Cost of inaction on climate change is too high

The commentary below offers some concrete steps required to address the damage caused by global warming and highlights the costs. In addition, we need to reduce our carbon production to prevent more devastating changes.

That includes aggressive support for alternatives, as well as energy efficiency.  Working together, this can easily be accomplished.

 

We can no longer ignore Global Warming.


  JOANN FITZPATRICK: Cost of inaction on climate change is too high

Photos

Part of a home rests upside-down in Seaside Heights, N.J. on Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2012 after superstorm Sandy made landfall in New Jersey on Monday evening. The rest of the home sat away from its original spot an in the middle of a street. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

COMMENTARY —

Hurricane Sandy’s force was horrific but its timing was impeccable. The storm arrived as the country was exhausted from the presidential campaign and racing toward the now-famous fiscal cliff.

To those who think we can continue operating in a 20th century mindset, Sandy was a devastating warning. We cannot continue paying for storm cleanup and restoration without taking preventive measures. We cannot continue building and rebuilding in places where water and wind damage is predictable.

The cost of these disasters is borne by all of us; the billions set aside annually for federal disaster aid are now being used up on a regular basis. And the federal flood insurance program – which heavily subsidizes home insurance for those in danger zones – had a soaring deficit before a single Sandy claim was received.

Even if one chooses not to accept climate change as factual, weather-related calamities since 2000 are cause for alarm. Where floods were expected every few years along the Mississippi, Missouri and other rivers, as well as the Gulf Coast, they now occur annually in some areas and are happening where they aren’t expected – Vermont a year ago, New Jersey and New York this year. In the West, forest fires are now more commonplace and far more widespread.

Hurricane Sandy can and should help shape the debate over federal spending that begins with the fiscal-cliff deadline. Unless Congress reaches some agreement on taxes and spending before Dec. 31, automatic spending cuts and tax increases will be triggered. The hope among rational lawmakers is that resolving the fiscal cliff dilemma will lead to thoughtful reform of the tax code and government programs.

This is what the presidential debate – in the moments when it went beyond slogans – was all about. If compromise for the good of the country can be achieved, it must start with a vision for the future that is radically different from the past. The focus should be on planning for the future rather than lurching from one crisis to the next.

When a neighborhood disappears because of water, tornado, fire or other destructive forces beyond an individual’s control, no one cares how big the deficit is: The government is supposed to fix it. But the size and cost of recent storms make it unaffordable to rely on repair and restoration instead of concentrating on preventing future financial disasters. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo pegs the cost of repairs in New York at $42 billion, $30 billion in New York City alone. And New Jersey’s bill is estimated to be $36.8 billion. You know these numbers will go higher. By contrast, the estimate for creating a system of barriers and dikes to protect New York City from a future Sandy is $15 billion to $27 billion. It would be insane not to begin making that investment now.

This is not a futuristic idea: Stamford, Ct., has a 17-foot high hurricane barrier that saved the city from major damage from Sandy. Providence built a hurricane barrier in the 1960s.

Sandy caused problems familiar to Massachusetts residents from Plymouth to Hull and Plum Island and coastal towns in between. Time and successive storms have reduced the breadth of beaches, caused higher ground to disappear and sea walls to buckle or collapse. The predictable response is for the town, the state or federal government – or a combination of the three – to dredge ocean sand and replenish the beach, rebuild the sea wall yet again and tell people it’s fine to build another home near the water.

The debate over this response is not new but typically beachgoers and owners of shore property win out.

Housing codes also need to be changed. After Hurricane Hugo in South Florida in 1992, that beach-crazy area established stiff codes to move homes above the level at which a storm could wash them away. Federal officials have recommended that all new or rebuilt homes in flood-prone areas be built high enough to protect against storm surge but their sound ideas are largely ignored.

We thought New Orleans was costly, until Sandy came along. Another storm is certain to happen. Mother Nature will always be in control but failure to take action to curb her menace is reckless.

What better time for politicians and taxpayers to revise their attitudes about disasters than while facing a fiscal cliff?

JoAnn Fitzpatrick may be reached at joannftzptrck@yahoo.com.

Joann Fitzpatrick

Joann Fitzpatrick was an editorial writer at the Ledger for 20 years before she retired in 2006. Before that she worked for the Associated Press in Boston, and Reuters and UPI in Washington. She was also a legislative assistant to the Massachusetts welfare commissioner and public affairs director for the state Department of Mental Health. A graduate of Boston University, Fitzpatrick holds a master's degree from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. Read more of her columns. E-mail her. Leave a comment at the end of the column or CLICK to write a letter to the editor.

Read more: http://www.patriotledger.com/topstories/x459327204/JOANN-FITZPATRICK-The-cost-of-doing-nothing-is-too-high-a-price-top-pay#ixzz2DoHj8bcG