    [Senate Hearing 115-67]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 115-67

                     EXTREME WEATHER AND COASTAL FLOODING:
                       WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW, WHAT IS THE
                           FUTURE RISK, AND WHAT CAN
                                WE DO ABOUT IT?

    =======================================================================

                                 FIELD HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                             COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                          SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 APRIL 10, 2017

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
                                 Transportation

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    26-599 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2017

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

           SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                       JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
    ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
    ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
    DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
    JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               TOM UDALL, New Mexico
    MIKE LEE, Utah                       GARY PETERS, Michigan
    RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
    CORY GARDNER, Colorado               MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
    TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
                           Nick Rossi, Staff Director
                     Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
                        Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
                     Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
                  Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
                          Renae Black, Senior Counsel

                               C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on April 10, 2017...................................     1
    Statement of Senator Nelson......................................     1

                                   Witnesses

    Hon. Ted Deutch, U.S. Representative from Florida................     4
    Hon. Jeri Muoio, Mayor, West Palm Beach, Florida.................     5
    Hon. Paulette Burdick, Mayor, Palm Beach County, Florida.........     7
    Ben Kirtman, Ph.D., Director, Cooperative Institute for Marine
      and Atmospheric Sciences, and Director, Center for
      Computational Science, Climate, and Environmental Hazards,
      University of Miami............................................     9
        Prepared statement...........................................    10
    Leonard ``Len'' Berry, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor, Geosciences,
      Florida Atlantic University, and Vice President, Government
      Programs, Coastal Risk Consulting, LLC.........................    19
        Prepared statement...........................................    20
    Carl G. Hedde, CPCU, Head, Risk Accumulation Department, Munich
      Reinsurance America Inc........................................    35
        Prepared statement...........................................    36
    Dr. Jennifer L. Jurado, Chief Resilience Officer and Director,
      Environmental Planning and Community Resilience Division,
      Broward County, Florida........................................    39
        Prepared statement...........................................    41

                                    Appendix

    Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to:
        Ben Kirtman, Ph.D............................................    55
        Leonard ``Len'' Berry, Ph.D..................................    55
        Carl G. Hedde................................................    56
        Dr. Jennifer Jurado..........................................    57

                          EXTREME WEATHER AND COASTAL
                          FLOODING: WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW
                            WHAT IS THE FUTURE RISK,
                          AND WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?

                                  ----------

                             MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
            Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                   West Palm Beach, FL.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:38 p.m., City
    of West Palm Beach Commission Chambers, 401 Clematis Street,
    West Palm Beach, Florida, Hon. Bill Nelson presiding.
        Present: Senator Nelson [presiding].

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Nelson. The meeting of the Senate Committee on
    Commerce, Science, and Transportation will come to order.
        This is a field hearing that is being held by the Senate
    Committee. We have had these kinds of field hearings many times
    before, but on the subject of the day, extreme weather and
    coastal flooding--in other words, sea-level rise and climate
    change--we had an identical hearing 3 years ago in what was
    then ground zero in Miami Beach. And so this record will be
    compiled with the other records of the Committee that are
    occurring in Washington on this topic that we will be hearing
    our witnesses discuss today.
        I want to welcome all of you.
        If we may first have Reverend Gerald Kisner of Tabernacle
    Missionary Baptist Church, if he will give us our Invocation?
        Reverend Kisner. Thank you, Senator and Mayor. Let us pray.
        God of Creation, Creator, again, we come into your divine
    and magnificence presence. First of all, thank you for the
    lifegiving force that you give to each and every one of us. We
    thank you that you are a God of creation. We pray, Lord, even
    as these deliberations and these testimonies are lifted up,
    that all will be done to help maintain our job as the
    custodians of your creation, be with all, that we might do the
    thing that is pleasing in thine sight. And, Lord, as always, we
    will be careful to thank you. We lift up this prayer, the only
    one that matters. Amen.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Reverend Kisner.
        Now, we have a treat. For our Pledge of Allegiance, we have
    students from The Greene School, and they are going to come up
    and lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
        So, students, if you can come up?
        [Pledge of Allegiance.]
        Senator Nelson. Thank you so much.
        Thank you to everybody for coming. This is an extraordinary
    turnout. There is obviously a lot of interest in the subject
    matter, and we appreciate so much your being here. I want to
    welcome you, as I said, to an official meeting of the Commerce,
    Science, and Transportation Committee. We are doing this
    because we sit at ground zero of the impacts of climate change
    in the U.S.
        While there are still some who continue to deny that
    climate change is real, South Florida offers proof that it is
    real and it is an issue we are going to have to confront in the
    decades ahead. All of us here today know that Florida is
    particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. We
    have over 1,200 miles of coastline, more than any other state
    in the continental U.S., and over three-quarters of our state's
    residents live in coastal areas.
        Florida is also quite flat. The highest point in the
    peninsula of Florida is in the center of the state near Lake
    Wales at Bok Tower, and it is only 345 feet high.
        Our communities are already experiencing regular, nuisance
    flooding, especially during the king tides.
        You can see a photograph taken in Miami Beach in 2015. Here
    is a gentleman trying to walk across the street. That is just a
    year and a half ago. Obviously, the floodwater there reaches
    above the curb. And it has gotten so extreme that, if you look
    at this photograph, you will see the sea creatures are showing
    up in bizarre places. Here is an octopus in a parking garage.
        The National Academy of Sciences found that 67 percent of
    the nuisance floods in the U.S. are being driven by human-
    caused global sea-level rise. In Miami Beach, tide-induced
    flooding has increased by more than 400 percent in the last
    decade. In southeast Florida, sea-level rise has tripled since
    2006.
        The resulting impacts of coastal flooding, saltwater
    intrusion, storm surge, and land erosion on the Florida coast
    has prompted local governments to act. And that is one of the
    reasons we wanted to bring a field hearing of the Commerce
    Committee here to South Florida, because you will be hearing
    from some of those local governments.
        Here in Palm Beach County, more than 20 acres of beach and
    sand dunes had to be restored following Hurricane Sandy to
    better protect shoreside communities from flooding and severe
    weather.
        Observations such as these--not models, not projections,
    but data--tell us that the average global sea-level rise is
    happening.
        We had a NASA scientist 3 years ago in Miami Beach. You may
    have read about this scientist, because he was the scientist
    who was also an astronaut, and he worked until his last moment
    that he could function, since he had incurable pancreatic
    cancer. He testified 3 years ago that measurements--that is not
    forecast, that is not projections--measurements over the last
    40 years were showing 5 inches to 8 inches in South Florida of
    sea-level rise.
        So the rising ocean temperatures also have been linked to
    increasing hurricane activity and intensity as hurricanes draw
    more energy from the warm water.
        Now you wonder, why is all of this happening? As we emit
    more and more greenhouse gas, specifically carbon dioxide,
    CO2, and, in some cases, sulfur dioxide,
    SO2, and those gases rise, they create in the upper
    atmosphere the greenhouse effect.
        So if you are familiar with a greenhouse, it has a ceiling
    of glass. It lets in the sunlight but then it traps the heat,
    thus a greenhouse. So too, without the pollutants in the upper
    atmosphere, the sun's rays would come and reflect off of the
    Earth. Some of the heat would be retained but a lot of them
    radiate back out into space. When you put a ceiling up there, a
    ceiling of CO2 and SO2, it acts like a
    greenhouse glass top. It traps the heat from radiating out into
    space and, thus, starts to heat the Earth.
        Two-thirds of the Earth is covered with water. What happens
    to water when it heats up? It expands. And, thus, you see the
    phenomenon that is happening in this country.
        In 2016 alone, there were 15 weather and climate disaster
    events that caused over $1 billion in damage each and resulted
    in 138 deaths across the country. In the first three months of
    this year, there have been five more events with losses
    exceeding $1 billion. These included a flood, a freeze, and
    three severe storms. Five is the largest number of billion-
    dollar events for January to March ever recorded.
        Sea-level rise will worsen the issue by creating deeper
    waters near shore, causing higher waves and stronger storm
    surges, especially during hurricanes. This is especially
    concerning considering that 79 percent of Florida's economy is
    generated in coastal communities, and over $130 billion in
    beach real estate is at risk.
        So what can we do about it? Well, first, we need to be
    clear about the facts that are presented to the public and
    fight against the political censorship of our climate
    scientists and their data. If a doctor were barred from using
    the word ``cancer,'' he or she cannot do his job. The same is
    true with scientists and the work that they do to understand
    and educate the public about the Earth's increasing fever.
        Now if you think I am kidding, I want you to know that I
    have gone out to some of the agencies of the Federal Government
    and they are being warned not to use the term ``climate
    change.'' And of course, we have had our own experience here in
    the state of Florida by a similar message being given by the
    Administration in this state to State employees of not using
    the term ``climate change.''
        So at the end of the day, what we have to do is limit the
    greenhouse gas emissions, but we must also create more
    resilient communities. And I want to take the opportunity to
    applaud, to really congratulate and to thank and to applaud
    Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and Monroe counties for their
    work on the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact
    and the City of Punta Gorda on the West Coast and the City of
    Satellite Beach further north on the East Coast for their sea-
    level rise adaptation planning and their efforts to become more
    resilient communities.
        And I know that they will keep up this work, and I hope
    that others will follow their lead. And I believe that, at the
    Federal level, we should be providing more tools to these
    communities, not less.
        Now, lest you think that we are all in a period of partisan
    warfare and ideological extremism, which someone could conclude
    that by watching the news, I want you to know that, in the past
    two weeks, I have had two separate conversations with Vice
    President Pence on trying to get a bipartisan infrastructure
    bill going. Of course, the infrastructure that you will hear
    about in Miami Beach and the South Florida compact is extremely
    expensive infrastructure. Miami Beach has already spent
    millions and millions of dollars on the big, big pumps to get
    that water out of the streets when it comes, and to raise the
    level of the streets.
        So, before I introduce the distinguished panel, I want to
    turn to our colleagues here, and I want to hear from them.
    Before I do, let me introduce the elected officials that are
    here in the audience. Hold your applause, please.
        If you all will stand and remain standing, we can recognize
    you all at once.
        County Commissioner Melissa McKinlay of Palm Beach County;
    Martin County Commissioner Doug Smith; Martin County
    Commissioner Ed Fielding; Mayor of the Town of Palm Beach, Gail
    Coniglio--thank you, Mayor; Riviera Beach Councilwoman Dawn
    Pardo; Kim Ciklin, representing County Commissioner Hal
    Valeche; Marian Dozier, representing State Senator Bobby
    Powell; Charity Lewis, representing Congresswoman Lois Frankel;
    Jervonte Edmonds, representing Florida House Representative Al
    Jacquet; West Palm Beach Commissioner Materio; Congressman
    Hastings being represented by Dan Liftman; County Commissioner
    Dave Kerner, I think Danna White is representing him; and Lori
    Berman, our State Representative.
        Now let's welcome them.
        [Applause.]
        Senator Nelson. All right, we have a star-studded panel up
    here. I want you to know that I, as is appropriate and
    respectful, even though I am the only Senator here from the
    Commerce Committee, I invited the entire Congressional
    delegation from South Florida, Republicans and Democrats. And
    for one reason or another, and I make no inferences here--this
    is the Easter recess and Passover starts tonight at sundown. So
    there were a number of folks that just simply could not be
    here.
        But I am very pleased that one of the South Florida
    delegation, Congressman Ted Deutch, is here.
        So, Congressman, your opening comments?

                     STATEMENT OF HON. TED DEUTCH,
                    U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA

        Mr. Deutch. Thanks very much, Senator Nelson. I will be
    heading out as soon as this is over to help prepare matzo ball
    soup.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Deutch. I really appreciate your holding this hearing
    here in Palm Beach County. Climate change and coastal flooding
    is not a threat to our future in South Florida. It is, as you
    know, a threat today.
        The challenges require immediate action. I want to thank
    you for bringing us together for this critical hearing.
        I also want to thank our witnesses, the private sector, the
    public sector, universities all well represented here and speak
    to the kind of broad-based approach that we are taking here in
    South Florida and nationally.
        Recently, NOAA confirmed that 2016 was the warmest year on
    record, something that we have heard but need to do something
    about.
        Rising sea levels and coastal flooding are forcing real
    estate lenders to consider sea-level rise before issuing 30-
    year mortgages. Recent studies have predicted that one million
    Florida homes will be underwater by the year 2100 if we do not
    act. That translates to one in 8 homes, which would take a
    devastating toll on the real estate market, $413 billion in
    losses, if we do not take this seriously.
        In South Florida, we have sea-level rises 10 times the
    global rate. Our porous limestone peninsula fills with water
    that floods homes and spills over seawalls. The king tides, as
    you pointed out, Senator, are bringing floodwaters into our
    streets on sunny days each year.
        And that is why this area is so important. We have to be
    prepared with mitigation plans and investments in adaptation.
        And our local leaders cannot do it alone. Reducing the
    impact of climate change is going to require interaction at a
    serious level between Federal, State, local, and the private
    sectors to rise above those challenges to find common ground.
        That is why, last year, in the House, we founded a
    bipartisan climate solution caucus, which is a first of its
    kind in Congress. We are focused on building our bipartisan
    membership. We have a good showing already from Florida
    Congressman Ros-Lehtinen; Congressman Mast; Congressman Crist;
    Carlos Curbelo, the Congressman from Miami-Dade, who is my Co-
    Chair; and there are lots of other Members who are anxiously
    waiting to get on, but can only join when a Democrat and a
    Republican join together.
        In total, we have pulled 38 Members thus far aboard evenly
    split. Seventeen states are represented from diverse regions,
    each reflecting the varied challenges presented by climate
    change.
        This hearing today gives us the opportunity to explore
    these issues in a very public way to make a record, Senator
    Nelson, that we are grateful that you will make and take back
    to Washington to share with your fellow members of the Commerce
    Committee so that, hopefully, we can start to see the sort of
    coming together that is necessary, and that is starting today
    here, thanks to you.
        I appreciate it very much. Thanks, Senator Nelson.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Congressman.
        We are here at the kind invitation of the City of Palm
    Beach, and we are so pleased that you could join us, Mayor Jeri
    Muoio.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JERI MUOIO, MAYOR,
                        WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA

        Ms. Muoio. Thank you, Senator. We are so happy to have you
    here in West Palm Beach. I just wanted to say that, in West
    Palm Beach, we say the words ``climate change,'' and we say
    them frequently. We are very active. And I want to thank you
    for being here, first of all, and for holding this hearing.
        I want to welcome our witnesses and, of course, welcome all
    the guests who are here this afternoon who have undertaken
    this.
        In West Palm Beach, it has been very clear to us that
    climate change is occurring. We see it happening.
        And I want to thank you, Senator Nelson, for very clearly
    explaining why we are seeing sea-level rise and why this is
    happening in our coastal regions.
        What I would like to do is just take a couple minutes to
    talk about some of the things that we have done here in West
    Palm Beach.
        We have had a sustainability action plan since 2008, and we
    have been working on that. We have these green bottles here
    that say, ``Rethink Paradise.'' That is the title of our
    sustainability action plan. Penni Redford, who is the Manager
    of the Mayor's Office for Sustainability, she and I had the
    opportunity to go to Paris to attend the COP 21 meetings and to
    urge national leaders to commit to addressing climate change
    and making sure that there is a lowering of our temperature by
    a significant portion.
        We have committed to that. I hope the United States will
    remain committed to it.
        Here in West Palm Beach, we have committed to Net Zero by
    2050. We have already begun to decrease our carbon emissions
    and have made a significant difference in that.
        We have also pledged, by 2025, to turn over our fleet to
    non-fossil-fuel, and we are working on that diligently. It is
    not all that easy because there are not a lot of options out
    there for vehicles.
        We have a storm water master plan that we are working on
    that is going to make a significant difference in how we manage
    storm water. We are already seeing storm water intrusion on
    Flagler Drive, especially during king tide and when we have
    water events, rain events. It really will make a big
    difference.
        Our city has committed to a Global Covenant of Mayors for
    Climate & Energy, the world's largest cooperative effort among
    mayors and city officials.
        So we are very proud of that. And one of the things we are
    most proud of is that we were recently awarded a four-star
    rating by the Star Community Rating System. We are the only
    city in Florida to have achieved a four-star rating, and only a
    handful of cities in the country have achieved a five-star
    rating, so we are working on that diligently.
        We have adopted new green building requirements, because we
    are going to have to address sea-level rise. We are talking
    about freeboarding. We are talking about alternative fuels as
    part of our Energy Secure Cities Coalition. We are moving
    forward with making sure that West Palm Beach is going to be a
    sustainable city as well as a resilient city.
        So thank you for being here. We are very proud and honored
    that you chose to be here, and I am looking forward to hearing
    the testimony this afternoon.
        Thank you.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
        And we are delighted to be here in Palm Beach County, and
    we have our County Mayor with us, Paulette Burdick, to share
    with us.

              STATEMENT OF HON. PAULETTE BURDICK, MAYOR,
                       PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

        Ms. Burdick. Good afternoon, Senator. Welcome to Palm Beach
    County. As Mayor of the County, we are pleased and honored that
    you chose West Palm Beach, which is one of our cities in Palm
    Beach County, as your location to hold the U.S. Senate Commerce
    Committee field hearing on extreme weather and coastal
    flooding. We are honored to have our Congressman Deutch here.
    And it is always a delight to be with my mayor, Mayor Muoio.
        Climate change has been characterized as the most profound
    threat to our national security and our country's continued
    prosperity. It does create instability in our economy through
    longer droughts and flooding. It harms our citizens' health
    through more frequent heat waves and air pollution. And it
    destabilizes our infrastructure through sea-level rise and
    extreme weather events.
        As these conditions become our Nation's new norm, our
    collective response should be to strengthen critically
    important U.S. climate policies, including the Clean Power Plan
    and vehicle fuel efficiency standards, not proposing budget
    cuts to the EPA and crucial Federal programs like Energy Star.
        The county is committed to improving the resilience of our
    communities both regionally and locally. As a charter member of
    the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact, a
    regional collaborative model to reduce carbon emissions, adapt
    to climate impacts, and build resilient communities, we strive
    to address the impacts of climate change, including sea-level
    rise, through regional collaboration and local action.
        In the past 8 years, the climate compact has fostered
    close, cooperative relationships with Palm Beach, Broward,
    Miami-Dade, and Monroe counties, and our local municipalities.
        Locally, Palm Beach County continues its effort to adapt to
    and mitigate the impacts of climate change. We are
    incorporating resilience and sustainability measures in our
    capital projects, curbing greenhouse gases through reducing
    soft costs for solar heating systems and tracking energy use,
    and by strengthening relationships with businesses and
    addressing economic benefits of resiliency in our community.
        Politicizing science erodes one of the main hallmarks of
    our great country, the celebration of our ingenuity and the
    ability to transform insurmountable hurdles into advantageous
    opportunities. We urge the Senate Commerce Committee and its
    counterpart in the House to increase rather than eliminate
    local support, regional and national efforts to protect our
    businesses and our citizens from climate change, which
    continues to be documented and proven by the international
    community of scientists.
        I call upon you to continue to provide the critical
    leadership needed on the global climate stage so the gains
    achieved over the past few years are not lost.
        And on behalf of all of us here in Florida, thank you for
    your leadership and being with us here today.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mayor.
        Okay, our distinguished panel, your written remarks will be
    included as part of the official record. What I would like you
    to do is to summarize your remarks and try to keep it within
    less than 5 minutes.
        Dr. Ben Kirtman is the Director of the Center for
    Computational Science, and Climate and Environmental Hazards at
    the University of Miami--this is Dr. Kirtman over here--as well
    as the Director of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
    Administration's Cooperative Institute for Marine and
    Atmospheric Sciences. Dr. Kirtman is a professor in the
    Division of Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at UM's
    Rosenstiel School for Marine and Atmospheric Science, and is
    the Executive Editor of the scientific journal Climate
    Dynamics.
        How do you have time for all this?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Nelson. His research focuses on predicting climate
    change in the short and long term, and how much of that change
    can be attributed to humans.
        Then we are going to hear from Dr. Leonard Berry. He is
    Professor Emeritus of Geosciences at Florida Atlantic, and he
    serves as a consultant to Coastal Risk Consulting, a Florida
    company that assesses climate risk to properties. He is also
    providing consulting services to communities who wish to
    relocate power infrastructure to avoid those risks.
        Mr. Carl Hedde is the Senior Vice President and the Head of
    Risk Accumulation for Munich Reinsurance Company of America.
    Mr. Hedde oversees corporate accumulation issues, including use
    of catastrophic risk models, climate catastrophic risk
    consulting services, and portfolio management and optimization.
    Additionally, he manages a group of scientists that provide
    expert and research capabilities to Munich Reinsurance Company
    of America and its clients.
        By the way, if you are confused, you do not hear a lot of
    insurance companies come out and chronicle this, though
    reinsurance companies do, because they see the long-term risk
    whereas the insurance companies are usually just setting their
    rates on the basis of 1 to 3 years in the future, not the
    reinsurance companies. That is why we have Mr. Hedde here
    today.
        Then, Dr. Jennifer Jurado, she is the Chief Resiliency
    Officer as well as the Director of the Environmental Planning
    and Community Resilience Division of Broward County. Dr. Jurado
    serves as the county's primary representative coordinating with
    regency and agency partners--and we want you to tell us about
    the South Florida compact--and public and private stakeholders
    to advance the planning and infrastructure investments.
        Dr. Jurado was on the President's Task Force on Climate
    Preparedness and was recognized in 2013 by the White House as a
    Champion of Change for her leadership on climate resilience.
    She was integral in drafting the compact, which she is going to
    tell us about.
        So thank you all for being here. Let's just start in the
    order that I introduced you.
        Dr. Kirtman.

               STATEMENT OF BEN KIRTMAN, Ph.D., DIRECTOR,

            COOPERATIVE INSTITUTE FOR MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC

                SCIENCES, AND DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR

     COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE, CLIMATE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AT
                        THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

        Dr. Kirtman. Senator Nelson, Congressman Deutch,
    distinguished Mayors, distinguished elected officials, thank
    you for this opportunity to share what I think are really
    important problems in climate change and climate variability.
    As a Floridian, I am particularly grateful for the Committee's
    focus on this matter as it hits very close to home for many of
    us.
        First of all, as a scientist, my goal is to understand how
    the Earth system works and how to predict its evolution into
    the future. As a weather and climate scientist, it is my hope
    that policymakers will utilize the best available science to
    save lives, protect property, and enable economic opportunity,
    and secure our national defense.
        What I want to do today is I want to tell you a little bit
    about the best available science that we have on climate change
    and how that affects Florida regionally. As part of that
    process, I want to have a mantra that sits in the background,
    and this is from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
    That mantra is ``multiple lines of evidence.''
        So I am going to show you a few figures, and they are going
    to be very overwhelming. That is on purpose. There are going to
    be tons and tons of curves, and I am not going to explain each
    individual curve. But I want to hit hard on this mantra of
    multiple lines of evidence.
        Let's first start out with the fact that Senator Nelson has
    already given us, and that is that CO2 and methane
    affect global atmospheric temperatures. That is a fact. Over
    the last 800,000 years, up until about 3,000 years,
    CO2 levels have oscillated between 180 parts per
    million and 280 parts per million--180 to 280. Those
    oscillations took on the order of 10,000 to 40,000 years.
        The current levels of CO2 are 405. That jump
    from 280 to 405 took less than 200 years--less than 200 years.
    Something is out of balance.
        What I show here on the panel is our instrument record, our
    modern instrument record, and you can see there are a number of
    different fields there. They have different curves and
    different data sets. These are disparate scientists using
    different instruments to collect this data and to analyze the
    data. And it is different fields. One might be Arctic sea ice
    in the summer. One might be sea surface temperatures. One is
    sea-level rise.
        Multiple lines of evidence all point to the same thing, all
    point to the same thing, that our climate system is out of
    balance, and it has warmed, 100 percent confidence, since the
    1950s.
        I want to pause a moment to talk about sea level because
    this is important. This is really important. That top panel
    shows sea-level rise estimates from the previous 2,000 years up
    until about 1900, or maybe 1700--2,000 years.
        What you notice in that top panel is there is no change in
    sea level. The sea level is remarkably stable. When you look
    more recently in the other two panels to the left, what do you
    see? You see over the modern instrument record, a rapid
    increase in sea level globally. That is due to human
    activities.
        The panel on the right, that is flooding in Miami Beach.
    These are based on insurance claims and anecdotal evidence but
    also data. What you can see is the rate of flooding has
    steadily increased over that record.
        So these are clear, unequivocal indicators, 95 percent to
    100 percent certainty--scientists are always a little bit
    conservative--95 percent to 100 percent certainty that the
    climate system has warmed and the sea level has risen since the
    1950s, and that is due to human activities.
        How do we know it is due to human activities? You can
    analyze the data very carefully. What this is is a very, very
    careful analysis of the global temperature records. And you can
    see we can contribute it to El Nino, which we just had. We can
    attribute it to sunspot cycles. We can attribute it to all
    kinds of things. Volcanoes.
        The one thing that jumps off the page is the one in the
    black oval. That is human activity. The bulk of the temperature
    rise we have seen since the 1950s is due to human activities.
        We do the same thing with our model that is in the right-
    side panel. We take out the volcanoes. We take out the
    CO2. We are unable to reproduce the temperature
    record in the 20th century without the anthropogenic greenhouse
    gases.
        Again, multiple lines of evidence all pointing to the same
    thing.
        The last slide, the regional change is difficult, it is a
    very difficult problem, and that is because the natural
    variability is large. It requires very careful calculations.
    But the panels on the right are showing the near-term future.
    We have every reason to believe that the current trends that we
    are seeing are going to continue.
        In fact, there is compounding evidence that the current
    trends are going to continue. There is no credible science
    whatsoever that the trends we see today are going to reverse
    themselves.
        So even if you want to be skeptical about human activities
    affecting climate change, for the next 25 to 50 years, there is
    no evidence that those trends will reverse.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Kirtman follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Ben Kirtman, Ph.D., Professor, University of
    Miami--Rosenstiel School for Marine and Atmospheric Science; Director,
       Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies; Program
          Director for Climate and Environmental Hazards, Center for
                             Computational Science
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Nelson, distinguished members of the
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and
    members of the House of Representatives, thank you for this opportunity
    to come before you today and share my thoughts regarding climate
    variability and climate change, and how this affects Florida.
        I've been a climate scientist for about 25 years, having received
    my Ph.D. in 1992. Ten years ago, I joined the University of Miami
    Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science as a Professor of
    meteorology and physical oceanography and in 2016 was appointed as the
    Director of the Cooperative Institute of Marine and Atmospheric
    Studies. I use complex earth system models and the most sophisticated
    supercomputers throughout the United States to investigate the
    predictability of the climate system on time scales from days-to-
    decades.
        I served as a coordinating lead author for the Intergovernmental
    Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) working group one--the Scientific Basis
    and have chaired several national and international scientific panels
    and working groups. I'm an Executive Editor of Climate Dynamics and an
    Associate Editor of the American Geophysical Union Journal of
    Geophysical Research (Atmospheres). I have received research grants
    from the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, NOAA, NASA,
    and the Office of Naval Research, and I lead the North American Multi-
    Model Ensemble Prediction (NMME) Experiment. I'm the author and/or
    coauthor of over 120 peer reviewed papers focused on understanding and
    predicting climate variability on time scales from days to decades.
        And as a Floridian, I am grateful for the Committee's focus on a
    matter that hits very close to home for many of us in this room.
        First and foremost, as a scientist my goal is to understand how the
    earth system works and how to predict its evolution into the future. As
    weather and climate scientists, it is our hope that policy makers will
    be able to utilize the best available science to help: (1) save lives,
    (2) protect property, (3) enable economic opportunity and (4) secure
    our national defense.
        My testimony will summarize the current state-of-the-science in
    climate variability and change on a global scale, and how these global
    drivers affect the local Florida environment. The over-arching key
    points are summarized below, and the remaining text goes into further
    detail with data and figures. Much of the material included here is
    from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th
    Assessment Report (AR5, Stocker et al., 2013; Kirtman et al., 2013),
    which assesses our current scientific understanding of climate change.
    It is important to understand that any robust conclusions in the IPCC
    assessment report require: (i) multiple disparate lines of evidence and
    (ii) quantitative estimates of uncertainty. This assessment process
    summarizes the best available science.
    The Science: Global Climate Drivers of Regional Change
        (i) CO2 levels in the atmosphere affect global
    temperatures.
        (ii) During the last 800,000 years (excluding the modern era; 1900-
    present), CO2 levels in the atmosphere have ranged from
    about 180 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to about 280 ppmv. The
    oscillations were between 180 and 280 ppmv; these changes took
    approximately 10,000 to 40,000 years to occur. Current CO2
    levels are about 405 ppmv and the increase from 280 to 405 ppmv took
    less than 150 years (see Fig. 1). This rapid increase in CO2
    is unprecedented in any observational estimate.
        (iii) Since the 1950s the climate system has warmed and it is 100
    percent unequivocal (see Fig. 2). There are robust multiple lines of
    evidence--multiple studies that involve different observational
    instruments that measure different components of the climate system--
    that support this conclusion.
        (iv) The bulk of the warming since the 1950s is extremely likely
    (95-100 percent certainty) due to human activities (i.e., increases in
    CO2 levels associated with the consumption of fossil fuels;
    see Fig. 3 and Fig. 4).
        (v) Given its importance in Florida, sea level merits special
    attention. Paleo sea level data from the last 3000 years, until
    approximately 1900, has been remarkably stable; there has been little
    change in the global mean. However, since about 1900 global mean sea
    level has steadily risen consistent with the warming seen (Fig. 5).
        (vi) Regional climate changes are more difficult to assess. This is
    because the natural variability tends to be larger on the local scale,
    and this makes it more challenging to isolate the anthropogenic signal.
    Nevertheless, regional changes in temperature through out much of the
    U.S. show a pronounced warming trend (see Fig. 6).
        (vii) There is evidence that at regional scales along the eastern
    U.S., and in Florida in particular, the sea level rise is accelerating
    (see Fig. 7).
        (viii) There is no compelling scientific evidence that any of the
    trends that we currently see are going to reverse themselves. There is,
    however, compelling evidence that the current trends will continue for
    at least the next 25 years, and there is even some evidence that
    particular trends may accelerate. Even if one is skeptical that human
    activities are the cause of these trends, there is a clear local need
    to protect lives and property, and ensure economic opportunity in
    response to changes we see today. Robust, well-calibrated,
    scientifically based predictions of the next 25 years and beyond (see
    Fig. 8) are the first step in developing effective adaptation
    strategies and to capitalize on the associated economic opportunities.
        (ix) Florida is well positioned to respond to the challenges and
    opportunities associated with climate change. The academic community
    has established the Florida Climate Institute (FCI; https://
    floridaclimateinstitute.org). The Florida Climate Institute (FCI)
    fosters interdisciplinary research, education, and extension to:
    Improve our understanding and the impact of climate variability,
    climate change, and sea level rise on the economy, ecosystems, and
    human-built systems; Develop technologies and information for creating
    opportunities and policies that reduce economic and environmental
    risks; and Engage society in research, extension and education programs
    for enhancing adaptive capacity and responses to associated climatic
    risks. We collaborate with the local, state, and Federal Government to
    address our most pressing adaptation problems.
        (x) The process of challenging the conventional wisdom is a
    critical component of how robust science progresses. We should always
    be respectful of differing perspectives, accounting for new information
    and ideas and then test them through the scientific method. This is how
    science works, this is how we find fact. When it comes to policy, I
    would just ask that policy makers take into account the best available
    science. When it comes to climate change, the scientific consensus is
    not cavalier, it is prudent and conservative, and is the best available
    science.
    Basic Global Climate Change
        Figure 1 shows 800,000 years of CO2 and temperature from
    ice core records from Vostok, Antarctica. The temperature near the
    South Pole has varied by as much as 20+F (11+C) during the past 800,000
    years. The cyclical pattern of temperature variations constitutes the
    ice age/interglacial cycles. During these cycles, changes in carbon
    dioxide concentrations (in purple) track closely with changes in
    temperature (in blue), with CO2 lagging behind temperature
    changes. Because it takes a while for snow to compress into ice, ice
    core data are not yet available much beyond the 18th century at most
    locations. However, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, as measured in
    air, are higher today than at any time during the past 800,000 years.
    Source: National Research Council (https://nas-sites.org/
    americasclimatechoices/more
    resources-on-climate-change/climate-change-lines-of-evidence-booklet/
    evidence-impacts-andchoices-figure-gallery/figure-14/).
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Source 1 for top image: Luthi, D., M. Le Floch, B. Bereiter, T.
    Blunier, J.-M. Barnola, U. Siegenthaler, D. Raynaud, J. Jouzel, H.
    Fischer, K. Kawamura, and T. F. Stocker. 2008. High-resolution carbon
    dioxide concentration record 650,000-800,000 years before present.
    Nature 453(7193):379-382, doi: 10.1038/nature06949.

        Source 2 for bottom image: Jouzel, J., V. Masson-Delmotte, O.
    Cattani, G. Dreyfus, S. Falourd, G. Hoffmann, B. Minster, J. Nouet, J.
    M. Barnola, J. Chappellaz, H. Fischer, J. C. Gallet, S. Johnson, M.
    Leuenberger, L. Loulergue, D. Luethi, H. Oerter, F. Parrenin, G.
    Raisbeck, D. Raynaud, A. Schilt, J. Schwander, E. Selmo, R. Souchez, R.
    Spahni, B. Stauffer, J. P. Steffensen, B. Stenni, T. F. Stocker, J. L.
    Tison, M. Werner, and E. W. Wolff. 2007. Orbital and millennial
    Antarctic climate variability over the past 800,000 years. Science
    317(5839):793-797.

        One of the top level conclusions of the IPCC AR5 is that the since
    the 19th century the climate system has warmed. This conclusion is
    based on multiple lines of evidence from many different data sets that
    have been collected using different instruments. All of these data
    sets, whether they are ocean, land, or sea-ice measurements point to
    one unequivocal conclusion--the world has warmed. Figure 2 summarizes
    the results from many several of these different data sets. For
    example, there are four different data sets used to estimate global
    land surface temperature changes, and they all indicate a warming of
    about 2.5+F. There are six different data set used to estimate global
    sea level, and again they all agree in the upward trend. Summer arctic
    sea-ice extent is estimated using six different data sets, and they all
    indicate the same downward trend.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 2: Multiple independent indicators of a changing global
    climate. Each line represents an independently derived estimate of
    change in the climate element. In each panel all data sets have been
    normalized to a common period of record. Figure take from IPCC AR5 and
    a full detailing of the data sources is given in Stocker et al., (2013,
    supplementary material).

        Perhaps the most important question that needs to be addressed is
    how do we know the trends seen in Fig. 2 are due to human activities.
    There are two typical approaches. The first is referred to detection
    and attribution studies (Bindoff et al., 2013). Figure 3 summarize a
    classic detection and attribution study based on observational
    estimates of global mean surface temperatures. The time series analysis
    separates the global mean temperature changes due to: El Nino (panel
    b), volcanoes (panel c), solar output (panel d), and other modes of
    climate variability like the AMO (panel f). The global mean temperature
    changes associated with the changes in greenhouse gases such a
    CO2 are shown in panel e, and demonstrate that it is
    extremely likely (95-100 percent) that the bulk of the warming since
    the 1950s is due to human activities.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 3: (Top) The variations of the observed global mean surface
    temperature (GMST) anomaly from Hadley Centre/Climatic Research Unit
    gridded surface temperature data set version 3 (HadCRUT3, black line)
    and the best multivariate fits using the method of Lean (red line),
    Lockwood (pink line), Folland (green line) and Kaufmann (blue line).
    (Below) The contributions to the fit from (a) El Nino-Southern
    Oscillation (ENSO), (b) volcanoes, (c) solar forcing, (d) anthropogenic
    forcing and (e) other factors (Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO)
    for Folland and a 17.5-year cycle, semi-annual oscillation (SAO), and
    Arctic Oscillation (AO) from Lean). (From Lockwood (2008), Lean and
    Rind (2009), Folland et al. (2013 ) and Kaufmann et al. (2011), as
    summarized in Imbers et al. (2013).) See Figure 10.6 in Bindoff et al.
    (2013) for references and details.

        The second approach for attributing the observed warming to human
    activities is based on climate model simulations. Again, as with the
    data analysis shown in Fig. 3, the climate models used in the
    assessment of the climate of the 20th century have been developed and
    validated by different modeling centers in different countries around
    the world--multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion. The
    approach is to simulate the climate of the 20th century with and
    without the anthropogenic changes in CO2. The results and
    then be compared with the observed temperature record. An example of
    this for global mean temperature is shown in Fig. 4. Again, the results
    point to the same conclusion--the bulk of the warming since the 1950s
    is due to human activities.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 5: Comparison of observed (black curve) and multi-model
    simulated global mean temperature with natural and anthropogenic
    forcing (pink swath) and just natural forcing (blue swath). The width
    of the swaths correspond to the 5 percent-95 percent range from the
    multi-model ensemble simulations. Figure adapted from Stocker et al.,
    2013.

        Sea level rise associated with climate change is of particular
    importance to Florida. Here we show results from Church et al., (2013)
    which includes a detailed analysis of paleo and historical estimates of
    global sea level and more recent modern instrument records. The results
    further underscore the unequivocal conclusion that human activities are
    leading to profound changes in the climate system.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 5: a) Paleo sea level data for the last 3,000 years from
    Northern and Southern Hemisphere sites. The effects of glacial
    isostatic adjustment (GIA) have been removed from these records. Light
    green = Iceland (Gehrels et al., 2006), purple = Nova Scotia (Gehrels
    et al., 2005), bright blue = Connecticut (Donnelly et al., 2004), blue
    = Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005), red = United Kingdom (Gehrels et
    al., 2011), green = North Carolina (Kemp et al., 2011), brown = New
    Zealand (Gehrels et al., 2008), grey = mid-Pacific Ocean (Woodroffe et
    al., 2012). (b) Paleo sea level data from salt marshes since 1700 from
    Northern and Southern Hemisphere sites compared to sea level
    reconstruction from tide gauges (blue time series with uncertainty)
    (Jevrejeva et al., 2008). The effects of GIA have been removed from
    these records by subtracting the long-term trend (Gehrels and
    Woodworth, 2013). Ordinate axis on the left corresponds to the paleo
    sea level data. Ordinate axis on the right corresponds to tide gauge
    data. Green and light green = North Carolina (Kemp et al., 2011),
    orange = Iceland (Gehrels et al., 2006), purple = New Zealand (Gehrels
    et al., 2008), dark green = Tasmania (Gehrels et al., 2012), brown =
    Nova Scotia (Gehrels et al., 2005). (c) Yearly average global mean sea
    level (GMSL) reconstructed from tide gauges by three different
    approaches. Orange from Church and White (2011), blue from Jevrejeva et
    al., (2008), green from Ray and Douglas (2011) (see Section 3.7). (d)
    Altimetry data sets from ve groups (University of Colorado (CU),
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Goddard Space
    Flight Centre (GSFC), Archiving, Validation and Interpretation of
    Satellite Oceanographic (AVISO), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
    Research Organisation (CSIRO)) with mean of the ve shown as bright blue
    line (see Section 3.7). (e) Comparison of the paleo data from salt
    marshes (purple symbols, from (b)), with tide gauge and altimetry data
    sets (same line colours as in (c) and (d)). All paleo data were shifted
    by mean of 1700-1850 derived from the Sand Point, North Carolina data.
    The Jevrejeva et al., (2008) tide gauge data were shifted by their mean
    for 1700-1850; other two tide gauge data sets were shifted by the same
    amount. The altimeter time series has been shifted vertically upwards
    so that their mean value over the 1993-2007 period aligns with the mean
    value of the average of all three tide gauge time series over the same
    period. References and details in Church et al., 2013.
    Regional Climate Change
        Regional climate changes are more difficult to assess. This is
    because the natural variability tends to be larger on the local scale,
    and this makes it more challenging to isolate the anthropogenic signal.
    Nevertheless, regional changes in temperature thought much of the U.S.
    show a pronounced warming trend (see Fig. 6).
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 6: The colors on the map show temperature changes over the
    past 22 years (1991-2012) compared to the 1901-1960 average, and
    compared to the 1951-1980 average for Alaska and Hawai`i. The bars on
    the graphs show the average temperature changes by decade for 1901-2012
    (relative to the 1901-1960 average) for each region. The far right bar
    in each graph (2000s decade) includes 2011 and 2012. The period from
    2001 to 2012 was warmer than any previous decade in every region.
    (Figure source: NOAA NCDC / CICS-NC). Figure taken from Melillo et al.,
    2014.
        There is evidence that sea level rise along the eastern seaboard of
    the U.S. is accelerating (Fig. 7 below). The factors for the
    acceleration are not well understood but could be due to changes in
    ocean circulation associated with global warming, Greenland ice melt
    also associated with global warming or even land subsidence.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 7: Flooding frequency in Miami Beach. Figure adapted from
    Wdowinski et al., (2016)

        Finally, there is no compelling scientific evidence that any of the
    trends that we currently see are going to naturally? reverse
    themselves. There is, however, compelling evidence that the current
    trends will continue for at least the next 25 years, and there is even
    some evidence that particular trends (regional sea level) may
    accelerate (see discussion of Fig. 7).
    Predicting the Future
        Even if one is skeptical that human activities are the cause of
    these trends, there is a clear local need to protect lives and
    property, and ensure economic opportunity in response to changes we see
    today. Robust well-calibrated scientifically based predictions of the
    next 25-years (and beyond) are the first stop in developing effective
    adaptation strategies and to capitalize on the associated economic
    opportunities.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Figure 8: Projected changes in global temperature and sea level
    from IPCC AR5. See Stocker et al., 2013 for details.
    References
        Bindoff, N.L., P.A. Stott, K.M. AchutaRao, M.R. Allen, N. Gillett,
    D. Gutzler, K. Hansingo, G. Hegerl, Y. Hu, S. Jain, I.I. Mokhov, J.
    Overland, J. Perlwitz, R. Sebbari and X. Zhang, 2013: Detection and
    Attribution of Climate Change: from Global to Regional. In: Climate
    Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group
    I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
    Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K.
    Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
    USA.
        Church, J.A., P.U. Clark, A. Cazenave, J.M. Gregory, S. Jevrejeva,
    A. Levermann, M.A. Merri eld, G.A. Milne, R.S. Nerem, P.D. Nunn, A.J.
    Payne, W.T. Pfeffer, D. Stammer and A.S. Unnikrishnan, 2013: Sea Level
    Change. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
    Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K.
    Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex
    and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
    Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
        Collins, M., R. Knutti, J. Arblaster, J.-L. Dufresne, T. Fichefet,
    P. Friedlingstein, X. Gao, W.J. Gutowski, T. Johns, G. Krinner, M.
    Shongwe, C. Tebaldi, A.J. Weaver and M. Wehner, 2013: Long-term Climate
    Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility. In: Climate
    Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group
    I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
    Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K.
    Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
    USA.
        Kirtman, B., S.B. Power, J.A. Adedoyin, G.J. Boer, R. Bojariu, I.
    Camilloni, F.J. Doblas-Reyes, A.M. Fiore, M. Kimoto, G.A. Meehl, M.
    Prather, A. Sarr, C. Schar, R. Sutton, G.J. van Oldenborgh, G. Vecchi
    and H.J. Wang, 2013: Near-term Climate Change: Projections and
    redictability. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
    Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K.
    Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex
    and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
    Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
        Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds.,
    2014: Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National
    Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 841 pp.
    doi:10.7930/J0Z31WJ2.
        Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, L.V. Alexander, S.K. Allen,
    N.L. Bindoff, F.-M. Breon, J.A. Church, U. Cubasch, S. Emori, P.
    Forster, P. Friedlingstein, N. Gillett, J.M. Gregory, D.L. Hartmann, E.
    Jansen, B. Kirtman, R. Knutti, K. Krishna Kumar, P. Lemke, J. Marotzke,
    V. Masson-Delmotte, G.A. Meehl, I.I. Mokhov, S. Piao, V. Ramaswamy, D.
    Randall, M. Rhein, M. Rojas, C. Sabine, D. Shindell, L.D. Talley, D.G.
    Vaughan and S.-P. Xie, 2013: Technical Summary. In: Climate Change
    2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to
    the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
    Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen,
    J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
    USA.
        Wdowinski, S. R. Bray, B. P. Kirtman, Z. Wu, 2016: Increasing
    flooding hazard in coastal communities due to raising sea level: Case
    study of Miami Beach, Florida. Ocean and Coastal Management, 126, 1-8.

        Senator Nelson. Thank you very much, Dr. Kirtman.
        Dr. Berry.

               STATEMENT OF LEONARD ``LEN'' BERRY, Ph.D.,

           EMERITUS PROFESSOR, GEOSCIENCES, FLORIDA ATLANTIC

               UNIVERSITY, AND VICE PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT

                 PROGRAMS, COASTAL RISK CONSULTING, LLC

        Dr. Berry. Senator, Congressman, Mayors, 5 years ago,
    almost to the day, I testified before the Senate Committee on
    Natural Resources in Washington, and I started with a joke. I
    said, ``the sky is not falling, but the seas are rising.'' It
    got their attention. Now I can tell you the seas are still
    rising, and I wonder sometimes if the skies are falling.
        What I thought I would try to do today was really talk
    about what has happened in those 5 years in relation to sea-
    level rise and our understanding.
        On the science side, we have all the stuff that Ben has
    talked about, but we have also understood the processes better.
    We know more about the Antarctic and what is happening there.
    We know more about the role of the Gulf Stream in our local
    sea-level rise. We did not know a lot of that 5 years ago. We
    know it now. And as Ben says, the percent of certainty goes up
    from 95 beyond.
        We know a lot more, and we are a lot more scared, because
    if I look at the new information coming up year by year, every
    time it gets a little bit worse. It is not inference. It is
    what data comes out, what information comes out.
        In my written testimony, I emphasize, and we can emphasize
    more, that the information provided by NOAA, NASA, and all of
    our other agencies are vital for our understanding of what is
    happening now and for our understanding of what is going to
    happen in the near and more distant future.
        Also, the data is vital for mayors, Congressmen,
    businesses. The business I co-founded relies on NASA data--
    LIDAR, sea-level tides, and so on. Information is the key to
    our understanding. And reliable, credible information is what
    we have to rely on.
        Our appreciation of risk has changed over 5 years partly
    because of all of the stuff I am talking about but also, as you
    point out--you stole my thunder--it is about experience. We
    experience flooding. We spend $100 million a year in Miami
    Beach on pumps. We do all of this stuff, and it is new.
        And so as our appreciation of risk has changed, our
    response has changed. We have sustainability officers--one
    great one here. A lot of counties, cities, now have
    sustainability officers, because they need people who
    understand a broad range of change and are willing to manage it
    in a relatively uncertain future.
        I think our responses have changed. We were not spending
    $100 million anywhere on pumps 5 years ago. But king tides have
    convinced us that the problem is not in the future. It is now.
    Adaptation action scenarios have been designated, mainly in
    Broward County, and people in those areas have special legal
    issues and special responses.
        Investments in people and technology are protecting more
    than the buildings and the infrastructure. They are protecting,
    as you point out, the economy. Our economy depends on our
    coastal areas being vital. And without responding to our sea-
    level rise issues, those coastal areas will be in trouble.
        On the other hand, there are opportunities there that we
    have in using our technology to be innovative, create new
    ideas, and create new jobs.
        Homeowners have a responsibility too. The company I am
    working with focuses on individual homeowners. We can provide
    them with information on what they need to do. They can match
    what the communities are going to do and become a stable
    community where the central organization is not doing one thing
    and the homeowners are trying to catch up. Homeowners need to
    take adaptation action, and they need data to do it.
        This may sound good as a regional response, and we feel
    very proud of it, but it pales in significance beyond what
    needs to be done.
        As you pointed out and as we all know, great things done at
    the regional level have to be matched at the State level and at
    the Federal level. We need a coherent policy that deals with
    all of those levels at one time, and I hope that we can find
    ways that this Committee can do them.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Berry follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Leonard ``Len'' Berry, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor,
         Geosciences, Florida Atlantic University, and Vice President,
               Government Programs, Coastal Risk Consulting, LLC
        I am Dr. Leonard Berry, founder and former director of the Florida
    Center for Environmental Studies at Florida Atlantic University (FAU),
    now Emeritus professor of geosciences at FAU. I am also the co-founder
    and Vice President of Coastal Risk Consulting, LLC, a start-up
    technology company providing affordable flood vulnerability and risk
    assessments, located in Plantation, Broward County, Florida.
        As a scientist and businessman, and as a resident, I want to
    emphasize that sea level rise is a critical issue in South Florida--not
    only in Miami, which gets most of the press--but for the whole region,
    including here in Palm Beach County. The issue requires our scientific,
    legislative and legal attention; and our current investment in the
    amount of several billions of dollars to be spent over the next few
    years alone.
        As the topics of this hearing suggest, dealing with the current and
    future threat of sea level rise requires a combination of the best
    available science, based on credible and ongoing global data, and
    assessment of that data with respect to conditions on the ground--from
    communities to individual properties--to determine degrees of risk now,
    and in the future.
        But the important part is action across all parts of society, from
    government on the local to national levels, in the business community,
    and in civil society. While we have seen responses from many parts of
    our community in South Florida, the action is far from universal.
        My colleague Dr. Ben Kirtman will address the scientific progress
    in some detail, but his work and that of others depend on the continued
    information flow from the Federal Government. I have attached a letter
    to the President from many Florida scientists that underscores the
    importance of science and information.
        It can't be overemphasized--continued flow of global data is vital
    to our understanding of the science of sea level rise and the actions
    we take form that science. As the 2016 Sea-Level Rise Summit (http://
    www.ces.fau.edu/arctic-florida/) highlighted, the fate of Florida
    depends on what happens in the Arctic and Greenland. And over a longer
    timeframe, what happens in Antarctica is important too. There are large
    questions and uncertainties regarding the melt rate and effects of ice
    on land. We must continue to learn more and reduce these uncertainties.
        South Florida and the state as a whole have long experience of
    dealing with risk in the form of major storms or hurricanes. Extreme
    weather is predicted--we prepare for it, and if it strikes, we respond
    and rebuild.
        Risk from sea level rise is different however; steady increase in
    the number of sunny-day flooding events is more insidious, though
    sometimes, like during Sandy, the level of risk does not get fully
    exposed until an storm like no other.
        In various ways the region has begun to assess the level of risk
    and to respond. The obvious threat is physical damage to
    infrastructure, but we now recognize that the economy is also at risk
    unless remedial actions are taken. The Southeast Florida Regional
    Climate Compact, an important partnership now supported scientifically
    by the statewide Florida Climate Institute, has begun laying out the
    response to these challenges. Action has been occurring a slower pace,
    albeit faster than almost anywhere else in the United States.
        One of the Compact's activities is the Resilient Redesign series,
    where sample areas are re-planned to thrive in a future sea level
    situation. The Resilient Redesign concepts for part of Delray Beach are
    appended as examples.
        Adaptation to sea level rise however, has both top-down and bottom-
    up components. Government on all levels will have a responsibility to
    assist, and individual homeowners have obligations as well.
        In the last five years, we have observed case studies on sea level
    rise adaptation. The City of Miami Beach is on the forefront--raising
    streets, communicating directly with residents, and having the
    difficult, but necessary conversations about sea level rise. Recently,
    the Cities of Miami and Miami Beach with Miami-Dade County were honored
    by being accepted as part of the Rockefeller Foundation's 100
    Resilience Cities program, further elevating the conversation and
    creating a cross-government organization to do so. These issues will
    not be solved by one level of government, but will require crosscutting
    and boundary-breaking ideas and actions. Dr. Jennifer Jurado, the Chief
    Climate Resilience Officer for Broward County, can more knowledgably
    speak to local government adaptation actions.
        Private homeowners have a responsibility as well. Individual
    residents are going to have to take adaption actions to protect their
    homes and assets. In order to take necessary actions, homeowners need
    accurate and trustworthy actionable intelligence. This is where
    innovation and technology intersect with sea level rise.
        After I retired from Florida Atlantic University, I co-founded a
    company based in South Florida called Coastal Risk Consulting. The
    company's mission is to help coastal residents in the United States and
    around the world prepare for sea level rise and coastal flooding. It
    has become my mission to use the best available science and distill
    that down to the individual property level to create a communication
    tool personalized to a homeowner. Coastal Risk forecasts the numbers of
    fair-weather flood days an individual property owner will see for the
    next 30 years. This is all presented in an adaptation framework,
    proposing adaptation steps based on the number of fair-weather flood
    days.
        Homeowners can use this data to make the decision to adapt now,
    plan on adapting in the future, or decide that adaption will not be
    necessary for the foreseeable future. The important part of the
    decision making process is that it is a well-informed decision about
    personal adaptation. As cities and towns begin to plan for adaption,
    homeowner must as well. This is how we will create robust and resilient
    communities.
        Sea level rise is a complex, multi-faceted issue that will require
    the best minds from all fields of study and industries to come
    together.
        For example, in addition to protecting their assets through
    adaptation, homeowners protect their homes through insurance. As
    Congress begins to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program, we
    must also consider the effects of sea level rise. Big questions remain
    for the program--What will flood insurance look like in the future?
    When homes begin to flood due to fair-weather flooding associated with
    sea level rise, will that be an insured loss? What will happen to flood
    insurance in those areas that are now more susceptible to coastal
    inundation due to sea level rise?
        Sea level rise will also raise new and complex environmental
    issues. How will we ensure that traditional septic tanks will not
    contaminate surrounding areas? What other issues will communities need
    to consider as salt water begins to interact with the built
    environment?
        In addition, South Florida has its own set of complex issues. The
    limestone base of our community is basically a porous rock. So as sea
    level rises, the water table will be pushed closer to the surface.
    Communities close to sea level, even far inland, will see water seep
    through the surface creating puddles at low lying points. Properly
    communicating this risk is imperative, as sea level rise is currently
    considered solely an issue for communities that abut the coastline.
        While sea level rise is acknowledged as a South Florida concern, it
    is becoming an issue for every coastal community in the world. Boston,
    Norfolk, Santa Monica, Charleston, New Orleans, and even our Nation's
    capital, Washington, DC, are beginning to see clear signs that the seas
    are rising. We want all of our cities to be resilient.
        Adaptation to sea level rise and resiliency go hand in hand. We
    cannot create resilient communities along our coastlines if we do not
    begin the adaptation conversation now, and in order to have a
    conversation, we must have the best available data. States, local
    governments, and companies rely on this data from the Federal
    Government and we'll need it even more going forward.

        Attachments: Letter to the President, dated March 13, 2017,
    Resilient Redesign notes and presentation excerpt
                                  Attachments
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Dr. Berry.
        Mr. Hedde.

                STATEMENT OF CARL G. HEDDE, CPCU, HEAD,

                     RISK ACCUMULATION DEPARTMENT,

                    MUNICH REINSURANCE AMERICA INC.

        Mr. Hedde. Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting me to
    testify.
        As Senator Nelson mentioned, I work for a company, Munich
    Re, that allows us to talk about climate change.
        Today, I want to share some thoughts on the potential
    financial impact posed by climate change and on resiliency
    steps that society must undertake to mitigate the human and
    financial toll of our changing climate.
        Let me begin with a quote from Dr. Peter Hoppe, Head of the
    Munich Re Corporate Climate Center, and a leading climate
    change expert. He said, ``A look at the weather-related
    catastrophes of 2016 shows the potential effects of unchecked
    climate change. Of course, individual events themselves can
    never be attributed directly to climate change. But there are
    now many indications that certain events, such as persistent
    weather systems or storms bringing torrential rain and hail,
    are more likely to occur in certain regions as a result of
    climate change.''
        The insurance industry relies heavily on historical loss
    information to make business decisions. However, the use of
    historical loss data assumes that the risk we see today is the
    same that it was in the past. This is not always the case. As
    an industry, we also rely heavily on weather and climate data
    produced by NOAA.
        Losses from weather catastrophes in the U.S. have increased
    in both frequency and severity over the past 4 decades. In the
    U.S., socioeconomic changes have played a substantial role in
    this increase, but do not explain the entirety of the changes.
    It is likely that the changes in climate, whether from natural
    variability or due to man's influence, are playing a role in
    these trends.
        During 2016, the U.S. experienced approximately 91 large
    natural catastrophe events. Of the 91 events, only two were
    caused by earthquakes. The other 89 events have a climate
    connection.
        The economic loss for these 91 events totaled approximately
    $43.9 billion U.S. dollars, of which $23.8 billion, or 55
    percent, was covered by insurance. The difference is the amount
    that is not insured and thus directly borne by U.S. citizens in
    the form of retained loss, cost of disaster relief, or lost
    economic opportunity.
        Within the U.S., approximately 50 percent of all losses
    caused by large natural catastrophe losses are historically not
    covered by insurance. In the U.S., related events such as
    hurricanes and other wind-related events have a higher
    penetration of insurance coverage as compared to earthquake and
    flood events.
        Human safety is our greatest concern when natural cat
    events occur. During 2016, 260 lives were lost due to severe
    weather events in the U.S. Just weeks ago on March 30, a mother
    and her 3-year-old daughter lost their lives in a relatively
    weak EF-1 tornado with estimated winds of about 100 miles per
    hour. The tornado occurred in Breaux Bridge, Louisiana, placing
    their mobile home in the HUD Zone 2, with mobile home design
    speed requirements of around 100 miles per hour. Unfortunately,
    it appears that this mobile home was likely built before HUD
    standards were adopted, and it appears to have been placed on
    cinder blocks without tiedowns.
        Munich Re feels that if mobile homes were required to be
    properly sited and designed to the stronger HUD Zone 3
    standards, this tragic loss of life could have been avoided. So
    we recommend that all mobile homes in the U.S. be designed and
    installed at the Zone 3 standards, and those would be built to
    withstand about 110 miles per hour.
        These tragedies can be significantly reduced or even
    avoided if proper building codes and enforcement are in place.
    The citizens of Florida enjoy some of the most stringent
    building codes in the U.S.
        After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Florida officials
    strengthened both the building codes and building code
    enforcement. It is time for building codes to be strengthened
    across the U.S.
        As a Nation, we must build stronger homes. Most of our
    homes and businesses are not built to a changing climate and
    the weather that a changing climate might bring. The cost in
    terms of lost lives, and damage to homes and businesses, and
    community post-event viability is devastating.
        So in summary, we must address climate change on multiple
    fronts. Munich Re supports a smart, balanced approach that
    protects the public but does not stifle business or innovation.
    Researching and addressing the genesis of climate change is one
    step. Preparing our Nation for the impacts of a changing
    climate must happen concurrently.
        National preparation must keep citizens safe in the face of
    the natural disasters we are experiencing. Safety starts in our
    homes, and extends to our schools and businesses. It is in the
    mutual interests of the Federal Government and the insurance
    industry to partner to find solutions in the areas of
    adaptation and risk.
        Thank you again for allowing me to testify today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hedde follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Carl G. Hedde, CPCU, Head, Risk Accumulation
                  Department, Munich Reinsurance America Inc.
        Good afternoon and thank you for inviting me to testify. I am Carl
    Hedde, Head of the Risk Accumulation Department at Munich Reinsurance
    America Inc., one of the largest reinsurers in the United States.
        Founded in 1917, we have over 1,000 employees serving our clients
    in the U.S. Our parent company, Munich Re, is one of the world's
    leading reinsurers.
        Today I will share thoughts on the potential financial impacts
    posed by climate change, and on resiliency steps that society must
    undertake to mitigate the human and financial toll of our changing
    climate.
        Let me begin with a quote from Dr. Peter Hoppe, Head of the Munich
    Re Corporate Climate Center, and a leading climate change expert. Dr.
    Hoppe said, ``A look at the weather-related catastrophes of 2016 shows
    the potential effects of unchecked climate change. Of course,
    individual events themselves can never be attributed directly to
    climate change. But there are now many indications that certain
    events--such as persistent weather systems or storms bringing
    torrential rain and hail--are more likely to occur in certain regions
    as a result of climate change''.
        The insurance industry relies heavily on historical loss
    information to make business decisions. However, the use of historical
    data assumes that the risk we see today is the same as it was in the
    past. This is not always the case. As an industry, we also rely on
    weather and climate data produced by NOAA.
        Losses from weather catastrophes in the U.S. have increased in both
    frequency and severity over the past four decades. In the U.S.,
    socioeconomic changes have played a substantial role in this increase,
    but do not explain the entirety of the changes. It is likely that
    changes in climate, whether from natural variability or due to man's
    influence, are playing a role in these trends.
        During 2016, the U.S. experienced approximately 91 large natural
    catastrophe--or ``Nat cat'' events, after removing small scale events.
    Of the 91 events, only two were caused by large earthquakes. The other
    89 events have a climate connection. The frequency of earthquakes is
    remaining relatively constant.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The upward trend in regard to losses from weather catastrophes is
    also apparent in the economic and insured losses for some weather-
    related perils, such as severe tornado and hail outbreaks in the U.S.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The economic loss total for these 91 events totaled approximately
    $43.9 billion U.S. dollars, of which $23.8 billion, or 55 percent was
    covered by insurance. The difference between Economic and Insured
    Losses is the amount that is not insured and thus directly bourn by
    U.S. citizens in the form of retained loss, cost of disaster relief or
    lost economic opportunity.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Within the U.S., approximately 50 percent of all losses caused by
    large natural catastrophes are not covered by insurance. In the U.S.,
    weather related events such as Hurricanes and other wind related events
    generally have a higher penetration of insurance coverage as compared
    to Earthquake events. The coverage penetration for flood protection is
    also very low, and presents a critical exposure for our citizens.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Adaptation
        Human safety is our greatest concern when natural cat events occur.
    262 lives were lost due to severe weather events in the U.S. in 2016.
        Just weeks ago, on March 30, 2017, a mother and her 3 year old
    daughter lost their lives in a relatively weak EF-1 Tornado with
    estimated winds of 100 MPH. The tornado occurred in Breaux Bridge, LA,
    placing their Mobile Home in the HUD Zone 2, with Mobile Home design
    speed requirements of 100 mph. Unfortunately it appears that this
    particular mobile home was likely built before HUD standards were
    adopted, and appears to have been placed on cinder blocks without tie-
    downs. Munich Re feels that if the Mobile Home was required to be
    properly sited and designed to the stronger HUD Zone 3 standards, this
    tragic loss of life could have been avoided. Munich Re recommends that
    all Mobile Homes in the U.S. be designed to the stronger HUD Zone 3
    standards, which are built to withstand winds of 110 MPH.
        We constantly hear tragic stories of communities being devastated
    by severe weather events. These tragedies can be significantly reduced
    or even avoided if proper building codes and enforcement are in place.
    The citizens of Florida enjoy some of the most stringent building codes
    in the U.S. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Florida officials
    strengthened both the building codes and building code enforcement. It
    is time for building codes to be strengthened across the U.S. . .
    Taking Action
        As a nation, we must build stronger homes. Most of our homes and
    businesses are not built to withstand the weather we have today, let
    alone the weather a changing climate might bring. The cost--in terms of
    lost lives, damage to homes and businesses, and community post-event
    viability--is devastating.
        Munich Re supports a non-profit organization called ``IBHS''--the
    Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety. The insurance
    industry and IBHS have been conducting research into, and promoting
    stronger building codes and construction practices. Much of the
    findings are incorporated into the IBHS Fortified Program which
    essentially promotes Code+ construction standards.
        Munich Re is committed towards the goal of making our country's
    building stock more resilient than it is today. For example, Munich Re
    funded the development of a ``tablet app'' in partnership with the IBHS
    that can help users build or retrofit a home to IBHS Fortified
    standards. The ``app'' is available for free on the iTunes app store,
    and we encourage all attendees at today's meeting to test it out and
    distribute it to your constituents.
        In summary, we must address climate change on multiple fronts.
    Munich Re supports a smart, balanced approach that protects the public,
    but does not stifle business or innovation. Researching and addressing
    the genesis of climate change is one step. Preparing our Nation for the
    impacts of a changing climate must happen concurrently. National
    preparation must keep citizens safe in the face of the natural
    disasters we are experiencing. Safety starts at our homes, and extends
    to our schools and businesses. It is in the mutual interest of the
    Federal Government and the insurance industry to partner to find
    solutions in the areas of adaptation and risk transfer.
        This makes absolute sense from a macroeconomic perspective, as
    lower subsequent losses will generate savings of several times the
    investment. Most importantly--these solutions can protect human lives.
        Thank you again for providing this opportunity for me to testify.

        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Hedde.
        Dr. Jurado.

     STATEMENT OF DR. JENNIFER L. JURADO, CHIEF RESILIENCE OFFICER
     AND DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCE
                   DIVISION, BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

        Dr. Jurado. Thank you. Good afternoon, Senator Nelson,
    Congressman Deutch, and Mayors. It is a great honor to speak
    with you regarding the very real challenges facing our county
    and Southeast Florida as a whole regarding climate change.
        Our region is working aggressively to address the reality
    and the impact that sea-level rise is affecting our coastal
    counties. Not only is the global science clear, but regional
    data and local impacts align unambiguously with the
    predictions.
        We know that the sea level has risen and continues to rise
    at an ever-accelerating rate. Like many regions in the states,
    we are already grappling with the impacts.
        However, in South Florida, our circumstance is unique given
    the expansive impacts on our region's drainage, our flood
    control, and our water supplies.
        These are not examples of future risk, but are reality
    today. Tidal flooding is not just a mere nuisance, but an
    agonizing recurrence for many of our communities.
        Seasonal flooding isolates neighborhoods, restricts
    commerce, and disrupts essential services.
        As you see in the many photos, storm water systems and
    streets fill with seawater as walls are overtopped. Coastal
    waters backflow through pipes and storm drains. Marinas now
    funnel water into streets and nearby neighborhoods. And
    businesses, as Congressman Deutch has seen, must seal their
    front doors with caulk in order keep the water at bay.
        These are the visible impacts, but the region's
    vulnerabilities extend well beyond the coastal corridor. Rising
    seas will contaminate 40 percent of the coastal wellfield
    capacity in Broward County alone. Our regional flood management
    system, the Central and South Florida Flood Control Project, is
    losing capacity as rising seas restrict discharges at tidal
    structures, preventing flood relief during rainfall events.
    Groundwater elevations are rising, reducing soil storage and
    compounding flooding miles inland.
        The situation is challenging but it has also marshaled
    incredible leadership across our region. As you have heard, in
    2010, the Southeast Florida Climate Change Compact was formed
    by Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, and Monroe counties,
    inclusive of 108 cities in our region. Through the efforts of
    the Compact, we have accelerated climate resiliency policy,
    planning, projects, and aided the realization that immediate
    action is required.
        We understand science. We have developed the tools.
    Collectively, we are all utilizing the same sea-level rise
    projection to inform our planning, our consulting services. It
    is time to invest in infrastructure to reduce risk, improve our
    communities, and stimulate our economies. Across the region, we
    have adopted the sea-level rise projection. It is integrated
    across our processes.
        We have pursued strong partnerships with our Federal
    agencies that have continued to inform the scope, depth, and
    power of our work, a decade-long collaboration with the USGS to
    form the hydrologic models. We are utilizing tools developed by
    FEMA. We are partnering with the Army Corps of Engineers. We
    work with the EPA on resiliency studies. And we are utilizing a
    NOAA-funded project to further address resiliency.
        These are the investments that are now informing the design
    standards for drainage systems, higher finished floor
    elevations, and resiliency for interconnected systems.
        In Broward County, we are amending our code of ordinances
    to formally adopt a future conditions map for the design of all
    infrastructure in our county. We recognize local communities
    must shoulder certain conditions and responsibilities. However,
    Federal and State action are equally important.
        Given our location between two national priorities, the
    Everglades and the Atlantic Coast, our flood protection relies
    upon upgrades to the Central & South Florida Flood Control
    Project and the Intracoastal Waterway.
        We urge the Federal leadership to prioritize resiliency and
    infrastructure improvements of this infrastructure. We know the
    price tag will be large, but these are investments that will
    further the economies where we already account for one-third of
    the State GDP, but coastal communities also make up 50 percent
    of our national economy.
        Investment in coastal resilience will bolster economic
    activity through vast public works projects, through the
    preservation of economies long term. And, ultimately, this is
    just the beginning in terms of where these impacts are most
    visible today. All of our Nation ultimately relies upon the
    revenues and economies that our coastal communities support.
        These impacts are already in motion. We hope that Federal
    leadership will continue to provide resources to support the
    science that aids our communities, clean energy that will help
    harness the magnitude of future changes, and investments in
    transportation programs where so much of our emissions are
    generated.
        We want to do our share of the national and international
    work to cut emissions and are eager to partner with the Federal
    Government in this effort. We thank you for the opportunity and
    the efforts to bring policy and resources to bear in addressing
    climate risk and impacts to our community and Nation. Thank
    you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Jurado follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Dr. Jennifer L. Jurado, Chief Resilience Officer
    and Director, Environmental Planning and Community Resilience Division,
                            Broward County, Florida
        Good morning, Senators, Representatives, and distinguished guests.
        I am Dr. Jennifer Jurado, Chief Resilience Officer and Director of
    the Environmental Planning and Community Resilience Division for
    Broward County. Thank you for convening this hearing here in Southeast
    Florida and for bringing attention to the vitally important issues of
    climate science, coastal risk, and the urgency of action. It is a great
    honor to speak with you regarding the very real challenges facing
    Broward County and southeast Florida as a whole. Our region is working
    aggressively to address the increasingly unavoidable realities of
    climate change, and the impacts of sea level rise in particular on
    coastal counties.
        Not only is the global science clear, but regional data and local
    impacts align unambiguously with the predictions.
        We know that the sea level has risen and continues to rise at an
    ever accelerating rate. Like many regions across the United States, we
    are already grappling with impacts. However, the south Florida
    circumstance is unique given the expansive impacts of sea level rise on
    our region's drainage, flood control, and water supplies.
        These are not examples of future risk and exposure, but rather the
    reality we experience in our communities from sea level rise today.
    Tidal flooding is no longer a mere nuisance, but an agonizing
    recurrence for many south Florida communities, with water levels that
    increasingly exceed predictions and place people, businesses, and
    infrastructure at increased risk.
        Seasonal tidal flooding isolates neighborhoods, restricts commerce,
    and disrupts essential services. Stormwater systems and streets fill
    with water as seawalls are overtopped. Coastal waters backflow through
    storm drain pipes, causing water to rush out of storm drains. Marina
    boat ramps turn into funnels, pouring the ocean onto nearby streets and
    inundating neighborhoods. Businesses must seal their front doors with
    caulk to keep the water at bay. Employees and customers use alley
    entries, donning galoshes or rolling up their pant legs. Many have
    become practiced at making a mad dash for their vehicles before the
    parking lot and adjacent roadways become inundated with saltwater for
    2-3 hour periods. This condition repeats 12 hours later, and daily over
    the next week, and again the following month, and so on.
        These are the visible effects, but the region's vulnerabilities to
    the impacts of sea level rise extend well beyond our coastal corridors.
    Our regional flood management system, the Central & South Florida Flood
    Control Project (CSF Project for short), is losing capacity as rising
    seas restrict discharges at tidal structures, compromising flood
    protection for inland communities miles away from the coast. The South
    Florida Water Management District has estimated that 18 of these
    structures are already within six inches of their design capacity. At
    the same time, due to our porous geology, groundwater elevations are
    rising in direct response to the rising sea, reducing the ability of
    the soil to store water and thereby exacerbating flooding.
        The situation is immensely challenging, but it has also marshalled
    leadership from across our region, in an organized effort focused on
    both climate mitigation and adaptation strategies. In 2010, this
    regional collaboration was formalized as the Southeast Florida Regional
    Climate Change Compact, organized by Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade
    and Monroe Counties, and inclusive of 108 municipalities. The efforts
    of the Compact have accelerated climate resiliency policy, planning,
    and projects throughout the region in an unprecedented fashion that has
    become a model for regions across the globe. There is an urgency in our
    efforts, and a growing realization across all sectors that the time for
    preemptive action has already passed and that immediate action is
    required. We understand the science. We have developed the tools. It's
    time to invest in infrastructure and updated design standards that will
    reduce risk, improve our communities, and stimulate our economies.
        Our communities are taking action and ownership. Across the region
    we have formally adopted a unified sea level rise projection as the
    basis for adaptation planning and integrated that projection into
    capital, land use, water supply, transportation, emergency management,
    and capital investment plans. We have pursued strong partnerships with
    our Federal agencies, relationships that continue to expand in their
    scope, depth, and power to inform.
        This has included:

       A decade-long collaboration with the United States
            Geological Service in the development of advanced hydrologic
            models to help assess the impacts of sea level rise on water
            supplies and flood elevations.

       A resiliency study under the Planning Assistance for States
            Programs with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to
            evaluate the future flood conditions, risk reduction measures,
            and resiliency standards for sea walls.

       A study that will build upon modeling tools developed by
            FEMA. A collaborative resiliency study with the EPA focused on
            a coastal municipality.

       A partnership with Deltares, a Dutch water institute, in a
            NOAA-funded project focused on future flood risk, sectoral
            interactions, and decision-support for resiliency planning.

        The technical investments and projects are now being translated to
    practical applications as we prepare to update our regulations to
    address future flood conditions, including revised design standards for
    drainage systems, higher finished floor elevations, and consistent
    standards for interconnected and interdependent systems. These
    investments will help reduce flood risk, including future FEMA losses,
    and will create a foundation for a more resilient community and
    economy.
        We recognize our local communities must shoulder certain
    responsibilities to protect our residents, businesses, infrastructure,
    properties, and environmental resources, and we are aligned regionally
    in this determination. However, the effectiveness of our regional
    planning, of all of our investments, is dependent on strong Federal and
    state partnerships and joint action. Given our location between two
    vitally important national priorities, the Everglades and the Atlantic
    coast, our flood protection relies upon federally-supported upgrades to
    the Central & South Florida Flood Control Project and the Intracoastal
    Waterway.
        So, as we continue to make significant advancements regionally and
    locally, we urge our Federal leadership to prioritize the building of
    resilient communities and infrastructure and specifically request that
    our Federal and state partners undertake a detailed evaluation of the
    CSF Project and Intracoastal Waterway for flood protection service
    levels under evolving climate conditions, especially sea level rise,
    and to develop a comprehensive infrastructure and funding plan to
    execute the necessary improvements for our region's flood protection.
        I mentioned the partnership agreement with the Army Corps to
    develop recommendations for resilient sea walls. With more than nearly
    400 miles of armored and armored shoreline, preliminary estimates
    suggest a cost between $1 billion and $4 billion. Needless to say, this
    level of investment is beyond the means of Broward County government
    alone to finance. But this investment and many others will need to be
    undertaken, because the no-action alternative will be far more costly.
        Of course, seawalls are only part of the solution. Coastal flood
    control structures--part of the CSF Project--will need to be converted
    from gravity-based to pump-operated systems. Improvement of each
    structure is likely to cost around $50 million. Stormwater systems will
    need to be upgraded. Miami-Beach has advanced a $400 million stormwater
    improvement plan, just to address sea level rise. Roads will need to be
    raised and drainage systems will need to be reengineered.
        Coastal communities account for nearly 50 percent of our national
    GDP. Southeast Florida accounts for one-third of our state GDP.
    Investment in the resilience of these communities is essential to
    preserving not only local economies, but our national economy.
    Investments in resilience will provide shared benefits. Deferral is an
    option we cannot afford.
        I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge that we also have
    an obligation locally, as a state, and as a nation, to reduce
    greenhouse gas emissions--and this need is just as urgent. Many climate
    impacts will be unavoidable, given our emissions to date. But our
    choices today and in the next few decades about energy, transportation,
    land use, food, and environmental protection will determine if future
    generations face manageable climate impacts or severely compromised
    conditions.
        In Southeast Florida, we are well aware of our contributions to the
    problem of climate change. We have some programs in place to reduce our
    energy and fuel use, but our efforts are admittedly too modest. We face
    significant challenges--often beyond our direct control--in deploying
    solar energy, reducing building energy use, and transitioning to a
    transportation system with more choices and fewer emissions.
    Fortunately, the Federal Government has been a leader and partner over
    the last decade, helping local governments and regions to begin to
    overcome these barriers by offering significant technical assistance,
    backed by national-level policy decisions which provide great benefit
    to our vulnerable region. We hope that our Federal leadership continues
    to provide resources to Federal agencies for climate science, clean
    energy and transportation programs, and local assistance. We want to do
    our share of the national and international work to cut emissions, and
    we will, but we continue to need the Federal Government's help.
        Thank you again for this opportunity and for your efforts to bring
    policy and resources to bear in addressing the risk and impacts of
    climate change on our communities and nation.

        Senator Nelson. Thank you.
        I want to commend all of you. I have never seen witnesses
    pay attention to the 5-minute rule.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Nelson. So thank you.
        By the way, if anybody is wondering why we do not have
    somebody that has the opposite opinion here, we have had that
    plenty of times in front of this Committee. The case today is
    the Full Committee. But a year ago, we had the Science and
    Space Subcommittee chaired by Senator Cruz of Texas, and the
    minority was allowed one witness. There were four witnesses by
    the majority, and all of them were denying that the climate was
    changed.
        We selected as the minority witness the former head of
    meteorology for the United States Navy, a retired Admiral. And
    of course, he presented in livid and living detail a lot of the
    points that you all have pointed out.
        So there has been a fair hearing of all parts of the issue
    saying that it is fair and balanced. However, when you talk
    about scientific attitudes, it is another thing. So, thank you,
    you are particularly good on this.
        Now, what is the procedure here? The Committee will ask
    some questions of the witnesses. I am going to defer to our
    witnesses up here, and I will do some cleanup.
        So let me turn to Congressman Deutch.
        Mr. Deutch. Thanks very much, Senator.
        Thanks so much to the witnesses. I think the answer to why
    are there not other views, Dr. Kirtman, you provided the
    answer, which I will refer to over and over again, and that is
    ``multiple lines of evidence,'' and it is appropriate for us to
    be hearing from all of you who have seen and understand and
    appreciate those multiple lines of evidence.
        I want to ask a question to everyone on the panel, and it
    has to do with the President. And I would like you, if the
    President were sitting here across from you, instead of as
    close as he is on a regular basis, as our Mayors know, here in
    Palm Beach County--I do not want to focus on the concerns that
    a lot of us have about statements from some in the
    Administration about climate change and how they view climate
    change. I want to focus on the President's campaign promise and
    repeated statements since being elected that he wanted to make
    a massive investment in infrastructure.
        And I want to take advantage of having all of you here,
    because you all, in one way or another, have talked about the
    importance of resiliency and adaptability and preservation and
    mitigation.
        So if the President asked you what kinds of investments in
    our big infrastructure plan that we all hope is coming, what
    kinds of investments can we make that will sustain our economy,
    generate economic growth, and, at the same time, help us
    address the very real issues that we are grappling with that
    have been the focus of this hearing, what kinds of investments
    would you tell him to make?
        Dr. Jurado, why don't we start with you?
        Dr. Jurado. Sure, I would be glad to address that question.
        First of all, beginning with the Central and South Florida
    flood control system, we know that 18 of the salinity control
    structures on the system are within 6 inches of their design
    capacity. Those gravity control structures need to be retrofit
    with pumps, and we need a comprehensive plan on how we will
    maintain flood elevations for flood protection for an entire
    community through modified operation and investment in that
    system.
        During the 2015 high tide events, the Intracoastal Waterway
    has been overtopped in Broward County and Hollywood. Last year,
    the high tide events were 1 inch beneath the top wall of the
    Intracoastal Waterway. This is Federal infrastructure well
    beyond the capacity of any community to be able to upgrade. We
    are working with the Army Corps of Engineers on recommended top
    elevations for our seawalls under future climate conditions. We
    should use that information to inform investments on those
    barriers to coastal flooding.
        Seawalls in Broward County, we have 350 miles of shoreline
    with all the finger canals and waterways in the county. Those
    will collectively have to be upgraded to a common top
    elevation. Easily, that price tag is $1 billion to $4 billion,
    depending on the structural integrity of those seawalls.
        And you have all the municipal storm systems and roadways
    that can potentially be addressed at the same time.
        Those are the key pieces of infrastructure that I suggest
    we might begin with.
        Mr. Deutch. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Hedde?
        Mr. Hedde. Sure. As a global insurer, reinsurer, we wind up
    paying losses across a wide spectrum of properties, whether
    they are residential or commercial. And we are strong
    supporters of stronger and large investment in infrastructure.
    We focus on the infrastructure that ultimately will protect
    these businesses and homes that we are working in.
        On a micro level, listening to us, we talk a lot about
    protecting homes, better building codes. We are a member of the
    IBHS, the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety,
    focusing on keeping people safe with broader, better protection
    across the economy.
        Mr. Deutch. Dr. Berry?
        Dr. Berry. Yes, I would focus on the kind of
    infrastructure. And just like after hurricanes, we have a
    tendency to put back what was there before. I would like to see
    any new infrastructure from roads to waterways and so on built
    with an appreciation of climate change.
        Let's have roadways that cannot move water off them but can
    add water into them. Let's build water and roadways that are
    compatible with one another.
        What we often do is put in a highway, and then we have to
    add drains and we have to add all kinds of other things to get
    rid of the water up there.
        Let's look at an integrated way to use a big $1 trillion
    infrastructure bill to create a new moon landing kind of
    approach to it. Let's not do what we have done. Let's create a
    new image of what is the infrastructure of the future, and
    build our electronic infrastructure into this too. We always
    think of roads and rails. What about the electronic
    infrastructure that we need? How should that be? How do we look
    at that 20 years ahead?
        So a futuristic view is what I would appreciate.
        Mr. Deutch. Thank you.
        Dr. Kirtman, any thoughts?
        Dr. Kirtman. It is difficult for me to expand on what my
    colleagues have said. That is a wonderful list. I hope that all
    happens.
        The one thing is I would like to underscore some comments
    that Len said. I think it is critically important that we take
    a holistic view when we think about infrastructure, and that
    holistic view has to include multiple time horizons and
    multiple inputs.
        So we really need to be very, very careful that we
    implement a no-regrets strategy, that we do not do anything
    that we regret 10 years or 20 years or 30 years from now, and
    we also need to be very careful that we take in all the best
    available information. We need to anticipate all of the
    unanticipated events that could happen in how we design our
    infrastructure in the future.
        There are going to be very difficult decisions in the
    future about how we go forward, and we need to start thinking
    and planning for those things now. That requires socialization
    and that requires a lot of careful thinking, and we need to do
    that.
        Mr. Deutch. Thanks.
        Senator, I hope that, in addition to taking these findings
    from this hearing back to Washington, that you will share these
    responses with the White House as well, as they are putting
    together this infrastructure plan. Everything that our
    witnesses suggested will not only help us address climate
    change but will help to preserve and strengthen our economy,
    which is the goal that I think we all share, Democrats and
    Republicans, and what is ought to be driving us today.
        Senator Nelson. I am curious, Dr. Berry. What do you mean
    by a road--I got the impression that it is a road that absorbs
    water?
        Dr. Berry. Yes.
        Senator Nelson. Tell me, what is it made of?
        Dr. Berry. I know in Chicago that any sidewalk renovation
    is done with permeable sidewalks. This is not my field, so I am
    kind of brainstorming. But can we have roads that do not spew
    water everywhere and create new problems on either side,
    particularly here in Florida? But if we had roads that could
    absorb water rather than disperse water, then I think we would
    be dealing with two problems at the same time. I know there is
    some technology.
        Senator Nelson. You are seeing that in driveways, for
    example, in homes. The intrigue that you have caused me to
    wonder is, can you get that kind of surface that will stand up
    to the wear and tear of trucks, et cetera?
        Dr. Berry. That is where our challenges come from.
        Senator Nelson. That is exactly right.
        Madam Mayor?
        Ms. Muoio. Just to sort of add to that, I think we have to
    be rethinking our whole transportation system, and roads and
    cars and be working on mass transit and alternative ways to get
    people around other than building another road.
        So a question I have as a local leader, we are charged
    locally with building codes and establishing building codes.
    What would you advise us to do in terms of our building codes
    to be more resilient to sea-level rise? What kinds of things
    should we be including in our building codes moving forward?
        We can start with Dr. Kirtman.
        Dr. Kirtman. So, first of all, I think all building codes
    should include all the possible scenarios of sea-level rise
    over the lifetime of the building. So that should be a
    requirement. We should be thinking about how does a building
    recover from tidal flooding and storm surge flooding.
        So I think we have to think that there is going to be time
    when the ground floor, whether that be parking or what, is
    going to be flooded. And how rapidly are you going to recover?
        So I think we have to think that our buildings are going to
    have a certain amount of flooding that is going to happen, but
    how quickly can you recover? I think that is how we have to
    think about our building codes, is think about rapid recovery
    from anticipated events.
        Ms. Muoio. Dr. Berry?
        Dr. Berry. Already, in Miami-Dade, a number of hospitals
    have taken electrical equipment and raised it. I think that is
    for houses too. I think we have to look at the potential fire
    hazards and potential electrical hazards and make sure those
    are out of a reasonable flood zone.
        So that is not a usual building code, but that is one I
    think ought to be implemented.
        Mr. Hedde. I would identify three areas.
        I think from the local community standpoint, it starts with
    a planned use plan and keeping structures out of harm's way.
    That is one of the easiest things.
        As I have worked on building code issues, I have been
    appalled at the lack of strength in some communities' building
    codes. Luckily, in Florida, they are fairly strong.
        So the second piece I would agree would be the elevation of
    the structure, make sure the structure is elevated.
        I think the last piece that people forget is that we need
    to build foundation systems that are strong enough to withstand
    storm surge. A lot of these things are not strong enough. So in
    spite of being elevated, they do not withstand the storm surge.
        Dr. Jurado. I think that the responses thus far have been
    quite substantial. I appreciate the need to elevate structures
    and have some uniformity. Consistently, we hear about the
    importance of having consistency across our codes, making sure
    that whatever we do in the build environment will be consistent
    with transportation and drainage systems, since everything is
    interconnected.
        But independent of the resiliency of flood protection,
    focus I think on the challenge in Florida, which is the
    inability to dictate really on how to treat energy within the
    build environment. There are substantial limitations about
    requirements for renewable energy many local governments, for
    example, might want to see advance.
        So some flexibility with regards to energy code at the
    State level would be useful.
        Ms. Muoio. Very good. Thank you so much for your comments.
    I appreciate it.
        Senator Nelson. Madam Mayor?
        Ms. Burdick. Thank you.
        We have talked a lot about what we can do to mitigate the
    impacts of climate change. And I thought I heard, Dr. Berry,
    that there is nothing that we can do to mitigate those in the
    near future?
        We talk about carbon and carbon tax. We talk about trying
    to reduce the problems of climate change. We hoped that we were
    going to get cutbacks on coal, and it looks like some of that
    is changing.
        So what are some of the preventive things that we should be
    doing locally, nationally, and globally, to reduce climate
    change? And how do we best educate our public?
        Dr. Berry. For Florida, I am not a pessimist, but I am a
    realist, in the sense that we should mitigate what we can. We
    should have clean energy, and we should be efficient. But the
    rest of the world is imposing its will on us at least for the
    next 20, 30, 40 years in that the emissions that we are already
    on our way to creating or are already there are going to result
    in sea-level rise. If we stop everything now, there still will
    be sea-level rise. We are not going to stop everything now. It
    is too complicated.
        So sea level and emissions are going to go on in the best
    world, in my opinion, for 20 or 30 years. Therefore, given
    where we are, we have to mitigate the impact of the global sea-
    level rise.
        At the same time, we ought to be moving to new forms of
    energy. We ought to be moving, as the mayor says, to thinking
    through not just electric cars but ways of transportation. We
    started. We have local communities that are very advanced in
    that.
        Changing our ways of life individually is something that I
    do not do very well but some people do in terms of where we go,
    what we transport, how we manage driving a single car or
    driving with four people. There are lots of small things that
    we ought to do. But we also ought to be realistic and say the
    big picture for South Florida is not going to change until we
    better understand how we can manage it and take advantage of
    it.
        What I say in my written testimony is that we have the
    opportunity, as Commissioner Abraham said in another interview,
    of creating innovation technology in dealing with flooding, in
    dealing with structure that I have talked about.
        So we can turn a problem into an opportunity here in South
    Florida. We are the bad example, if you like. Bad, but we can
    turn it into something good. It is a lesson, like the Dutch.
    The Dutch are exporters of technology to deal with floods.
        We could create our own patterns of technology, our own
    social responses, and, therefore, be exporters of good things
    to the rest of the coastal areas of the country that are going
    to have the same problems that we are having maybe 5, 10 years
    down the road.
        Ms. Burdick. It makes that collaboration piece with the
    South Florida regional climate compact all the more important
    so that we can all work together to find these innovative
    solutions and implement them.
        Thank you.
        Senator Nelson. And the big difference between the
    Netherlands and Florida is that we sit on top of a honeycomb of
    all kinds of materials that are decayed from seashells and
    critters over millions of years, and that honeycomb of
    limestone is filled with water. Thus, saltwater intrusion,
    because saltwater is heavier than freshwater. As the saltwater
    rises, it comes inland, and it invades our honeycomb.
        You, Dr. Jurado, have had a number of your wellfields in
    Broward County invaded. You have closed two in the county.
    Hallandale Beach has relocated further to the west six.
    Deerfield Beach has abandoned eight.
        So what in the world?
        Dr. Jurado. The issue of saltwater intrusion is incredibly
    problematic. Working with the USGS, we have seen that sea-level
    rise has accelerated the land movement of the front by about a
    factor of two. We, as I indicated, expect to lose about 40
    percent of coastal wellfield capacity in the future sea-level
    rise, and that is sea-level rise, because we are actually
    precluded, the regional policy for taking more from the
    Biscayne aquifer, and thus we have an offset. So this was
    really driven by sea-level rise.
        And so that will require substantial relocation of wells to
    the west. We are also working with Palm Beach County, however,
    and a diverse number of stakeholders on a regional reservoir.
    And that is the other thing that we need in our region is more
    storage, because we simply lack the land for long-term water
    storage. Even though we receive rainfall of 20 inches at a
    time, we are trying to find a place to put it.
        But storage in the system when we are trying to manage
    saltwater intrusion in extreme drought is going to be really
    critical, and it is another piece of infrastructure funding. We
    are pursuing funds to the tune of $160 million for Phase 1 of
    the C-51 reservoir, which could provide water supply and
    environmental benefits for Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade
    counties--full-scale, a $460 million reservoir providing up to
    150 million gallons per day and water supply for the region.
        So investments in alternative water supplies such as storm
    water reuse and reclaimed water coupled with conservation will
    be an absolute necessity.
        Senator Nelson. And, Congressman, this fits hand-in-glove
    with our Everglades restoration efforts, moving that water
    south and increasingly getting it cleansed as it is coming
    south, ultimately into Everglades Park into Florida Bay as well
    as the Shark River Slough.
        How do these municipalities monitor the aquifer to
    determine whether the freshwater has been contaminated?
        Dr. Jurado. We have an extensive groundwater monitoring
    network with wells that are maintained by the South Florida
    Water Management District, by the individual water utilities,
    by Broward County, and by the USGS. So this saltwater network
    is monitored monthly. We have more than 50 years of data the
    state has now used to help develop models that are informing
    our decisions today.
        So it is a vast network, one that we are actually
    upgrading. Just now we have been holding regional workshops.
    Since the saltwater front has moved beyond many of the wells
    that were previously used to measure the advancement of the
    front, they are already salty, so we are having to recalibrate
    that network for the current condition. But it is aggressively
    monitored and wellfields managed in accordance with these water
    shortages and predictive losses.
        Senator Nelson. And moving those wells further west
    ultimately ends up with the customer paying more because of the
    added expense.
        Dr. Jurado. That is correct. Moving the wellfields will
    cost something. We also have to recognize that we have water
    treatment facilities that are associated with individual
    wellfields. And if we have to move the wellfields outside of
    the regional water treatment facilities, then you are
    potentially looking at new water treatment facilities as well.
        The other thing though is, if we have to move to reclaimed
    water or brackish water sources as an alternative water supply,
    those require more in the way of treatment to produce potable
    water and much higher energy costs. So the reservoir option is
    highly attractive because it is freshwater. It does not require
    a higher level of treatment, such as the removal of salt.
        So storm water reuse coupled with conservation are really
    the most attractive strategies.
        Senator Nelson. Dr. Kirtman and Dr. Berry, you know I
    mentioned at the outset the attempts to try to cut the budgets
    of anything that measures climate change. This is all the way
    from programs existing in NOAA and NASA to future satellites
    that would have all of these very intricate measurements.
        Now, to what extent does your work rely on climate-
    observing platforms like those satellites?
        Dr. Kirtman. A great deal of my work relies on observing
    networks.
        So one of the projects we have at the University of Miami
    is to make forecasts based on decades. And how do you make
    those forecasts? You need to have some way of saying what the
    state of the climate system is today in order to project it
    into the future. That information, that state of the climate
    system today, comes from our observing networks, our satellite
    platforms, our ocean buoy systems, our drifter buoy systems,
    our radio sound data.
        If we stop collecting data, that is truly putting your head
    in the sand. Just because you stop collecting data does not
    mean the climate change problem is not continuing to progress.
        So first and foremost, you need to monitor the health of
    the climate system. That is first and foremost. We have to put
    a red line in the sand in stopping any attempt to remove the
    collection of data. This is critical.
        Senator Nelson. Just to put a point to this and to
    underline it, I want, Dr. Kirtman, if you will, just shortly
    describe how a lot of this data that you are talking about for
    climate change also goes into our computers to help us with the
    direction and the velocity and the intensity of hurricanes.
        Dr. Kirtman. Exactly. That is a wonderful question,
    Senator.
        It is exactly the same kind of data that we use to make
    better forecasts for extreme rainfall, better forecasts for
    hurricanes. All of that data is the data of the climate system.
    We do not make a distinction when we observe the atmosphere of
    the ocean, the land surface. We do not make a distinction
    whether it is climate change data or whether it is just weather
    data. It is data.
        If we throw away that data on the state of the ocean
    because we worry about it revealing some climate change, we are
    throwing away our opportunity to improve our forecasts for the
    intensity of hurricanes, our ability to predict storm surge.
        I cannot say enough how much of a threat this is to lives
    and property and economic opportunity and national security.
    This is day-to-day weather, not only climate change. It is of
    paramount importance.
        Senator Nelson. Dr. Berry, did you want to add to that?
        Dr. Berry. I am as passionate as he is with this. It is not
    just for science. Communities that are dealing with current
    problems need to have information. Miami Beach cannot put the
    pumps in there and just guess that sea-level rise or that king
    tides are a certain height or sea-level rise is going to be
    something. We need information. Companies need information.
    Engineering work needs that same information.
        The company I work with at the household level is using
    LIDAR data based on NOAA. We are using tide data. We are using
    all kinds of data that come out of the Federal Government.
        This government, I mean, I was born in England, and one of
    the things that I recognized many decades ago is that
    information is treated differently in different parts of the
    world. We have a tradition going back dozens, hundreds of years
    of saying the data comes from taxpayers and it goes back to
    taxpayers. It is open.
        And I was so impressed with the USGS at one time putting
    data out on streamflow. And who used it? Trout fishermen, OK?
    And that is great.
        And so I cannot emphasize how important it is not just for
    science but for everybody.
        Senator Nelson. And that is so true in Florida not only for
    commercial fishermen but for recreational fishermen as well.
        Now, Mr. Hedde, your industry, the reinsurance industry, so
    you are insuring against catastrophe, you really rely on this
    data, don't you, to make your calculations?
        Mr. Hedde. Yes. So I asked if I could comment because we
    definitely rely on this information.
        That is a surprise to some who really do not understand our
    industry, where we rely on this information to value risk.
        When you value risk, if you add uncertainty into the value,
    that impacts the valuation, usually on the higher side of the
    price. So that is one way.
        A lot of our transactions, especially in the reinsurance
    industry, are based on triggers that are based on NOAA data
    that's supplied. So I made a point in my testimony today to say
    that we rely on NOAA information.
        Senator Nelson. All right. Just so that you will know how
    we are getting all the more accurate, you have heard of the
    Hurricane Hunters. They fly into the hurricane. They are
    usually in the range of 15,000 to 30,000 feet.
        They are taking data real-time from their instruments. They
    are dropping an instrumented package about that long. It has a
    little parachute on it, and it goes all the way down to the
    ocean. It sends back real-time data to the airplane, which is
    sent immediately by satellite to the National Hurricane Center.
        At the same time flying over the top of the hurricane is
    the G-IV. We had it down one time during a hurricane, so I
    think we are able to get another one. We just got it in the
    NOAA bill. And it is doing the same thing, from 45,000 feet,
    dropping an instrument. Here is the latest gizmo, and the P-3
    that goes into the storm.
        Now they are putting out through a hole that big an
    instrumented package that comes out and, all of a sudden, it
    sprouts wings and a motor fires up. And now you have a UAV
    inside the hurricane that can fly actually in and stay in the
    hurricane eyewall giving us more measurements.
        And they are thinking that we might get an accuracy as a
    result of that from 10 to 15 percentage points even more
    accurate in our data.
        Now, Dr. Jurado, so the people that are trying to muzzle
    scientists--it is happening. I have seen it in Washington. I
    have seen it here in the state of Florida Government.
        Could you do your job effectively if you could not use
    certain scientific terms?
        Dr. Jurado. I cannot imagine planning for the future
    conditions of the community and making informed policy planning
    investment decisions without recognizing the reality of what
    the driving factors are. And in our region, climate change and
    sea-level rise are the primary influences for which we need to
    be organizing policy planning investments for decades to come.
    I cannot imagine those being informed or fruitful investments
    if they were not based upon credible use of scientific data and
    in large part on contemplation of the impacts of climate change
    on our environment.
        Senator Nelson. And, Mr. Hedde, what would happen in your
    industry if you, as a consumer, a homeowner, could not get
    accurate climate data and climate change on which to make your
    decisions on what your purchases are?
        Mr. Hedde. We have seen a change in our industry over the
    last 5 years.
        About 5 years ago, our clients would ask us to come and
    talk about climate change at the board level but tell us
    specifically not to use ``climate change'' in our words. Over
    the last couple years, we still come back and talk about
    climate change, but they are allowing us to use ``climate
    change.''
        It comes back to my point before. We use the data to
    accurately assess risk. And insurance plays such an important
    part in our economy, if we are not properly able to assess the
    risk, it is a drag on the economy.
        So it makes our answers better. It makes our product
    better. It makes our response to events better.
        Senator Nelson. And would you believe that I have even had
    to file a Scientific Integrity Act to define common scientific
    values free from political interference?
        Mr. Hedde. It does not surprise me.
        Senator Nelson. It has come to that, as well as to try to
    keep from the intimidation and censorship that we see.
        Congressman, do you have another question?
        Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Senator.
        I just want to follow up on your important question about
    terminology and what is actually happening.
        I think it is fair to say, and the witnesses can correct me
    if I am wrong, and, Mr. Hedde, I think you just alluded to
    this, that every major company in the United States and likely
    in the world devotes some core part of its time and resources
    to addressing the issues that we will be grappling with as a
    result of climate change, whether it is supply chain
    disruptions, issues driving sustainability, the severity of
    storms.
        So the business community understands that we have to be
    tackling this, and they do it in a thoughtful and responsible
    way. And I am sure the same is true for Senator Nelson for
    meetings I have had in my office with corporate leaders from
    some of the largest corporations, including energy companies
    who understand that we have to start to anticipate the impact
    this is having, address it, and even recognize that carbon has
    a cost in doing business.
        So the business community gets it.
        Local government, again, Dr. Jurado, as a professional, not
    a politician, local governments run by Democratic and
    Republican administrations who are grappling with sea-level
    rise firsthand and the impact firsthand, and the issues of
    climate change firsthand, are having responsible discussions
    about how to address it, because as Dr. Kirtman points out,
    when we have multiple lines of evidence making it clear that
    human activity makes a dramatic impact on climate change, then
    we all have to be examining it.
        Why is it--I am not sure that anybody can answer this.
    Perhaps it is a rhetorical question. But why is it that when
    the business community understands what is at stake for the
    future of our economy and our country, and our local
    governments understand what is at stake, why is it that there
    are some in important roles in our government who continue to,
    as, Dr. Kirtman, I think as you put it, continue to put their
    hand in the sand? And, by the way, in Florida, that sand is the
    coastline and the water is getting closer.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Deutch. So why is it that there is this ongoing denial
    that we see in some very narrow segments of our government?
        I am not sure, Senator, if anyone wishes to answer that.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Deutch. But I suppose I would ask another way.
        You would agree that, given your eloquent testimony and the
    work that every one of you does every day in this area, that it
    is difficult if not impossible to accept the fact that there
    are those in important positions of power who will continue to
    deny the necessity of taking on these issues that every one of
    you has devoted your life to?
        Four nods across the table.
        Senator Nelson. I am going to ask the Congressman's
    question in another way.
        First of all, one of you testified about, particularly
    after Hurricane Andrew, the changing building standards.
        That is something I will never forget, flying in a National
    Guard helicopter over ground zero the day after Hurricane
    Andrew. There were two buildings that were left standing. One
    was the bank building, and the other one was an old Florida
    cracker house that had been built in the 1920s to withstand
    wind. Everything else was leveled.
        Indeed, as a result of that rather traumatic experience in
    1992, we have really, to the credit of the local communities
    and their governments, brought up building standards.
        So, certainly, that means a lot to you, Mr. Hedde. But it
    also means a lot to folks like this from local government that
    you do have predisaster mitigation grants and community rating
    systems to reduce the risk. And that means that you need those
    FEMA programs.
        And remember what I said? They were reducing FEMA 11
    percent in the budget for these kind of programs? What would
    that do to you in Broward County, Dr. Jurado?
        Dr. Jurado. Broward County and many of the local
    communities in our state are very active participants in CRS.
    The CRS program has served as a critical incentive for really
    robust flood mitigation strategies that reduce our reliance on
    FEMA because we have built-in protections in the way we develop
    and design the community.
        The savings are, I don't know, in the tens and hundreds of
    millions of dollars in terms of the policy reductions that are
    delivered to residents in the community. We are strong
    supporters of the CRS and the type of robust standards that
    have elevated all of our flood protection measures by helping
    deliver resources to communities.
        And with FEMA being $30 billion, $20 billion in the
    negative, we can no longer afford to expose ourselves to flood
    risks, and we need programs that help all of our communities
    build resilience and do it cost-effectively. The cost of
    insurance has to be something we keep our eye on.
        Senator Nelson. Mayors, I have one more question. Do you
    have any questions?
        Ms. Muoio. Thank you so much for being here.
        Senator Nelson. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
        All right, Mr. Hedde, you mentioned that there was over $40
    billion in economic loss due to storm events just last year in
    2016, and you said that about half of that was insured losses.
    So that means the remaining half was not insured, so that was
    going to have to be paid by somebody.
        So given the modeling scenarios that you have seen, do you
    think those losses that are primarily being borne by the
    individuals, since they were not insured losses, will rise in
    the future, given what we are seeing?
        Mr. Hedde. That is a tough calculation. We see a pretty
    steady historical insured versus noninsured penetration within
    the U.S., so I think everything will rise most likely at that
    variable.
        What disturbs me more is the lack of penetration on flood
    insurance, where we do not see a large penetration of flood
    insurance or earthquake insurance. I think that ultimately will
    impact the banking industry, because so much of their portfolio
    is not insured upfront.
        So we are looking at solutions for increasing the
    penetration of flood insurance and participating heavily in
    NFIP program insurance this year. We developed our inland flood
    product that we are offering to people, not competing with the
    NFIP but supplementing people who do not live in coastal
    regions but are subject to inland flooding.
        So I think there are ways to address that. Ultimately, I
    look at it as we need to change behavior, both in the long term
    and the short term.
        And coming back to the question around funding, I think we
    need to make incentives available to help people change
    behavior, become more resilient, whether it is building a
    stronger house, whether it is energy efficiency. There are so
    many things that we need to have funds for to be able to take
    care of this problem.
        Senator Nelson. I want to thank everybody. We have covered
    this subject in depth. It is exactly what we wanted to do in a
    field hearing.
        Thank you, and the meeting is adjourned.
        [Applause.]
        [Whereupon, at 3:14 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
                               Ben Kirtman, Ph.D.
        Question. Dr. Kirtman, you told us that for about 800,000 years,
    the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere stayed between 180 and 280
    parts per million. And in less than 150 years, we've seem an
    unprecedented rise in CO2. A few years ago, I visited the
    NOAA observatory on top of Mauna Loa, and it was a bittersweet moment.
    The CO2 reading was 399. The scientists told me it was
    probably the last reading that would be below 400 parts per million.
    Today, we are at 405 parts per million.
        Dr. Kirtman, without action to curb emissions, what is the likely
    carbon concentration we will see in 10 years? And even with significant
    climate action now, will we still need to invest in adaptation to make
    coastal communities more resilient?
        Answer. Given the current trajectory, I would expect CO2
    levels to go from 405 ppmv today to about 450 ppmv ten years from
    today.
        Even if we were somehow about to reduce CO2 levels to
    say 370 ppmv (the concentration from 2000) today we would still be
    committed to significant warming for the next 25 years. This is the
    climate change commitment that is already ``baked-into'' the system.
    Essentially, adaptation will always be a 25-year or so time horizon
    challenge as long as greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue to
    rise.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
                          Leonard ``Len'' Berry, Ph.D.
        Question. Dr. Berry, your testimony included a letter to the
    President signed by several Florida scientists that notes three
    important climate change considerations: the need for continued Federal
    earth science research, the importance of scientific integrity, and
    federally important coastal properties at risk.
        The letter specifically mentioned the Kennedy Space Center and Cape
    Canaveral. Can you describe how sea level rise may threaten our space
    launch capabilities?
        Answer. In highlighting the vulnerability of many military
    facilities to sea level rise, we, as scientists, are stating the
    obvious.
        Air Force bases, Naval bases, and many Army bases are located in
    coastal areas, and in the search for flat, available land, many are on
    the coast at low levels above the high tide mark. In a world where sea
    levels had remained relatively stable for hundreds of years, this made
    sound sense, particularly as aircraft and rockets could take off across
    the ocean.
        In the world of today, where sea levels have already risen at least
    nine inches, and are on an accelerating course, with anticipated rises
    of up to two feet in the next thirty years, and more than double that
    by the end of the century, those coastal locations can present tough
    problems.
        Higher sea levels provide a higher base level for storm surge and
    also high ground water tables which can compromise infrastructure.
    Bases in Florida provide plenty of examples. Patrick (near Cocoa),
    McDill (near Tampa) and Elgin (in the Panhandle) Air Force Bases all
    have areas close to sea level. McDill has a mean height of about five
    feet, easily vulnerable to storm surge now and in the future. Patrick
    AFB and Elgin AFB are higher but have significant areas of
    vulnerability.
        But the most threatened facilities are at Cape Canaveral, where a
    recent report has said ``rising sea levels are the single biggest
    threat to the facility with over two thirds of constructed
    infrastructure and more of the land area are below sixteen feet and
    vulnerable to storm surge as sea levels rise.'' (Source: https://
    www.giss.nasa
    .gov/research/features/201508_risingseas/)
        It is important to note two things. First, the bad news is that
    projections of the rate and amount of sea level rise are growing
    steadily, as we have more information and understanding of the
    processes involved. The second is better news, that with ongoing basic
    research and analysis, we can be continually better informed and able
    to adapt and protect these vital facilities.
        As many have said, adaption needs to start now based on the best
    available science and the best ongoing collection of vital data. The
    very facilities under risk are those needed to preserve our information
    flow and our ability to guide our future.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
                                 Carl G. Hedde
        Question 1. Mr. Hedde, you noted that most of our homes and
    businesses aren't built to withstand the severe weather we currently
    experience from time to time, much less more extreme events in a
    changing climate. Is this true for hospitals and schools too?
        Answer. It is not possible to make a blanket statement regarding
    the construction quality of our Nation's schools and hospitals.
    Engineers are required to incorporate safety features based on a
    building's primary or intended function. For example, ASCE 24-14 is the
    industry consensus standard for flood resistant design and
    construction, and uses four building categories to guide engineers on
    flood design specifications: the first is for accessory buildings
    (e.g., garages), the second is for residential homes and general
    commercial buildings, the third is for large gathering places, and the
    forth is for essential service facilities, such as hospitals and fire
    stations. In ASCE 24-14 elementary schools are considered a class three
    building, unless they also serve as a designated emergency shelter, in
    which case they are considered a class four. The higher the class, the
    more the building must be elevated and flood-proofed. Similarly,
    seismic loads and design requirements are more robust for schools and
    hospitals. Wind loads are typically increased for schools and hospitals
    either through an importance factor in older versions of codes and
    standards, or through maps with higher design wind speeds in more
    recent building codes and standards. While ASCE 24-14 and other wind
    and seismic standards have been around for decades, not all buildings
    were historically built to code, while others may have been constructed
    after a code was put into place, but lax enforcement allowed the
    building to be under-constructed. We have seen numerous examples of
    Hurricanes and Tornadoes causing severe damage to schools and
    hospitals. As a nation, it is important that infrastructure such as
    schools and hospitals be constructed based on forward looking
    conditions that might be experienced in the future.

        Question 2.This August will mark 25 years since Hurricane Andrew
    devastated Homestead, Florida. If Hurricane Andrew were to happen in
    2017, given our current building codes and coastal development
    patterns, what would the loss be like?
        Answer. Hurricane Andrew was a strong wake up call for the need for
    stronger building codes and practices. More than half of the U.S.
    population lives in one of the Nation's 673 coastal counties, and
    values of properties in these coastal regions have increased since
    Hurricane Andrew. If a storm similar to Hurricane Andrew would happen
    in 2017, the resulting damage would be heavily dependent on where the
    storm occurs. While building codes have improved during the years since
    Hurricane Andrew, building code application and enforcement varies by
    state, and further varies by local community within states. Since
    Hurricane Andrew, building codes in Florida have been greatly improved,
    and we would expect better building performance for buildings build in
    Florida's coastal regions since the post Hurricane Andrew building
    codes were implemented. Unfortunately, the same strengthening has not
    occurred in all coastal regions along our Nation's coast. Organizations
    such as IBHS (Insurance Institute for Building and Home Safety) have
    conducted extensive research on building performance, with the ultimate
    goal to improve building practices and products, and better inform the
    development of stronger building codes.

        Question 3. This August will mark 25 years since Hurricane Andrew
    devastated Homestead, Florida. Are there resources available to
    homeowners who want to strengthen their homes, and have we supported
    those efforts sufficiently at the Federal level?
        Answer. A number of insurers and reinsurers writing insurance in
    the United States have formed and financially support a non-profit
    organization dedicated to researching and communicating effective
    measures that can be taken to reduce loss to human life, homes, and
    businesses from natural disasters. IBHS (Insurance Institute for
    Business and Home Safety) conducts critical research that will improve
    building practices, building materials and building codes. Insurers
    continue to new find ways to communicate with policy holders on ways to
    protect and strengthen their homes and businesses. Munich Re has
    developed The FORTIFIED HomeTM On the Go Tablet App. The app
    has been designed for an iPad, is an interactive tool for homeowners,
    contractors and architects to use when building or retrofitting a
    single-family home to make it a more fortified structure. It includes
    information about the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety
    (IBHS) FORTIFIED HomeTM program which is designed to
    strengthen homes. The ``app'' is a ``free'' app available on the iTunes
    app store. We would ask that all Congressional offices make the ``app''
    available to their constituents.
        The Federal Government is exploring several new programs to help
    prioritize risk mitigation spending over disaster response. The FEMA
    Disaster Deductible is a good example of risk sharing and incentivizing
    mitigation. FEMA is financially supporting a new study to update the
    often stated statistic that every dollar spent on mitigation saves $4
    is disaster recovery. The study will be completed by the National
    Institute for Building Science (NIBS). We feel that the study should be
    fully funded by Congressional appropriators.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
                             Dr. Jennifer L. Jurado
        Question. Dr. Jurado, you mentioned that a recent estimate done in
    partnership with the Corps of Engineers suggested that for Broward
    County to execute a plan for resilient seawalls would cost anywhere
    from $1 billion to $4 billion--and that failing to act would be far
    more costly. How can counties like yours even begin to finance such
    massive capital improvements?
        Answer. Just to clarify, Broward County is in the midst of a study
    with the Corps of Engineers to develop recommended sea wall top
    elevations needed to deliver flood protection with rising seas. The
    study will formally evaluate the flood protection level of service
    derived with a 2.5 foot increase in sea wall height. Concurrently,
    Broward County is developing cost estimates for collective raising/
    armoring of the 350 miles of canal banks and waterways along our
    shoreline. The final figure will depend on the initial condition of the
    seawall and the construction approach, but we estimate the cost to be
    between $1 billion and $4 billion. This infrastructure upgrade will
    need to be coupled with additional stormwater improvements and
    resilient investments as part of development practices, efforts which
    are already underway.
        Regarding the question of financing, local communities simply can't
    do this alone. The scale of investment needed far exceeds the resources
    and bonding capacity of individual communities, while the timeline for
    execution is urgent. A Federal partnership is essential, as has been
    the case in advancing many of the most sizeable infrastructure projects
    and investments in our nation--investments which have served to connect
    and protect our communities as they exist today, including ports,
    bridges, roadways, waterways, regional flood control systems, and
    reservoirs. These investments provided a foundation for communities,
    including our coastal communities, to develop and thrive. However, many
    coastal communities are now exposed to new pressures and excessive,
    unforeseen infrastructure needs, which threaten to overwhelm our
    capabilities. Local sources alone won't be sufficient, given the costs
    and timeframes involved. We are not punting responsibility; however, we
    recognize that diverse funding sources and alternative funding streams
    will need to be pursued. Therefore, we desperately need the support of
    the Federal Government, and of our Federal agency partners, including
    the Corps of Engineers, to undertake the large-scale flood protection
    investments our region needs. These infrastructure upgrades are vital
    to protect against catastrophic flood damage, service disruptions, and
    threats to public safety. They will deliver a sizeable return on
    investment, ensuring long-term economic well-being of national
    consequence, while substantially reducing the potential for costly
    Federal post-disaster assistance often required in the aftermath of
    severe floods and storms. Absent organized investments to address our
    risks, these events will only increase in severity and consequence.

                                      [all]