Florida is a unique lens through which to view the dilemma of delay and inadequate response by government to the challenges of global warming. On the one hand, there has been plenty of talk about reforming energy conservation in order to limited carbon dioxide emissions. The inconsistencies are plentiful: a kind of massive foot-dragging.
The low hanging fruit is easy stuff: simple steps like government purchase of fleets of higher mileage efficiency cars. But there has been successful resistance by Miami taxi cab companies to do the same. It is no different from the big energy companies like Florida Power and Light who accept common sense measurement of energy efficiencies as a test for whether or not to build new power generating facilities in other states, but not in Florida. Why? Because they can. Because they have the system wired. There is an entire other class of power brokers who also have the system wired, from the adoption of computerized voting machines to votes on the county commission: property rights attorneys and lobbyists representing land speculators. As it happens, they are avid readers of this blog too. (click, 'read more')
In recent months, the mainstream media has started to pick up on the topic: when will local governments stop development of houses and office space and malls in the areas that will be flooded, first, as a result of sea level rise? Another way of putting it: who in government has the guts to say, stop? So far, no one.
The question of government halting zoning and permitting housing in flood plains runs straight up against the preference of property owners to build on the ocean, the bay front, river banks, lake shorelines, and in wetlands. For some, it is the magnificent views. For others, the fact that low lying property is cheap and if you, Mr. Developer, can persuade local government to install flood control infrastructure and water pipes, then you can cheaply convert low lying areas to profits.
That is the growth model of Florida. It is supported by builders associations and Chambers of Commerce across the state. Stopping growth in flood plains is as popular as banning tail gate parties at a college football game. But on the other hand, it is very, very profitable for the land use attorneys and lobbyists who gin fees from conflict.
Indeed the profit motive continues to hold back the United States from engaging in climate change strategies while other nations, from Germany to China to Brazil, are embracing government incentives and building the new energy technology products that we will end up having to import instead of make, here at home.
A reader commented on a recent post, "Politics, ethics, and sea level rise": "An excellent statement but you leave out so much critical information. Sea level rise is not a concern for the future it's been measureable for years and the signs are everywhere. It's just that it's not happening at a rate that puts immediate fear in people."
This is true, despite the thousands of volunteer hours devoted by the Miami Dade Climate Change Advisory Committee and the massive effort of non-profit groups and industry, both, to highlight climate change here and across the nation. Of course, the US Chamber of Commerce is on the other side, espousing the "make money till you drown" point of view. The oil and goal industries continue to spend huge sums to sow doubt and antagonism to government intervention on climate change. And property rights lawyers are getting ready for battle under the banner: "Don't tell me what I can do with my property, until it is under water then I want the government to pay for it."
Our reader writes: "You leave out information from the Keys that provide evidence of continual rise for decades now and you leave out the recent information from The Nature Conservancy (surprising coming from that organization) that details graphically the various predictions of SLR (sea level rise) in the Keys. Studies of the changes wrought by SLR from Upper Sugarloaf Key and Cape Sable could be used to drive home the point that SLR is real, and happening. Other published reports from back in the 1950s detail what was known at the time and the future risks."
You are right: studies from the 1950's predicted impacts from sea level rise on coastal zones. As to "future risks", the entire growth model of Florida-- in which property rights has played an enormous role and influence-- is based on miscalculating risks.
"From both legal and economic standpoints(not to mention private property rights) the impact of SLR (sea level rise) has the potential to overwhelm all else in the coastal US. Discretionary funding now for many things including basic research and science now supporting so many "scientists" and academic types will be very limited and we'll be forced to rely on existing available information to make critical decisions."
This is an interesting point of view: that at some point our budgets for science will become so severely impacted by climate change that we won't be able to afford anything but basic necessities provided by industry and government.
"The legal ramifications are huge and that's why the work at the Vermont Law School is so important, if not way behind the curve. The federal government will be forced to play an active role and force local and state governments to recognize what may be coming, if for no other reason than to minimize the cost to the US taxpayers of inaction."
I'm not sure about this point. When has government been about long-term planning and minimizing the cost to US taxpayers? We have sacrificed public health and the environment on the altar of private profit.
"A very likely scenario and the first serious test in todays new reality is a hurricane rearranging part of Florida's coast and testing government's ability to for once say no to the bad idea of rebuilding in the vulnerable portion of the coastal zone. That is the test we should be preparing for."
This happened, already, in small form in Florida City and Homestead compared to Katrina. After Hurricane Andrew devastated South Dade in 1992, a group of planners offered a vision for rebuilding South Dade to maximize the watershed features and attributes of communities on the edge of two national parks. The local mortgage bankers and pro-business leaders-- like Bob Epling, Bill Losner, and Steve Shiver-- thumbed their noses. The builders' lobbyists and lawyers said, "You can't tell us what to do. It is our property." They rebuilt the Florida City business district on US 1 exactly as it was, except bigger signage and this time they succeeded in getting the US Army Corps to back off and allowed development on small wetlands.
I am all for the Obama administration getting global warming/ property rights litigation into the US Supreme Court ASAP. Why, given the conservative, pro-business, pro-states rights slant of the Court? Because without Court decisions, it is still not clear why the public must support change. The biggest mistake the Clinton White House made in Florida was cutting a deal with the State of Florida on pollution of the Everglades: this big, massive test of environmental sustainability belonged in the US Supreme Court, absent leadership by legislators under the influence of special interests. Instead we have exactly the kind of half-steps and "consensus" based measures, and intimidation of scientists, that we cannot afford in the case of climate change. Ironically, these clashes over environmental law and policies are fruitful sources of compensation for the army of consultants and lobbyists and attorneys involved in the pushing and pulling. That, too, is the American Way.
5 comments:
Here is another piece of information, that may help explain why we have had abnormal flooding at high tides in Miami:
http://www.fsu.edu/news/2009/03/16/sea.level/
Sea level rise due to global warming poses threat to New York City
"Global warming is expected to cause the sea level along the northeastern U.S. coast to rise almost twice as fast as global sea levels during this century, putting New York City at greater risk for damage from hurricanes and winter storm surge, according to a new study led by a Florida State University researcher.
Jianjun Yin, a climate modeler at the Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies (COAPS) at Florida State, said there is a better than 90 percent chance that the sea level rise along this heavily populated coast will exceed the mean global sea level rise by the year 2100. The rising waters in this region — perhaps by as much as 18 inches or more — can be attributed to thermal expansion and the slowing of the North Atlantic Ocean circulation because of warmer ocean surface temperatures."
The model I think will emerge will be this: the US will protect the areas it must protect, and the rest will be left to fend for itself. Thus Katrina, not Andrew, is the right model. Downtown New Orleans was cleaned up, partly because that's where the money was but also partly because there was still value there. There simply will be no more funding for rebuilding certain areas and they will be left to sink under the waves, just as the Louisiana coastline is today. But Miami and NYC will be protected until we can't do it any longer because they are more valuable.
In Florida, this means the Keys will go first, and then some of the barrier beaches. The Keys will end when a hurricane destroys the "new" Overseas Highway bridges. Key West will stick around for a while but it will become a city you need a boat to get to once again.
The barrier beaches we foolishly built atop are a bigger problem. Was in New Smyrna Beach last year and the "beach" part of the name is no longer applicable as it's gone in spots.
All these new "Reefs" will hopefully make for some hollow waves.
m
I didn't want you to feel lonely on another one of your Global Warming rants.
In our kid's lifetime south FL and the Keys will be very different places. It's hard to imagine the legal strife and monetary loss that is going to result, esp following major hurricanes. (Those folks in Key West are pretty greedy.) The Nature Conservancy projections for economic loss in the Keys over the next 50-100 years are extraordinary. Wonder when people will start pulling their investments and money from the Keys??? It's a rising tide with a new moon coming up.
One of the main points that explains the battle that we are fighting between scientific revelations that Florida is (again) likely to be under water someday (soon), and the forces of the past (interest groups, oil industry, property right advocates,etc.) is grounded in the form of capitalism, and the business models that are at the origins of this country's success and domination of other nations economically and in the use of war power. Private interest have been encouraged to prevail over general or common interests (The Monopoly game type of approach). So, it is a whole mentality that is prevalent sociologically that will have to change (progressively) before any real results are noticed on a grand scale. What we see is the beginning of the decline of the US, whether you like to read this or not. Where is our Superman?
Post a Comment