20
I do not live in Houston, but in Cincinnati, on the Ohio River, we have developers being permitted to build in front of the flood wall and most surprisingly to me, they have anxious buyers scooping up the $1M+ houses for the prestigious views
13
Climate change / global warming / sea level rise is not established scientific fact.
@Steve That's great... Problem is, we're past the need for any science at this point. We'll just live it from here.
1
Yes, it is, but keep disbelieving in reality.
2
What about "doing something" meaning less contribution to global warming? No real mention of Houston making these efforts, even as a major oil and gas hub. Just rerouting floodwater and changing some building codes is a bandaid on the bigger problem here...
7
If only all those who deny the climate is changing (and the GOP they elect) would just take their personal fortunes to Houston (and everywhere along the coast) and buy out those who are being flooded and want to sell out. Since climate change is just a big hoax, this should be an opportunity for those who think change is not occurring to buy up what they should see as very valuable property at bargain prices. If they act on their beliefs they will buy out the losers who want to give up and later sell the properties at great profit. If you really think there is no such thing as climate change, go put your money where your mouth is and make the purchase of a lifetime.
20
Ask the insurance companies if THEY believe in climate change.
21
@DM Williams yes, they appear to! here in the SF bay area insurers are cancelling policies of homes located in the hills around the bay since they've been designated "extreme fire hazard" areas. Also, no doubt a response to the horrendous wildfires we had around here last year.
3
I think we should pay everyone who has a fire, a flood, wind damage, earth quake damage full value for repairing their home, as many times as necessary. All medications should be free. also burglary, car accidents, clothing allowance, vacation money, free use of attorney, heat and electric, food..........yeah, let's do that.
2
Disregard science! Fill in your wetlands, pave them, and build developments on them! Then - face the consequences.
13
Ya know, Houston is completely covered with blacktop, (asphalt).
The rain can’t percolate down.
8
This all comes from allowing construction in unsuitable areas, such as South Florida specializes in doing. People always fall for it, then complain.
7
Seems like karma to me. Exxon gets to eat its own golden calf.
7
@Dan Lake - the alarming thing is along coasts and rivers around the country, toxic sites and chemical storage sites are very likely to have been sited alongside waterfronts, for easy bulk shipping via waterways. Along with active industrial sites and storage facilities, you also have abandoned sites, old dumps, lots of coal ash storage ponds.
The longer we put off increased investment in replacing fossil, the more we'll all also be paying for cleanups of surface spills, and finding drinking water supplies to replace those infiltrated by runoff or increased saltwater levels.
1
Far too little, far too late.
3
Deep in the heart of "Climate change is a hoax" country, we see rugged anti-socialists running for Federal (aka Socialist) dollars every time their choice to live in a flood zone bears real-world consequences. I don't want my tax dollars going to support a self-induced crisis.
Republicans have long declared that they should not be required to pay in health care dollars for those who make bad life and health choices. I say: living in Houston is a bad life choice and those who made it should pay for their own folly.
27
@Hanging I actually agree with you. I am a republican in Houston and I think that is a great compromise. I didn't take a single tax dollar for Hurricane Harvey because I made sure I didn't buy a house that would put me in that situation. If I can make wise decisions, then others should be able to also. No one should be forced to subsidize poor decision making by others.
Here's the interesting thing about alarmists. Two storms in a short period that flood Houston means climate change is REAL. But going 12 years without a major hurricane hitting the contiguous US means nothing. We avg, per NOAA, .6 majors hitting the US each year. That's the average. So over 12 years we should have had 7 majors strike us. But that didn't happen. Why? Because averages are averages but that doesn't mean every that each year we should expect .6 majors. That's the best odds we know but that doesn't dictate what actually happens. A lot of things have to happen for a major to make landfall in the US.
And to restate (since the gate keepers haven't released my previous post) if Imelda or Harvey had hit a hundred miles west there wouldn't be anything to be alarmed about.
1
@Ralphie it is not just the major storms that are a problem. Look at the flooding events in and around Houston starting in 2015. There was the 2015 Memorial Day flood, the 2016 Tax Day flood, Hurricane Harvey, and now Imelda. In between there have been a couple of rain events that caused minor flooding of a few homes that 10 years ago never saw flooding, homes that are 50 or 60 years old. Climate change is real. Houston just happens to be in a place where it’s effects seem to be magnified. The Gulf is warmer - hence more evaporation, the atmosphere is warmer and holds more moisture. The atmospheric steering currents that used to move storm systems along are weaker. All this is leading to more common flooding rain events for Houston and the surrounding area.
18
@Ralphie Should I be alarmed that the last 5 years have been the 5 hottest individual years globally in recorded human history? That is quite an average.
Here in Montreal it's called "The Consortium." Over there it's called "The Developers." Notice I say "It," because it's always this faceless, formless group of people—I should actually say "men," because it's almost always a group of men (and notice how it resists, even in written form, being personalized?)
And it's always the same: another MegaMall (over here they're pushing—and I know it's almost *sure* to be "approved"—some monstrous large mall they're calling "Royalmount," which they're going to shoehorn into one of the most hopelessly congested parts of the city, and which is going to turn into what has already resulted in many similar malls across the city—vacant storefronts because of ludicrously high rents and ghost malls with a few bored security guards keeping watch).
So even as online shopping makes "going to the mall" an even more unattractive proposition than it was before, more concrete, more cars and more unwanted congestion degrades the urban environment even further, and for what? More useless consumption of "stuff" that is consuming the planet with frightening and remorseless rapidity.
I for one welcome our new Climate Demon overlords.
17
Houston has not only had a problem from increased storm intensity but also from land subsidence. Oil and water withdrawals from under the metropolitan area has caused up to 10 feet of ground subsidence:
https://hgsubsidence.org/science-and-research/
The subsidence contour map at the bottom right of the page used to be available at the Texas General Land Office, but they have gotten rid of all links to sea level rise and ground subsidence.
15
well, at least this last storm should make some of the hearings and votes on responses to Harvey more straightforward.
No one is going to try the "It was a freak storm, let's not overreact!" argument. At least not for a while. Florida was hit by a number of massive hurricanes in the early 2000s, and now you just read people talking about how no M rated storm has landed in over a decade, therefore all is well.
The other big thing not mentioned is the massive amount of growth in the city and increasing about of concrete. Even if mitigation projects happened quicker, they might have a hard time keeping pace with the destruction of surfaces that can absorb water.
7
Maybe the core problem is an unsustainable population growth. Too many people needing houses, water, electricity, schools, hospitals, shopping malls, police stations, electric power plants, oil refineries, and so forth.
10
Shouldn't there be a limit on the number of times a flooded home can be rebuilt at the taxpayer's expense?
21
All planning is regional. Developers in Texas, as everywhere, leverage promises of economic development to strike the best deal - often at the expense of sensible land management.
In Houston, this creates a race to the frontier, which is ever expanding. Nowhere is land and natural beauty so marginalized, so degraded and disregarded as this city. I didn’t realize it growing up. There was always new shopping center replacing one just a few years old. Clear cut and stripped of any life and then christened “Deer run” or “Sandy creek”.
Without regional controls and coordination, how can one manage a watershed? Without regional cooperation, how can towns safeguard against corporate giveaways in the form of tax incentives? Nowhere is there more skepticism toward this kind of comprehensive planning than the city where capitalism is seen as a panacea.
My Houston, try to save yourself while there is still time.
18
Houston and surrounding suburbs pander
to the Developers and opposition Legislators
who refuse plans for public transit. These
same State officials award contracts mandating
the concreting of Wetlands and natural barriers
that formerly served as flood protection.
Yes, we now have tollways, parkways and 6 lane
highways and destruction and damage from the
floods.
.
15
Houston area has experienced multiple hurricanes and other events over the decades, and has only intensified its risk of loss through overdevelopment, ignoring the realities of climate changes and poor planning.
It's a good thing it's a solid Red region; if the same series of events and poor decisions had happened to Puerto Rico, well, one can only imagine the abuse that would have been piled on after the latest flooding disaster, rather than the unquestioning flow of aid and support from DC.
10
@MassBear
Houston consistently votes Democratic.
The current mayor is a Democratic, as was his predecessor.
One of Houston's most popular mayors, though, was a Republican who made his fortune through real estate development.
6
Things Houston has done since Harvey cannot undo decades of poor planning and development decisions that preceded Harvey. Houston allowed willy-nilly development in places it shouldn't have (like floodplains); failed to protect natural drainage ways and lagged in stormwater infrastructure. No city can easily manage 40-plus inches of rain, but Houston spent years making decisions that would only increase flood damage. The bill has come due on those years of libertarian development policies.
30
Where I live, in the Galleria area, there was not flooding. This neighborhood was built in the late sixties, so maybe more time was put in infrastructure, and drainage, and we're on a higher level. A lot of the new construction during the recent explosive growth may have happened in more dicey areas, without adequate runoff provisions, and near bayous.
9
Before Imelda this year and Harvey in 2017, there were 500-year floods in 2016 and in 2015, and neither of those events was a hurricane or tropical storm or depression. Hot air holds more water, briefly, then drops it.
After Harvey, Texas' governor applied right away for federal disaster funds, but the state was much slower as they deliberated on whether to touch their state rainy-day fund.
Old habits die hard, but the pressure to change them there, and in other states, is going to be intense to make changes.
We're going to be playing catch-up, in a very expensive way, for a very long time to come, and that's going to have to include some fairly wrenching shifts for states and locales who think they can take a big pass on smarter building codes and zoning, yet still qualify for federal aid if they don't show real signs of helping themselves.
Maybe Houston's smarter now, but right after Harvey they approved a new development - in a flood reservoir area.
7
We haven't even begun to cope with what's coming without action on the part of our government.
2
Climate change is warming the atmosphere more quickly, causing storms to move more slowly, and raising sea temperature and levels faster than we have budgeted money to harden our defenses. It's pretty much that simple. King tides plague us here, and only Miami Beach has devoted much to the problem with pumps and raising road surfaces. But they don't raise the housing that borders on the roads.
We have pressing needs across the country for all sorts of infrastructure spending. Instead, the Republicans gave wealthy people and corporations a tax break and bankrupted the federal government.
12
I lived in Houston for 25 years, moving to the DC area in 2013. Starting in 2001 with Tropical Storm Allison and the devastation it brought to Houston, the storms have been slowly, but surely growing more perilous each year. The Gulf Coast area is getting progressively worse as climate change begins to escalate --glad they're trying to combat issues, but quite honestly, it's no longer a great place to live...sorry Houston.
8
"We will grow from 60 million a year to 60 million a month". Remember that quote when you hear the Republicans screaming about the cost of the Green New Deal. The cost of doing little or nothing will overwhelm all economies in the not distant future.
41
The problem with politics is that it attracts politicians.
We could have done so much more by now. But Al Gore was considered insufficiently dynamic to engage the public. Problem solvers are like that: they put their head down and dig into vast, complex issues that require consensus and science and innovation and objectivity.
When the flood waters recede, may they wash away a few shades of rhetoric red and take it with them.
11
Good for Houston trying to adapt to Global Warming they don't have any other choice it seems. The problem is that Global Warming is a worsen environment catastrophe, a moving target. Since Republicans in government can go on denying the reality of Global Warming and the citizens of Texas elect them because they too refuse to accept the science no Congressional action can be taken to stop polluting the atmosphere. Global Warming will get worse overwhelming Houston's efforts to adapt. You can't fight the physics of Global Warming with denial.
It's like a bath tub that is overflowing on the floor and you just keep wiping up the water but refuse to turn off the faucet. Where I am from we are losing wildfire insurance and everyone holds their breathe when it gets really hot, dry and windy fearing ever worsening wildfires. And yet, folks here refuse to even say the words, "Global Warming" and we too elect a Congressman who claims "It's all normal." Sorry for your troubles, Houston and my own.
9
Has there been any time in the last 100 years that a city in the United States has gotten two storms in three years that have dumped 50 and 42 inches (respectively) of rain? If so, I can't remember it. These are rainforest or Southeast Asia typhoon numbers and happened in a matter of days rather than an entire season. Tropical disease is killing people in Minnesota; Montana just got more than 40 inches of snow last week - in September! And yet we have a president and an entire political party expecting us to whistle past the graveyard with them. Insane!
47
Each day, Trump and his Republicans act to make our planet less & less inhabitable for our children and grandchildren.
The window of opportunity to effectively mitigate Climate Change is rapidly disappearing.
The remaining 2020 Democratic Candidates will try to cut & paste portions of Governor Jay Inslee’s comprehensive & actionable Climate Change Mitigation Plan.
We must go with the Real Deal.
The winning Democratic Party 2020 Ticket: President Warren (build a green economy) + Vice President Inslee (save a blue planet)! W+IN 2020!
25
@Phillip Stephen Pino The UN in 1989 was saying 2000 was the "point of no return" date. https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0 Here's a prominent climatologist for the first time on his part saying no, the science isn't settled. Your entire comment is clouded by partisan politics, not scientific thinking.
2
@Phillip Stephen Pino Most rational people realize that it is good to do what they can for the environment within reason, but I still have yet to see ANY evidence to show EXACTLY how much man-made pollution effects climate change (and I agree it is happening, as climate change has happened well before humans existed on this planet). Also, even if we can prove that it is caused by man-made pollution, I want to see proof that even if we did spend trillions on it that there would be a tangible effect on the outcome. So far, meteorologists can't predict the weather two weeks from now with much certainty, so their predictions for 100 years from now seems like an educated guess, at best. There is no consensus from scientists on any of this and it is more fear tactics and propaganda like that we have previously seen. If we had listened to Al Gore's predictions, we should have already lived through a mass extinction by now. This is the same recycled garbage argument and you are trying to use fear tactics to get your way.
Houston, the fourth largest city in the U.S. with great basketball, baseball, and a very fine Classical orchestra, the Houston Symphony has been suffering from climate change for several years. Hopefully their governor and other republicans will someday recognize the dangers climate change poses.
3
And what is Trump doing about this?
Toss some paper towels?
Our federal government, in its current form, has failed us yet again.
9
@RebeccaTouger and just what do you expect him to do? Because wasting trillions of dollars while China and India continue to pollute at the same or higher rates, even if we reduce our emissions here and further punishing the working class with more new taxes is going to help how? All the while we have illegal immigrants invading our country and they will eventually require more transportation and electricity, all of which takes a toll on the environment, not to mention the new financial burdens (especially if you consider the "free education/healthcare/welfare benefits for all type platform that the leftists keep calling for). It simply isn't realistic. Are you going to give up your electricity anytime soon and start reading by candlelight? I guess whatever devide you used to type up your response will be out of the question as well because it also uses electricity. Let's be real. You are saying stuff because you think it sounds good and it probably makes you feel better about yourself, but what are YOU doing about it? Are you willing to upend your life and start walking to work? What if it was 100 degrees F where you lived and the elderly were dying because they got too hot? Are you still fine with that because it "might" made it 1 degree less hot 100 years from now?
But the average buyout funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency nationwide takes more than five years, according to data compiled by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Socialism to rescue of those who hate government socialism, go figure. Don't worry just keep building in flood prone zones and we blue states will keep bailing you out through SOCIALISM!
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY goes a long way to avoid having to wait on the feds to come to your rescue.
7
The future of man-made, fossil-fuel-driven, climate change:
Flooding and burning, flooding and burning, flooding and burning, to the far future.
4
Move, if you can. Things will only get Worse.
10
The Chinese are going to extraordinary lengths with this hoax:
"The storm, which struck two years and two weeks after Harvey, means Harris County has now suffered one 500-year rainfall event and two 100-year events since 2016."
16
Houston is clearly not doing enough if they're also pushing to widen their highways (I-45 and I-10). This will invite even more carbon emissions and seal more land, giving water fewer places to go.
7
"[C]an cities act quickly enough for what’s coming?"
What's coming -- rapidly -- is that many coastal areas will soon be uninhabitable.
Scrambling to modify building codes and implement better responses to weather emergencies will not stop these catastrophes from happening.
Climate change is dictating where humans can live safely, and this is only the beginning. The US needs leaders who are awake to this reality.
18
Greater Houston has over 1.2 million housing units. 1,700 is the count for the broader Harris County area but this is still 0.1% of the housing units impacted last week by Tropical Storm Imelda. Lets not declare failure and instead declare a little success.
6
@Ben P Declare a little success when the cost of your car insurance goes way up because of all the cars damaged by high water on roads and freeways all over Houston. I lost a car to flooding during Harvey, and yes, my car insurance went up quite a bit, but the same was true for my brother, who lives in Tucson. He was told his car insurance went up because of all the cars damaged by flooding (and wildfires) in other parts of the country. The flooding in Houston caused by Imelda came on the heels of equally bad flooding in May. Some parts of my city, and especially my neighborhood, aren’t going to be inhabitable much longer regardless.
7
There is definite irony in the home of so many petroleum giants and their support companies suffering from climate change consequences. It must be very difficult to plan for something that the major employers want to sweep under the rug as a non-issue.
51
The lengths Houston will go to avoid zoning regulations... building height requirements, dredging for canals, building pits to store rainwater all address symptoms, not the root problem. Stop allowing development on floodplains and wetlands. The earth has methods to handle and alleviate floods.
As long as Houston keeps allowing critical wetlands to be paved over with impervious surfaces, the problem is going to get worse. Houston MSA is prioritizing the city's short term profits at the expense of billions of dollars and people's lives.
73
This is the bigger issue in Houston. Yes climate change is real and happening every day but planning and zoning decisions that eroded the natural drainage and catchment systems is the bigger problem.
12
@Sarah While I agree that we need zoning here in Houston, that alone won't do much to fix our problems. The bigger issue is that a large chunk of state revenue comes from property taxes, which creates a perverse incentive to approve development projects in floodplains and wetlands. Using income tax instead of property tax to fund the government would make more sense.
9
@Sarah Sorry, but the article doesn't tell you the full story. For the most recent storm, the city of Houston received over 12 inches of rain in less than 12 hours and the ground was previously saturated from storms a few days prior. Cities east of Houston received over 40 inches of rain within the same period. Even if you had an area of undeveloped fields and marches, the area would still completely flood. There is no planning for that much water within such a short timespan.
5
I don't live in Houston nor have I visited. Since this is a climate emergency, approaching the situation in the manner of an emergency is reasonable. The political, social, financial and legal abilities to respond to this emergency must be devised.
Developing resources for life saving, organizing the population into block committees and other social organizations, and disaster resource planning seems to be already happening.
Long term flood infrastructure must be fast tracked.
Construction moratoriums must be instituted until greater understanding of the situation is developed.
Buyouts and housing jackups must be required. Waiting until the decision to renovate or build new is just too long. A required jack up, elevating the building the 8-12 feet needed to survive a flood could be funded by long term loans with liens. The alternative would be no permits for repairs or reconstruction after the next flood.
Failure to act will result in vast financial losses and deaths. Climate change means climate chaos. I am sorry Houston is facing this.
4
How about not building in flood plains. As i recall, right after first storm, Trump relaxed standards for building in wetlands, floodplains. Not smart and why should federal government with our tax dollars keep bailing people out who keep building in the wrong place?
The relevant question is if there was no federal disaster relief, would Houston permit or the citizens build in places that keep flooding ??
52
@savks
Houston is one giant flood plain.
Three rivers drain in the Houston area Trinity, Brazos and San Jacinto. Multiple bayous crisscross the area. The rivers drain into the Gulf of Mexico or Galveston Bay. The area is pretty much flat from just north of Conroe (about where the east Texas Piney Woods end, and the Gulf Plain begin) all the way to the Gulf of Mexico.
The urban legend of Houston's founding is that the Allen Brothers, of New York, came to what is known as Houston, and bought up a bunch a swamp land; and sold shares of it back to unknowing New Yorkers.
Yes, there were Allen Brothers. Houston had the advantage of being a deep port, on Galveston Bay. However, before the Great Hurricane, Glaveston was the main port. After Galveston was nearly destroyed, Houston became a better choice for a port. Houston ports was originally used for cotton exporting. Then, came the discovery of oil, in Texas, and that fed the Houston petrochemical industry. Then, in the early 1960s, NASA established Mission Control just south of Houston.
The city just grew and developed haphazardly, building just about over everything to deal with the influx of people moving to the area for jobs. They just paved over all the swampland and lined the bayous with concrete. What little flood mitigation that does exits, are two water retention ares about 10 miles west of downtown just west of Texas 6, to handle flooding on Buffalo Bayou.
Houston is a textbook example of no urban planning.
52
@Nick Metrowsky If I remember correctly, Houston eliminated zoning in 1962 under pressure from developers, who yelled that zoning was communism.
15
@savks If there was no federal disaster relief, people would still be building in floodplains because empty land owned by the government doesn't pay property taxes and we lack a state or city income tax to fund the government.
The focus on floodplain development misses a more general point, which is no matter how far from the floodplain you live, 30-50 inches of rain will cause you to flood.
4
The issue is the increased amount of rainfall not how to plan for it. Either find a way to lessen rain or move to higher ground.
7
I assume some Houston officials are looking into the expertise that can be provided by engineers, urban planners and the like from the Netherlands. After all, a significant portion of that country lies below sea-level.
The Houston area isn't alone with this problem in the USA. New Orleans, the Gulf Coast, Miami, and many similar areas are facing similar challenges. This problem isn't going to "go away"... it will only become more acute as time goes by...
18
I lived in Houston around the time of Tropical Storm Alison and a number of other major flooding events. It was clear then that these were becoming more common and more severe costing billions in damages. Each of these floods - individually - costs many billions in damages. Even with several billion set aside for adaptation... that's miniscule to the size of the problem. In addition, policies and procedures need to be changed to expedite this. And I'm just guessing that the Allen Parkway and other Bayou flood-zones haven't been returned to wetlands to dissipate flood waters.
The other problem is that climate change is getting worse faster than we can adapt. We need to also mitigate the causes of climate change.
6
@Dan
When it floods, Allen Parkway and Memorial, floods from downtown well past Shepard. If you drive on Montrose and look east, Allen Parkway/Memorial, looks like a large waterway. Nothing has changed,except they built more; much more.
Houston is in the process of creating an outer loop that will go from Sugarland north and east to Conroe, south to Baytown and west back to Sugarland. And, within that zone, more houses, stores, apartments, condos, etc.
How bad is it? When Harvey went through the developers built west of Addicks and Barker Reservoirs, so much rain fell it flooded those homes built in the overflow flood area. An area meant for a 500 year flood.
Global warming or climate change notwithstanding, Houston si reaching a point that a summer thunderstorm gully washer (2" downpour in less than an hour) can possibly flood the area.
To create drainage areas, they would have to buy out a lot of homes and businesses. The area along Braeswood, west of I610, would cost millions alone to widen Braes Bayou and to create a buffer against flooding.
5
@Nick Metrowsky
Braes Bayou is being widened now.
2
@W
It's about time.
1
I lived in Houston from 1991-95, and during that time there were two major flood events. One happened at night, the next day was a "rain day". You could not get from point A to point B, because of flooding. The other flood event happened during the day, a cloud burst that sat just east of Barker and Addicks Reservoirs. These reservoirs are actually giant rain retention areas to prevent flooding along Braes and Buffalo Bayous. Needless to say the flooding, the second time n two years, made getting home an interesting challenge from Rise University (just south of downtown) to southwest Houston.
Since then, the Houston area has grown by almost a million people. Areas which were rural, when I lived there, are now built up and paved over. Thus, it makes drainage wore than it was 24 years ago. Houston is flat, crisscrossed by three rivers and multiple bayous. It's highest point is 59' (a placename called Houston Heights),
Houston is notorious for lack of zoning and urban planning. Thus, no planning or efforts were made to deal with flooding. Houston is poster child fro urban sprawl.
I lived just about three miles from the point where Braes Bayou meets I610 Loop (yes the freeway is built above where two bayous come together). When it floods, everything on both side up the bayou floods within a quarter mile, north and south. It is all built up with houses, apartment and stores
It is going to cost much more than they allocated to rectify this, meanwhile Houston keeps growing.
40
@Nick Metrowsky
Indeed. We were lucky in that Imelda's rains were not as widespread as Harvey's. I used to criticize the many SUVs here in Houston, but driving my low-clearance sedan around floodwaters, I now sympathize.
3
@W
I found that when it flooded there, sedans had most trouble getting around the mess. Also, if you took a freeway, you were stuck on it, while 59 would be open, all the exits were closed, from Shepard all the way into Sugarland, because they were under water.
So, you took surface streets, trying to avoid bayous and freeways. One flood, I went from Rice to Fondren and Braeswood, on some kind of zigzag, (though University Place, Bellaire, and Meyerland) that eventually got me to a 200 yard flood stretch of Beechnut at Bissonnet. The 200 yards were crossed by driving on the median with about a dozen other souls.
I wish I had an SUV or my old Ford Bronco II during that experience. The sedan survived fro a couple years after that, and even made it to Colorado, until i got rid of it in 1997.
When you live in Houston you expect a flood event ever few years. But, since Harvey it has been a major event a couple times a year. Worse than the floods that experienced in the early to mid 1990s
Though, Houston was the first place I lived where work was called because of flooding. The enxt time I experienced that was when we had the 1000 year flood here back in 2013. 18" of rain fell just west of Longmont, over a 48 hour time period. The area is still rebuilding from that.
2
@Nick Metrowsky
When I moved to Houston I drove around different neighborhood after rainstorms, taking note of which streets flooded and which didn't.
I decided to purchase a home in the Houston Heights when it still had asphalt companies and crackhouses there, along with beautiful bungalows and Queen Annes. The house I bought had been condemned by the city.
Everyone told me I was crazy, even crazier when I got pregnant and decided against moving to the suburbs.
My house in the Heights never flooded. It's a bungalow elevated further on pier and beam construction, which is ideal for Houston.
I didn't even bother to evacuate for Rita. Our neighbors who stayed expected power to go out (it never did); everyone emptied their freezers and liquor cabinets. We set up grills in street and had a block party.
You couldn't leave the neighborhood when it flooded, but the houses within the Heights proper never flooded. Sunset, Independence, Woodland Heights flooded but never The Heights.
I sold my home to people from New Orleans who lost their home in Katrina.
6
I am feeling so sorry for people who live in Houston and proud of them jumping to it but they could not possibly have fixed the ills of developer-lead expansion for years.
6
At risk of being labelled a pedant it is important to point out that the claim current populations must adapt reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what adaptation is.
Through time populations may adapt to environmental change by the process of natural selection: the process of evolution by natural selection involves populations.
Individuals may acclimate via physiological change at the level of individual organisms. This is what is meant here, but the process invoked is wrong.
Timescales matter enormously. What might be possible by natural selection over 1000s of years and 100s of generations is likely impossible over the time frame of a single individual.
1
@Pedanticia I don’t think that the author was referring to humans developing gills and scales. Rather, the piece discusses adapting infrastructure and urban layout to the challenges posed by frequent flooding!
3
I live in Houston we had Harvey in 2017, Tax Day flood in 2016 Memorial Day Flood in 2015 and now Imelda. The surprise is we didn't have a big one in 2018. Houston has improved responders ' resources but building in flood prone areas needs to stop. The city is limited in preventing this so some laws somewhere needs to change as large flooding events are becoming the norm.
12
It sounds like Houston is doing virtually all of the right things. Unfortunately, and as the article rightly points out, the environmental bureaucracy has dramatically slowed some simple and highly effective projects. The environmental impacts of deepening a drainage ditch - seriously? To make a ditch deeper will have precisely 0 significant environmental effects. It is time to ditch the environmental reviews for many of these projects.
The Army Corps of Engineers had land designated as flood overflow. The city of Houston allowed people to build houses on that land. When Harvey hit, guess who got flooded? Planning for climate change – step 1 - should be to coordinate government agencies. Step 2 – do not allow developers to build on marginal land.
I wonder if the picture accompanying this article shows homes in the flood overflow zone.
63
If I am right, the picture is looking east along Clay Road just east of State Highway 6. The now-abandoned golf course is in the upper right. The area shown suffered extensive residential and commercial damage during Harvey, obviously, but was not impacted by Imelda, to my knowledge, due to the vagaries of rainfall distribution in the recent storm. West and Northwest areas of the region received much less rainfall than the hard-hit areas generally to the east this time.
5
@MikeS I live in Houston and they are still allowing building in the same area that flooded inside the dam.
17
I would suggest insurance companies relocate people out of flood plains instead of paying to rebuild. However, this is wishful thinking, as insurance companies would lose money in the long run. There are no easy answers for Houston or any other place in such a situation.
7
For some places, time and money will run out. Projects will get started, then stall out as property values plummet, insurance becomes unobtainable, bonds fail or can’t get insured, people move away, businesses close and the next storm just compounds the situation. The federal government will not be able to fund everything as tax payer fatigue sets in. So like in the dust bowl of the 1930s, afflicted cities and counties will start to empty out as people just abandon their now valueless homes and property. except that with this edition of climate change, the rains will only get worse.
9
@doug mclaren - "The federal government will not be able to fund everything as tax payer fatigue sets in."
We could stop spending gazillions of $$$$ on our bloated, top-heavy, inefficient MIC that (R) Texan politicians, like Chickenhawk George, use to wage unfunded, pre-emptive invasions against smaller, weaker nations that have done us no harm.
We could stop shoving ever-greater amounts of taxpayer $$$$ into the Money Pits of the already grossly Rich Pluto-Corporatocrats via the (R)'s repeated rounds of Trickle-Up tax "reforms".
And BTW, "tax fatigue"? - when our taxes are near all-time lows? Time to lose the "high taxes" meme foisted on the mouth-breathers by (R)onald (R)eagan and Grover Norquist.
Extreme weather is becoming the norm, and not unusual. Downpours that never taxed the limits of storm drain systems now often do. Massive rainfalls cause mudslides and road washouts in hilly country.
And how many times can you tear everything out and rebuild your house before you throw in the towel and move away? And what does that do to mortgages and the housing market?
Get used to it. Climate change is becoming a very bumpy ride indeed. (And it's probably not a hoax...)
12
You wonder how many of these people would loudly proclaim they're against socialism unless it's regarding their federal flood insurance? Maybe their should be a lifetime insurance limit for those people who just fix their house and stay in a flood zone. What was that definition of insanity regarding doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.
93
@markd
They did not all know.
4
@TR they sure do now!
3
@markd
They are stuck there now. They can't sell their homes. Who would buy them now that they have flooded? Without those sale proceeds, they can't afford to buy another home and they must remain. Spending money for repairs is the cheapest option. No doubt most of them have mortgages as well and they would have to walk away and default. Talk about being "underwater" with your home loan.
7
All of the efforts described in this article are worthwhile and might make significant improvement but the real problem is that these storms are going to become both worse and more frequent because we are avoiding the underlying issue—climate change. If we continue as a country to ignore climate change, all those efforts will only be temporary, so by the time, for example, that all structures are more elevated to deal with flooding—estimated at decades—the flooding will already be significantly worse.
On the other hand, if we aggressively address climate change now by putting into place policies that not only reduce our carbon footprint but actually remove it from the air (using plants—it’s a big country), we’ll be in a position to insist that our global partners do the same. Doing nothing most likely means the Midwest will be a lot like the dust bowl days, only with flooding, and farming will go with it.
It will be a major shift and it won’t be easy, but the US is famous for doing things that aren’t easy. As voters, we have to insist upon our government to enact policies that product our present and our future, not just that of corporations.
41
@David R I agree that climate change is real and an issue, however, the US has exported most of its carbon footprint to China and India, and their own populations create huge problems. We produce a scant 10% of what they produce.
2
@Ernest Montague
Actually, the US with 330 million people generates 1/3 the CO2 of China and India, with close to 3 billion people does.
Check your data source.
10% isn’t accurate.
And cumulatively, which is what matters, we are way ahead.
40
@Ernest Montague
You are exactly correct about exporting our carbon footprint and that has to stop. One way to do this might be to create an voluntary international standard--manufacturers that don't meet the standard are subject to a carbon tax to level the playing field.
Of course, that won't happen unless our government adapts a policy towards climate change, and our current administration is doing all it can to go the opposite direction.
It really is up to those in the states most affected by flooding to vote for their interests; the political climate just won't change until they do.
3