I suppose maybe they didn’t see this study on how a long forgotten seawall helped save homes in New Jersey.
The best defense against catastrophic storms: Mother Nature, say Stanford researchers
Stanford researchers say that natural habitats such as dunes and reefs are the best protection against storms and rising sea levels along the U.S. coastline.
By Elizabeth Rauer
Extreme weather, sea level rise and degraded coastal systems are placing people and property at greater risk along the coast. Natural habitats such as dunes and reefs are critical to protecting millions of U.S. residents and billions of dollars in property from coastal storms, according to a new study by scientists with the Natural Capital Project at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment.
The study, “Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms,” published July 14 in the journal Nature Climate Change, offers the first comprehensive map of the entire U.S. coastline that shows where and how much protection communities get from natural habitats such as sand dunes, coral reefs, sea grasses and mangroves. The likelihood and magnitude of losses can be reduced by intact ecosystems near vulnerable coastal communities.
One map shows predicted exposure of the United States coastline and coastal population to sea level rise and storms in the year 2100. An interactive map can be zoomed in on for the West, Gulf or East coasts; Hawaii or Alaska; or the continental United States.
“The natural environment plays a key role in protecting our nation’s coasts,” said study lead author Katie Arkema, a Woods postdoctoral scholar. “If we lose these defenses, we will either have to have massive investments in engineered defenses or risk greater damage to millions of people and billions in property.”
With the release of the Obama administration’s Climate Action Plan on June 25, there is renewed interest in coastal resilience and climate adaptation planning, as well as in finding natural ways to protect America’s coastline. Billions of dollars will soon be spent on restoration activities in the Gulf of Mexico and the Eastern Seaboard affected by Hurricane Sandy. Leaders can make decisions now to factor natural capital into decisions that could have long-term benefits.
“As a nation, we should be investing in nature to protect our coastal communities,” said Mary Ruckelshaus, managing director of the Natural Capital Project. “The number of people, poor families, elderly and total value of residential property that are most exposed to hazards can be reduced by half if existing coastal habitats remain fully intact.”
At a moment when many coastal planners are considering their options for dealing with the impacts of sea level rise, the study provides both a national and a localized look at coastal areas where restoration and conservation of natural habitats could make the biggest difference.
“Hardening our shorelines with sea walls and other costly engineering shouldn’t be the default solution,” said Peter Kareiva, the chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy and co-author of the study. “This study helps us identify those places and opportunities we have to keep nature protecting our coastal communities – and giving us all the other benefits it can provide, such as recreation, fish nurseries, water filtration and erosion control.”
The Natural Capital Project is a partnership with the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, the University of Minnesota’s Institute on the Environment, The Nature Conservancy and the World Wildlife Fund, aimed at aligning economic forces with conservation. The project works to integrate ecosystem services approaches into all major resource decisions that affect Earth’s natural resources.
For more information about the study, visit naturalcapitalproject.org.
@Blade
“””””……There is a pure and simple solution that would really scale back government power, a Constitutional Amendment ( one of quite a few we will need ) that prohibits the government from giving ( granting ) any taxpayer money to anyone. ……””””””
Well you don’t need ANY Constitutional amendments.
Article I section 8 , clause 1 of the existing US Constitution, says that the Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes, to pay the debt, and provide for the common defense, and general welfare OF THE UNITED STATES (that’s Washington DC; not Tom Dick, and Harry).
Nowhere are they empowered to collect taxes for anything else. Just pay the national debts and the military, and take care of the federal government.
Well unfortunately, it says what they can raise taxes for, but it doesn’t say what they can spend money on.
So they spend money they don’t have on anything their hearts desire, and then it becomes part of the national debt, which they can raise taxes to pay off.
Incidently, the first words of the US Constitution are : Article I section 1… NOT “we the people”, that;s in the “library card” that says what the Constitution is for.
Anyone know of a Supreme Court decision, that ever cited the preamble, as the enabling authority for its ruling ??
We had a similar problem in the UK when the enviro bods wanted to enclose some salt meadows by a new sea wall. A local expert forced cancellation to let the meadow flood naturally during storms and spring tides to reduce inland flooding. To government amazement it worked and saved the cost of a sea wall.
FYI, Most of the flooding occurring here in the PPDREU-UK happens due to poor catchment maintenance & management, Local Authorities being short of revenue allowing developers to build on flood plains, both natural & created, without ensuring design was adequate to allow for flooding to occur! I don’t mind flood plains being built on per se but so long as the design is adequate, & can withstand the highest known flood water, there shouldn’t be a problem. There are also one or two areas here where flooding rivers have reached extreme heights of 20 feet or more, flood local pubs – a true tragedy in any beer man’s book!!!!! Anyway, they’ll still be pumping out the rhetoric anywhere in the world about “the worst flooding for 75 years”, thinking everyone is as stupid as they are, by implying it is something to do with AGW! HAGWE folks everywhere, now where are those four-packs?
george e. smith says:
July 18, 2013 at 10:21 pm
I favored Prop 13 when it passed. I’m not disputing any of the points you made. What I’m trying to point out is there are other consequences to passage that have had strong negative effects on everyone else. Prop13 has allowed people to become even more smug and unconcerned about the effects of their actions (votes). The dirty little secret is those with their piece have tried very hard to exclude others from getting theirs, meanwhile cashing in on the distorted market. A free market would have produced more housing at a price people could afford. Prop 13 prevents made it possible for what might be a majority of people to own and keep property valued much higher than they could afford to buy. It was home owners’ support of policies and regulations preventing new construction caused the price rises.
Regarding schools, more money doesn’t necessarily produce better education. Where is all the money going? Again, we have bloated administration. I recently discussed some issues about my son’s education with a vice principle who was complaining about making about $450 instead of $500 per day. Really? A vice principle making that much? Ya gotta wonder how much other school bureaucrats are making. Then we have the feedback loop of the teachers unions taking dues funds and feeding the campaigns of the politicians who continue to shovel money into the schools, while our kids continue to get propaganda and social engineering instead of real education. It is no accident that Bill Ayers former terrorist and Obama groomer was a professor of education.
In a perfect world you are exactly right. But the founders overestimated the integrity of the citizens and underestimated the evil of the enemy. I also believed that we didn’t need anything like this, perhaps a single Supreme Court could turn it around with a ruling stating that: “The Constitution makes no mention of the People and the States granting wealth redistribution power to the new federal government, nor have any Amendments been added, and since the 16th was necessary for income taxing, and the 18th for prohibition, and none say anything about socialism, this law is unconstitutional!”. Again, that’s how the would-be tyrants should be thwarted in a perfect world. I think it is now self-evident that we need Amendments, to get very specific about their few and clearly defined powers.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendments were the firewall designed to fulfill the promises made in the Federalist Papers to a skeptical war-weary colonial society unwilling to serve another tyrant. But they are intentionally forgotten ( how do you fight that? ), and the bureaucrats are working like mad to eviscerate everything else, astonishingly including the First, Second and Fourth even as we speak. They use tech companies to violate the Fourth to do the dirty work of spying and then revoke their First Amendment right to even mention it. The attacks on the Second Amendment is most dangerous, they are playing around the nuclear button now and are but two Supreme Court heartbeats away from detonation because over a hundred million well-armed people are unlikely to bow to their whims, to say the least.
Consequently the time for feet-dragging and hand-wringing about Amendments is over. We are at the precipice and the enemy is willing to shove the nation over the cliff and see what happens. They are intent on calling our bluff. The idea of more Amendments is kind of a Hail Mary last resort before the really ugly part comes. Unfortunately, our well-meaning purist friends have helped delay it and now it may be too late. Just 13 states are needed to block any Amendment ( sad and ironic as it matches the original number of colonies ) which would even neutralize the product of a Constitutional Convention. So IMHO, there is nothing left after this, even 537 completely new faces on election day cannot dent the bureaucratic momentum. But I’m open to ideas, what do you got?
P.S. In addition to Amendments stating absolute specificity of the limited powers that We The People grant to the knuckleheads in the District of Criminals, I believe there is at least one large change needed, and that might be for a new fourth branch of government. It would be empowered to only watch over and scrutinize the other three branches with absolute authority to investigate anyone taking a taxpayer funded paycheck and remove them at the first appearance of impropriety. The details need be worked out by Constitutional scholars ( real ones ).
That seawall shouldn’t have been forgotten. It was visible when I moved away in 1976…….you climbed steps to go over it in order to go on the beach and the rocks were exposed. And the only reason Bay Head flooded so much is because of the lakes and high water table.