SAES_Ch22

1.

Higher temperatures should increase plant productivity, so how could climate change decrease crop yields?

Temperatures above 3 C could decrease yields as heat stress harms plants.

Increased soil water stress and droughts will slow photosynthesis.

Both a and b are correct.

None of the above is correct: Rising temperatures always increase crop yields.

999

Try again.

Correct.

Incorrect.

2.

Why will coastal areas and populations be at higher risk in a warmer world?

Higher temperatures cause water to increase sea level.

Increased intensity of hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons will flood more land.

Sea levels will rise as ice melts.

All of the above

999

Try again.

Correct.

Incorrect.

3.

An increase in wildfires is an often-overlooked prediction of a warmer climate: How does a warmer world lead to greater risks of wildfires?

Fires require higher air temperatures to begin burning.

Longer and deeper droughts lead to more fuel to burn.

Lower biodiversity collapses food webs and increases chances of wildfires.

Warmer conditions increase plant productivity.

999

Try again.

Correct.

Incorrect.

4.

Thought Question: Imagine you are the Minister for the Environment in a tropical country with a high biodiversity and many low-lying coastal areas. What factors from Infographic 22.11 (health impacts, crop productivity, coastal erosion and flooding, biodiversity losses, drought, fire risk) would you prioritize as highest risk?

Tropical countries with a high biodiversity would require significant efforts to protect existing species and ecosystems. The low-lying regions would be seriously impacted by any sea-level rise, and there would need to be sea walls and other structures to minimize flooding.

5.

Short-Answer Questions

Currently, the federal government runs the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide insurance for more than 5 million property holders living in flood-prone areas along coasts (these areas are deemed too risky for private insurance companies). Since 1968, when the NFIP began, more than $41 billion has been paid out in claims to insurance holders (with half of the total going to residents of Louisiana, Texas, and Florida). Sea-level rise is perceived as one of the less-severe changes predicted by climate change because the changes are fairly small (climate models predict additional increases of 4 to 40 inches by 2100). According to a 2012 study, if the sea level rose by 40 inches, more than 3.7 million Americans would be living in areas inundated by the ocean. Making matters worse, 89% of those Americans are concentrated in just 5 states: Louisiana, California, Florida, New York, and New Jersey.

Another predicted change is increased storm and hurricane intensity. Recent increases in hurricane intensity have led to the largest set of claims in the history of the program ($17 billion in 2005). The tightening federal budget has led for some to call for an end to the NFIP or privatization of flood insurance (which is not likely as no private insurance companies can afford the claims that come from catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina—$16 billion in 2005). What is the future of the NFIP in the era of climate change?

1) If hurricanes’ intensity and rise in sea level increase as predicted, should the federal government discontinue the flood insurance program to save money and convince people to move out of high-risk areas?

2) Some areas predicted to be flooded are known as vacation destinations (like North Carolina's Outer Banks), and their flooding wouldn’t destroy many primary residences. Others (like lower Manhattan) are dense urban areas with significant populations and businesses. If you were the administrator in charge of choosing which areas to protect with seawalls, then what criteria would you use?

3) Use the precautionary principle to argue for the federal government to seek to relocate towns before sea-level rise or hurricane storm surges put those areas underwater.

1) If sea level rises, then storm surges would make insurance claims skyrocket. As costs rise, there would have to be a breaking point where the program became too expensive to support anymore. Without insurance, no one could get a mortgage in a flood zone and property ownership would plummet—but at the cost of suddenly depressing property values.

2) In low-lying countries such as the Netherlands, seawall construction has been ongoing for decades, and the precautionary principle gave enough time to protect both urban and vacation areas. But in the early decades, construction protected urban areas first, and only later did construction move out to lower-density areas. Other than population, economic value would be easy to calculate—downtown Manhattan has far more importance to the national economy than the Outer Banks in that case, too.

3) The precautionary Principle suggests that we make changes before effects become noticeable. In this case, if we agree that sea-level rise is a very likely event, then moving people and towns out of the potential flooding areas beforehand would save lives and money ahead of time.

Chapter 22. Chapter 22: Climate Change

What actions can we take to respond to a world with a changing climate?

Guiding Question 22.5

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.