[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, [email protected].
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]