By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, hydrologic data from the National Hydrography Dataset, urban areas from Vector Map, all other features from the National Atlas., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12520461
About this Report
This report summarizes and communicates the results of EPA’s ongoing Climate Change Impacts and Risk Analysis (CIRA) project. The goal of this work is to estimate to what degree climate change impacts and damages to multiple U.S. sectors (e.g., human health, infrastructure, and water resources) may be avoided or reduced in a future with significant global action to reduce GHG emissions, compared to a future in which current emissions continue to grow. Importantly, only a small portion of the impacts of climate change are estimated, and therefore this report captures just some of the total benefits of reducing GHGs.
Climate change is becoming an existential threat with warming in excess of 2°C within the next three decades and 4°C to 6°C within the next several decades. Warming of such magnitudes will expose as many as 75% of the world’s population to deadly heat stress in addition to disrupting the climate and weather worldwide. Climate change is an urgent problem requiring urgent solutions. This report lays out urgent and practical solutions that are ready for implementation now, will deliver benefts in the next few critical decades, and places the world on a path to achieving the longterm targets of the Paris Agreement and near-term sustainable development goals.
This is a pivotal report in US Environmental Law. It looked at whether the EPA was spending too many resources on low level toxic exposures, at the expense of other environmental risks, including climate change. It later became a cudgel in the fight to require cost benefit analysis for all environmental protections. The report is in five parts, the overview and four technical reports.
A draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public but was obtained by The New York Times, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. The report was completed this year and is part of the National Climate Assessment, which is congressionally mandated every four years.
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was designed to help Americans recover from flood disasters, but it can also unintentionally trap homeowners who would prefer to move somewhere safer. Instead of moving, many policyholders find themselves rebuilding their homes again and again. Across the United States, more than 30,000 “severe repetitive loss properties” (SRLPs) have been covered under the NFIP. These properties have flooded an average of five times, according to FEMA data acquired by NRDC through a Freedom of Information Act request.
More and more Americans are living in areas that are vulnerable to flooding and sea level rise.4,5,6 In the face of rising flood risks and damages, the NFIP should provide interested homeowners the option of relocating. This issue brief proposes flood insurance reforms that would make it possible for the owners of repeatedly flooded homes to receive a buyout of their property after a flood, removing the uncertainty that surrounds FEMA’s existing buyout efforts. Under this proposal, homeowners would be able to voluntarily sign up for a buyout before the next flood occurs. If a flood then substantially damages their home, FEMA would quickly provide funding that enables the local government to purchase the flood-prone property and convert it to open space while freeing the owner to relocate.
This year, Congress is debating the future of the NFIP. This presents a critical opportunity to make buyouts of flood-prone properties a more realistic option for more homeowners. With floods and flood damages on the rise, now is the time for climate-smart reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program.
This lawsuit by an anti-immigration group alleges that since Americans have among the highest carbon footprints, allowing immigrants into the US will increase GHG emissions and climate change. This means that immigration has environmental impacts and thus immigration policy changes require an Environmental Impact Statement under NEPA.
A primary issue in addressing climate change is that many people either deny its existence or deny or downplay man’s role in driving it. The usual answer is that we need more education about climate science. Cultural cognition research questions this presumption, finding that many climate change skeptics/deniers understand the underlying science as well as those who accept man’s role in climate change. These papers report research on how and when education about facts can change minds when it may only harden existing attitudes. This is new work and is evolving with time. These are links to public domain copies of the papers that can be used in class.
The Del Mar Sea-Level Rise Adaptation Plan serves as the City of Del Mar’s long-range planning guide to address future sea-level rise and its effects on storm surge and coastal flooding and erosion. This Adaptation Plan will provide the basis for developing new sea-level rise policies that will be integrated into the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) via a LCP Amendment. The Adaptation Plan draws on the City of Del Mar’s Coastal Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment (ESA 2016, Coastal Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment – Del Mar, Ca ), guidance provided by the City’s Sea-Level Rise Stakeholder Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), and the California Coastal Commission’s (2015) Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance for addressing sealevel rise in LCPs.