Observation One: Current efforts to protect transportation infrastructure from climate change are inadequate
Download 1.03 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The benefits of revamping our transportation infrastructure to cope with global warming far outweigh the costs.
- ---50 State Fiat is illegitimate and a voting issue
- B. Education. The states counterplan distorts the topic by pushing affirmatives to peripheral areas like territories and federal lands. This crushes topic specific education.
- ---Federal Investment Key
- B. Assessment -Lack of federal assessment to guide new investment will undermine adaptation efforts
- C. State Politics -State level politics will undermine implementation
- ---Public Infrastructure
2AC-DisadsAT-SpendingClimate adaption is cheaper in the long runWinkleman 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] Climate adaptation is all well and good, but if proposed measures do not appeal to community self-interest – improving quality of life and enhancing the local economy – they are unlikely to garner the public support necessary for large scale implementation. Steve Winkelman described CCAP’s Growing Wealthier matrix that examines returns on investment, cost savings and quality of life improvements for individuals, business and governments.8 He presented a few examples of how preventative measures yield long-term returns.Preventative measures are cheaper than recovering from a disaster – preparedness is a least-cost strategy. While it might be tempting to climate-proof every community and piece of infrastructure for the worst-case event, we don’t need to and we can’t afford it. Risk-based decision making requires that preventative measures be prioritized based upon risks and available budget. The benefits of revamping our transportation infrastructure to cope with global warming far outweigh the costs.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies ’11 [Transportation Research Board, “ Adapting Transportation to the Impacts of Climate Change”, June 2011, Transportation Research Circular, E-C152, http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/165529.aspx AD] The potential impacts of global warming on transportation and other built infrastructure are sufficiently well defined to incorporate climate change into the long-term planning process for transportation systems. There are new techniques to learn and apply for dealing with problems with deep uncertainty. If we do so, the marginal cost of adapting to climate change can be readily accommodated. Further, the profession will have met its obligation to future generations of transportation users. 2AC-CounterplansStates CP 2AC---50 State Fiat is illegitimate and a voting issueA. Non sequitur. No policymaker is ever in the position to choose between state or federal policy action. State action is not relevant to the question of whether or not the federal government should increase investment.B. Education. The states counterplan distorts the topic by pushing affirmatives to peripheral areas like territories and federal lands. This crushes topic specific education.C. Ground. The counterplan fiats through critical solvency arguments. After all, the critical warrant for most federal action is state inaction.---Perm-Do Both----Only federal leadership can overcome institutional barriers-Extend our National Transportation Policy Project evidence from the 1AC. The complexity of investment that requires coordination at the local, state, regional and national level requires federal action.---Federal Investment KeyA. Federal Infrastructure Projects-The CP doesn’t alter existing infrastructure projects at the federal level-This guts solvencyNTPP ‘9 (National Transportation Policy Project, Bipartisan coalition of transportation policy experts, business and civic leaders, and is chaired by four distinguished former elected officials who served at the federal, state, and local levels, Published December 15 2009, Bipartisan Policy Center, http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Transportation%20Adaptation%20(3).pdf) Near-term planning actions focus on the immediate¶ steps needed to integrate climate change¶ into the transportation planning process: revising¶ planning process requirements, establishing¶ long-term scenario planning that looks beyond¶ the current federally-mandated planning horizon,¶ beginning the process of inventorying transportation¶ facilities at risk from climate change, and¶ integrating climate impact considerations into¶ emergency planning.¶ Revise planning process requirements in the next¶ surface transportation authorization bill to address¶ climate considerations. Legislative action or guidance¶ should address the incorporation of climate¶ change considerations — both emissions mitigation¶ and adaptation — in the planning process.¶ This may be accomplished by adding climate¶ change as a distinct planning factor, requiring¶ and supporting cross-agency consultation among¶ climate science agencies, transportation agencies,¶ resource agencies and local governments; and/¶ or specifying that climate measures be included¶ as part of a performance-based planning and¶ program approach. Lead agency: DOT B. Assessment-Lack of federal assessment to guide new investment will undermine adaptation effortsBPC, 10 (Bipartisan Policy Center; non-profit and politically-balanced organization, public policy think tank; “Transportation Adaptation to Global Climate Change;” 1/21/10; http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Transportation%20Adaptation%20(3).pdf) Only the federal government can do the necessary ¶ interdisciplinary climate impact research, data ¶ gathering, modeling and forecasting, mapping, ¶ and structuring of the comprehensive planning ¶ necessary to ensure the resilience of our nation’s ¶ multimodal transportation systems, and the communities and businesses they serve. This federal ¶ legislative session provides a unique opportunity ¶ to address these emerging climate related infrastructure impacts. New federal surface transportation authorization is needed by October 1, 2009 ¶ and both Congressional leaders and the Administration have identified comprehensive climate and ¶ energy legislation as a priority this year. C. State Politics-State level politics will undermine implementationMeyer et. al. 09, (Michael Frederick R. Dickerson Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, PhD Michael Flood Senior Planner at Parsons Brinckerhoff ¶ Chris Dorney Transportation/Land Use Planner at Parsons Brinckerhoff ¶ Ken Leonard Principal of Cambridge Systematics, ¶ Robert Hyman Associate at Cambride Systematics ¶ Joel Smith expert on climate change policy, lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2001 and 2007 assessment report; the latter shared the Noble Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore. Vice-President of Stratus Consulting, Boulder, CO. “Climate Change and the Highway System: Impacts and Adaptation Approaches”. National Cooperative Highway Research Program. 5/6/2009 http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP20-83%2805%29_Task2-3SynthesisReport.pdf) The adaptation plans developed from these statewide efforts are almost always multi-sector plans, not transportation plans. Nor is transportation always a priority – issues may rise to the forefront. The Pennsylvania Climate Impact Assessment Report, for instance, fails to address transportation at all. Colorado’s Climate Action Plan, for instance, lists 15 adaptation recommendations – of which 14 were related to water resources, which is a pressing concern for that state with the expected decrease in precipitation and snowpack. Utah, similarly, focused almost entirely on water resources. ---Public InfrastructureA. Public ownership-The federal government controls key sections of transportation infrastructure. Only the plan can initiate comprehensive adaptation strategies.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] The federal government is most heavily involved in funding new and improved infrastructure in the transport, water, and sewer sectors, presenting an opportunity for adaptation through federal policy. Federal roles vary by infrastructure subsector and location, however. Almost all major U.S. road transportation and public transit infrastructure is publicly owned, and much is built with a large share of federal funding and then maintained with state and local resources. The same is true of airports, but freight rail networks and port facilities are more commonly privately owned and operated. Energy infrastructure, both generation and transmission, tends to be privately owned but highly regulated by the public sector. Large‐scale flood defense infrastructure is most often financed and maintained in the public sector, though often with cost‐sharing from multiple
B. Private Investment Signal-Leveraging public transportation assets is key to motivating changes in the private sector. Extend our Neumann evidence from the 1AC. This especially critical to accessing rail and ports.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] Almost all major U.S. road transportation and public transit infrastructure is publicly owned, and much is built with alarge share of federal funding and then maintained with state and local resources. The same is true of airports, but freight rail networks and port facilities are more commonly privately owned and operated. Energy infrastructure, both generation and transmission, tends to be privately owned but highly regulated by the public sector. Large‐scale flood defense infrastructure is most often financed and maintained in the public sector, though often with cost‐sharing from multiple layers of government.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:
|