GAO-13-242, Climate Change
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters GAO April 2013 CLIMATE CHANGE Future Federal Adaptation Efforts Could Better Support Local Infrastructure Decision Makers GAO-13-242 April 2013 CLIMATE CHANGE Future Federal Adaptation Efforts Could Better Support Local Infrastructure Decision Makers Highlights of GAO-13-242, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The federal government invests billions According to the National Research Council (NRC) and others, infrastructure of dollars annually in infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, wastewater systems, and National Aeronautics and such as roads and bridges, facing Space Administration (NASA) centers are vulnerable to changes in the climate. increasing risks from climate change. Changes in precipitation and sea levels, as well as increased intensity and Adaptation—defined as adjustments to frequency of extreme events, are projected by NRC and others to impact natural or human systems in response infrastructure in a variety of ways. When the climate changes, infrastructure— to actual or expected climate change— typically designed to operate within past climate conditions—may not operate as can help manage these risks by well or for as long as planned, leading to economic, environmental, and social making infrastructure more resilient. impacts. For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration GAO was asked to examine issues estimates that, within 15 years, segments of Louisiana State Highway 1— related to infrastructure decision providing the only road access to a port servicing 18 percent of the nation’s oil making and climate change. This supply—will be inundated by tides an average of 30 times annually due to report examines (1) the impacts of relative sea level rise. Flooding of this road effectively closes the port. climate change on roads and bridges, wastewater systems, and NASA Decision makers have not systematically considered climate change in centers; (2) the extent to which climate infrastructure planning for various reasons, according to representatives of change is incorporated into professional associations and agency officials who work with these decision infrastructure planning; (3) factors that makers. For example, more immediate priorities—such as managing aging enabled some decision makers to infrastructure—consume time and resources, limiting decision makers’ ability to implement adaptive measures; and (4) consider and implement climate adaptation measures. Difficulties in obtaining federal efforts to address local and using information needed to understand vulnerabilities and inform adaptation adaptation needs, as well as potential decisions pose additional challenges. opportunities for improvement. Key factors enabled some local decision makers to integrate climate change into GAO reviewed climate change infrastructure planning. As illustrated by GAO’s site visits and relevant studies, assessments; analyzed relevant these factors included (1) having local circumstances such as weather-related reports; interviewed stakeholders from crises that spurred action, (2) learning how to use available information, (3) professional associations and federal having access to local expertise, and (4) considering climate impacts within agencies; and visited infrastructure existing planning processes. As one example, the Milwaukee Metropolitan projects and interviewed local decision Sewerage District managed risks associated with more frequent extreme rainfall makers at seven sites where adaptive events by enhancing its natural systems’ ability to absorb runoff by, for instance, measures have been implemented. preserving wetlands. This effort simultaneously expanded the sewer system’s What GAO Recommends capacity while providing other community and environmental benefits. District leaders enabled these changes by prioritizing adaptation, using available local- GAO recommends, among other level climate projections, and utilizing local experts for assistance. things, that a federal entity designated by the Executive Office of the GAO’s report identifies several emerging federal efforts under way to facilitate President (EOP) work with agencies to more informed adaptation decisions, but these efforts could better support the identify for local infrastructure decision needs of local infrastructure decision makers in the future, according to studies, makers the best available climate- local decision makers at the sites GAO visited, and other stakeholders. For related information for planning, and example, among its key efforts, the federal government plays a critical role in also to update this information over producing the information needed to facilitate more informed local infrastructure time. Relevant EOP entities did not adaptation decisions. However, as noted by NRC studies, this information exists provide official comments, but instead in an uncoordinated confederation of networks and institutions, and the end provided technical comments, which result of it not being easily accessible is that people may make decisions—or GAO incorporated, as appropriate. choose not to act—without it. Accordingly, a range of studies and local decision View GAO-13-242. For more information, makers GAO interviewed cited the need for the federal government to improve contact David C. Trimble at (202) 512-3841 or local decision makers’ access to the best available information to use in [email protected]. infrastructure planning. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background 6 Roads and Bridges, Wastewater Management Systems, and NASA Centers Are Vulnerable to Changes in the Climate 14 Climate Change Has Not Been Systematically Incorporated in Infrastructure Planning 37 Key Factors Enabled Some Decision Makers to Integrate Climate Change into Infrastructure Project Planning 45 Future Federal Adaptation Efforts Could Better Meet the Needs of Local Infrastructure Decision Makers 66 Conclusions 85 Recommendations for Executive Action 87 Agency Comments 88 Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 89 Appendix II GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 93 Tables Table 1: Current and Projected Climate Changes in the United States and Impacts to Infrastructure 15 Table 2: Examples of How NASA Centers Are Vulnerable to Observed and Projected Climate Change Impacts 28 Table 3: Changes in the Frequency of Hot and Cold Days at Johnson Space Center, as Projected by NASA Climate Scientists 33 Table 4: Extreme Events at Langley Research Center: 2020-2090 35 Table 5: NASA Model Results of Projected Climate Changes at Johnson Space Center 61 Figures Figure 1: Damaged Segments of the Twin Span Bridge 18 Figure 2: Interactive Graphic Illustrating the Impact of Hurricane Katrina Storm Surge and Waves on I-10 Twin Span Bridge 19 Figure 3: Louisiana State Highway 1 Leading to Port Fourchon 21 Page i GAO-13-242 Infrastructure Adaptation Figure 4: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Facilities Potentially Vulnerable to Sea Level Rise 25 Figure 5: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District’s Sewer System Infrastructure 27 Figure 6: NASA Field Centers and Component Sites 29 Figure 7: Location of Johnson Space Center 31 Figure 8: Location of Langley Research Center 34 Figure 9: Adaptive Measures Integrated into New Twin Span Bridge 47 Figure 10: Rendering of Raised Segment of Louisiana State Highway 1 49 Figure 11: Flooding of an Unraised Segment of Louisiana State Highway 1 Following Hurricane Isaac 50 Figure 12: Adaptive Measures Integrated into Washington State Route 522 52 Figure 13: Flap Gate Installed at the Barton Pump Station 54 Figure 14: Examples of Green Infrastructure Projects in Milwaukee 55 Figure 15: NASA Model Results of Observed Climate Changes at Langley Research Center 63 Page ii GAO-13-242 Infrastructure Adaptation Abbreviations AASHTO American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials CEQ Council on Environmental Quality DOD Department of Defense EPA Environmental Protection Agency ISO International Organization for Standardization NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRC National Research Council OMB Office of Management and Budget OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy Recovery Act American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 RISA Regional Integrated Science and Assessments TRB Transportation Research Board USGCRP United States Global Change Research Program This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. Page iii GAO-13-242 Infrastructure Adaptation United States Government Accountability Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2013 The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse Chairman Subcommittee on Oversight Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate The Honorable Max Baucus Chairman Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Extreme weather events and climate change pose risks to physical infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, essential to the economic well- being of the United States. As evident from Superstorm Sandy