Happy Green New Year

by

This year has soared by, and we would like to thank all of our friends, old and new and our followers and co-bloggers for your support for our group and for your commitment to the green movement.  We wish you all a Happy New Year.

As we move forward to a new year, we know that it is important that we renew our commitment to protect the environment and the green movement so that we can live green and healthy lives.  As we face the fiscal cliff, we are aware of the uncertainty of the continuation of some of the successes that we have already achieved.  There is a chance that we may lose some gains in the area of alternative energy (wind and solar energy) , and we may see decreased financial support for our national parks and forests.  However, we will not be deterred.  We will start the new year out maintaining our personal commitment to live green by continuing our routine habits of recycling, living healthier, eating healthy diets, supporting local eateries and local farmers, and taking all the steps we can to reduce our carbon footprint.

We also must remain mindful of the eco-cliff.  As bad as financial debt is, environmental debt is worse.  Our legacy to our children must take into consideration the state of the environment.  There is no value in a country with a balanced budget but with polluted air, depleted natural resources and lack of fresh water.  Failure to deal with the looming eco-cliff will hurt the U.S. economy, plus the lives of billions of people around the world.  In this new year, we must keep environmental issues in the forefront of discussion, policy and legislation.

During the next year, we would like to focus more on policies and legislation regarding green issues.  Our goal here is to keep you abreast of pending legislation in different jurisdictions on issues important to the green movement.  We would like to bring notice to our representatives in Congress who support green initiatives, as well as those who consistently thwart our efforts.  This past election year proved costly to “flat earthers” and others who doubted or totally denied the existence of climate change and its impact on global warming.  We owe our thanks especially to the efforts of the League of Conservation Voters and Momsrising.org for their tenacity and relentless determination to bring climate change doubters to task and block their reelection.  We must continue with this effort, and LGBG wants to concentrate time and effort into lobbying our Congress and local public officials in this regard.

We here at LGBG are excited and energized about our work for the new year.  We will continue to research and learn, share and educate and do all that we can to protect our environment so that we all can live green, be green.

Source for this article:

http://ecopreneurist.com/2012/12/29/the-eco-cliff-and-the-fiscal-cliff/

Fiscal-Cliff-1

Credit :  Ecopreneurist

The Fiscal Cliff & Our Environment

by

Much has been made of the potential sequester the U.S. faces this New Years’ Eve, which the masses have affectionately labeled the “fiscal cliff.”  Well, with the possibility of large impacts to the average person and small business, rightly so.  However, what has not been rightly emphasized, in our opinion, is the potentially devastating effects this cliff could have on our nation’s environmental sector.  The cliff would lead to higher taxes and governmental budget cuts in the defense department, yes.  But what is less well-known is that the governmental cuts will also most likely include environmental victims.

For one, the energy industry could be significantly hurt, both at governmental and private sector levels.  Solar energy contractors who rely on receiving current 1603 cash grants for installation projects will not see those cash grants should the US see the cliff.  This could strongly hinder the financing of solar energy projects, depleting a relatively small but significant portion of the necessary cash for such projects.

Moreover, the cliff would trigger a $148 million retraction of funds from the US Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program.  To help put this into perspective, this loss is the equivalent of cutting the US Department of Energy’s solar energy program completely in half.  These cuts to agencies like the Department of Energy threaten not only a decrease in energy development, but also a decrease in energy usage, as programs would lose funding for research and loans used now for innovation projects.  The future would be increasingly questionable.

A second instance would have harmful effects for the US National Parks, National Forests, wildlife refuges, and other public lands.  For instance, the 258,000 jobs scattered among US National Parks and the 35,000 jobs among wildlife refuges could be jeopardized by the expected cuts in science and law enforcement positions at these establishments.  Similarly, the 2 million plus jobs within the Bureau of Land Management, which oversees the US National Forests could also find themselves in limbo, as awaited budget cuts loom large.  The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, which employs 66 million scientists, educators, researchers, and technicians, among others, could see devastating effects, as well.

As the list goes on, the bottom line remains ever evident.  In cutting governmental agencies’ budgets, the environmental agencies will surely be among those who see drastic cuts.  Further, those cuts could prove disastrous, and at the very least, detrimental to the US’s management, protection, and research of the environment.  There are millions of jobs at risk, in addition to the health and lives of the organisms living among the zones over which these agencies keep watch.

Overall, based on the observations and predictions surrounding the seemingly imminent sequester our government currently wrestles, there could be hampering effects on government agencies who will see severe cuts, US citizens who will see layoffs, and wildlife who will see the harmful effects of increased neglect.  So God Speed to our government representatives, in hopes that their efforts add up to a reasonable solution that can avoid harmful cuts to the essential beings of such agencies, people, and wildlife.

[polldaddy poll=6799106]

Sources for More Reading:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/guest-post-what-would-the-fiscal-cliff-mean-for-the-u.s.-solar-market
http://www.governing.com/news/state/gov-fiscal-cliff-full-coverage.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/eco-nomics/2012/11/15/the-fiscal-cliff-and-the-environment/
http://blog.cleanwateraction.org/2012/12/06/dont-let-the-fiscal-cliff-devastate-our-environment/

Green Living– More An Obligation Than A Choice

by

On this good green news Monday, LGBG has opted to use this opportunity, in light of the tragic events at  Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, to reflect on the meaning and obligation of green living.  We know that green living means different things to each of us, from protecting the air, land and water to recycling and not polluting to eating healthy diets and getting exercise.  No matter the individual perspective towards green living, I think it is safe to say that there are basic tenets central to our understanding of green living.  They are as follows:

  • The choices made by any one individual affects all of us.
  • The choices we make today will affect us at some point in the future.
  • When we speak about saving the planet or the environment, we are talking about saving ourselves.

With this understanding, it is important for everyone to make living green an obligation, not a choice.  The greatest obligation we have is to our planet and to our children, each and every one of them.  They are the future of this land and as stewards of the Earth, we are obligated to deliver to them a clean, healthy environment.  It is our responsibility to love and protect our young and to do all that we can to ensure that they grow up to be healthy, happy and prosperous adults.  To that end, we are obligated to educate them.  We send them out to school each day with the expectation, and a very reasonable one, that they will return home to us.  In turn, our government has an obligation to provide a safe learning environment for our children and a guarantee that they will be protected and will be returned to us at the end of the day.

A major concern of green living is the safe and environmentally friendly design of buildings, and the conversation regarding this matter must be a top priority.  It is urgent that city planners, engineers, environmental consultants and elected officials design and build schools that are safe and secure from intruders, with the staff and technology to monitor all visitors and deny admission to anyone perceived to be a problem or who pose a potential danger to staff or students.  We know that buildings can be designed to be secure as our prisons are secure on any level that we need.

We also must address the safety of our society, especially our children, from a health perspective.  This begins with coming face-to-face with the issue of mental illness.  We need for every citizen to have access to health care.  This goes a long way to aid in the identification of people, young and old, with mental health or emotional problems, which apparently is a substantial portion of our population as evidenced by the widely used mental health diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder , bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.  We must provide treatment for these individuals, just as we would for people with cancer, heart conditions, arthritis autism or any other physical anomaly.  A change in attitude that regards mental illness as a sickness will help families to come forth and seek help, rather than hiding these conditions so that a loved one will not be made to feel like a pariah in the community.

Green living obliges us to raise our children to respect our environment and the other people and animals who occupy this space with us.  Our choices on how we treat our children, what we feed their minds and bodies, and the examples that we set for them to follow will determine their physical and emotional development and well-being.  We must teach them to be kind to others and to never be a bully to any person or animal.

If we all accept green living as an obligation, not a choice, we can take a major step forward to heal from these recent tragedies and move forward to save our planet and our children.  Let’s all respond to the call of duty to live green, be green.

On Children by Kahlil Gibran

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,
and He bends you with His might
that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
so He loves also the bow that is stable.

Description unavailable

Description unavailable (Photo credit: theloushe)

“Exxon Hates Your Children”– Fact, Fiction or Propaganda

by

The recent ad launched by opponents of the fossil fuel industry declaring “Exxon Hates Your Children” is disturbing, provocative and unsettling.  Two advocacy groups, Oil Change International and The Other 98%, launched the controversial ad on its website on Wednesday in an effort to cajole Congress to “eliminate fossil fuel subsidies amid fiscal cliff negotiations”.   The ad portrays an actor posing as a representative of Exxon, stating, “We all know the climate crisis will rip [your children’s] world apart, but we don’t care because it will make us rich”.  The targeted markets for this advertising campaign includes the very same areas where the American Petroleum Institute is running ads arguing that “[m]ore energy development produces more jobs, revenue and energy.  More taxes produce less of all three”.

This ad war comes on the heels of the budget crisis and looming fiscal cliff.  Proponents of climate change face the possible elimination of wind energy tax credits amid the arguments of conservatives voicing objection to the 2% subsidy by the federal government.  If not extended the PTC credit will expire.  Conversely, opponents of the fossil fuel industry voice objections to not only the huge subsidies received by oil companies, but also to their business model, which requires continuous drilling for oil, which is proven to be responsible for climate disruption.  They cry foul also because in the last year alone, renewable energy, though recognized as important for a healthy environment, received six times less support worldwide than fuel subsidies.

While the declaration that “Exxon Hates Your Children” grabs the attention, it is propaganda.  We all know or should know that Exxon and all major corporations exist at the will of the people.  As long as Exxon (the current poster child for the fossil fuel industry)  has a viable market, it will be around, doing what it does–  drilling and manufacturing oil for oil-hungry consumers.  Exxon does not hate children.  Rather, it loves money, and in its quest to make the money it loves so much, it harms the environment.  Perhaps the best analogy for this scenario can be found in the circumstances surrounding Timothy McVeigh‘s bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City.  It was not McVeigh’s intent to kill the children in the nursery in the federal building.  Rather, they were “collateral damage” in his quest.

Currently, the earth and its inhabitants all are the “collateral damage” of the fossil fuel industry.  However, we do have a choice.  Let’s strive to reduce our carbon footprint and reliance on fossil fuels.  We can start at home by conserving energy, reducing our use of water and electricity, recycling and using energy-efficient products.  Moreover, we can make sure we are heard by our representatives, who serve at our will.  Demand that they vote green or be voted out of office.  Let’s fight to live green, be green!

Sources for article:

  1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/05/exxon-hates-your-children_n_2246481.html
  2. http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/reflections-on-mcveigh.html
Exxon

Exxon (Photo credit: Tom Haymes)

PTC Stirs Evil Wind Debate

by

In a statement released earlier this week, a bipartisan group of legislators from both the Senate and House of Representatives warned that the expiration of the wind protection tax credit (PTC) would result in the loss of a substantial number of manufacturing and construction jobs, thus triggering a great debate on the relevance of this credit and the efficacy of wind energy.  The PTC “subsidizes new wind generation by 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour of wind electricity produced”.  If this credit is not renewed by Congress, it will expire at the end of the year.  The impact of the threat of expiration of this credit already is being felt as wind companies are pushing back projects and laying off workers because of the looming uncertainty of federal funding.

After reading articles and blogs on this subject, I could not help but notice some of the comments made by other readers, many of which were constructive, but others, concerning.  I use the term “concerning” because I see that in most debates or discussions regarding green initiatives, education and understanding of the issues, or the lack of such, clearly guides the dialogue on these topics.

Living green and understanding the need to effect environmental change requires education.  Research and development and technological advancement enable scientists to find solutions to cleaner and efficient energy.  This definitely comes at a cost, albeit a worthwhile expense.  The push to advance science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in schools today recognizes the benefits of providing opportunities for students to explore new ideas and new worlds related to science.  Education programs, such as STEM, provide a bridge from the old to the new and are so important because they enhance vision, which is a key ingredient in the success of any scientific venture.

Unfortunately, there are many diehards in this country, who are resistant to change, even if it is for the good of people and the environment.  The green movement should not and cannot be dragged down by resistance to change, and modern technological solutions to energy problems should be welcomed, especially in the face of scientific evidence of looming catastrophes relative to climate change directly attributed to human behavior.  This negative mindset is not new in America as history gives us many instances of innovative ideas that prevailed but were met with great resistance.  An immediate example that comes to mind is the case of Henry Ford, who was successful in mass marketing the gas engine automobile in a time when many Americans would have settled for “faster horses“.  In the same spirit of Henry Ford, the green movement must promote efficient wind energy solutions as the future of our nation rather than “clean oil” solutions as suggested by some people.

Another major issue with detractors of wind power, who would be happy to see the credit expire, surrounds the willingness to destroy the job market.  Job creation is crucial to the recovery of the economy, and the market in wind energy projects presents the opportunity to add jobs.  This is especially good for veterans because “work in wind energy offers vets the opportunity to use a wide variety of skills they learned in the military, such as risk analyses, problem-solving and contract negotiation. . .”  So many of us voice our appreciation for the sacrifices of veterans and their families to protect us, and the promotion of wind energy projects through the PTC presents opportunities to reward returning soldiers with jobs, rather than just handshakes and pats on the back for their service.

Another potential base of support which needs to be tapped for wind energy advancement in this country is couples with young children or who are planning to have children.  Today’s energy solutions will frame your children’s tomorrow.  Living green should be the top priority on your agenda so that you can ensure a safe and healthy environment for your children.  Issues of renewable energy, such as wind power should become routine in articles in parenting magazines and blogs designed to educate families on living healthy.

The time is running short to extend the PTC.  As Congress haggles over the many issues dangling on the fiscal cliff, it is urgent that supporters of the green movement band together and speak up to protect the PTC so as to ensure the advancement of wind power as a viable source of energy in America.  We cannot allow the defeat of innovation technology such as this that enables us to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_21990652/four-governors-including-hickenlooper-urge-renewal-wind-power-credit

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/11/30/us-veterans-fight-for-wind-jobs-as-tax-credit-hits-the-cliff/

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/08/henry_ford_never_said_the_fast.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/wind-tax-credit-fiscal-cliff_n_2207581.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green

Wind Energy

Wind Energy (Photo credit: janie.hernandez55)

 

New York Tackles Comprehensive Storm Preparedness

by
SANDY BB Tunnel Gov Cuomo press conf-3808 crop...

SANDY BB Tunnel Gov Cuomo press conf-3808 crop crop (Photo credit: MTAPhotos)

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has outlined a storm preparedness plan that addresses power maintenance and prevention of flooding from hurricane-driven waves.  These are two of the major items under consideration by Cuomo’s NYS 2100 Commission.  The governor is well aware that it will be difficult to obtain the necessary federal funding required for his plans, but he emphasizes that prevention and mitigation of risks now, although costly, will save money and lives in the future.

The plan to protect New York City from future super storms comes at a price of more than $9 billion.  The current price for damages to the state from Sandy is $32.8 billion, with $19 billion apportioned to damages in New York City alone.  With this data available, hopefully this proposed investment will be deemed wise, particularly in light of the dire predictions of increases in the frequency of super storms.

The current proposed plan would rearrange the location of huge electrical transformers from the basements of large commercial buildings to the upper levels to prevent power failures.  Also, the state would have the systems in place to shutter key tunnels, airports and subway systems, locking out floodwaters.  Additionally, Cuomo wants to construct a seawall to prevent beach erosion and destructive surges into the city and Long Island.  Another item on board in the plan calls for the requirement for health care facilities to be equipped with backup power located at upper levels, rather than in basements.

It will be interesting to see how Gov. Cuomo’s plans play out in the current political environment, especially with the looming fiscal cliff,  Clearly the ultimate concern here is to take adequate steps to prevent injury and loss of life during extreme weather occurrences.  While there is an expectation that the federal government will offer financial support to address these problems, it also will be mandatory for each of the states affected by the storm to step up to the plate financially.  This is especially true regarding seawall barriers.

An excellent case study on the role of states in the construction and maintenance of water protection systems can be found the study of post-Katrina recovery efforts in New Orleans.  After the devastation by Katrina, the Army Corps of Engineers spent $12 billion to build a system of gates, walls and armored levees to protect the city during future storms.  There still remains approximately $1 billion worth of work to be completed.  A looming issue here is the cost of upkeep of this system, which carries a hefty and ongoing, but mandatory, price tag.  By necessity, New Orleans instituted a levee tax, which was just renewed by voters.  Consequently, if a seawall is approved and constructed in New York, the citizens there can expect to shoulder the financial responsibility for its maintenance.

Another issue that will have to be addresses is oversight of any water protection projects.  Under the Flood Control Act of 1936, the Army Corps of Engineers transferred the maintenance of water-control projects to local and/or state authorities.   New York State and/or City would have to put in place the necessary authorities to handle any seawall projects constructed there.  This project will be a very expensive system which will require strict inspections and maintenance to be effective.

The recovery from Hurricane Sandy will be long, difficult and expensive.  This storm has forced New York and surrounding states to “rethink” its infrastructure.  We can expect long debates and compromises to fix the problem, and we know that the cost of any solutions will be large and ongoing.  Hurricane Sandy and the expectation of future storms of this magnitude have forced all of us to “rethink” our relationship with the earth.  Now more than ever, we need to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/new-orleans-levee-upkeep-_n_2200667.html?ref=topbar

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/new-york-storm-preparedness-cuomo-9-billion-new-york-city_n_2203662.html?ir=Green&ref=topbar

 

U.S. Holds To Current Climate Goals at Doha

by
Kyoto Protocol Convention

Kyoto Protocol Convention (Photo credit: Marufish)

The opening sessions of the United Nations Climate Change meeting in Doha, Qatar witnessed the United States resisting pledges of steeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.  U.S. Deputy climate envoy John Pershing stated, “President Obama was sticking to his 2009 goal of cutting emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020″.  Even that target was rejected by the U.S. Senate.

The United States’ refusal to back the Kyoto Protocol has been joined by China, Russia, Japan and Canada, leaving the European Union and Australia as the larger countries supporting the pact, along with ore than 100 developing countries and Kyoto backers.  The recent protocol dropouts agree with the position of the United States that “it is meaningless to extend cuts under Kyoto when big emerging countries have no curbs on emission”.  It is for this very reason that the United States never ratified the Kyoto Protocol.  The worry here is that without extension of the Kyoto Protocol, there only would be national actions without any legally binding UN pacts.

With the devastation of Hurricane Sandy and its ever-increasing price tag still on the minds of Americans, along with the acknowledgement of key political figures that climate change and global warming are harsh realities that need urgent attention, it is evident that Americans are ready to tackle these issues.  Additionally, President Obama pledged to do more to address the issues of climate change in his second term.  With or without the Kyoto Protocol, it is important that we as citizens educate ourselves on the issue of global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, keeping dialogue on the forefront.  More than ever, we must demand that our elected officials commit to plans to upgrade failing power grids and outdated infrastructure and to implement solutions for cleaner and more efficient energy.  Now is the time for America to take the lead and be the driving force to effect change so that we live green, be green.

Source for this article:

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/us-holds-to-climate-goals-despite-poor-nations-pleas-2012-11-27

 

Wind Power Blows Strong For Red States

by

The renewal of the production tax credit for wind energy prior to its scheduled expiration at the end of the year would best serve traditional Republican or red states.  The 2012 election results clearly shows that most Americans believe that clean renewable energy is important and that oil is not representative of energy resources in our country’s future.  This clearly was evidenced by the defeat of candidates backed by polluters and their “dirty energy” dollars.

Presently, the strongest wind resources in the country are in Texas, Kansas and South Dakota, with Texas claiming bragging rights for the most installed wind power at a rate of 10 gigawatts per  hour or the equivalent of five Hoover Dams.  Statistics indicate that 81% of wind installed in America is in Republican districts.

Additional reasons to extend the production tax credit include the following:

  • Its expiration would result in the loss of 37,000 jobs, mostly in Republican districts.
  • Letting any tax expire is commensurate to raising taxes, which would not be good for the nation or for the states that already are heavily invested in these projects.

The production tax credit is good for both the economy and the environment, and it should not be held political hostage during the debates on measures to be taken to avoid the looming fiscal cliff.  The best way to help save this important tax credit is to let your elected officials know your position at the following website:  https://secure.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=8744&s_src=612LSCMB01.

The production tax credit extension will serve as clear notice by our elected officials that they are ready to put aside partisan bickering and come together to do the work of the people so that we all can live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

  1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brune/wind-tax-credit_b_2133428.html?utm_hp_ref=green
  2. http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/2012/11/sierra-club-helps-elect-dozens-of-new-clean-energy-champions-with-historic-campaign-efforts.html
wind power

wind power (Photo credit: twicepix)

Licensed Women Drivers Overtake Men

by
"The world turned upside down" (gend...

“The world turned upside down” (gender-role reversal) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

According to a study by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, female licensed drivers outnumber their male counterparts for the first time in automotive history.  This study examined gender trends in driver’s permits between 1995 and 2010.  As of 1995, male registered drivers outnumbered female drivers with permits 89.2 million to 87.4 million.  By 2010, however, 105.7 women had driver’s licenses compared to 104.3 million men.  Results indicate that “[w]omen are more likely than men to purchase smaller, safer and more fuel-efficient cars; to drive less, and to have a lower fatality rate per distance driven”.  These findings effectively place women in the driver’s seat, having assumed a position to take control over the country’s direction in matters of efficient affordable transportation and clean energy relative to it.

Certainly, these findings also impact automobile design.  However, it is noteworthy that the role of women in car design is not a new phenomenon.  In the period of more than 120 years since cars have been on the road, women have been instrumental in automobile design but largely were rendered invisible in this role by automakers.  In the 1960s’, auto companies, such as Ford, advertised cars for women, but the “woman’s car” generally was either smaller, cheaper and cuter than cars geared to male buyers, or it was the oversized family transport vehicle.  This notion directly reflected the perceived role of women in society in terms of participation in financial contributions and decisions.  Volvo set out to court women car buyers in 2005 with the “Your Concept Car“, which addressed automotive design features important to women, showing that these same features, i.e., interior space, position of front end and windows for better field vision, etc., also were important to men, thus leveling the playing field regarding cars in this price range.  Other than this, the role of women in the automobile industry basically was reduced to a “sex sells” mentality with car show images of beautiful women alongside gorgeous cars in an attempt to lure men to buy.

Now, fast forward to 2012 where truly “you’ve come a long way, baby!”  Women now outnumber men in college attendance and are commanding higher salaries (though they still lag behind men at a rate of 77 cents per dollar).  Women now are seen in the boardroom more often and assume higher positions in Fortune 500 companies.  Also, they are behind the wheel in professional auto racing.  Women were a deciding factor in the 2012 presidential election.  It is a normal progression for women to have a major impact on economic trends in America, including the auto industry.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of discussions and compromise on legislative issues regarding clean, affordable, safe and efficient transportation, as well as other green initiatives.  Hopefully, the major organizations in the green movement will work hard to include women in the dialogue and to gain their support to advance their many causes, particularly in the area of transportation.  As the primary nurturers in our society, women are a captive audience for the message to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

  1. http://www.insideline.com/car-news/more-women-than-men-have-drivers-licenses-study-shows.html
  2. http://herstoria.com/?p=9
  3. http://auto.howstuffworks.com/volvo-concept.htm

Sandy Forces Rethinking on Living Near Water

by

As the recovery and rebuilding from the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy continues in the northeastern region of the United States, so must rethinking the plausibility of living close to waters.  While it is understandable that the city flooding in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut was unavoidable and qualifies for federal funding for repairs, maybe this is an opportune time to reconsider living in beachfront communities.

It appears that the realization of the burdensome costs of storm damage in beachfront communities is in the crosshairs of the Obama administration.  This past summer, President Obama signed a bill that makes changes to the National Flood Insurance Program.  This law allots $105 billion to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the administrative agency for the National Flood Insurance Program, to update flood plain maps and to “adjust federal flood insurance premiums to reflect real risks”.  This law also includes provisions for efforts to remove vacation homes and repeat claims from the protection of federal insurance.

While programs such as these face opposition by long-time residents in flood-proned areas, they are supported by liberal officials because they represent acknowledgement of the reality of climate change and its effect on global warming.  Also, conservatives support these measures because they reduce federal spending.  It is important to note that the federal government is not restricting citizens from living in flood-proned areas.  Rather it is transferring the overwhelming financial burden of storm damage, which is expected to occur at greater frequencies, from all taxpayers to the residents in these communities.

During the 2012 presidential election campaign, we witnessed FEMA and its huge deficit become a point of contention.  While it is mandatory that federal monies be spent for natural disasters, consideration must be given to the argument for the necessity of some controls along these lines.  At the time the last transportation bill was signed, FEMA was $18 billion in debt.  Hurricane Sandy has pushed this debt closer to the agency’s cap of $20.8 billion.  The conversation to reduce the federal deficit and to address the looming fiscal cliff must include compromise on both sides of the aisle, and Congress would be remiss to not include measures to address the costs of devastation to communities by violent weather.  Of course, states and localities could adopt legislation to build sea walls to protect residents living near water and/or to provide state insurance funds to pay for rebuilding after storms, but this cost can no longer fall totally on the shoulders of the federal government.

Living a green life requires making choices, some of which are difficult but necessary.  To protect our families, communities, businesses and our very existence, let’s live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-safina/hurricane-sandynot-over-b_b_2109657.html?utm_hp_ref=green

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/appropriations/264639-hurricane-sandy-puts-fema-budget-in-campaign-spotlight

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/265179-groups-say-sandy-could-spark-more-flood-insurance-reform

FED - FEMA | Federal Emergency Management Agency

FED – FEMA | Federal Emergency Management Agency (Photo credit: Inventorchris)