NEWPORT BAY, Calif. — Marine biologist Claire Earle roams the sand in search of Olympia oysters on a recent sunny afternoon and the beds her organization has constructed to clean the surrounding watershed. and pondered everything she could do if she could get federal funding to expand her work.
Arre’s project aims to address climate change by using nature instead of ergonomic construction. This is his one of many counties in the United States’ 254 coastal counties targeted for billions of dollars in federal funding from inflation reduction laws, uncontrolled climate change and health care. The tax bill signed by President Biden last month.
The move “could have the direct consequence of initiating the next restoration project and sharing the beneficial impacts here with other communities,” said the nonprofit organization Orange County Coastkeepers. Director of Marine Restoration, Mr. Arre, notes with great care: We scanned the site surrounded by sandbars and cliffs, pickleweed, and anchored boats.
The group hopes to expand to nearby Huntington Harbor and is seeking funding to do so.
An under-represented section of the Democratic climate bill, which has made the largest federal investment in history to combat global warming, will help coastal areas across the country through grants to fund projects that prepare for and respond to hazards. Injecting $2.6 billion into communities over five years due to climate-related events and disruptions. Although the program accounts for less than 1% of all statutory climate investments, it is an important step and a catalyst for the federal government’s shift towards funding nature-based climate solutions. Widely regarded as the latest sign.
As floods wreak havoc in the East and rising sea levels increasingly threaten the West, coast-to-coast authorities have long sought funding to restore vital natural habitats for beach communities. By 2050, sea levels are projected to rise by an average of more than 1 foot, during which time we will see a rise similar to that of the last 100 years.
Scientists expect the impacts of climate change to become even more severe in the future. Rising sea levels are being exacerbated by flooding and storms known as “megastorms,” which could disrupt San Francisco and cities around the world. Along the East Coast, rainfall-induced sea-level rise and flooding are threatening cities in states such as Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida. Cities face many obstacles, such as repairing destroyed roads and ditches, and retreating inland. And paying for such measures presents yet another challenge.
“Our coastal areas are shrinking before our eyes and people are fleeing,” said Rep. Troy Carter, a Louisiana Democrat. It’s a slam home run,” he said.
As the threat of climate change escalates, policymakers and experts debate how best to prevent catastrophic damage from man-made infrastructure like seawalls (sometimes called “gray infrastructure”). ) and those in favor of nature-based solutions, there is an ongoing debate. Or the so-called green infrastructure.
Some scientists and climate groups see climate law as a clear signal that governments are prioritizing natural solutions.
“Greener options are gaining attention and acceptance,” said Charles Lester, director of the Center for Marine and Coastal Policy at the University of California, Santa Barbara. and this funding forces us to think more fully and holistically about all the different pieces of these puzzles.”
The Nature Conservancy’s Government Relations Officer, Tom Koes, said funding resilience in climate legislation, coupled with the resources of the Infrastructure Act passed last year, is one of the most important funding sources for green infrastructure. said to represent an influx. It started about ten years ago.
Contents of the Inflation Control Law
Bipartisan infrastructure measures have added $3 billion to the federal budget for projects related to habitat restoration and climate resilience, but the application process is still underway, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Therefore, the funds have not yet been disbursed. Nearly half of that is allocated to high-impact natural infrastructure projects.
And in 2020, Biden said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the government’s primary civil engineering agency that has historically favored gray infrastructure, will consider nature-based solutions in the early planning stages of several projects. signed a law requiring that
Funds from the new climate law will be distributed to NOAA. NOAA will provide funding through contracts, grants, and other agreements to local, state, and tribal governments, non-profit organizations, and institutions of higher learning. The law stipulates that projects that support the natural resources of coastal and marine communities, such as restoring wetlands and restoring seagrass and oyster beds, must be funded. He also said the funds should be used for projects that protect fisheries and protect communities from extreme storms and climate change.
Some examples include adding sand or restoring dunes to provide cushioning for receding coastlines. Restoring wetlands also helps absorb storm water and carbon dioxide (an atmospheric chemical known to warm the planet), contributing to biodiversity. You can also slow down the water flow by putting back beds of seagrass and oysters.
Amy Hutzel, executive director of California Coastal Reserves, California’s leading nature-based restoration agency, is pleased that the climate law is focusing on nature-based projects: levees and seawalls. as opposed to creating a
The moment a city builds a dyke or revetment, the city “degrades very quickly,” Hutzel said. “Working with nature means building a system that is maintained by natural processes.”
Some scientists argue that such approaches are more cost-effective than man-made projects.a new york city study A Queens study found that gray infrastructure costs twice as much as incorporating both gray and green projects.
But nature-based solutions, while attractive, can be difficult to implement, Lester said.
Jennifer Brunton, New York-area water business line leader at engineering consulting firm WSP, said many of her clients don’t have enough space to offer nature-based solutions, and they don’t have green infrastructure because they’re not mainstream. It states that it is turning its back on the structure.
“These are distinctive projects,” says Brunton. “Gray infrastructure is proven.”
Gray infrastructure has traditionally been favored by coastal homeowners. Coastal homeowners are willing to give up beach access if it means building concrete fixtures that can protect their homes. Proponents of gray infrastructure argue that gray infrastructure is easy to maintain, whereas green projects require regular maintenance.
In Pacifica, California, homeowners like retired Mark Steckbert have sought grayer infrastructure to offset rising sea levels that threaten their properties. The coastline of the Northern California community where Stechbart lives doesn’t have the right conditions to build a green infrastructure, Stechbart said, and the city has two options.
“At least around here, it’s just gray infrastructure,” Stechbart said in an interview. “You either have a functioning town or you don’t.”
He added, “There are some areas where major hotels will be submerged if the coastline protection is not maintained and improved.”
Lawmakers from both parties embraced the nature-based infrastructure initiative, but Republicans en masse opposed climate change legislation.
“Investments in natural infrastructure projects will better protect coastal areas while restoring habitats and stimulating local economic development,” Senator Alex Padilla, a Democratic California senator, said in a statement.
California Republican Rep. Michelle Steele has supported nature-based resilience projects in her district, including adding sand to Huntington Beach. In her statement explaining why she voted against the Inflation Reduction Act, Steele said:
Louisiana Republican Rep. Garrett Graves, an advocate for resilience projects, also voted against. In a written statement, he said he had little confidence that NOAA would be “fair or transparent” in allocating funds.