Observation One: Current efforts to protect transportation infrastructure from climate change are inadequate



Download 0.95 Mb.
Page22/25
Date18.10.2016
Size0.95 Mb.
#1150
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25

2AC-Topicality




Transporation Infrastructure Investment

Joanne 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)
The flooding of coastal roads, railways, transit systems, and runways will be a likely result of a projected¶ global rise in sea level coupled with storm surges and¶ exacerbated by land subsidence in some locations. This¶ flooding represents the greatest potential impact of climate change on North America’s transportation system.¶ The vulnerability of transportation infrastructure¶ to climate change, however, will extend beyond coastal¶ areas. Federal, state, and local governments, in collaboration with owners and operators of infrastructure—¶ such as ports, airports, and private railroads and¶ pipelines—should inventory critical transportation¶ infrastructure, identifying whether, when, and where¶ the projected climate changes may be consequential.¶ Incorporate climate change into investment decisions.¶ Every day, public officials at various levels of government and executives of private companies make¶ short- and long-term investment decisions that have¶ implications for how the transportation system will¶ respond to climate change. Transportation decision¶ makers, therefore, should be preparing now for the¶ projected climate changes.¶ State and local governments and private infrastructure providers should incorporate adjustments for climate change into long-term capital improvement¶ plans, facility designs, maintenance practices, operations, and emergency response plans. A six-step¶ approach for determining appropriate investment priorities is presented in the box on page 23.
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 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) attempts to address some of these

shortfalls in infrastructure provision; the act authorizes up to $150 billion in infrastructure funding

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-Design



Updating 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.



Download 0.95 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page