Search Results

Keyword: ‘infrastructure’

Flood experts seek to revamp federal coastal policies after Superstorm Sandy

February 22nd, 2013 No comments

“Rebuild Madness” Drives Out Policy Debate 

“There’s a lot of signs that the pace of restoration is being prioritized above … building resiliency into our future conditions,” Miller said yesterday at a conference for floodplain experts. (2/21/13)

I have long argued that a toxic combination of factors have blocked any serious policy discussion of climate change or coastal land use policies in the wake of Sandy, including:

So, instead of repeating all that, in another case of “we told you so”, let me just post the complete text of a national article that makes those points, particularly Obama CEQ head Nancy Sutley, who confirmed my point.

I just wish Professor Miller had made those strong criticisms when and where it mattered, like in his recent testimony to the Senate Sandy oversight Committee. It might have helped NJ press corps get it.

Flood experts seek to revamp federal coastal policies after Superstorm Sandy

Evan Lehmann, E&E reporter

Published: Thursday, February 21, 2013

A New Jersey flood expert believes the state is emphasizing speed, rather than increased protection against climate change, in its massive rebuilding effort following Superstorm Sandy. The analysis comes as flood professionals try to fix policies that they say have exacerbated water damage for decades.

Gov. Chris Christie (R) has put a premium on resurrecting oceanfront highways and has allowed municipalities to dictate their own standards for rebuilding and land use — conditions that suggest the state may miss an opportunity to craft stronger flood protection strategies, said John Miller of the New Jersey Association for Floodplain Managers.

There’s a lot of signs that the pace of restoration is being prioritized above … building resiliency into our future conditions,” Miller said yesterday at a conference for floodplain experts.

He pointed to a directive by Christie following the October storm allowing state agencies to rebuild infrastructure like roads and utilities without a permit.

“Basically, ‘Hey, if you want to build it back the way it was, go for it, you don’t have to wait for us to approve that,'” Miller said, describing the state’s attitude. “That was kind of the calling sign of, ‘Hey, we may not get resiliency out of this thing.'”

With multiple disasters striking the East Coast in consecutive years, experts are calling for stronger building techniques and smarter land-use policies to reduce future damage associated with rising seas and more inundation. Sometimes that means reforming federal policies that invite future flood damage, like using guidelines that say infrastructure and homes should be rebuilt to its condition at the time it was damaged.

Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, told the group yesterday that the Obama administration is crafting new guidelines to help improve the resiliency of infrastructure.

Federal aid may be ‘excessive’

 

“Traditionally, as you know, projects that are damaged are rebuilt to their original condition rather than updated to withstand a changing climate and making them vulnerable to further damage,” Sutley said. “We need to focus on resiliency and sustainability when we plan for more restoration.”

Other harmful policies identified by experts include low-priced flood insurance and disaster assistance, both of which can make people feel overly safe in dangerous areas.

“Our [nation’s] generosity has been so excessive that the risk and the perception of risk is now externalized to the federal government,” said Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers, which hosted a conference that ended yesterday.

The group brought a coalition of flood experts together to develop a framework for improving water management along the nation’s coastlines, which scientists say face current threats from warming temperatures and rising sea levels. The challenge of climate change is pronounced by the coasts’ rapid real estate development, which creates more damage during disasters and increases flood damage.

The group’s recommendations focus on creating a “holistic” approach to water management that balances “appropriate human occupancy” on the coasts with sustainable efforts to reduce flooding, which usually means fewer structures like seawalls and more wetlands.

The plan calls for “NTSB-style investigations” after each big coastal flood event to determine what happened and how it can be avoided in the future. That is patterned after the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which investigates plane crashes and other accidents.

Land-use restrictions needed to limit damage

 

The group also wants the nation to determine the extent of its coastal vulnerabilities to hurricanes and floods, reform federal programs that encourage unwise coastal development and study the economic and social impacts of restricting land use to avoid flooding. It also expresses concern that development is overtaking much of the nation’s natural areas that diminish flooding.

“If you look at economics at a whole, we are not truly valuing or considering the fact that we have resources that are on verge of crashing or on the verge of being lost,” said Doug Plasencia, a specialist in floodplain management.

Climate change is a key theme in the short document. Each recommendation touches on minimizing future flooding, which scientists expect will increase as seas rise and precipitation increases.

The group unveiled its ideas one day after Christie announced a plan to use $1.8 billion in federal recovery aid to provide community development block grants for the elevation of homes. Raising homes is one adaptation policy to higher seas and storm surges. Christie also recently approved interim flood maps developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency that could spur communities to raise the height of new and rebuilt homes.

Roy Wright, the deputy associate administrator for mitigation at FEMA, said there are signs that states and communities struck by Sandy are making better rebuilding decisions than in the past. For example, he said FEMA has had discussions with officials in New York and New Jersey about rebuilding water treatment plants 2 feet above previous heights. He also said higher premiums for federal flood insurance authorized by Congress last year is encouraging homeowners to rebuild better, so they can pay a lower rate.

Wright also said that FEMA is considering whether to place more stringent conditions on the federal emergency aid approved by Congress to ensure resilient rebuilding.

Coastal life becomes ‘more challenging’

 

David Conrad, a water specialist who has been following the flood program for years, said the $1.8 billion in federal funding being used in New Jersey to elevate homes sends the wrong message to homeowners. He said the funding could free residents from paying anything to raise their homes. That could encourage others to build, or rebuild, in areas that are likely to be damaged again the future, he said.

The recommendations come weeks after the U.S. Global Change Research Program released a draft report outlining the latest scientific findings related to climate change. The nation’s coastlines are experiencing more erosion, flooding and saltwater intrusion as sea levels rise, the rate of which has increased since 1990, the draft says.

Storms strengthened by the warming Atlantic Ocean are possible, and increased rainfall is already being seen in some regions. That rain can cause a different risk of flooding than storm surges: Runoff toward the coast will get heavier as more precipitation courses over more impermeable surfaces, the draft says.

In 40 years, sea-level rise will turn floods seen in today’s 100-year storms into events that occur once a year in places like Southern California and Georgia. Other regions will see centennial floods happen every two years, or five, 10 or 20 years.

“Humans have heavily altered the coastal environment through development, changes in land use, and overexploitation of resources,” says the draft. “Now, the changing climate is imposing additional stresses, making life on the coast more challenging. The consequences will ripple through the entire nation, which depends on the productivity and vitality of coastal regions.”

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Senate Dems Again Defer to Gov. Christie’s Complete Control of Sandy Rebuild

February 21st, 2013 No comments

Oversight Bills Do Not Provide A Legislative Role or Opportunity for The Public To Influence Coastal Rebuild Policy or In Setting Priorities on Use of Billions of Taxpayer Dollars 

Stunning Abdication of Legislative Role

[Update #2: Here’s something you won’t read in NJ press – but that AP reported in a national story:  NJ panel advances oversight of Sandy funds

At a brief hearing Thursday, one speaker, Bill Wolfe, director of the New Jersey chapter of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, asked lawmakers to consider not just requiring the state administration to report on spending, but also to offer a chance for public input on those decisions.

Lawmakers did not take up the suggestion.

[Update #1: The federal appropriations bill requires that NJ develop and submit a plan for the money. Here is the HUD block grant language. Where is that plan? Where is it? Where is it? Why can’t I see it! Here is what federal law requires:

        “That as a condition of eligibility for receipt of such funds, a grantee shall submit a plan to the Secretary detailing the proposed use of all funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of such funds will address long-term recovery, restoration of infrastructure and housing, and economic revitalization in the most impacted and distressed areas” – end update

The Senate State Government Committee released two important Sandy related bills today to create “Integrity monitors” (S2536 – Sweeney) and promote “transparency” (S2566 – Sarlo).

There was no testimony on the “integrity monitor” bill and I was the only person to testify on the “transparency” bill. Where the hell are coastal advocates, the environmental lobbyists, and the public interest community?

(You can listen to the testimony here).

I reminded the Committee that setting policy and priorities for the expenditure of taxpayer funds is a core legislative function.

I urged the Committee to amend the bill to strengthen the legislative role and provide a meaningful opportunity for the public to participate in huge economic and land use decisions that will affect the future of the shore.

I urged the Committee to amend the bill to require either:

1)  the Gov. submit a proposed plan to the Legislature for the expenditure of monies to formalize and make transparent legislative consultation,

[Note: informal consultations between the Gov. and legislative leadership are ongoing, behind closed doors. Those negotiations require transparency as well.] or

2)  to establish a planning process to facilitate legislative oversight and public involvement in the priorities, policies, and plans for expenditure of taxpayer funds for shore rebuilding and natural resource protection.

I stressed the importance of consideration of climate change, sea level rise, and more intense storms in Sandy rebuild planning and funding decisions.

I advised the Committee that Gov. Christie stated that these were “esoteric” concerns that he had no time even to consider and that he felt that the public did not “give a damn about” them anyway.

I cited a series of technical flaws with the bill, including failure to specifically track uses of funds for natural resource protection, resilience, adaptation, climate change mitigation, and other specific policies and purposes set out in President Obama’s Executive Order and the Congressional appropriations bill (for law, see this).

I urged the Committee to drill down on these issues to make the transparency provisions meaningful and send a message to the Gov. that these objectives were important (this is particularly important given his rejection of them).

The Dems on the Committee were silent, but I got some pushback from Senator Thompson (R-12th), who defended the Gov. and took exception to any legislative incursion on the Gov.’s powers.

I can not imagine why progressive Democrats Senator Turner (D-Mercer) and Weinberg (D-Bergen) would sit back add raise no objections to things like Gov. Christie’s:

  • rejection of climate change science in rebuild decisions;
  • priority on business grants when thousands of mostly low and moderate income people remain homeless;
  • Rebuild Czar and consolidation of total control of decisions on more discretionary spending than the entire state budget; and
  • touts spending $215 million on rebuilding Rt. 35 on a barrier island, so that those big Escalade and BMW SUV’s can avoid pot holes on the way to their shore summer homes (while thousands remain homeless)

It is simply mind boggling that progressive Democrats would sit back and allow the Governor unilateral power to set policy, control billions of taxpayer dollars, and make these kind of bad decisions with no legislative role or public participation.

It remains a stunning abdication.

[End notepolitical intel: high level sources told us that “the FEMA maps are wrong” and confirmed our suspicion that Senate Dems are prepared to legislatively veto the DEP Emergency Rule that adopted the FEMA ABFE maps. A Resolution to kill that rule is being drafted as we speak.]

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

DEP Adopting New Sewer Service Maps Without Consideration of Sandy and New FEMA Flood Maps

February 16th, 2013 No comments

DEP Must Not Allow New Infrastructure And Development in Flood Hazard Zones

High Vulnerability of Existing Infrastructure Must Be Addressed

In the January 7, 2013 edition of the NJ Register,  the NJ DEP proposed for public comment “water quality management plan amendments” (WQMPs) for portions or all of several counties, including Cape May, Atlantic, Ocean, Burlington, Monmouth, Essex, and Sussex.

Those proposed WQMP amendments and maps were developed by counties, BEFORE SANDY struck (and perhaps before Irene struck).

Accordingly, they very likely proposed to locate new infrastructure and new development in hazardous locations, prone to flooding or that actually experienced flooding during Irene or Sandy.

I read the text of the DEP’s proposed approval of these WQMP amendments (but did not review the maps) and it appears that DEP’s review of the county proposed WQMP did not consider or apply the new DEP EMERGENCY FLOOD HAZARD AREA CONTROL ACT RULE  adopted by DEP on January 24, 2013, AFTER the Jan. 7, 2013 proposed WQMP notices.

Obviously, DEP could not apply the new flood maps, because they were adopted AFTER DEP proposed the new WQMP amendments.

That new Flood Hazard Area Emergency  rule adopted the new FEMA “Advisory Base Flood Elevation” (ABFE) maps.

So, DEP must now apply the new FHA FEMA ABFE rule.

This would include new WQMP plan reviews to consider not only the new FHA maps and the new elevations, but also the lessons learned by Sandy in terms of vulnerability of existing infrastructure –

On December 3, 2012, DEP Commissioner Martin testified that over 80 sewage treatment plants were knocked out. The WQMP planning process is well suited to mandatory vulnerability assessments and emergency planning that has been ignored by the DEP NJPDES permit process.

DEP NJPDES permit regulations require sewage treatment plants to prepare a vulnerability assessment and emergency plan – but the regualtions have major loopholes and DEP does not enforce the requirement or review these plans.

Public hearings are scheduled (some have passed already) and public comment periods are about to close on these proposed WQMP amendments.

It is important that the public weigh in a tell DEP to not approve of any WQMP that would locate new infrastructure or development in dangerous locations, including those areas identified by the new FEMA ABFE maps DEP just adopted – or those locations recently inundated by Irene or Sandy.

For details, see (if embedded links don’t work, go here for free public access to NJ Register)

26. 45 N.J.R. 62(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
27. 45 N.J.R. 63(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
28. 45 N.J.R. 64(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
29. 45 N.J.R. 65(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
30. 45 N.J.R. 66(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
31. 45 N.J.R. 67(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF COASTAL AND LAND USE PLANNING, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
32. 45 N.J.R. 69(a), VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1, ISSUE DATE: JANUARY 7, 2013, PUBLIC NOTICES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY, NEW JERSEY REGISTER Copyright © 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law
Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

A Plan For Coastal Planning

February 11th, 2013 2 comments

Senate Committee to Conduct Hearing Today on Coastal Planning and Sandy Rebuild

NJ Needs a Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Vulnerability to Climate Change – Phase I: Sea- Level Rise and Coastal Storms

NJ Is The Only State in The Northeast With No Climate Change Plan

The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee meets today in Toms River at 10 am to conduct a hearing – “to hear testimony from invited witnesses on issues surrounding coastal planning and rebuilding in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. ” You can listen live here .

We studied regional planning in Grad school, spent 13 years as an environmental planner at DEP, helped draft the Highlands Act, written many times about coastal planning issues, and in addition to strong criticism of the Christie administration, have made positive recommendations, see:

We attended all of the Committee’s hearings, and signed up to testify at the hearing in Atlantic Highlands that was designed to take testimony from the public, but were blocked from speaking by the Chairman Sarlo, so of course we were not invited to testify today.

On Saturday, we suggested Massachusetts coastal program as a model.

So today, to supplement prior posts, below are the State of Maryland’s Coastal planning and climate change adaptation program key recommendations.

The Senate Environment Committee has looked to Maryland as a model for stormwater management and to the Chesapeake Bay Clean Water Act TMDL program as  a model for Barnegat Bay, so I thought they might want to consider Maryland’s  climate change program too, especially given the fact that NJ is the only state in the Northeast with  no climate change adaptation plan. 

We’ll attend the hearing and report what went down later today or tomorrow.

Here are Maryland’s key recommendations: 

Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Maryland’s Vulnerability to Climate Change – Phase I: Sea- Level Rise and Coastal Storms

  • Take action now to protect human habitat and infrastructure from future risks. Require the integration of coastal erosion, coastal storm, and sea-level rise adaptation and response planning strategies into existing state and local policies and programs. Develop and implement state and local adaptation policies (i.e., protect, retreat, abandon) for vulnerable public and private sector infrastructure. Strengthen building codes and construction techniques for new infrastructure and buildings in vulnerable coastal areas.
  • Minimize risks and shift to sustainable economies and investments. Develop and implement long-range plans to minimize the economic impacts of sea-level rise to natural resource-based industries. Establish an independent Blue Ribbon Advisory Committee to advise the state of the risks that climate change poses to the availability and affordability of insurance. Develop a Maryland Sea-Level Rise Disclosure and Advisory Statement to inform prospective coastal property purchasers of the potential impacts that climate change and sea-level rise may pose to a particular piece of property. Recruit, foster, and promote market opportunities related to climate change adaptation and response.
  • Guarantee the safety and well-being of Maryland’s citizens in times of foreseen and unforeseen risk . Strengthen coordination and management across agencies responsible for human health and safety. Conduct health impact assessments to evaluate the public health consequences of climate change and projects and/or policies related to sea-level rise. Develop a coordinated plan to assure adequacy of vector-borne surveillance and control programs.
  • Retain and expand forests, wetlands, and beaches to protect us from coastal flooding. Identify high priority protection areas and strategically and cost-effectively direct protection and restoration actions. Develop and implement a package of appropriate regulations, financial incentives, and educational, outreach, and enforcement approaches to retain and expand forests and wetlands in areas suitable for long-term survival. Promote andsupport sustainable shoreline and buffer area management practices.
  • Give state and local governments the right tools to anticipate and plan for sea-level rise and climate change. Strengthen federal, state, local, and regional observation systems to improve the detection of biological, physical, and chemical responses to climate change and sea-level rise. Update and maintain state-wide sea-level rise mapping, modeling, and monitoring products. Utilize new and existing educational, outreach, training and capacity building programs to disseminate information and resources related to climate change and sea-level rise.
  • State and local governments must commit resources and time to assure progress. Develop state-wide sea-level rise planning guidance to advise adaptation and response planning at the local level. Develop and implement a system of performance measures to track Maryland’s success at reducing its vulnerability to climate change and sea-level rise. Pursue the development of adaptation strategies to reduce climate change vulnerability among affected sectors, including agriculture, forestry, water resources, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, and human health.
Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Gov. Christie: Climate Change An “Esoteric” Issue that “People Don’t Give a Damn About”

February 6th, 2013 No comments


Christie’s Climate Denial Puts People, Future of Shore, Federal Funds Needlessly At Risk

Governor Brags He is Clueless on Climate Change

Christie Beyond Climate Denial in Pursuit of Climate Dismantling

An Empty Stage for an Empty Suit

 

One of these things is not like the others,

One of these things just doesn’t belong,

Can you tell which thing is not like the others

By the time I finish my song?

  • “I have no idea. I’m not a climatologist and in the last hundred days I have to tell you the truth, I’ve been focused on a lot of things, the cause of this is not one of them that I’ve focused on,” Christie said in response to a question about the role climate change could have played in fueling the Oct. 29, 2012 storm. “Now, maybe in the subsequent months and years, after I get done with trying to rebuild the state and put people back in their homes, I will have the opportunity to ponder the esoteric question of the cause of this storm. …If you asked of these people in Union Beach, I don’t think they give a damn.” NJ Gov. Chris Christie, Feb. 5. 2013
  • We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms. ~~~ President Obama Inauguration Speech
  • First thing we have to learn is to accept the fact – and I believe it is a fact – that climate change is real.  It is denial to say this is, each of these situations is, a once-in-a-lifetime.”~~~ NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo State of the State Address – 1/9/13
  • GRADUALLY OCCURRING phenomena are more predictable and allow for long-range planning and measured preparation. On-going data collection, research, and modeling continue to refine our knowledge concerning the effects of climate change on the expression of phenomena that are regarded as coastal hazards. The U.S. Geological Survey evaluated the vulnerability of the mid-Atlantic region to the effects of sea level rise. The results of the study are presented in the report, Potential for Shoreline Changes Due to Sea-Level Rise Along the U.S. Mid-Atlantic Region. The USGS study indicates that most of New Jersey’s coast is highly susceptible to the effects of sea level rise.
  • SEA LEVEL CHANGE – While the precise rate of sea level rise is uncertain, current models indicate that climate change will cause the rate to increase. Based on the trend of sea level rise from 1961 through 2003, sea level would rise by almost 6-inches by the end of this century in the absence of any effects of climate change. Taking climate change into account, sea level is projected to rise between 7 and 21 inches by 2100. This increase would result in the threat of more sustained extreme storm surges, increased coastal erosion, escalating inundation of coastal wetlands and saline intrusion.

 4.4.12.1.1 Preparing For Coastal Hazards & Climate Change

  1. New Jersey Sea Grant College Program prepared a thorough manual that provides valuable guidance for addressing coastal hazards. “The Manual for Coastal Hazard Mitigation”* (PDF) is,”… intended to serve as a resource for individuals, and federal, state, and local officials with which to form the basis of informed coastal hazard mitigation decisions.”
  1. Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional, and State Governments, provides a process designed to guide regions and communities in preparing for the effects of climate change. In addition, The Heinz Center has prepared a report on human vulnerability to coastal disasters.

Which one?

We’ve written that the Gov. – working through his puppet Bob Martin – has managed to whitewash and dismantle the DEP Coastal Hazard and Climate Change programs, but he couldn’t get to the State Police – maybe Christie should spend some time reading his own “State Hazard Mitigation Plan” instead of doing Letterman and the Superbowl?

In a jaw dropping display of climate change denial, NJ Governor Christie went off on a rant at a press conference in Union Beach yesterday, when asked about Sandy and climate change (see: Sandy recovery, not climate, on Governor Christie’s radar):

The failure to acknowledge a link between climate change and Sandy will have “direct, concrete consequences,” said Bill Wolfe, an environmental blogger.

An executive order signed by President Obama in December that established the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force calls for an understanding of the future risks posed by extreme weather events, Wolfe said.

“The point is, New York is going to have a leg up,” he said.

Wolfe attended Christie’s event Tuesday and tried to ask the governor a follow-up question on that specific issue but was shot down by the governor, who said, “I’m not answering your question because you’re not in the press.”

That morbidly obese man in that Big Empty Suit refused to answer this question, posed by yours truly (paraphrase):

“Governor: President Obama issued an Executive Order to coordinate the federal response to Sandy. It emphasizes the need to plan for future storm risk from climate change, extreme weather, and sea level rise. 

Similarly, yesterday, recognizing Sandy as a climate change wake up call, NY Gov. Cuomo pledged a $400 million program to buy out flood prone properties. 

Given that you have not engaged climate change, NJ’s open space fund is broke, and DEP has ignored multiple warnings from scientists and actually reduced the priority on coastal hazards in NJ coastal zone management program, do you think NJ is at a competitive disadvantage in receiving federal funds just approrpriated to the various federal agencies, who will review NJ’s rebuild plans subject to the Obama EO policies?

But the Governor is way beyond denial of climate change.

He has systematically attacked and eliminated, defunded, or destroyed NJ’s policies and programs to reduce greenhouse gas  emissions and to adapt to the consequences of climate change.

I)  Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Ignored

In 2007, the Legislature enacted the Global Warming Response Act (GWRA – “Act”).

The Act set aggressive greenhouse gas emission reduction goals of 20% by the year 2020, and 80% by 2050, based on a 1990 emission baseline.

In 2009, DEP submitted a Report to the Legislature, as required by the Act, setting forth recommendations for meeting the short term 20% and mid term 80% emission reduction goals. (See this for full Report).

A) Short term emission reduction goals

The DEP GWRA Report describes three programs that will meet the 2020 20% goal:

Three core measures form the backbone of New Jersey’s plan to meet its statewide 2020 GHG limit. The core measures implement the:

  • New Jersey Energy Master Plan (EMP);
  • New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program; and,
  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) program.

Here’s is how those 3 core measures have fared under Gov. Christie, who

1) weakened the renewable portfolio standards of the EMP;

2) shifted the EMP’s focus from conservation and efficiency to expanding in state power production and  pipeline construction;

3) diverted $680 million in Clean Energy Funds to implement the EMP to close State budget shortfalls and pay for tax cuts;

4) unilaterally pulled NJ out of RGGI.

5) Christie was unable to destroy the LEV program because he couldn’t – it was a federally approved program.

B) Long term emission reduction goals

The DEP GWRA Report recommends specific steps required to meet the Act’s 80% reduction goal by 205o:

Actions Now for Future Impact

While meeting the State’s 2020 GHG limit is an essential first step for New Jersey, implementing additional measures in the near-term will ensure that the State stays on track to meet its 2050 limit. In addition to the three core recommendations, this report identifies a set of  22 supporting recommendations (see Table ES-1) to ensure attainment of the 2020 statewide limit. Additionally, this report acknowledges the GHG emission reductions anticipated as a result of several other significant statewide public policies.

Successful implementation of these recommendations will require the participation, collaboration and cooperation of a broad spectrum of State agencies, businesses, organizations, public officials, and New Jersey citizens. Therefore, outreach and education will be a crucial component of the State’s efforts, as discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5 of this report.

Here are some of the most significant recommendations that Christie killed outright, ignored, or defunded, including land use, transportation and direct regulation of additional sources of GHG emissions:

  • Recommendation #1: Establish standards for fossil fuel EGUs  
  • Recommendation #2: Implement requirements for non-EGU industrial sources
  • Recommendation #3: Develop and facilitate the use of State Green Building Guidelines for all New Residential and Commercial Buildings
  • Recommendation #4: Develop and facilitate State Green Building Remodeling, Operations and Maintenance Programs for all Existing Residential and Commercial Buildings
  • Recommendation #14: Develop Agricultural Best Management Practices to address energy efficiency, renewable energy and the release of GHGs in agricultural operations and structures
  • Recommendation #18: Establish a carbon footprint standard for transportation projects
  • Recommendation #21: The State will work in partnership with local and regional entities to conduct an infrastructure capacity assessment of the 113 municipalities that will benefit from the ARC tunnel  
Those recommendations were ignored, none of that work got done – and Christie killed the ARC tunnel project (bet you didn’t know that!)

 

II)  Adaptation – Coastal Climate Change Vulnerability and Risks Ignored

Governor Christie has: 1) gutted NJ climate change programs, 2) ignored,suppressed, and denied “extreme weather” and other infrastructure  vulnerability warnings; 3) outsourced climate change adaptation planning; 4) diverted over $680 millionin clean energy funding; and 5) his DEP actually deregulated rebuilding of public infrastructure and private rebuilding in the same highly vulnerable locations and elevations.

We previously explained all this in depth. We:

In all that, we failed to highlight 2 extremely revealing things:

1) The Christie DEP managed to delete all the climate change related findings from the Section 309 Coastal Hazard Assessment Report.

DEP’s 309 Coastal Hazard Assessment Reports have long explicitly recognized  that “strategic retreat” policy option- a finding and a policy that has changed under Gov. Christie – the most recent 309 Report excluded the “strategic retreat” concept. Here are the prior DEP findings that have been eliminated:

Many parts of New Jersey’s densely populated coastal area are highly susceptible to the effects of the following coastal hazards: flooding, storm surge, episodic erosion, chronic erosion, sea level rise, and extra-tropical storms. Reconstruction of residential development and the conversion of single family dwellings into multi-unit dwellings continues in hazardous areas… the value of property at risk is increasing significantly. With anticipated accelerating sea level rise and increasing storm frequency and intensity, vulnerability to the risks of coastal hazards will not abate; it will only become more costly.

Development in areas suited to the inland migration of coastal wetlands serves to preclude this adaptation and the wetlands will either diminish in extent or will be lost to inundation. 

All of the impediments to meeting this 309 programmatic objective that appeared in the last New Jersey Coastal Zone Section 309 Assessment and Strategy remain. These include lobbying efforts of special interest groups, legal challenges to DEP permit decisions, provision of flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program, and public perception that large-scale beach nourishment projects eliminate vulnerability to coastal hazards.

Titus demonstrates (link) that in certain instances, structural engineering solutions will not be practical or economically feasible. In these cases future public and private development and redevelopment must be directed away from the hazardous areas. While some derogatorily refer to this option as “retreat,” from the perspective of sound planning based on the best available science, the concept actually involves “strategic adjustment.” Prudent planning requires that we expand upon the existing studies of the societal, economic, and environmental costs of possible mitigative actions while the greatest number of alternatives exist.

[Read full 2006 DEP 309 Report]

Those DEP expert findings are now gone – deleted – down Orwell’s memory hole. Why was that done?

Instead Gov. Christie has championed Rebuild Madness and flat out lied about “engineered beaches” (watch the video).

2) The DEP downgraded the priority of coastal hazards in that 309 Report from “high” to “moderate”.

Just as NJ faced Irene and Sandy, it was downplaying the priority for coastal storm risks.

Right.

To avoid any discussion of all this that documents this outrageously bad record, Christie has gone into attack mode, against FEMA and all critics.

In addition to going into attack mode, the Governor has lied repeatdly to the public and the press. Here are just a few of his more egreegious lies:

1. He falsely stated the bid he used was a “competitive bidding process”. FEMA directly contradicts that:

Piggyback contracting is a concept of expanding a previously awarded contract. Piggyback contracting does not meet the requirements … because it is non-competitive and may have an inappropriate price structure,” the manual states, according to the paper.

2. He falsely stated that the percentage of FEMA flood insurance claims processed – Christie said 30% FEMA says over 50%. (link forthcoming).

3. He lied about the FEMA map elevations too by claiming that they address Sandy and sea level rise. NJ Spotlight –

Asked if the new standards reflect projections of rising sea levels due to global climate change, Christie responded, “They say yes.’’

But the new FEMA ABFE maps do not address actual Sandy elevations of projected climate change, sea level rise, and stronger storms. See this Asbury Park Press article by Todd Bates:

According to FEMA, Sandy & sea-level rise were not included in analysis that led to the ABFE maps”

4. He denied climate change – see Bergen Record story today

5. He failed to prepare for the storm and denied climate change after the storm: – see this FEMA Climate Adaptation policy

6. He lied about “engineered beaches” protecting development watch Star Ledger video:

7. in the Union Beach PC yesterday, when asked point blank if he would support creating a website to provide more transparency and accountability for Sandy rebuild money, he flat out refused to do so. His lame excuse was that he didn’t want to divert staff from helping people to updating a website.

As we’ve repeatedly argued, the Governor has a poor record and is very vulnerable when the focus shifts away from his demagoguery to the substance.

Just yesterday, you saw that in Union Beach – especially when he refused to answer my question, because the bully inside that Big Empty Suit is really afraid of someone who knows enough and is willing to hit back.

Gov. Christie's routine scripted campaign event cum orchestrated press conference was derailed by questions on climate change. The Gov. bragged he was clueless.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: