I know! You’re all sick of hearing about Global Climate Change. Every little thing brings us to the brink of disaster. A butterfly flaps it’s wings in China, and we get a storm in Florida. Or at least that’s what we’re told. Today, let’s forget about complex science… and math. We all hate math? Right? Instead, I’m just going to tell you a story. A simple story, with Heros (can I get a “yeah!” from the audience?) and Villians (OK Internet trolls… this is where you go “BOO!”). But best of all, it’s a LOCAL story about places you know and individuals you can relate to. Sounds good? Let’s dive in!
Back in 2017, Hurricane Harvey slammed into Houston. It was the wettest storm in history, with over $125 billion, claiming 68 lives. The rain that fell on Houston was unprecedented. Yet, even after the deluge in Houston, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas State governement, the government of Houston, and key local business leaders continue to tell us that the climate is always changing. Nothing new here. Keep moving. No one can do anything, least of all your Government!
That’s the official line. But it’s not the truth. The truth is that Ted Cruz and the government of Texas has been secretly spending billions of dollars to change the climate! Surprising, right? But it’s all completely true! Unfortunately its a good-news… bad-news… kind of thing.
The good news is that the state of Texas has proved that, for a price, a measurable change can be made in the climate. Ultimately, both conservatives and liberals can (and do) agree on this. The bad news is that the change was to make the climate worse.
Let’s forget about their massive petroleum and chemical companies, and all that butterfly flapping its wings stuff. And good god, let all forget about math! I still have nightmares about Mr. Finch’s 10th-grade geometry class! Sure, algebra was OK, but when we had to plot those damned triangles… where was I? Oh, yeah. Climate change.
Could all of you please go outside your house, apartment, or where ever you live. Are you there yet? Now, look at your feet. Just under your feet is what is technically known as the “ground”. What of kind of ground are you standing on? Is it a concrete driveway? A lawn? A flower garden?
For the purpose of clarity, let’s divide up everything on earth into the paved and the unpaved world. Paved means ground covered with concrete, asphalt, buildings or similar “impermeable” substances. The rest is unpaved, covered with dirt, sand, grass, swamps, mountains, the ocean… that sort of stuff.
If you’re not sure which type of ground you’re looking at, just pour some water on it. If the water just sits there or runs downhill without getting soaked up, it’s usually paved. If it gets soaked up, it’s unpaved. The reason why this is important is that… ready for it… rain is water!
Big surprise, huh? A heavy downpour on unpaved ground gets soaked up. If the ground is uneven, muddy, has trees and grass or swamps, it soaks up water and slows the downhill movement of whatever water is left. Different types of unpaved ground have different capacities to soak up or slow down rainwater. However, on paved ground rain just rolls across the surface and heads quickly downhill. And into your neighbor’s basement. Or whatever part of town is downhill.
I first saw this years ago. A friend father had a small garden in his backyard. His neighbor sold his house, and the new owner paved his entire backyard, which was slightly higher than my friend’s father’s garden. Obviously, the contractor who did the paving did want to flood his customer’s basement, so the surface of the concrete was very slightly tilted away from his house and towards the neighbor’s garden. When it rained, the garden was so badly flooded that the plants were literally ripped out of the garden by the force of flowing water. This never happened before the yard was paved.
Too small an example? What about the Ford River Rouge factory? About 20 years ago, Ford was fighting a losing battle with floods. They hired the architect William McDonough, who identified the problem… too many (paved) parking lots. Some paving was removed, to allow strips of grass to grow. Parks and lawns were planted on roofs.
This soaked up water, and the insulation from the lawns reduce the cost of heating and cooling. Flooding was greatly reduced, and the cost of the old flood control system (storm drains, cisterns to hold the water) was also reduced. The system paid for itself, and the workers had a more enjoyable work environment.
The River Rouge project influenced the development of thousands of other buildings, factories, and cities. Houston has a highly qualified city planning department, that is well aware of these projects. In fact, they have repeatedly made reports to City’s leaders that they have eliminated too much of the surrounding wetlands and excessive paving will lead to disastrous flooding.
Rather than following this common-sense advice, Houstons leaders have doubled down, destroying rather than protecting local wetlands, prairies and other barriers to stormwater. Houston has been on a multi-billion dollar building spree, paving over everything in sight.
The results of Houston’s uncontrolled urban sprawl? A recent study by the University of Iowa determined that all of this construction and paving magnified the damage caused by the storm ($125 billion and 68 lives, remember?)… by 21 times! That means that the cost of Hurricane Harvey would have been just 5% of that $125 billion (less than $7 billion). At least the leaders of Houston stood up and took responsibility for their criminal neglect, the damage to the city and the death of their citizens.
Just kidding!
The leaders of Houston sent the bill to the Federal government, and want the rest of the nation to pay for their intentional flooding of the city. Which means that you and I (and every family in America) need to pay around one thousand dollars, each. Meanwhile, Houston continues to build. But a battle is brewing. Houston’s leaders continue to value short term growth over the long term value of the city, but other voices have been raised for a more balanced approach.
Unfortunately, as long as politicians and businesses are rewarded for unethical behavior, they will act unethically. We voted in these politicians, so when we get tired of their bad decisions, we can vote them out. But what about business leaders and investors? Will they continue to plow money into unethical, even dangerous projects? Some will, but others demand alternatives.
The United Nations has issued a number of decrees and declarations about how nations can better cooperate and bring about a better world. Most are just ignored, but a few actually do stick. Like Environment, Social and Governance… or ESG for short. I greatly simplify but essentially ESG means… you will not burn down the earth, your products should help (not harm) people, and the governance of your organization must be fair and do more than just generate profit at any cost. ESG is taking off across the world.
In an ESG world, Houston will find that it is very difficult to get funding for environmentally destructive construction projects. Or, if they can get fuding they will need to pay a SUPER high-interest rate. Essentially, ESG will take a lot of the profit incentive out of really bad projects. That means that local governments, like that in Houston, will need to start thinking very differently.
Think about it! Houston is a city that consciously and intentionally violated basic engineering, and was warned by its own city planners. Why? To make a short term profit. Is this a “natural disaster”? Or a faulty product? Shouldn’t Houston, rather than the rest of the nation, pay for the predicted damages? I the University of Iowa is right about the degree to which Houston’s own actions created the flood, then the Feds should reject all by $5 billion of Texas’ $125 billion relief request.
What do you think? Should cities be responsible for the changes they make to the climate? Even if the Federal government continues to pay flood insurance claims, should they collect from municipalities when they caused the damage? What do you think is the best way to deal with future floods?