President Trump Is Repairing National Infrastructure While Ignoring Weather Patterns

For a business owner who has property (A golf course) which is flush with the ocean in Scotland, the potential threat posed by rising sea levels should be a concern for the future.  Recently, I received a daily e-mail from 'Politico Energy' containing the following excerpt which should be surprising to any future (and present) beachside property owners:

ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PUSH THUDS: Before he veered off-message by arguing there were "very fine" people among the neo-Nazis and KKK members in Charlottesville, President Donald Trump actually signed an executive order Tuesday that aims to hit a two-year goal for completing federal environmental permitting for infrastructure projects by designating a lead federal agency for each major project. "It's going to be a very streamlined process," he said at a Trump Tower press conference. "And, by the way, if it doesn't meet environmental safeguards, we're not going to approve it." The order tasks the White House Council on Environmental Quality (still without a nominee to lead it) with developing a government-wide action plan to speed environmental permitting reviews and with sorting out any disputes between agencies.

Most controversial among the order's provisions was the revocation of an Obama-era flood standard requiring new federally funded projects be built to withstand the stronger storms likely fueled by climate change - a move that earned broad condemnation. R.J. Lehmann, a senior fellow with the conservative R St. Institute, called the revocation "shortsighted and ill-considered." Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo , whose South Florida district sees frequent flooding, called Trump's decision "irresponsible and it will lead to taxpayer dollars being wasted on projects that may not be built to endure the flooding we are already seeing and know is only going to get worse." And Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said axing the standard was "actively wasting taxpayer dollars, endangering schools and hospitals, and threatening the lives of people around the country for no other reason than his apparent contempt for the public."

Supporters of Trump's reversal of the Obama-era initiative were limited mainly to home builders and some Republicans in Congress. "President Trump made the correct decision to repeal this onerous regulation that was written to make a political statement on climate change rather than for practicality," Louisiana Rep. Ralph Abraham , whose state has been ravaged by more frequent flooding, said in a statement. And National Association of Home Builders Chairman Granger MacDonald praised Trump's action to kill the standard that would "needlessly hurt housing affordability" and said it would "provide much-needed regulatory relief for the housing community and help American home buyers."

What about infrastructure? Trump attempted to call attention to his $1 trillion initiative to rebuild the nation's roads, tunnels and bridges - but provided hardly any detail about what that forthcoming proposal may actually contain, Pro Transportation's Lauren Gardner reports. National Economic Council Chairman Gary Cohn said the White House continued to hope action on infrastructure would come this year but told reporters it would "come on the heels of taxes," another complex issue without a firm proposal ready for congressional consideration.

As you might have already guessed, the person described in the first sentence with a business (a golf course) that is flush with the ocean in Scotland is none other than the leader of the free-world -- President Trump.  Yes, and the excerpt was taken from my daily e-mail briefing from 'Politico Energy'.   The current administration believes that climate change is not man-made and is not real.  Furthermore, that investment into the research behind or the aftermath effects should be disregarded and under funded (or not funded at all).



This rhetoric from the Trump administration comes despite a report prepared by the National Academy of Sciences (along with 12 other agencies) on Climate Change which has been released to the current administration for editing and clarity.  Which means that President Trump can take from the report language and twist it to his advantage.  Senator Dianne Feinstein (California) recently released a statement regarding the release of the report and climate change shown below:

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today issued the following statement in response to a draft report on climate change produced by 13 federal agencies:

“This report leaves no doubt that climate change is real, it’s man-made and is already having a profound effect on the United States. The president shouldn’t ignore or try to censor the scientific conclusions of 13 federal agencies. Instead, he has a responsibility to listen to the scientists, learn how climate change is threatening our country and work with us to find achievable solutions.

“The draft report, which hasn’t yet been edited by the political leadership of the administration, warns that ‘human activities are now the dominant cause of the observed changes in climate.’

“The draft report documents that temperatures in the United States have already risen by about 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit since 1901, will increase by at least 2.5 degrees in the next few decades and could rise 8.7 degrees by late century if we don’t cut our greenhouse gas emissions.

“Similarly, sea levels have risen about 8 to 9 inches since 1880, are expected to rise another 6 to 14 inches by 2050 and could potentially rise more than 8 feet by the end of the century if polar ice sheets destabilize.

“In the western United States, the report warns of chronic drought by the end of this century due to reduced snowpack. At the same time, increased evaporation may strengthen sudden storms that cause severe floods. The anticipated effects on weather, agriculture, infrastructure and the oceans cannot be ignored.

“Up to this point, this administration has rejected the fact that human activity is driving climate change. This willful ignorance has made it almost impossible to address the risks highlighted in this report. Burying this report and refusing to act on its conclusions would be a dereliction of duty.”

Wow.  Amazing right?  Earlier in the week, when I was adding the content to this post (the excerpts), I was unaware that a Hurricane was about to visit the U.S. -- Hurricane Harvey.  Here is an excerpt from the 'Politico Energy' today regarding the potential impact of the incoming Hurricane to the southern coastal cities of the United States:

HARVEY MESSES WITH TEXAS: Hurricane Harvey is closing in on the Texas coast, with the bullseye painted right on Corpus Christi. The storm will be the first to hit the Texas coast since the Category 4 Hurricane Ike slammed into Houston in September 2008. Harvey looks likely to reach at least Category 3 by the time it makes landfall early Saturday, according to forecasts. It has already caused BP, Exxon Mobil, Anadarko and other oil companies to evacuate their deepwater rigs. BSEE estimated the shutdowns took 10 percent of the Gulf of Mexico's oil production offline as of mid-day on Thursday, and that number is only likely to be higher when the agency's next bulletin comes out later today. Harvey will also throw a wrench into U.S. oil exports, much of which leaves the country via Corpus.

Harvey could prove to be the first big test of FEMA's new head, Brock Long, who won Senate confirmation in June. FEMA set up an Incident Support Base at near Seguin, Texas, complete with supplies, a spokeswoman said, but so far there have been no requests for support.

Bolstering the case for the Ike Dike? The petrochemical and refining operations around Galveston and the Houston Ship Channel aren't expected to be at the epicenter of this storm, as of Thursday's forecast, but emergency planners there have been worrying ever since Hurricane Ike inflicted $29.5 billion in damages and killed 74 people in 2008. Texas politicians and business leaders have been pushing the idea of a massive seawall to protect Galveston and Houston, and in April asked President Donald Trump for $15 billion for the project. Hurricane Harvey could help them continue to make the case as they fight for federal funding. But environmental groups are wary of the effort, dubbed the "Ike Dike," arguing it could hugely alter the salinity patterns and block key fish species in Galveston Bay, where millions of dollars, including money related to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, have been spent on environmental restoration.

What about New Orleans? A dozen years after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the city, the Big Easy may not be prepared to handle heavy rains this time around with three of five turbines that power drainage pumps for the low-lying city not working, the New Orleans Advocate reports. In addition, 15 of the city's 120 water pumps are offline as the city braces for between five and 10 inches of rain.

Reupping: How bad can it get for Houston? This bad.

The excerpt above is outlining the last category 3 hurricane which hit in 2008.  Here is a link to an infographic and interactive map which shows the amount of rain dropped in the storms path in 2008 over Houston (Texas).  If Hurricane Harvey does as much damage to the southern coastal cities, President Trump will be challenged to keep his promises to build infrastructure which is resilient and long lasting.  This might be President Trump's first major test from a natural disaster.



Regardless of whether the Trump administration believes that climate change is real (and man-made) or not, storms like Hurricane Harvey will only reinforce that his misinformed understanding of weather patterns will have 'real-world' adverse impacts on infrastructure in the area.  In a previous post, I showed that at least congress (even Republicans) believe that climate change is real.  The only remaining group of citizens are the supporters of the Trump administration who choose to ignore the realities.  Luckily (and unfortunately) events such as Hurricane Harvey will drive home the reality that the weather patterns are changing as a result of climate change.



Furthermore, that the United States should get ahead of the problem instead of playing catch up.  Currently, we are headed in the direction of lagging behind the edge (of research) to stay ahead of the growing problem.  Hopefully, the damage done by Hurricane Harvey is minimal and we can change the course to stay ahead of the curve.  In the next post, I will perform dimensional analysis of the expected amount of rainfall to the coastal cities in Texas to drive home the enormous threats to our country.