An illustrated history.
A prescient warning.
A prescient warning.
Coastal and Inland
Disaster Mitigation
Climate Adaptation
Community Resiliency
Holistic and Sustainable
Critical Infrastructure
Nature-based Solutions
Almost 9 out of 10 Presidential Disaster Declarations include flooding as a component.
-The Northeast State Emergency Consortium
Since the earliest days of the Second Industrial Revolution, New England has served as the cornerstone of business and manufacturing and innovation in the United States. This is largely due to the dozens of major rivers in the region and the hundreds of tributaries feeding them that lend themselves to production of direct water power, first turning wheels and belts in mills and factories along them and the canals that were built around the great falls. Then, beginning around the turn of the twentieth century, through hydroelectric power spinning massive turbines and sending energy over a network of cables to light cities hundreds of miles away.
Understandably, and like much of the rest of the world, New England has been built along the banks of rivers. But this practical decision has consequences when natural patterns shift and a variety of weather scenarios result in massive flooding in those communities disrupting those businesses and often worse, displacing people from homes and jobs, causing unmatched damage when compared with other disasters and often resulting in loss of lives.
As professionals responsible for the safety of all people in our respective communities, the social fabric and culture, the business and economy and the surrounding environment, we must be willing to learn from history to understand the impact sustained during these events, while at the same time look for data that will provide insight to come up with innovative and sustainable solutions to protect us the next time New England Floods.
After each event, emergency managers, public safety officials, political leaders, city engineers, public health agencies, healthcare facility managers and other stakeholder partners review the damage and propose solutions that will prevent, or at least reduce the impact of the next time the rivers rise and inundate the community normally thriving around it. Dikes and flood walls were built, powerful pumps installed to move water back into channels, electrical connections raised far above grade, rip rap dropped and bridges rebuilt.
This is the same for all the communities around New England.
But each event is the result from a different set of circumstances and each community has its own set of vulnerabilities and concerns. While there may be patterns and trends, these are not always reliable predictors of what is going to happen. Flooding is a regional threat and does not recognize local, county, state or even federal borders.
Now, as the science supporting climate change becomes more available and widely accepted, stakeholders are beginning to realize that this method employed during a traditional Hazard Vulnerability Assessment where a rearview mirror approach may need to be reconsidered. Communities can not practically build walls high enough or pumps powerful enough for what is likely facing us in the next generations.
Understandably, and like much of the rest of the world, New England has been built along the banks of rivers. But this practical decision has consequences when natural patterns shift and a variety of weather scenarios result in massive flooding in those communities disrupting those businesses and often worse, displacing people from homes and jobs, causing unmatched damage when compared with other disasters and often resulting in loss of lives.
As professionals responsible for the safety of all people in our respective communities, the social fabric and culture, the business and economy and the surrounding environment, we must be willing to learn from history to understand the impact sustained during these events, while at the same time look for data that will provide insight to come up with innovative and sustainable solutions to protect us the next time New England Floods.
After each event, emergency managers, public safety officials, political leaders, city engineers, public health agencies, healthcare facility managers and other stakeholder partners review the damage and propose solutions that will prevent, or at least reduce the impact of the next time the rivers rise and inundate the community normally thriving around it. Dikes and flood walls were built, powerful pumps installed to move water back into channels, electrical connections raised far above grade, rip rap dropped and bridges rebuilt.
This is the same for all the communities around New England.
But each event is the result from a different set of circumstances and each community has its own set of vulnerabilities and concerns. While there may be patterns and trends, these are not always reliable predictors of what is going to happen. Flooding is a regional threat and does not recognize local, county, state or even federal borders.
Now, as the science supporting climate change becomes more available and widely accepted, stakeholders are beginning to realize that this method employed during a traditional Hazard Vulnerability Assessment where a rearview mirror approach may need to be reconsidered. Communities can not practically build walls high enough or pumps powerful enough for what is likely facing us in the next generations.