Interesting morning, isn't it. The trains are all flooded. The tracks between Lawrence and Court in Brooklyn lost power due to flooding. My co-worker was stuck getting from Governor's Island. Sewage was backing up in my apartment (despite my building's $300,000 sump pumps, but at least the pumps kept the backup from becoming the fountaining river it used to be). The research facility I work at in Manhattan is flooded in the basement (I don't have access to the animal facility, so I can't check it, but it is in the basement!) and the elevators are out. And Brooklyn, technically speaking, had a tornado.
Yes, as I reported earlier [1], and confirmed elsewhere [2], Brooklyn was hit by, in essence, a tornado today. I can attest (since it passed over us!) that it wasn't quite like you see in the Wizard of Oz or what those in the Midwest think of when they think of a tornado, but meteorologists this morning were calling it a tornado. Whatever it is called, my wife, whose obsession with the Weather Channel goes back longer than I've known her, says she has never seen the full blown tornado warning on the Weather Channel in Brooklyn.
Now, as my wife says, this single incident cannot be directly attributed to global warming, but global warming is predicted to increase the incident of these kinds of extreme weather events and this prediction is playing out. While I would never say that today's events are "caused by" global warming, global warming DOES make such events more likely and it is practically a given that these problems will increase in NYC in particular due to three things: increased storminess (one predicted consequence of global warming), rising sea level (another predicted consequence of global warming), and increased development (a consequence not of global warming but of the almost slave-like devotion many Albany and NYC politicians show towards developers).
This year, around the globe, extreme weather is almost the norm. And the pattern we are seeing DOES fit the pattern predicted by global warming models [3]. This year is not alone proof of anything. But as part of a predicted pattern, it becomes one more datum strongly supporting the global warming hypothesis.
Today's problems were caused by a.) a particularly heavy rain; b.) an aging and inadequate infrastructure that is increasingly breaking down; and c.) a population and level of development that is too dense for the infrastructure.
The prediction that increasing global temperatures (and particularly increasing ocean surface temperatures) will increase storminess remains controversial. Unlike the general global warming hypothesis in general, which is rock solid, this particular prediction is still under study. But, there is evidence that increased storminess IS occurring and that it is correlated with increased temperatures, and the consequences of increased storminess are worrisome enough to take seriously even if the prediction remains under study. The consequences, at best, are what we experienced here in NYC this morning. At worst, think Hurricane Katrina. In fact even that could have been worse had Katrina remained category 5 when it hit land. Many (though not all) models predict more and more of these events, and we have been seeing more and more of these events, though not yet over a time span that is definitive.
It is probable, though not certain, that NYC will see more of these kinds of storms and the result will be much the same or worse as what we experienced this morning.
Sea level rise is almost certain. It is already happening, threatening several small island nations with extinction. The rate of sea level rise is what remains controversial. But what is known right now is that the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets seem to be melting at a FASTER rate than originally predicted. Two things will add to sea level rise: thermal expansion of the oceans (the hotter the water, the more volume it takes up) and the melting of ice sheets (as opposed to ice shelfs). These are both happening and sea level is rising. This will create a baseline of water level that will ALREADY be a problem and that storms like we are seeing today will make that more constant problem, periodically even worse.
Finally we have inadequate infrastructure combined with overdevelopment. Already Brooklyn has massive problems with sewage back up. I had experienced it for years. My building installed sump pumps (at a cost of $300,000, I say again) to force the sewage into the overstrained city system. These pumps in general work, keeping the sewage out of our apartment. But they aren't a complete solution because our building's laundry room (also in the basement) still floods and today, with the tornado conditions, even our apartment flooded. A blogging nemesis of mine also experiences this flooding, and recently asked me about the sump pumps in our building because they need the same solution.
Well, keep in mind, folks, that every building that shells out money for sump pumps makes it worse for everyone downstream who can't afford the sump pumps. Flooding in poorer neighborhoods will happen more and more as storms increase, sea level rises and more rich owners install sump pumps. Conditions conducive to Cholera are possible, I will point out as someone who knows a bit about both history and biology.
This is the current state of affairs: an existing flooding problems and inadequate sewer system which will be strained more and more just by the consequences of global warming.
Now add, oh, I don't know, a stadium and a bunch of skyscrapers on top of the already overstrained infrastructure. That is, of course, what developers, and their tame politicians, want.
When considering issues of global warming and development, New Yorkers have to ask themselves the following questions:
1. Do I want more flooding in my basement, perhaps even if I install sump pumps?
2. Do I want more track flooding and the inevitable delays and expensive clean up and maintenance issues that entails?
3. Do I want my home damaged by storms and flooding?
and, when dealing with development in particular,
4. Do I want my tax money to go to buying the land for the developer and giving him massive incentives so he can make a profit while making the flooding in basements and subways EVEN worse?
5. Do I want my utilities bills to go up so that developer's project can get infrastructure upgrades I won't get? (Con Ed has already proposed a rate increase for all of us so that the massive amount of new development can be accommodated).
If you answered "yes" to all these questions, then YOU want global warming and are a Ratner supporter. You probably are also a Republican and believe in creationism.
If you answered "no" you really have to seriously consider what needs to be done to mitigate global warming (we have ten years to do something, according to the optimistic experts...and they have been saying that for about a year now!) and you have to seriously question the sanity of some of the development projects that are being approved and that our tax money is going to fund so that developers can make even MORE money.
There have been lots of complaints about Congressional Democrats not having enough spine to stand up to Bush. Well, what about the state and local level in NY? Where is the leadership that will look at these problems, honestly recognize them, and do what needs to be done to deal with them? We do NOT need massive development like Bruce Ratner's massive projects. The cost to all New Yorkers as taxpayers and as part of an already overtaxed infrastructure (think roads, schools, firehouses, parks, etc as well as sewers) will be huge. And we will have more mornings like today.
Not one single Ratner advocate has been able to tell me how these problems will be handled. Marty Markowitz is silent on them. Bill de Blasio is silent about them. All they say is "affordable housing and jobs." That's what they say because ALL of us support affordable housing and jobs. But why do they hand the project over to Ratner, who has a poor record on job creation and NO record of generating affordable housing. The promises of affordable housing and jobs keep getting scaled back and modified out of significance even as the amount of taxpayer money that is being demanded skyrockets. We have no real guarantee that in the long run we will have better jobs or more affordable housing, but we ARE guaranteed higher utilities bills, more subway problems, more flooding and a higher tax bill.
Ask yourself this: is Ratner's plan, with almost no guarantees regarding jobs or housing, worth the cost that we already are paying. Given the problems global warming is already throwing at us, can we add MORE to an overburdened infrastructure.
I ask all my electeds what they are doing about this? New York is facing escalating problems and we KNOW they are going to get worse given our current path. So, what are you doing about it?
[4] | 
[5] | 
[6] | 
[7] | 
[8] | 
[9] | 
[10] | 
[11] | 
[12]