The impact of rising ocean temperatures and climate change due to an increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases has the potential to create a severe economic devastation across the world and especially in the State of Florida.

As a native Floridian and avid ocean-junkie, the impending risks associated with climate change are of major importance to me.  Each year more and more people are packing their lives up and moving to the coast of Florida to retire.  The increase in coastal populations and the increase in development and decrease in ecosystems is devastating in itself, and when we add the rising sea levels, erosion, longer and more intense rainy seasons, larger and stronger hurricanes, and warmer waters causing longer lasting dinoflagellate (red-tide) blooms, the economics of all of these perils come in to play.

From the scallopers in Homosassa Springs, the sponge divers in Tarpon Springs, the Black Grouper fisherman of the Gulf Coast to the lobster-men of the Keys, Florida’s economy relies heavily on the waters surrounding our little peninsula.  Rising ocean temperatures are causing coral bleaching which occurs as water temperatures rise above a tolerable level for the corals.  This causes the corals to expel the covering of algae exposing the white skeleton and kills the coral.  When large areas of reefs die off the ecosystem is left unbalanced.  Those sponge divers will be left out of work.  Increased carbon dioxide levels are causing acidification in our waters as well.  Last year alone millions of scallops died due to the acid levels.  If this trend continues, the scallops will be lost as well.  Higher sea temperatures are also contributing to an influx of invasive species (Tiger Shrimp and Lion Fish especially) as well as marine diseases.  Warmer waters promote growth of certain bacterium and virus, including lobster-shell disease and ‘the ich’ (Ichthyophthirius multifiliis).  This can lead to wide-spread migration of species or even extinction.  This will eventually lead to total devastation of population for these species and total loss of income for the fisherman.

Rising water temperatures not only effect marine life, it is also a cause of hurricane intensification.  When the water warms the hurricanes grow not only larger but much stronger.  Three-fourths of Florida’s population resides in coastal counties that generate 79% of the state’s total annual economy. These counties represent a built-environment and infrastructure whose replacement value in 2010 is $2.0 trillion and which by 2030 is estimated to be $3.0 trillion (FOACC).  Take a look at the chart below.  This shows hurricane probability from years 2000-2050 for the Miami-Dade area of Florida, hurricane alley as we call it, and a major factor in that 79%.  By the year 2020, when replacement values are estimated at just shy of $3.0 trillion, the probability for a category 5 hurricane is at 42.5%!

Cited:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20580904

http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/critical-issues-sea-temperature-rise/

http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/salt-water-species.html

http://www.floridaoceanscouncil.org/reports/Climate_Change_and_Sea_Level_Rise.pdf

http://www.demos.org/publication/economic-and-environmental-impacts-climate-change-florida

This week’s module made me take a closer look at the economic repercussions of living in coastal zones as temperature and sea levels rise.  I have been shopping around for homeowners insurance to insure our new home in North Carolina, which just so happens to be in Currituck County, and though we are extremely close to the Virginia border and away from the water, we are still considered a coastal area. One costly addition has been the extra wind/hail insurance we need for this certain area.  An article on USA Today titled “Report: Most insurers not prepared for climate change” discusses the problem of insurance companies not being prepared for the costly weather related damage that will likely increase as a result of global warming.  The article states that most insurers are not adequately prepared or planning to handle the changing environment, and the fear is that as storms become more powerful and damaging, insurers will quickly respond with high premiums and some refusing to insure in certain areas vulnerable to storm damage.

Rising insurance costs will not only impact homeowners, but businesses will also be vulnerable to rising premiums and lack of insurance options.  This week’s module discussed the Outer Banks, and though the population is relatively small, the tourism is a multi-million dollar business.  Rising costs due to global warming will impact residents, businesses, and tourists that travel to these coastal regions.  The module also discussed the dilemma over building a bridge to replace Bonner Bridge and the hefty price tag associated with the relocation to protect the structure from tidal energy.   Regardless of whether it is insurance or bridges, coastal regions will being paying hefty price tags for rising temperature and seas.

References:

Koch, W. (2013, March 07). Report: Most insurers not prepared for climate change. Retrieved June 26, 2016, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/07/insurance-industry-climate-change/1968003/

 

I was excited when I saw that my home state, New Jersey, was discussed extensively in this week’s material. As a NJ resident who experienced the aftermath of this massive storm, I think I have a unique perspective about how the population, state, federal government each reacted to this disaster, and I think that this case, like many others that we discuss in this course, highlights how the interaction among those actors can produce positive as well as negative outcomes.

For example, the resilience of the people of NJ has been great, but the role of the government in its response has been underwhelming. Namely, our corrupt Governor Christie has proven himself an inept leader, redirecting millions in rebuilding funds to develop self-aggrandizing television commercials featuring himself and his family at the beach. This sheds light on the political nature of disaster rebuilding.

Similarly, after Katrina hit in 2005, there was immense criticism of the US government’s response and dedication to providing support to affected populations. Because this area was not particularly lucrative in terms of national GDP and the population was comprised primarily of low-income minorities, it was suggested by many that the response by the government was less willing to provide assistance to those in need.

These two cases highlight the inherently and regrettably political nature of disaster response and risk mitigation, and lead me to the question raised in this weeks module regarding the intentions of the President of the Maldives:

Is the Island President’s mission realistic or futile? First, I believe that politicians are generally apt to say whatever they believe will be politically advantageous to them. While I believe that the president may be sincere in his desire to protect the coasts of the Maldives, I also believe that interests of other politicians and leaders of the country may not be similarly aligned and, without the promise of significant personal benefit, it is possible that many political figures may resist major changes to the status quo.

I believe we see this tendency across nations and political systems, and I worry that effective coastal protections are regrettably difficult to impose, given the weight of money and private interests in politics. Since it is difficult for coastal advocates to produce examples of short term benefits to often-costly protections, it seems that creating effective change to protect the world’s coasts will remain a difficult task to undertake.

After reading Module 6 lesson, I found the section on flood insurance really interesting. I have a family friend who still hasn’t been able to rebuild her house after hurricane sandy for this reason. I found a New York Times article about how a New Jersey Representative is citing fraud against FEMA. This happened just a couple of months ago in April, and there has been a call for a congressional investigation into the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s flood insurance program. They are alleging wrongdoing by the agency and stating that they have prevented thousands of victims of Hurricane Sandy from receiving proper payout to rebuild. There have been whistle blowers from FEMA stating that there have been doctored engineering reports for homes, “I have seen doctored adjusters reports with my own eyes, where an adjuster wrote something was caused by flood and somebody else inserted the word ‘not’ caused by flood” (Huetteman, 2016). Many people working at FEMA who were helping in the Sandy review process left because it was a sham.  The article also states that about 142,000 homeowners filed claims with FEMA after Hurricane Sandy ravaged the New York region.

While reading this article, it made me sick. The survivors of Hurricane Sandy have been through enough, and all they want to do it go on with their lives. Through the lesson, it also brought up the notion of relocating. If there has been fraud, and it has taken this long for people to receive their insurance money, it brings up a good question, should people just move. Like the lesson said, sometimes its hard to find a place to relocate, because of the rising sea level factors happening globally. This was a very touching article and the combination of this and the lesson, it gave me a new found appreciation for not living in coastal areas.

 

Huetteman, E. (2016, April 28). New Jersey Representative, Citing Fraud, Calls on Congress to Investigate FEMA. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/nyregion/new-jersey-congressman-citing-fraud-calls-on-congress-to-investigate-fema.html