Observation One: Current efforts to protect transportation infrastructure from climate change are inadequate
Download 1.03 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Transportation Infrastructure Investment-Design
2AC-TopicalityTransporation Infrastructure InvestmentJoanne R. Potter et al, March 2008, Michael J. Savonis, Virginia R. Burkett U.S. Climate Change Science Program Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.7 “Impacts of Climate Change and Variability on Transportation Systems and Infrastructure: Gulf Coast Study, Phase I” http://files.library.northwestern.edu.turing.library.northwestern.edu/transportation/online/restricted/200819/PB2008110533.pdf Transportation is such an integral part of daily life in the United States that few pause to consider its importance. Yet the Nation’s strong intermodal network of highways, public transit, rail, marine, and aviation is central to our ability to work, go to school, enjoy leisure time, maintain our homes, and stay in touch with friends and family. U.S. businesses depend on reliable transportation services to receive materials and transport products to their customers; a robust transportation network is essential to the economy. In short, a sound transportation system is vital to the Nation’s social and economic future. Transportation professionals – including planners, designers, engineers, financial specialists, ecologists, safety experts, and others – work hard to ensure that U.S. communities have access to safe and dependable transportation services. Given the ongoing importance of the Nation’s transportation system, it is appropriate to consider what effect climate change may have on this essential network. Through a regional case study of the central Gulf Coast, this report begins to examine the potential implications of climate change on transportation infrastructure, operations, and services. Investments in transportation are substantial and result in infrastructure that lasts for decades. Transportation plans and designs should, therefore, be carefully considered and well informed by a range of factors, including consideration of climate variability and change. Winkleman et al, ’12 [Steve Winkleman, Jan Muller, Erica Jue, associated with the CCAP and EESI, “CLIMATE ADAPTATION & TRANSPORTATION Identifying Information and Assistance Needs”, http://files.eesi.org/Climate_Adaptation_Transportation.pdf] Extreme weather events, including coastal storm surges, flooding, heating and freezing, and severe rain, snow, ice, and wind events, as well as changing average conditions and seasonal weather patterns – including, sea level rise, precipitation totals, mean temperatures, evapotranspiration rates, and ecosystem changes, are projected to affect safety, cost-effectiveness, efficiency, and technical feasibility of transportation investment and asset management decisions. These impacts will vary from region to region and may even vary at the local and site scale. Anticipating the consequences of such disruptive changes and planning prudent responses before they become reality will help transportation agencies protect the transportation infrastructure upon which communities, regions, and the national economy depend for the movement of goods and people. The general nature of potential climate change impacts on transportation has been reasonably well-defined. The specific operational implications for transportation agencies and the broader transportation community, however, are not well understood. Neumann ’09 – Resources for the Future think tank [Resources for the Future, “Adaptation to Climate Change: Revisiting Infrastructure Norms”, December 2009, Resources for the Future Issue Brief 09-15, http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/RFF-IB-09-15.pdf] The main threats presented by climate change to infrastructure assets include damage or destruction from extreme events, which climate change may exacerbate; coastal flooding and inundation from sea level rise; changes in patterns of water availability; and effects of higher temperature on operating costs, including effects in temperate areas and areas currently characterized by permafrost conditions. Almost half of the more than $60 billion annual federal infrastructure investment is for highways (in excess of $30 billion annually), with smaller but significant capital expenditures in dams and flood control (about 12 percent of the total), mass transit (about 11 percent), and aviation (about 9 percent). The federal role relative to state, local, and private roles is also highest in the transportation subsector. The best opportunity for the federal government to influence and enhance infrastructure’s adaptive capacity is thus in the transportation sector. In almost all cases, some adaptive capacity exists to respond to these threats through both public and private sector actions, but adaptive capacity can be significantly enhanced in the public sector by adopting three key policy reforms. First, although most public infrastructure is maintained as a capital asset, with annual operating, maintenance, and repair functions and a periodic replacement schedule, adopting a formal asset management approach could yield immediate benefits and provide a framework for incorporating climate forecasts to enhance adaptive capacity. Second, the location of major capital infrastructure should be mapped against those areas of the country considered most vulnerable to climate stress, and that information should be used to guide current and future investment in public infrastructure. These results should be actively publicized to most effectively signal the private sector about the expectations and limits of federal infrastructure provision. Third, efforts must begin to update infrastructure design standards to ensure that future infrastructure capital is more resilient to anticipated climate change and extreme events. Humphrey, Senior Program Officer, TRB Division of Studies and Special Program, 8 (Nancy Humphrey, TRB Special Report, “Potential Impacts of Climate Change on U.S. Transportation”, May-June 2008, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews256climate.pdf)
over three years.4 Most of this funding is focused on the transportation and energy sectors, with smaller amounts focused on wastewater, drinking water, and flood protection. Some does consider the impact of climate change on infrastructure operation and demand. For example, much of the energy infrastructure investments are focused on renewable technologies and development of a smart grid to accommodate greater reliance on renewables; there is a $1 billion allocation to the Bureau of Reclamation for water resource development in drought‐likely areas; and the roughly $4.5 billion allocation to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers includes upgrades to flood protection infrastructure, which is perhaps a nod to the likelihood of climate change increasing flood risks. Nonetheless, virtually no provisions in the transportation funding take account of the risks of climate change to these resources. The priority instead is on quickly moving money to maximize the short‐term economic stimulus effect of the spending. As discussed in the next section, this shortcoming in efficiently adapting to climate change is potentially serious, because shovel‐ready is almost certainly not climate‐ready. Transportation Infrastructure Investment-DesignUpdating design standards is investment Neumann ’09 – Resources for the Future think tank [Resources for the Future, “Adaptation to Climate Change: Revisiting Infrastructure Norms”, December 2009, Resources for the Future Issue Brief 09-15, http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/RFF-IB-09-15.pdf, AD] A longer‐term policy goal is investment in updating design standards. Some of this work is already happening in Canada (Canadian Standards Association 2005, 2006). The asset management framework described might be usefully deployed, for example, to develop new climate‐ready standards and specifications. In the United States, it is acknowledged that updating standards is a long process, involving many government, commercial, and nongovernmental standard‐setting organizations (Meyer 2008; TRB 2008). The potential in using standard‐setting approaches to enhance adaptive capacity is significant, however. Updating flood‐proofing measures in coastal zones, for example, has encouraged innovation in architectural and building practices to improve the resiliency of structures built or rebuilt in high‐risk areas. Similar innovation can be spurred in such areas as materials science, engineering, and construction trades through a continuously updated standard‐setting process that considers forecasts of climate change and variability. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.03 Mb. Share with your friends:
|