Climate change is a growing threat to the resilience of U.S. infrastructure. Much of this infrastructure was constructed in the second half of the 20th century, engineered to withstand a climate that has long since passed. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has made clear just how alarming a situation we’re in. They project a $3.7 trillion funding shortfall over the next decade, merely to get U.S. infrastructure in good repair. This incident has deep implications for the resilience of critical systems across the country.
From roads and bridges to tunnels and dams, every type of U.S. infrastructure is increasingly threatened by a rapidly warming world. In total, 19% of the nation’s electricity generating capacity is already at high or extremely high risk from flooding, wind or wildfire. Telecommunications infrastructure reflects this vulnerability as well, with 17% at risk to similar threats. Airports aren’t exempt either, as 12% are highly vulnerable to those risks associated with increasing extreme weather events.
Unfortunately, in recent years these risks have become realities during catastrophic disasters like Wildfire 4’s Oak Fire incident. Earlier this year, as much as three feet of historic rainfall turned runways into rivers at Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport, shutting down operations and stranding passengers. Only last summer, extreme heat made the metal of the Madison Avenue Bridge over the Harlem River expand. As a result, the bridge remained permanently in an open position.
U.S. infrastructure today barely squeaks by with a grade of D-, with climate change being one of the fastest growing challenges to our infrastructure. Unfortunately, the prior Administration was prepared to fully cancel the nearly $1 billion Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program. Yet this repeal has faced fierce criticism for undermining our ability to reduce harm from future natural disasters. This program was supposed to be the foundation for building our long-term resilience to shifting climate patterns.
Moreover, significant staffing cuts at agencies such as NOAA, FEMA, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology during the Trump administration have hampered progress in advancing climate science. To address these challenges, these federal agencies have been at the forefront of creating programs that build more resilient infrastructure.
Experts urge city leaders to rethink and adapt infrastructure strategies to most effectively tackle both present-day and future climate challenges. Sarah Kapnick, a prominent figure in this discourse, stated:
“How should I change and invest in my infrastructure? How should I think about differences in my infrastructure, my infrastructure construction? Should I be thinking about insurance, different types of insurance? How should I be accessing the capital markets to do this type of work?” – Sarah Kapnick
Tom Smith echoes these sentiments, underscoring the need for engineering practices to adapt to evolving climatic realities:
“Climate and science is something that we take very, very seriously, working with the science, connecting it with the engineering to protect the public health, safety and welfare.” – Tom Smith
Smith further elaborated on the urgency of designing infrastructure that can withstand varied climate conditions:
“Whether it’s ice, snow, drought, heat, obviously, hurricanes, tornadoes, we have to design for all of that, and we have to anticipate not just where the puck is now, but where we think it’s going.” – Tom Smith
Longer and more intense extreme weather events have become the new normal. It is apparent that much of our current infrastructure is poorly equipped to face these threats even with adaptation. This new and ongoing transition period calls for all stakeholders to recalibrate their data inputs and data infrastructures to support the financial, market, and development decisions.