Carolina Planning Journal

Bridging Theory and Practice Since 1974

Tag: Climate Change (Page 1 of 2)

Materiality and Space: A Case Study of the New Jersey Floodplains

October 24, 2023 /

By Ivan Melchor

Does landscape form generate society? This is the question posed by Anthropologist Anna Tsing, whose fieldwork in Sorong, Indonesia tracks how rampant mining and construction of impervious concrete infrastructure transforms the city into a ‘pinball machine’ where mud and water interact, ricochet, and respond to this human development, causing the local landscape to flood.[1] The question is applicable in many contexts, none more fitting than in the floodplains of New Jersey. 

Instances of hurricanes are attributed a great deal of importance, and rightly so, but so often the dialogue in the aftermath seems to mirror one another. The common conversation topics post-hurricane includes the following: a critique of the federal government’s response, analogies of negative health outcomes that cannot be quantified, and metrics of the subsequent flooding indicative of the worsening consequences of climate change.

Climate events should be taken seriously, and sea level rise is undoubtedly a reality that coastal communities like Fire Island, a barrier island off Long Island, New York, are wrestling with already.[2] But what is lost in this echo chamber is a discussion around how the human imposed landscape interacts with rather than reacts to these climate events. Often the dialogue around climate change is future-focused, geared towards generating new technologies and infrastructures. The consequences and answers to climate change are situated in the language of tomorrow but weight should also be placed on the history of the infrastructure in place and what could be recreated with the footprint we’ve already constructed.

I propose two entry points from which to interrogate the issue of flooding in NJ: the concept of the basement and the ‘unbuilding’ of a structure’s footprint.

Historically, the basement has been a common feature of residential buildings in New Jersey. Internet research quickly reveals a vague history explaining its use to deal with freezing pipes, supposedly critical to the infrastructure of the home. A review of FEMA flood claims filed in New Jersey revealed that 78% of claims filed by residential owners were for buildings with a basement.[3] A finding indicative not of causality but rather of how commonplace basements have become.

Figure 1: ArcGIS 3D model of basement square footage per residential building in Princeton, NJ (Source: Ivan Melchor)

Last year, the VizE Lab for Ethnographic Data Visualization at Princeton University obtained tax and property value data from the town of Princeton, NJ in order to visualize their widespread use. Figure 1 illustrates basement square footage per residential home to represent the below ground impact of development.

Constructing a basement in an area with a high water table can lead to recurring flood problems, making homes susceptible to ankle deep waters after a heavy rainstorm never mind a hurricane. The displacement of soil in order to accommodate these structures can further concentrate stormwater runoff, worsening flooding effects in areas with already high impervious coverage.

Conversations with local zoning officials regarding the issue often contain a cynical undertone. They suggest that new houses are being developed and old houses redeveloped with increasingly large basements despite warnings because they increase property value. And while there may be truth in that claim, it is stated that below-grade living spaces recoup up to 70-80% of the construction cost but do not often result in a gain on investment. [4]

A plausible alternative is that the idea of ‘livable space’ is an expression of our cultural behavior; the increased isolation of single-family zoning in towns such as Princeton reinforce the notion of “private property” and make us less likely to interrogate the issues occurring within our “homes.”  Figure 2 highlights how widespread low-density housing has become in Princeton, NJ for example.

Figure 2: Dasymetric map of Princeton, NJ highlights the spread of low-density housing (Source: Ivan Melchor)

There is also the question of what materiality our infrastructure takes on. Susan Bristol, a policy director at the Watershed Institute in New Jersey, proposes the concept of ‘unbuilding’ as a design practice to lighten our footprint on both the environment and the ground.

Unbuilding would mean returning some of the understory of buildings to pervious surface area rather than only resorting to concrete pours at grade irrespective of environment. This would allow for water to flow horizontally through the building’s footprint rather than creating combative infrastructure.[5]

Both the discussion of basements and the concept of ‘unbuilding’ invite us to think about space, not only how much of it we use but also what materials sustain its life force. The message of resiliency is commonplace, but our infrastructure must not only withstand climate events, but also be ready to interact with external forces such as stormwater.

What the ‘pinball machine’ effect reveals is that communities (and more explicitly property owners) continuously act upon their environment, changing its expression. Zoning laws and development serve as an archive of what a community has become, yes, but also generate a new interpretation of society, obfuscating issues that are ‘out of sight’ but that should be interrogated by urban planners and policymakers alike. 

Citations

[1] Anna Tsing, “Stop Blaming Global Warming: A Pinball Model of Chronic Flooding in Sorong, West Papua” (Clifford Geertz Commemorative Lecture, Princeton University, Princeton NJ, March 30, 2023).

[2] Liam Stack. “Millions were Spent to Fix Fire Island’s Beaches. Some Have Completely Eroded.” New York Times, August 11, 2023.

[3]  FEMA (2023). FIMA NFIP Directed Claims – v2 [Dataset]. https://www.fema.gov/openfema-data-page/fima-nfip-redacted-claims-v2

[4] Remodeling.com, “Basement Remodel,” accessed on August 19, 2023.

[5] Susan Bristol (2022). “‘Unbuilding’: Out of sight/Out of mind.” AIA New Jersey.

Ivan Melchor is a Data & Research Assistant with the VizE Lab for Ethnographic Data Visualization at Princeton University. He is interested in how the language of climate change generates possibilities for current and future human development. He is part of a team of academic researchers hoping to produce a documentary on NJ flooding in 2024.

Edited by Kathryn Cunningham

Featured image courtesy of Ivan Melchor

Women Are Needed in Spaces Where Decisions Are Being Made  

December 13, 2022 /

By Rene Marker-Katz

Climate change is ingrained in much of the work being done through the lens of urban planning, policy initiative, and other sectors influential at the human scale. While the web of climate adaptation has recently become embedded within the core of urban planning, it is crucial to address the continued lack of gender diversity in spaces where decisions are made. 

This lack of women’s representation was amplified at the recent climate conference in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt in November 2022. While there were many tickets on the docket for climate policy implementation, there was a notably stark contrast in the identities of activists on the front line and Member States at the head of negotiations. Through a lens of community engagement, activism, gender equality, and leadership, we still have a long way to go. 

A COP27 Recap 

In 1995, an annual event was drawn through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an international environmental treaty seeking to combat the negative impacts of climate change caused by human interference. What is now popularly known as COP, the Conference of the Parties was ratified by 198 countries known as the Parties to the Convention where their 27th annual meeting (COP27) was held this year in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. The overall goals of COP conventions are to track progress on global emissions reductions and to redraw international policy negotiations on climate adaptation and carbon neutrality. 

There has been a lot of buzz going around post-COP27 about the pattern of excluding women from negotiation processes. An organization that tracks women’s participation at major negotiating meetings of the UNFCCC called Women’s Environmental Development Organization (WEDO) has reported that while numbers have increased on women’s participation in negotiations at COP from 30 to 38 percent between 2009 and 2021, these numbers still reflect unequal participation among genders. A BBC report commented on the absence of women leaders attending COP27. Out of 110 leaders present, only 7 were women. 

This report touches on the harmful trends where women bear a disproportional burden within negative impacts of climate change. The United Nations estimates that 80 percent of climate refugees are women. In a sector where women are marginalized in terms of participation in leadership and negotiation processes yet are one of the groups most directly impacted by climate-related disasters, there is a harsh divide between those in power and those affected. What are the costs of excluding women from spaces where decisions are being made? What can be gained from their inclusion? 

Women-led Activism at COP27  

Another takeaway from COP27 was the prominence of women-led activism in the sphere of reparations in the form of “Loss and Damage”. This year, for the first time, negotiations concluded in an agreement to create the funding protocol, facilitating a reparations accord addressing the impacts of colonialism and the disproportional climate impacts on exploited countries that have been felt by the people who are experiencing compounding climate-related disasters such as drought, floods, and food and water insecurity. While this groundbreaking agreement was advocated for most vocally by women activists, there is a stark contrast in the lack of representation of women from the leaders of negotiations. Critically, while the loss and damage agreement outlined the importance of creating a funding protocol for disaster-impacted underserved countries, it did not create a concrete outline for how much funding or a timeline on when those funds would be distributed. 

Climate change permeates nearly every professional sector to exist in public relations, and the urban planning field will particularly require a more robust and inclusive protocol to facilitate roles for women to be more represented in spaces where decisions are being made. Indigenous women are particularly crucial to participation and negotiation in the climate sphere as Indigenous groups protect 80 percent of the world’s biodiversity. As planners facilitate approaches to clean up brownfields and limit future pollution, contain urban sprawl for the sake of ecological conservation, and weave practices of sustainability into the fabric of contemporary urban planning, it is crucial that there is conscious inclusion of indigenous practices to ensure the relationship between humans and the land is sustained.  

Women in Urban Planning 

Interestingly, the rate of women participating at COP27 and the percentage of women in the urban planning field are nearly identical. Zippia’s 2019 report shows that women in urban planning peak at a mere 34.5 percent. Similarly, the BBC reports that women made up less than 34 percent of country negotiating teams at COP27. As urban planning shifts to incorporate more community engagement, social justice, activism, and inclusion, what do these numbers say about the current regard for women’s roles in leadership? 

Inclusivity is far more than allowing a foot in the door to certain sectors, it is about the continual and deliberate creation of opportunities that give diverse identities access to positions of influence. The Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) reports that when women’s participation in politics increases by 5 percent, a country is almost five times less likely to respond to an international crisis with violence. It also reports that women in leadership are more likely to cross party lines to find solutions than their male counterparts. In the time sensitive era of combating the effects of climate change, women’s participation promotes bipartisanship, equality, and stability. Similarly, within the sphere of urban planning, there needs to be a more inclusive distribution of power across positions to provide a more diverse set of practices in a field that is notoriously white-washed and male-dominated. 

A Path Forward 

While it is recognized that women are underrepresented in positions of leadership at all governance levels, there are incremental ways that this shift of power can begin to better reflect the communities it works within. One way would be for those currently in power, namely men, to take conscientious action in creating mentorships for women in positions of leadership. Consider who is being sent to represent an organization or government. Put women in rooms where negotiations are being held, because a diversity of influence will bring a diversity of ideas that can incite positive change for the future.  

Rene is a graduate student at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) pursuing a Master’s degree in City and Regional Planning, specializing in land use and environmental planning, accompanied by a Natural Hazards Resilience certificate. She is currently working as an Associate Researcher with the UNC Water Institute Re-Energize DR3 team to strengthen the relationship between governance and private/public entities, to better support vulnerable community groups through climate-related disasters. Follow more of her work on LinkedIn and on Instagram @oneforallplanning. 

Edited by Candela Cerpa

Featured Image: Loss and Damage Protest at COP27, November 2022 by Jamie Cummings (@climatejamjam on Twitter)

Thoughts from Abroad: A Reflection on Week 1 of the UN Conference of Parties (COP) 26

November 19, 2021 /
By Pierce Holloway, CPJ Editor-in-Chief

From November 1st to the 6th I had the immense privilege of attending the first week of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 26th Conference of Parties (COP) meeting in Glasgow, Scotland. My time at COP26 was ripe with captivating juxtapositions, intriguing talks, and harsh reminders of climate impacts. I am thankful to have attended the conference. I had the opportunity to meet and talk with professionals and academics from across the world. Yet, I left with mixed feelings and a refocused eye on how my planning education may be leveraged to affect positive change. Many reports have come out noting COP26 as a failure which is accurate in some senses. However, there is still progress to be celebrated.

Many articles have been written in the past weeks describing COP26 as the most exclusive COP in history, noting that celebrities and world influencers alike were unable to obtain passes.[i] Beyond the task of getting a pass, one had to find housing in Glasgow. This mission was one flush with privilege, paved easier for those with access to more money (not climate activists). Locating housing was difficult: an estimated 25,000 people were expected at COP26 while Glasgow has only 15,000 hotel rooms.[ii] Even accounting for Airbnb and other non-traditional options there was still a noticeable dearth in local accommodations for an event billed as the “biggest and most important climate-related conference on the planet.”[iii] This resulted in attendees such as myself locating housing in Edinburgh, a 55 minute train ride east, and other satellite towns. What does this say about the UN’s promotion of better planning and development if their climate conference fell so short on housing? This may be even more evident next year where COP27 is scheduled to take place in the Egyptian resort town of Sharm El-Sheikh.[iv]

Every day I woke up at 7:00 AM in Edinburgh, bought food for the day, and caught the hour train to Glasgow. Next, I caught a circulating electric-bus (a sign of more transit electrification to come) exclusively used for COP26 attendees.[v] The 10-15 minute ride led me to the hour-long process of going through three waves of security to enter the conference area. This totaled a nearly 2.5 hour daily commute from my door to the conference. This daily journey was facilitated by a travel pass provided to all COP26 attendees which allowed for free access to all public trains and busses. While helpful, the unified travel pass is drawing criticism from local residents that are still required to have separate paid passes for trains and busses, questioning why a similar unified pass is not available to them.[vi]

Each day of the conference was jam-packed, attending panels and presentations from world leaders, academics, and professionals alike. The conference center was divided into two general areas, the pavilions, and the UN negotiation & plenary rooms. The near 50 pavilions represented many of the prominent countries and NGOs attending as well as specific interest groups for indigenious peoples, water, and nature. The plethora of individual stalls and rooms resulted in roughly 40 conference pavilion talks and 10 UN negotiations occurring at any one moment. This abundance of possibilities left me often feeling overwhelmed on how best to utilize my time.

My experience at the conference, while laden with a full schedule of insightful talks and interesting conversations, left me with 3 general criticisms of COP26:

COVID-19 precautions

The COVID testing system in place was not enforced the first day at all. The system used was based on self reporting, it was possible for someone to test positive for COVID on a rapid test but report a negative test. Attendants at the first gate only looked for a text from the NHS saying that the individual had registered a negative test. This issue was very concerning for myself as I and thousands of others waited in lines shoulder to shoulder for nearly an hour to get inside, only to be packed together at talks, and walking through hallways.

General lack of space

In passing conversations with other attendees I was told that the event space for this COP was by far the smallest space for the conference yet. While anecdotal, I find it easy to believe due to the packed nature of the pavilions, which begs the question of why this space was chosen originally. The limited space manifested in a severe lack of seating in the UN negotiations. Each of the open meeting rooms had a stated capacity which was quickly reached. With people standing along the wall or sitting on the ground not allowed there was often little to no room for observers such as myself. If this capacity limit was due to COVID precautions, why then were the pavilions where people were packed tightly into small spaces not policed?

Innovation versus behavioral change

The paths offered towards more positive climate outcomes were overwhelmingly spearheaded by innovation and creation of new markets. This speaks to me as a continuation of capitalistic ambitions: solving a problem fueled by desires of infinite growth with further fuel for capitalistic motivations. For example, on transportation day electric cars dominated the conversation while there was much less emphasis on designing our built environment to greatly reduce our need for cars overall. Now this is not to say I am a luddite of innovation or believe that we can completely turn away from a capitalist economy, but I am wary of its implications. Additionally, it is a question of equity: how can we ensure that innovation in the global north doesn’t serve to benefit only select populations?

The main COP26 banner falling down on the 3rd day Source: Pierce Holloway

Criticisms aside, I concede that there were a myriad of positives that I took away from this conference:

A planning education may be rewarded

From the many presentations and panels I attended, an overwhelming theme is that the world needs people focused on the intricacies of climate change adaptation at its implementations . Individuals that understand the value of communication, are able to adapt/react to a changing world, and value community leadership. From my perspective this embodies what a holistic planner should be. The skill of effective communication and systems thinking is invaluable to translating innovation into action. Specifically, there is a need for individuals who know how local governments and communities can manipulate new policies and resources to adapt to a changing world.

An emphasis on systems thinking

Climate adaptation cannot exist in a siloed field. One of my favorite themes was the repeated need for system-based thinking in nearly every approach, be it transportation, housing, energy, social equity, etc. Multiple speakers emphasized the need for policy makers to consider how intertwined climate adaptation must be to achieve its goals. Moreover, the nature of international issues necessitates systems thinking approaches.

Strong developments for third party verification of climate accounting efforts

I was very happy to learn about efforts towards creating tracking techniques that will allow for third party verification of climate accounting efforts. Much of this work appears to be coming out of the Open Earth Foundation and the Data-Driven EnviroLab, headed by UNC public policy professor Dr. Angel Hsu. Her work along with others is blazing a path towards methods that are allowing for validation of how corporations and governments are keeping with their climate emission reduction goals. The development of climate accounting is a necessary step to be able to track how organizations are adhering to their climate goals.

There has been a shift in talks from mitigation to adaptation and resilience

Consistently, I heard panelists acknowledge that we are past the point where we can solely mitigate climate impacts. A major speaker on this was a panel moderated by Ali Zaidi, US Deputy National Climate Advisor. Zaidi spoke multiple times on how we are entering a time where we must adapt to the future of climate change instead of simply operating under the belief we can mitigate it.

With COP26 officially ending Friday November 12th there are already analyses and many criticisms arising. One such report notes that the goal of not exceeding 1.5 degrees of warming is not in reach based on current pledges.[vii] This report among others is just cause for concern and is yet another call of activists and scientists to keep politicians’ feet to the fire and to not give an inch. This conference and exposure to the international governance involved in climate adaptation has made me consider how best I can leverage my privilege and education to affect a positive change on the climate frontier. There are many issues surrounding international development and top-down policy development but I feel through listening and remaining a humble learner I and other planners may be able to affect positive change.

[i] Taylor, Matthew. 2021. “Cop26 will be the whitest and most privileged ever, warn campaigners.” The Guardian.

[ii] Hodari, David & Colchester, Max. “Glasgow Expects 25,000 Climate Summit Guests. It Has Just 15,000 Hotel Rooms.” The Wall Street Journal.

[iii] “COP26 – what we know so far, and why it matters: Your UN News guide.“ 2021. United Nations.

[iv] “UN Climate Change Conference 2022.” IISD SDG Knowledge Hub.

[v] Manthey, Nora. 2021. “World leaders get the e-bus at COP26 in Glasgow.” Electrive.com.

[vi] Musson, Chris. 2021. “’Work To Be Done.” The Scottish Sun.

[vii] Dennis, Brady et al. 2021. “World leaders reach climate agreement at U.N. summit following two weeks of negotiations.” The Washington Post.

Pierce Holloway is a second-year master’s student at the Department of City and Regional Planning with a focus on Climate Change Adaptation. Before coming to Chapel Hill he worked as a geospatial analyst for Urban3, working on visualizing economic productivity of communities and states. Through his coursework he hopes to explore the nexus between adaptation for climate change and community equitability. In his free time, he enjoys long bike rides, trail running, and any excuse to play outside. 

Edited by Ruby Brinkerhoff

Featured image: Author Pierce Holloway attending COP26. Courtesy of Lauren Jensen.

Assessing Extreme Weather and Climate Impacts on Public Health Practitioners

October 8, 2021 /

Last summer, Emily Gvino (MCRP and MPH 2021 alumna), teamed up with Dr. Ferdouz Cochran to conduct a needs assessment of public health practitioners across the southeastern United States to understand the impact of extreme weather and climate events in their work. With support from Carolina Integrated Sciences and Assessments (CISA), the duo surveyed 108 professionals from emergency management and disaster services, healthcare coalitions, hospital or clinical based organizations, government-based public health agencies, and other community organizations.

The survey found that public health stakeholders are concerned about not just hurricanes, but also heavy rain, prolonged rain events, and heat. Funding, political climate, and organizational leadership are the main barriers to addressing the health impacts of climate change. Participants were also very concerned about power and infrastructure failures. Participants are greatly concerned about the health impacts of heat but less frequently utilize wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) in their work. WBGT is different from the commonly known heat index as it accounts for “temperature, humidity, wind speed, sun angle, and cloud cover (solar radiation)” in direct sunlight.[1]

A preview of the report’s findings can be found below, while the full report can be accessed on the CISA website.

Concern about Extreme Weather and Climate Events

Participants were very concerned about heavy rain, prolonged rain, heat, and hurricanes. Participants across all organization types were more concerned about heavy rain events (that may lead to flash flooding events) compared to prolonged periods of rain or flood events themselves. Participants were not at all concerned about fog and generally only somewhat concerned about drought, tornadoes, wildfire, and wind. Healthcare coalitions and emergency management—which operate on local and regional scales—are very concerned about localized impacts of winter weather, which is a lesser concern for other organizations that may operate on a larger scale. Non-profit and community organizations expressed a higher level of concern across flood-related hazards, heat, hurricanes, and storms. Those working in hospital- or clinical-based settings (primarily based in North Carolina) were very concerned about heat and prolonged rain.

The health risks of extreme heat events, from the question, “In your role, which of the following individual-level health risks of excessive heat concern you?”

The health risks of extreme heat events, from the question, “In your role, which of the following individual-level health risks of excessive heat concern you?”

Information and Tools

Despite concern about the health impacts of heat, survey participants less frequently use wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) in their work—a widely accepted and promoted measure of heat stress. The vast majority of respondents had not heard of WBGT and represent a key demographic that could benefit from access to more information, awareness, and tools regarding WBGT for their work, in comparison to relying on ambient temperatures alone. Across all types of extreme weather and climate events, participants trust the National Weather Service over other information sources, such as other phone apps, national TV stations such as the weather channel, or other web-based sources, such as Weather Underground. When asked to share what sources of information they are lacking in their current work, participants identified real-time phone and web alerts, showcasing opportunities here for improved climate communication.

In addition, public health stakeholders expressed interest in applying future climate projections and priority mapping to their current work. Based on these results, there may be opportunities for increased communication about the health risks of extreme heat and climate events for those in the public health and medical fields. For example, when it comes to heart attacks as a result of winter weather events, there was a disconnect between emergency management, who were very concerned about heart attacks, and those working in hospital or clinical settings, who were mostly concerned about car accidents due to winter weather events. Further research could explore this disconnect between different types of public health stakeholders.

Local Capacity and Leadership Building

Across all types of organizations, survey participants expressed that local levels of leadership should be responsible for preparing for extreme weather and climate events. However, survey participants shared that funding, political climate, and leadership are the most prominent barriers to action regarding addressing extreme weather and climate events in their work. Participants also expressed high levels of concern about power and infrastructure failures and access to healthcare facilities, which may require more regional capacity building and leadership across stakeholder groups. The majority of participants shared that their organizations had an emergency preparedness plan, and over half of these respondents had support the preparation of the plan. While participants reported Hazard Vulnerability Assessments (HVA) were fairly common at their organizations, less than one-third of respondents said that an HVA was prepared annually. Less than half of survey participants and their associated organizations are involved in a healthcare coalition. This summary reports our detailed findings across the top three extreme weather and climate events concerning public health stakeholders: extreme heat, winter weather, and flooding.

A full version of the CISA Public Health Needs Assessment: Summary Report is now available online through the CISA Library. If you’d like to learn more about this project, please contact Emily Gvino ’21.

[1] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, WetBulb Globe Temperature

By Emily Gvino, MCRP/MPH ’21

Featured image: Cows who survived Hurricane Florence, stranded on a porch, surrounded by flood waters in North Carolina. Courtesy of Jo-Anne McArthur, Unsplash

Lessons from the Fuel Shortage

June 18, 2021 /
By Pierce Holloway, Editor-in-Chief

Introduction

If you are a driver living in the Southeast, you likely felt the very real impacts of last month’s fuel shortage. The crisis began at 5:30 am on May 7th, when a ransom note from hackers was found on a Colonial Pipeline control room computer. This event halted 2.5 million barrels per day of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel shipments, making it the most disruptive cyberattack ever on U.S. energy infrastructure.[1] Pressing pause on a pipeline which supplies roughly 45% of the East Coast’s fuel resulted in a ripple effect across the southeast, with rampant reports of price gouging and empty gas stations. According to the fuel tracking company GasBuddy, 65% of North Carolina’s gas stations were left without fuel in the wake of the attack. While the hack itself did disrupt the supply of fuel to stations across the region, drivers’ panic-buying caused stations to run empty much faster than expected.

May’s fuel shortage was not without precedent. In the 1970’s the nation experienced two intense periods of fuel shortages. The gas crises of 1973 & 1979 were spurred not by a cyber attack, but by geopolitics, the Iranian Revolution, and OPEC, all issues exacerbated by industry-wide fuel inefficient vehicles.[2] What lessons can we take from this crisis and what implications does it have for our current transportation network?

Lessons Learned

One: The reliance on fossil fuels is not a resilient future for the United States.

Fossil fuels have allowed our country to develop and grow at an unprecedented rate, allowing for significant advances in science and technology. However, the U.S. has reached a point where we must diversify our energy sources for the future of our economy, transportation, and health.

  • Economy – Despite our robust gross domestic product (GDP) output, a continually fossil fuel-dependent United States is likely to reach a tipping point and be left behind as other countries lead the way economically.
  • Transportation – Our country’s transportation system is dependent upon single occupancy vehicles. What happens the next time 30% of a region’s workforce cannot acquire gas to get to work? The U.S. needs systems in place to prevent the disparate impacts fuel shortages have on those who cannot afford to live within walking distance to work.
  • Health – The negative health impacts of burning fossil fuels for combustion engines are well-known, with a harmful cocktail of particulate matter, ozone, sulfur dioxide, mercury, and more. Exposure to fossil fuels results in detrimental impacts such as lower life expectancy and reduced lung function, and these impacts are not equitably distributed. A 2014 study found that living in majority Hispanic neighborhoods were associated with higher air pollutant exposures, and newer research has revealed that historically redlined areas have significantly higher rates of asthma-related emergency room visits.[3]

Two: Continued reliance on fossil fuels stands to make the United States defense network fragile.

Our government has acknowledged for some time that energy policies are inextricably linked to our national security. The first sentence of the 1981 Energy Policies for Resilience and National Security report summarizes the problem exceedingly well: “The U.S. energy system is highly vulnerable to large-scale failures with catastrophic consequences, and is becoming more so.” Fast forwarding 40 years later, we find ourselves living in a country still extremely susceptible to large-scale failures, perhaps increasingly so due the rise of cyberattacks. Prior to the May Colonial Pipeline cyberattack, the 2020 discovery of the Solarwinds attack impacted the U.S. Department of Energy and revealed the previous worst attack on energy infrastructure in history.[4]

Three: The recent fuel shortage underlines the need for increased prevalence of effective and accessible public transit options.

Public transit can lead not only to more equitable outcomes, but more economic resilience in the face of fuel shortages. As of 2019, 76.3% workers over 16 reported driving alone to work, while only 5.2% utilized public transportation.[5] By decreasing our reliance on single occupancy vehicles, we correspondingly decrease our reliance on fossil fuels. However it is important to note that electric and other alternative fuel vehicles are a not a silver bullet. While an electric car produces fewer carbon emissions than a traditional vehicle, its true carbon emissions depend on the electricity source. As of February 2021, over 60% of the U.S.’s electricity is still sourced from fossil fuels.[6] While renewable electricity generation is rising, vehicles charged at home are not a perfectly green choice. And a single occupancy vehicle, electric or not, is still not as important as focusing on improving public transportation.

Four: Sprawling development patterns have played a crucial role in the rise of single occupancy vehicles.

The fuel shortage demonstrates that sprawling development cannot feasibly ensure long-term resilience for the U.S. A recent report from the Census Bureau reported that the average one-way commute for Americans reached an all-time high of 27.6 minutes in 2019.[7] This, combined with the previously mentioned majority of workers driving alone to work, demonstrates the extremely arduous daily commute American workers engage in. Many American suburbs are also intentionally designed for isolation from a larger societal fabric, stemming from our racist and classist roots. How can suburbanites be expected to efficiently utilize public transit if their own neighborhoods are designed for isolation rather than interwovenness?

Urban sprawl also substantially increases congestion, resulting in commuters spending more and more time in a sea of brake lights.[8] All this time stopping and starting compounds particulate emissions, decreases worker productivity, and results in less time for workers to spend with friends and family.[9]

In recent years there has been a resurgence in younger Americans wanting to live in and moving to the urban core, leading to higher education and income metrics.[10] A shift to living in denser, more interconnected communities seems to be growing across the U.S., but without political support and continued movement away from emissions-producing vehicles, will this trend continue?

Conclusion

U.S. residents need and deserve efficient transit wherever they live, and we cannot become truly sustainable nor equitable while sprawling development continues. Understanding the detrimental impacts of our current structures is the first step to creating and implementing improvements. The Colonial Pipeline disruption highlighted significant issues with our ongoing car-dependence, those which are not only important but also completely possible to address. Examples of effective transit systems and development patterns exist across the world, and the U.S. should learn from others who have successfully found a way to move away from pollutant-emitting fuels. Politics will always be a hurdle, but residents across the country deserve leaders willing to undertake efforts to explain and address the negative health and well-being outcomes  our current transportation and development patterns impose.

[1] Joseph Menn and Stephanie Kelly. 2021. “Colonial Pipeline slowly restarts as Southeast U.S. scrambles for fuel.” Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/top-us-fuel-pipeline-edges-toward-reopening-gasoline-shortages-worsen-2021-05-12/.

[2] The Washington Post. 2021. “Gas shortages and lines in the 1970s wreaked national havoc.” Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/05/13/gas-shortages-1970s/.

[3] Casey A. Nardone et al. 2020. “Associations between historical residential redlining and current age-adjusted rates of emergency department visits due to asthma across eight cities in California: An ecological study.” The Lancet. Planetary Health, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30241-4.

[4] Dina Temple-Raston. 2021. “A ‘Worst Nightmare’ Cyberattack: The Untold Story Of The SolarWinds Hack.” NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2021/04/16/985439655/a-worst-nightmare-cyberattack-the-untold-story-of-the-solarwinds-hack.

[5] U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. “Five-Year Estimate.”

[6] U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2021. “What is U.S. energy generation by energy source?” Retrieved from https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3.

[7] U.S. Census. 2021. “Census Bureau Estimates Show Average One-Way Travel Time to Work Rises to All-Time High.” Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/one-way-travel-time-to-work-rises.html.

[8] Bruce Schaller. 2019. “What Urban Sprawl Is Really Doing to Your Commute..” Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-03/when-bad-commutes-make-bad-transportation-policy

[9] Van Ommeren, J. N., & Gutiérrez-i-Puigarnau, E. (2011). Are workers with a long commute less productive? An empirical analysis of absenteeism. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2010.07.005

[10] Richard Fry. 2020. “Prior to COVID-19, Urban Core Counties in the U.S. Were Gaining Vitality on Key Measures.” Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/07/29/prior-to-covid-19-urban-core-counties-in-the-u-s-were-gaining-vitality-on-key-measures/

Pierce Holloway is a second-year master’s student at the Department of City and Regional Planning with a focus on Climate Change Adaptation. Before coming to Chapel Hill he worked as a geospatial analyst for Urban3, working on visualizing economic productivity of communities and states. Through his coursework he hopes to explore the nexus between adaptation for climate change and community equitability. In his free time, he enjoys long bike rides, trail running, and any excuse to play outside. 

Edited by Emma Vinella-Brusher, Managing Editor

Featured image courtesy of the Tallahassee Democrat

Greenwashing Alert: Where’s the Three Zeros Plan, UNC?

February 18, 2020 /

On September 20, 2019, I participated in the global climate strike at the Peace and Justice Plaza on Franklin Street spurred by Greta Thunberg and her Skolestreik for Klimaet. I was inspired to see Chapel Hill elementary, middle and high school students striking to attend the event, and showing their support for climate action. I was also happy to see local residents, most of whom were older. 

People held clever signs with clear messages; one protester wore a Santa Claus costume with a sign that read “Santa says coal is naughty.” A variety of environmental activism groups like Citizens’ Climate Lobby and Sunrise Movement shared their messages and recruited support. Speakers took to the microphone to share their perspectives. We sang and chanted. It felt great to stand with others in support of climate action. Even so, I left the strike disheartened for two reasons:

  1. I saw so few UNC undergrad students that I could have counted them on my own two hands. Where were the young people that say they care about environmentalism?
  2. The climate strike did not have a clear target audience or clear message. Activism cannot be effective without clear goals, objectives, and strategies.

I left with a desire to cultivate the energy and sense of community that I felt at the September 20 strike at the Peace and Justice Plaza, and to call for specific change in my local sphere, i.e. on campus at UNC.

As a former Three Zeros Environmental Initiative (TZEI) employee, I have unique insight into the reality of the status of UNC’s sustainability initiative. Carol Folt announced the initiative in 2016, identifying three goals: zero waste to landfills, zero greenhouse gas emissions, and net zero water use. As an intern, I watched TZEI quietly abandon its deadline of 2050, hire a consulting firm to develop a comprehensive plan, fire that consulting firm and scrap the deliverable, announce intentions to release a plan on Three Zeros Day in 2018 (the second anniversary of UNC’s adoption of the initiative), and then fail to produce it. No plan materialized for Three Zeros Day in 2019 either. It’s time to hold UNC accountable by demanding the release of a comprehensive, actionable Three Zeros plan. Read my letter to the Chancellor about this issue in the Daily Tar Heel here.

TZEI has promised the release of a comprehensive plan to achieve these goals for three years, but has not delivered. This is in part because of the frequent change in leadership—Carol Folt established this program in 2016, and has since left the University. Chief Sustainability Officer Brad Ives was fired last year, leaving the initiative under the direction of UNC Director of Energy Services Lew Kellogg. Among his other duties as Director of Energy Services, Kellogg oversees UNC’s coal plant – a role in inherent, direct conflict with the goal of zero greenhouse gas emissions.

I made a plan to strike for the climate on the steps of South Building where senior administrators make decisions that directly determine UNC’s environmental impact. I would call for the public release of a comprehensive, actionable Three Zeros Plan that explains in detail how the University will achieve its widely publicized and highly celebrated goals. Our first strike was a success—fellow students and I brought coffee and signs to the steps of the South Building and sat there for almost five hours, talking through what we knew about sustainability at UNC, and what we thought needed to change.

Students Olivia Corriere (left) and Zach Walker (right) strike on the steps of the South Building to pressure the UNC administration to release a Three Zeros Plan.

Since then, students have striked fourteen times on the steps of South Building calling for the release of a comprehensive, actionable Three Zeros Plan. The powerful people that work in this building, which houses the Office of the Chancellor, have to walk by us every Friday and acknowledge that UNC students care about climate action, that we are watching what they do, and that we will hold them accountable. By demonstrating in person, we have slowly built relationships with some administrators, who have been helpful in making suggestions on how to evolve and extend our efforts to impact change. 

At every strike, supporters sign the “guestbook” in support. Over time, supporters have written dozens of messages, like these:

  • “Want to see tangible next steps for climate action” (9/27/19)
  • “Nothing is not an option” (10/4/19)
  • “UNC cares more about money than they do about our planet” (10/4/19)
  • “No more coal!” (10/25/19)
  • “I am the Three Zeros Student Leader 2019. I do not know what I am supposed to be representing at the moment. That is a problem… no plan, no transparency!” (11/1/19)
  • “I am fighting for this University to not be a hypocrisy and prepare the next generation” (11/22/19)
  • “I am fighting for my baby nephew’s future!” (11/22/19)
  • “The students are doing their part…it’s time for the administration to stop hiding behind PR worries” (11/22/19)
  • “New decade, same vibes. I’d like to live; give me back my good, stable climate.” (1/10/20)
  • “UNC-CH should be a leader for other universities in the fight against the climate crisis.” (1/10/20)
  • “We owe this to the future students at UNC” (1/17/20)
  • “Environmental justice is racial justice” (1/24/20)
  • “End coal on college campuses. Be a visionary for once. Have some courage for once.” (1/24/20)
  • “DAMMIT UNC, YOU BETTER STOP PLAYIN’” (1/24/20)
  • “Everyone is listening, waiting… UNC, your move.” (2/14/20)
  • “It’s Valentine’s Day—can’t we PLEASE show our planet some LOVE?!?” (2/14/20)

Sometimes it can be hard to know whether this kind of activism is effective, but I knew we were holding administration’s feet to the fire on this issue when Chancellor Guskiewicz stopped by our strike a couple weeks ago to ask, “how many more of these strikes do you have planned?” to which my response was, “as many as it takes until the Three Zeros Plan is released.”

If you’d like to strike with this movement, find us on the steps of South Building every Friday morning, usually 8:30am-noon. Check out the Facebook page here. If you’d like to do something here and now to support this movement, email the Chancellor (chancellor@unc.edu) and call for the release of a comprehensive Three Zeros Plan!

Featured Image: Students gather on the steps of the South Building for the first Three Zeros strike on September 27, 2019.

About the Author: Olivia Corriere is a senior undergraduate studying environmental sustainability, geography, and urban planning. She serves as Co-Chair of the UNC Renewable Energy Special Projects Committee, managing renewable energy projects on campus. She also works as Project Manager at Blue Dogwood Public Market in Chapel Hill, NC. She plans to work in renewable energy development when she graduates in May. In her free time, Olivia enjoys hiking, running, and cooking with people she loves.

Equity and Adaptation in a Changing Climate: The UNC Climate Change Resilience Symposium

May 10, 2019 /

“If you had a town of 50,000 burned to the ground and hundreds of people killed by terrorists, do you think we would have done something about it by now?” It’s a provocative question, one of many raised at last month’s Climate Resilience Symposium. The person asking the question was Brigadier General Stephen A. Cheney of the US Marine Corps, and, perhaps surprisingly, he was talking about climate change. Specifically, he was discussing last year’s wildfires that devastated the town of Paradise, CA and the inability of our political system to come to terms with the immense security and economic threat posed by climate change.

The UNC Climate Change and Resilience Symposium is an annual event at UNC organized by the Carolina Resilience Hazard Planners and Carolina Climate Scientists and hosted by the Gillings School of Public Health. The event brings together community activists, practitioners, and scholars from around the Triangle region to discuss the impacts of climate change as well as the challenges and opportunities in addressing it in North Carolina and beyond.

CCRS keynote 1

Brigadier General Stephen A. Cheney, Keynote Speaker. Source: Josh Kastrinsky.

The day’s activities kicked off with General Cheney’s key note address. Retired from the Marines, General Cheney is currently the Chief Executive Officer of the American Security Project, a nonprofit policy and research organization founded by John Kerry to address underappreciated threats to national security like climate change. The goal of General Cheney’s address was to highlight both the direct impacts of climate change to military bases and infrastructure, as well as its indirect role in prompting widespread migration and political destabilization. Cheney presented Lake Chad in central Africa as a classic example. The lake has lost 90% of its water since 1973, driving a regional migration network, which terrorist organization Boko Haram has taken advantage of for active recruitment. Similarly, analysts project that one to two feet of sea level rise could prompt the relocation of 20-30 million refugees from Bangladesh, many of whom are expected to end up in Indonesia, which has a large ISIS footprint. On the home front, Cheney discussed the impacts of sea level rise and extreme weather on Norfolk, home to the world’s largest naval base, and on North Carolina’s Camp Lejeune, which he described as a “blue tarp city” following Hurricane Florence. Similarly, Tyndall Airforce base in Florida, one of the nation’s most important training bases, is expected to take at least five years to come back online following Hurricane Michael. But “why would you possibly put it in the same spot?” Cheney asked regarding Congress’s decision to rebuild Tyndall rather than relocate it to a lower-risk area. According to Cheney, the military gets it. They see the risk climate change poses and the opportunities in adaptation and mitigation activities. It’s up to us as voters, he stressed, to get our politicians on the same page.

After Cheney’s keynote and an engaging student poster session over lunch, there were two afternoon panels. The first – Climate Change Adaptation: Communities at a Crossroads – featured four experts on climate adaptation and planning in North Carolina. They discussed local climate resilience assessment projects and how to integrate local planning with regional, state, and federal efforts. Two recurring themes were the challenge of getting local government to understand the urgency of climate change and the tension between private property, individual choice, and public interest. As Stewart consultant, Jay McLeod, argued, when it comes to coastal development, we need to get “a place where the cost burden isn’t borne externally and a place where people actually understand their risk.” Key takeaways from the panel included recognizing the need for transformation in the existing climate change response approach and greater representation and diversity in the decision-making and planning process. Jessica Whitehead of North Carolina Sea Grant perhaps said it best: “adaptation just requires doing things differently.”

CCRS Second Panel 1

UNC PhD student, Amanda Martin, presenting at the first panel session. Source: Josh Kastrinsky.

Another thread through the entire afternoon was the issue of equity. When discussing existing land use strategies for reducing risk in the first panel, UNC PhD student, Amanda Martin, reminded the audience that the US has a “long history of forcing people to move for the ‘greater’ good” and discussed how our current adaptation strategies “continue to perpetuate structures of inequality.” That conversation continued into the second panel – Striving for Equity in the Face of a Changing Climate – with North Carolina State Professors Kofi Boone and Ryan Emanuel, both of whom sought to complicate and reframe the existing narrative around climate change and vulnerable communities. Professor Boone argued that it’s chronic stressors and underlying issues, like racism and poverty, which drive vulnerability and which our current adaptation strategies fail to address. A large part of the problem, he stated, is that poor black communities on the coastal plain of North Carolina are “feeling the impact of our bad development decisions” up in the wealthier Triangle region. However, that same history of exclusion has created a strong attachment to place and valuable social ties in many black communities that make relocation difficult. Dr. Emanuel, an enrolled member of the Lumbee tribe, addressed similar issues as they relate to native communities. He explored the Lumbee’s historical connection to the land and the tribe’s history of migration in response to environmental conditions AND forced displacement. Those experiences, he argued, make the Lumbee particularly vulnerable to climate change. However, they also make the Lumbee uniquely positioned to address it IF decision makers better recognize and incorporate indigenous knowledge and expertise in environmental justice and climate adaptation efforts.

CCRS Third Panel 2.jpg

North Carolina State Professors Kofi Boone and Ryan Emanuel discussing equity and climate change during the second panel session. Source: Josh Kastrinsky.

Both speakers on the second panel argued that our current paradigm, reflected in the existing strategies and narratives adopted around climate change adaptation, focuses on rational decision making at the individual level. However, that paradigm ignores community-level social forces that can limit mobility or, on the flip side, create social capital that can help generate innovative forms of resilience. In addition, our current paradigm too often focuses on cities or high-income coastal areas, ignoring rural communities like those found in the North Carolina coastal plain. As Professor Boone stressed, “we need to evolve a different unit of organization” in our hazard mitigation and disaster recovery efforts.

The final panelists closed the productive day of conversations and learning with a few key tips for working on these sensitive and timely issues, particularly in vulnerable communities:

  • Know when (and even if) to get involved
  • Listen, build relationships, and be willing to put in the time
  • Don’t go in looking for certain things or treating the exchange like an extractive process
  • Marry social issues like poverty that people relate to and experience on a day-to-day basis to conversations around adaptation and climate change

 

Featured Image: Brigadier General Stephen A. Cheney, keynote speaker, presenting to the attending audience. Source: Josh Kastrinsky.

About the Author: Leah Campbell is a first-year Ph.D. student in the Department of City and Regional Planning, where she focuses on integrating equity and resilience into climate adaptation to address urban flooding. Prior to UNC, she worked in the environmental nonprofit sector in California after receiving her B.S. in Geophysics and Environmental Science from Yale in 2015. Outside of academics, Leah enjoys folk music, long road trips, and anything that gets her outside.

How Asheville’s The Collider Can Help Us Meet the Challenge of Climate Adaptation

February 7, 2019 /

Already today, climate change is harming companies’ bottom lines and business models; undermining community disaster planning and recovery; and threatening individual health and wellbeing. The IPCC warned this year in a report later echoed by the U.S. Federal Government in its Fourth National Climate Assessment that the effects of climate change stand to become more severe much sooner than we thought. The need for climate adaptation solutions is clear.

Even clearer is the need for scalable tech solutions that will revolutionize our global capacity to be prepared for the risks and opportunities posed by climate change. In other words: solutions that match the magnitude and sweeping pace of the impacts and risks to which we are exposed. At The Collider, we call these solutions “climate tech.”

Three defining factors characterize these emerging companies focused on adaptation and resilience. One: designing scalable technology; two: leveraging weather and climate data; and three: creating actionable intelligence for the consumer.

What will climate tech solutions enable companies, communities, and individuals to do? Every day, billions of dollars of decisions are being made that could be informed by the use of weather and climate data—but aren’t. From deciding when to plant and harvest crops to making investments in new infrastructure, incorporating weather and climate data is critical. Climate tech solutions will bridge the gap between the petabytes of data that are being collected around the world from places like ship buoys, satellites, tree rings, and weather stations and decision-makers facing the risks of a changing climate.

Here are two examples of forward-thinking companies currently in the climate tech space:

NEMAC+FernLeaf Collaborative: Tech startup, FernLeaf Interactive, recently established a formal public-private partnership with UNC Asheville’s National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center (NEMAC). NEMAC+FernLeaf co-developed the federal resilience process for understanding risk and building resilience to natural hazards. Their newest software tool, AccelAdapt, provides local governments with an increased understanding of vulnerability to help improve decisions made in all local government departments. The tool helps align resilience to existing operational workflows.

The Climate Service: The Climate Service has developed software that runs a comprehensive climate risk analysis for the assets and global footprint of a given corporation. Using climate models and company-specific asset and logistics information, their software empowers executives with the information they need to make climate-informed decisions that span geographic locations and business functions.

In a time when the world is seeing increased extreme weather events, prolonged droughts, ravaging wildfires, and other climate-related environmental changes, decision-makers need access to accurate and affordable tools that enable them to make informed decisions. These technologies will be uniquely poised to provide replicable, scalable solutions that are also tailored to specific industries and risks (physical, transition, regulatory, reputational) and provide significant opportunities (new products, new markets).

Despite the existence of an estimated $23B market for climate-tech services, actual investment, both venture capital and venture philanthropy, in climate tech focused on adaptation and resilience lags behind the risks that climate change poses. Investment in mitigation-focused technologies and work to catalyze those technologies from both venture capitalists and philanthropies is staggeringly higher than it is for adaptation-focused technologies. In 2017 alone, venture capital investment in mitigation technologies exceeded that of adaptation technologies by 3000x.

Development of both the supply and demand sides of the market for adaptation-focused climate tech is sorely needed. In this early moment for the industry, tailored entrepreneurial support programs are needed to provide upfront, patient investment; mobilize the market; and make available other support resources to galvanize the launch and growth of emerging climate analytics companies. Yet, climate tech startups in the U.S. face a key challenge: no dedicated climate analytics incubator exists.

In 2019, The Collider, a nonprofit innovation center for climate entrepreneurship, will be launching a climate tech incubator and investment fund in order to provide resources to address this critical market gap. As an organization, we recognize that an investment in climate tech is an investment that will revolutionize the way society functions in light of a changed and ever-changing climate.

Tory Grieves is Program Director of The Collider’s forthcoming Climate Tech Incubator and oversees entrepreneurship initiatives at The Collider. She earned concomitant MBA and Master of Environmental Management (MEM) degrees from the Yale School of Management and Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, respectively, focusing on social entrepreneurship and impact investing. Tory holds a B.A. in Environmental Studies from Hamilton College, where she concentrated in environmental policy.

The Collider is a global innovation center dedicated to advancing climate entrepreneurship. We support startups, across almost every sector, that use data to help the world become more resilient to climate change. A non-profit based in Asheville, North Carolina, which is also home to NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information – the world’s largest collection of weather and climate data – The Collider leverages its network of local and global experts to support the growth and development of climate tech startups in pursuit of our vision: a world prepared for climate change.

Climate Change is Reshaping U.S. National Parks

January 17, 2019 /

Standing in awe in California’s Yosemite Valley or in the shadow of Denali, deep in the Alaskan interior, it is easy to imagine that the 60 national parks of the United States are pristine wildernesses. However, what many don’t realize, is that the national park system actually encompasses over 400 units, including historical sites, battlefields, and scenic trails. Even the 60 sites that include ‘National Park’ in their name – think Acadia in Maine, Virginia’s Shenandoah, or the ‘Mighty Five’ parks in southern Utah – are less untouched than we’d like to imagine. The wolves that are so integral to the ecosystem and tourist experience in Yellowstone, Wyoming were brought there less than 30 years ago from Canada after a 70-year absence from the park. The inhospitable Grand Canyon, deep in the deserts of Arizona, provided a permanent home to Native Americans for at least 4,000 years before it became a park. And, since 2000, the largest restoration project ever undertaken in the US has been underway in the endless expanse of the Everglades in south Florida. The truth is, our national parks have never been able to avoid, and in many cases have benefited from, human intervention. However, with climate change, these iconic landscapes are now facing new threats stemming from human activity that may permanently alter the parks and our relationship to them.

Because of their active management, relatively intact ecosystems, and the presence of long-running scientific experiments, national parks have served as valuable laboratories to understand the myriad impacts of climate change. They’ve also given scientists and visitors alike a front row seat to those impacts as these landscapes change before our very eyes. In Alaska, melting permafrost, rapid coastal erosion, and disappearing sea ice are destroying archaeological sites and disconnecting native people from their historical subsistence lifestyles (some Alaskan parks are open to hunting by Alaskan natives). In Glacier National Park in Montana, only 25 of the park’s titular glaciers remain, compared to 150 in the late 1800s. Scientists project that all of the remaining glaciers could be gone in just 15 years. And in California’s Sequoia National Park, average annual temperatures are expected to rise by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, threatening most of the 65 groves of Sequoia trees that exist in the entire world.

boulder glacier 1

boulder glacier 2

Photo: Glacier National Park’s Boulder Glacier in 1932 (top) vs. 1988 (bottom). Boulder Glacier is no longer considered an active glacier. Photo Credits: (top) Glacier National Park and (bottom) Lisa McKeon via Climate Central.

While the specific impacts of climate change, and the severity of those impacts, vary geographically, most parks are expected to experience, unsurprisingly, some warming. In fact, the acreage managed by the National Park Service has warmed faster since 1895 than the rest of the United States. For example, since 1948, the average annual temperature in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which spreads across Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana and includes Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit, and winter is on average 10 days shorter a year. In mountainous parks like Yosemite and Glacier, rising temperatures have also changed the timing and availability of the winter snowpack, with more precipitation falling as rain than as snow. In fact, snowpack in the northern Rockies region today is at its lowest level in eight centuries. This, in turn, increases the likelihood of catastrophic flooding during the spring melt season and terrible drought in the late summer. Increases in summer temperatures are expected to shift visitation patterns, with more tourists coming in the fall and spring shoulder seasons rather than in the peak of summer. Currently, the Park Service estimates that the main visitor season will grow by 13 to 31 days across all of the parks. While that change may be an economic boon from gateway communities, it could stretch existing services thin as park managers attempt to accommodate more people over a longer season.

In 2016, Climate Central, the nonprofit climate news service, released a report analyzing the impact of rising summer temperatures on parks in the Lower 48, assuming greenhouse gas emissions remain steady. They found that summer temperatures could be up to 12 degrees Fahrenheit warmer in some parks by 2100. They also found that there’ll be a dramatic increase in the number of extreme heat days, which is especially problematic for summer visitors. The most significant increase in extreme heat days will be felt in Texas’s Big Bend National Park, where the average number of days above 100 degrees will increase from 17 a year (from 1991-2010) to 113 in 2100. Arizona’s Saguaro National Park will similarly experience an increase from 39 to 127 days a year. Meanwhile, the number of days over 90 degrees in North Carolina and Tennessee’s Great Smoky Mountains, the most popular national park in the country with over 11 million visitors in 2017, could increase from 10 days to three months a year by 2100. At this rate of warming, summer time in Acadia National Park will feel more like that in southern Maryland, while Ohio’s Cuyahoga Valley will feel more like the Gulf Coast of Texas.

These increases in air temperature will increase the temperature of streams and rivers, affecting downstream commercial and recreational fisheries, and lead to an expansion in the range of invasive species and pests. For example, without the cold flow of glacier melt every summer, the western glacier stonefly, unique to Glacier National Park, is inching towards extinction. Bull trout throughout the mountain West are also struggling with warmer temperatures and an explosion of invasive lake trout populations. Meanwhile, invasive plants like cheatgrass have moved in en masse, pushing out more fire tolerant and nutritious native grass species. Warmer temperatures and extended drought have also led to infestations of mountain pine beetle across the West, particularly in high elevation forests that lack natural defenses against the pests. Over the past 30 years, the pine beetles have chomped over 46 million acres of forested land, infecting almost all of the pine trees in Colorado’s Rocky Mountain National Park and 80% of the whitebark pines in Yellowstone. Widespread tree morality not only increases the risk of wildfires, by providing more dry fuel to burn, but it also takes away an important food source for species like grizzly bears, which rely on pine cones as a staple of their diet.

beetlemap_web

Map shows the impact of Pine Bark Beetle infestations in the West from 2000-2014. Image Credit: Karen Minot via MotherJones

Rising temperatures and the expansion of grasslands also provide the perfect conditions for devastating wildfires. Across the country, the average annual number of fires larger than 1,000 acres has more than tripled since the 1970s. In the northern Rockies, specifically, it has gone up more than 10-fold. Fire season is now 105 days longer than in the 1970s, with some fire managers claiming that there really isn’t a discrete fire ‘season’ anymore. With these changing conditions, fires like the catastrophic Yellowstone fires of 1988 and the 2013 Rim Fire in California, which burned almost 80,000 acres of Yosemite, are likely to become all too common.

Combined, these changes will shift what biologists call the ‘green wave.’ The green wave is not just a college mascot, but an important ecological process whereby plants become green at different times at different elevations, driving the hibernation, reproduction, and migration patterns of animals. A change in the green wave, coupled with changes in water availability, may alter how and when animals migrate through the landscape. Already, drought conditions are shifting the annual migration of Yellowstone’s elk. Meanwhile, an increase in icy conditions (from more rain-on-snow events) will make it more difficult for the caribou herds in Alaska’s Gates of the Arctic National Park to dig for food in winter. In many states, national parks provide a refuge for large animals that are threatened by hunting and development outside of park borders. This is especially true for animals with long migration routes like the pronghorn (who have the longest land migration in the continental US) or bad reputations like wolves, that can be shot by hunters when they follow their elk prey beyond park boundaries. These uncertain changes to migration patterns will diminish the capacity of parks to provide safe havens that ensure these species and others can thrive.

The remote, high-elevation and forested parks of the West are not the only ones under siege. These same threats – invasive species, warming temperatures, changes in water availability – are affecting parks in every state. At the same time, parks protecting coastal and wetland ecosystems are also struggling with the additional burden of sea level rise. For example, New York City’s Gateway National Recreation Area – the only park service unit one can reach by subway – is preparing for sea level rise of 3 feet by 2100. That level of rise would put roughly $1.5 billion of assets at the nearby Statue of Liberty National Monument at risk. Those parks are having to find a way to adapt to the slow onset rise of sea level, while also shelling out millions for recovery from the devastation of Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Managing steady sea level rise, coupled with an increased risk of saltwater intrusion and a more intense hurricane season, is a challenge all the parks on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, including Florida’s Biscayne National Park and Louisiana’s Jean Lafitte, will have to confront.

Climate change is likely to permanently alter the landscapes of our iconic national parks across the country. And in most cases, ecosystems are transforming so rapidly that many species don’t have the time or capacity to adapt. The Park Service is already having to rethink the entire paradigm around which we manage national parks and preserve the plants, animals, and human communities that call them home. Increasingly, park managers are turning to scenario planning and other innovative approaches to account for the vast uncertainty they face, both in terms of how these ecosystems and the federal government will respond to change. If anything, though, the threats of climate change will make the park system more vital than ever. Vast tracts of undeveloped land and robust, well preserved green corridors between protected areas will leave more physical space for species to migrate and adapt in response to changing conditions. National parks can and must continue to serve as refuges for species already stressed by development and habitat loss for whom climate change could otherwise be a death sentence. While these landscapes will change, they may, with the proper adaptation strategies and proactive response of local, state, and federal government, continue to remain iconic landscapes for generations to come.

Learn more about what impact climate change will have on individual national parks and what the National Park Service is doing about it here.

Featured Image: Sequoia National Park by Tuxyso / Wikimedia Commons, via Climate Central

About the Author: Leah Campbell is a first-year Ph.D. student in the Department of City and Regional Planning, where she focuses on equitable climate adaptation and disaster mitigation. Prior to UNC, she worked in the environmental nonprofit sector in California after receiving her B.S. in Geophysics and Environmental Science from Yale in 2015. Outside of academics, Leah enjoys folk music, long road trips, and anything that gets her outside.

References:

Kahn, B. 2016. Climate Change is the National Parks’ Biggest Challenge. Climate Central. http://reports.climatecentral.org/nps/overview/

Kahn, B. 2016. The Future of National Parks is Going to be a Lot Hotter. Climate Central. 24 Aug. 2016.

Climate Central, 2016. Climate Change is Tipping Scales Toward More Wildfire. Climate Central. 23 June. 2016.

Gonzalez, P., F. Wang, M. Notaro, D.J. Vimont, and J.W. Williams. 2018. Disproportionate magnitude of climate change in United Sates national parks. Environmental Research Letters 13.

Holloway, M. 2018. Your Children’s Yellowstone Will be Radically Different. New York Times. 15 Nov. 2018.

Oatman, M. 2015. Bark Beetles are Decimating our Forests. That Might Actually be a Good Thing. Mother Jones. May/June 2015.

Hazard Mitigation and Hurricane Harvey: Reflections on a Conversation with Dr. Galen Newman

October 30, 2018 /

The following is derived from an interview about the 2017 disaster with Dr. Galen Newman, a Fellow in the Institute for Sustainable Communities and a member of the Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center at Texas A&M University. His research focuses primarily on urban regeneration and flood resilience.

Harvey was different. While many hurricanes pose serious flooding risks to coastal areas, the danger often lies in the rapid rise of seawater known as a storm surge. There is a reason that Harvey’s storm surge was hardly mentioned in the weeks and months following its landfall: the most serious flooding was caused by excessive rain. In an area that is accustomed to only 50 inches of precipitation annually, Harvey’s nearly 48 inches of rainfall was devastating. This inundation of water posed a completely different set of challenges for the Houston area.

Harvey’s Uniqueness

Accordingly, it was nearly impossible for authorities to plan for the 2017 hurricane. The unique nature of the storm resulted in an unprecedented strain on Harris County’s stormwater infrastructure system. Due to relentless and widespread rainfall, one-quarter of the resultant flooding occurred in areas outside of the 100-year floodplain. The new and unpredictable pattern of flooding had catastrophic effects on some Houstonians. Flood insurance is not required outside of designated floodplains and as a result, many of those whose property was damaged or destroyed were forced to start over from square one.

While Harvey was a particularly devastating event, Houston was previously vulnerable to any major rain, storm, or hurricane occurrence. The relaxed regulation of land use zoning and widespread development (much of it within existing floodplains) meant that a substantial amount of land was covered by impervious surfaces like concrete and asphalt. Weep holes—the gaps within brick walls that allow for drainage and ventilation—were easily clogged. Combined with relative inattention to stormwater infrastructure, these practices led to inadequate drainage in neighborhoods all over Harris County.

Keeping it Local

Preparing for the next big storm must be undertaken by planners and policymakers at all levels of government and private enterprise. While large-scale infrastructure improvements and national or state hazard mitigation plans can be helpful, it is critical to focus on smaller scale issues that could endanger individual communities and neighborhoods. This is especially salient when addressing issues in underserved communities. For example, some lower-income neighborhoods in Houston were especially vulnerable because of their open ditch drainage system and their proximity to industrial sites that could potentially contaminate floodwaters. Local issues like this are easy to gloss over at the national level. It is critical for lawmakers and planners to address the issues and concerns of individual communities and neighborhoods while drawing up large-scale mitigation plans.

There is also much to be done at a more regional level. The Texas Department of Transportation is keeping this in mind with long-term infrastructure projects, such as a redesign of highway 45 that will integrate detention ponds and pumps to prevent highway flooding like what occurred during Harvey1. The goal is to prepare for the 100-year storm, which may be insufficient given that Harvey was a 500-year storm and these kinds of events are projected to happen more frequently in the coming years.

Key Takeaways

The storm’s aftermath forced cities all over the country to take a more critical look at their respective infrastructure and hazard mitigation plans. Cities have begun encouraging sustainable development that reduces the negative impacts on natural hydrology and drainage. Changes can also be seen in floodplain development. Building parks and other types of green infrastructure in floodplains prevents substantial losses while benefiting the local community. Buyouts in flood-prone areas becoming more common as well, as cities seek to move people and businesses from high-risk areas. While every storm is different, focusing on local issues as well as city and statewide mitigation plans puts cities in the most resilient position possible. With the negative consequences of climate change unlikely to halt anytime soon2, Houston will need to take an aggressive approach in order to lose its reputation as one of the most flood-prone cities in the United States3. 

Dr. Galen D. Newman is an Associate Professor in the Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning at Texas A&M University (TAMU). At TAMU, he also serves as Associate Department Head, Coordinator of the Bachelor of Science in Urban Planning Program, Associate Director of the Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center, and Discovery Lead for Community Resilience for the Institute for Sustainable Communities. His research interests include urban regeneration, land use science, spatial analytics, community flood resilience, and community/urban scaled design. His current research focuses on the integration of urban regeneration (the reuse of vacant properties in shrinking and growing cities) and urban flood resilience.

About the Author: Wayne Powell is a first year Master’s student specializing in transportation and housing/community development. He is a research assistant with the Center for Urban and Regional studies focusing on accessibility in public transit. He hopes to further his education and career in planning by studying how technology can be used to shape cities and their transportation networks.

  1. Delaughter, Gail. “Flood Control Is A Big Part of A Major Houston Transportation Project.” Houston Public Media, 24 Aug. 2018, www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2018/08/24/301631/flood-control-is-a-big-part-of-a-major-houston-transportation-project/
  2. “IPCC Special Report Global Warming of 1.5ºC.” IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 6 Aug. 2018, www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/ma-p48.shtml.
  3. Satija, Neena. “Boomtown, Flood Town.” Scientific American, Springer Nature American, 8 Dec. 2016, www.scientificamerican.com/article/boomtown-flood-town/.

Featured Image: Cars floating down a flooded street in Houston, Texas. Photo credit: Dominick Del Vecchio, FEMA. 

 

« Older posts
Carolina Planning, the oldest student-run planning publication in the country, is produced once a year in UNC's Department of City and Regional Planning. Articles selected for the journal are written by academics and practitioners, covering a wide range of topics relevant to today’s planning challenges.

Join our announcements list

Email:
Copyright © Carolina Planning, All Rights Reserved

Carolina Planning is published with the generous support of the Department of City and Regional Planning at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the North Carolina Chapter of the American Planning Association, and the John A. Parker Trust.

© 2024 Carolina Planning Journal

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑