FEMA: Plan for Climate Change or Risk Emergency Funding

climate_change_FEMA_usdaWith winter just around the corner and El Niño still a probable forecast, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has news for state governments: Prepare for climate change now or risk losing access to funding.

The agency has just released a draft of its forthcoming State Mitigation Plan Review Guide, which includes new guidelines in assessing and planning for climate change. Entitled a ‘Draft for Public Comment,’ the document highlights some key changes in FEMA’s regulations for those states receiving federal emergency funding – including the need to prepare for, and assess, climate change risk.

States have always been required to formulate hazard mitigation plans, which help the governments assess their potential risk to environmental disasters. However, mitigation plans largely rely upon historical data, such as previous disasters, to spell out mitigation procedures. This is the first year in which states will be expected to “look forward” and assess their future risks for yet unprecedented climate change events.

FEMA vs. state governors

This requirement isn’t liable to sit well with some state governors, specifically those who have expressed doubt about the existence of human-made climate change.

That list includes Texas, Louisiana and Oklahoma, which have all benefited from federal funding during recent disasters, yet have either weak climate change policies or have gone on record to question its existence.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry attempted to sue the EPA in 2012 for attempting to regulate climate change, despite the fact that his state has been experiencing an exceptional drought. During that same year, Texas was deluged by more than 9,000 wildfires. Perry’s administration applied for and received funding to fight 25 large fires, before being told by FEMA that its cash-strapped funding, which provides priority support for survivor assistance and relocation, was not available to fight any more Texas wildfires.

The $1 billion FEMA emergencies

FEMA’s dwindling funding is at the heart of its new policy change, which aims to improve states’ ability to prepare for and deal with environmental threats before they become crises. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, the cost and frequency of environmental disasters are growing. Floods, droughts, snow storms and tornadoes have taken precedence in recent years, with costs averaging around $1 billion for each occurrence in 2013.

Still, FEMA isn’t setting itself up for an easy fight with state governments, particularly when it comes to those administrations that refuse to accept that climate change may be man-made. In July, the Center for American Progress published a breakdown of U.S. governors according to their views and policies regarding global warming issues. Fifteen have gone on record to question the origin of climate change, and in some cases have taken steps to block legislation that would regulate or recognize the existence of global warming trends. Those 15 include Texas, Oklahoma and North Carolina, all of which have relied on FEMA funding for natural disasters in the past four years.

Tornado Clean-upEarlier this year, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill that would allow residents who generate their own energy from wind or solar to be charged a state fee. North Carolina Gov. Pat McCroy has gone on record to state that climate change is “in God’s hands.” Since that time, his administration has all but stopped implementing climate change strategies and has lifted a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in the state. North Carolina has been forced to access FEMA funding more than six times since 2010.

NRDC: Is FEMA wording clear enough?

Some environmentalists have suggested that FEMA’s draft wording may not be strong enough to make it clear to administrations what they need to do to meet the new guidelines.

Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Becky Hammer has pointed out that the FEMA’s requirement to states that it begin “assessing risk in light of a changing climate” may be too vague for state disaster planners to know how to implement this new requirement.

It may be that the concept of how to deal with future climate change threats is still a challenge for FEMA as well, as it tries to grapple not only with the increasing financial burden of unexpected climate disasters, but also the challenge of finding the right wording to get the urgency of action across to state governments .

Still, while some state governments are still wrestling with this concept, others are already implementing changes to address climate change. More than a dozen states have taken steps to meet climate challenges, including California, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Another 12 are lukewarm on the issue but have begun to introduce climate change into the discussions about how best to protect their state resources from environmental change. Whether FEMA would deny funding next year as it implements these new guidelines is still up for debate. But the new draft wording, along with the Obama administration’s many other changes, signal a shift in federal funding policies.

The comment period for these new guidelines ended Friday. FEMA has not announced when the final version will be out, but will likely include some changes that NRDC and others have put forward to clarify just how states should prepare for environmental changes that come with the controversial issue of global warming.

Hurricane Katrina damage (2005) – USDA;

North Carolina tornado (2011) – USASOC News Service

Jan Lee

Jan Lee is a former news editor and award-winning editorial writer whose non-fiction and fiction have been published in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, the U.K. and Australia. Her articles and posts can be found on TriplePundit, JustMeans, and her blog, The Multicultural Jew, as well as other publications. She currently splits her residence between the city of Vancouver, British Columbia and the rural farmlands of Idaho.

14 responses

  1. Just part of the $22+ billion$$$ annually spent by this government
    on its GloBULL pseudo science, Academic Alarmist Alchemy, socialist agenda.
    Climb it NRDC and FEMA

    1. Thanks Patricia. Interesting report.
      Here in the West it’s often a misconception that gender references relate to perceptive qualities. We’ve written about the impact of water resources on women in developing countries before, who are often the ones responsible not just for carrying the water (and distances that you and I would be hard-pressed to carry 20-50 lbs every day), but for ensuring that precious resource is there to sustain the most vulnerable and sick in their families. It’s a huge burden, particularly when water is at risk due to drought.

      Thanks again for the feedback!

  2. SUPERNOVA POWER- a carbon neutral source of energy!
    Chemonuclear Fusion is a type of low energy nuclear fusion that has
    been shown to produce energy in two experiments. Aneutronic nuclear
    fusion can provide unlimited electric power without polluting the
    environment with radioactive waste and greenhouse emissions.
    Chemonuclear processes in small dense white dwarf stars accelerate
    the rate of nuclear fusion and cause them to explode in spectacular
    supernova explosions.

    We started the Chemonuclear Fusion
    Project is to raise awareness of this new and vitally important
    source of environmentally clean energy and to promote research and

    The Chemonuclear Fusion Project is soliciting
    volunteers to help our crowdfunding and educational campaigns. Our
    crowdfunding webpages will soon be up and running. We want people to
    post to discussion groups and help us get the word out that
    aneutronic chemonuclear fusion might be the radiation free way to
    power the world if we can get the funding to build and test

    We want artists who can help us design T-shirts,
    mugs, and promotional items to sell and give away to our
    contributors. Writers to write promotional materials and post to web
    forums are also wanted. Video producers and professional and amateur
    scientists who can help the public understand the concepts of
    chemonuclear fusion are encouraged to contact us also.

    Visit our facebook page
    and give us a like. We welcome your comments and questions!


        1. Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a Law, it is the solution resulting from assuming homogeneous direction independent random velocity.

          Velocity is not direction independent in a force field. (See; Modified Feynman Ratchet with Velocity-Dependent Fluctuations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics)

          Simple example is Lapse exploitation. Xenon lapses 61/°K/kiloeter, air lapses 6.5°K/kilometer, Photons lapse even less. Run a heat engine between the difference.

          How to set up an electrical field version?

        2. I think what I have has a bigger chance of being breakthrough than your project. It seem like nonsense. Do you have scientific references to prove what you are talking about or working models?

        3. “It seem like nonsense”?
          You have flipped over to mind control,
          green-lighting by Ridicule.

          “Losers just announce that you have failed, when you have not .. does not work on people who are thinking and are involved.” — Quote from Alex Jones “The Alex Jones Show … Monday October 20 2014”

Leave a Reply