The reading “Infrastructure Impacts and Adaptation Challenges” reinforces New York City’s increased vulnerability because of its interdependencies and dependencies among infrastructures, making it further susceptible to extreme weather events mentioned in “Four Storms in Quick Succession Expose the Flaws in New York City’s Electrical System.” Looking at the flip side of the coin, do you think New York City can use the interdependencies among its infrastructures and turn it into an advantage in its infrastructure adaptation to climate change? If so, how? What do you think is lacking in New York City’s current plan for infrastructure adaptation to climate change? Do you think New York City is prepared to face another storm such as Sandy or will its infrastructure crumble once again because of the interdependencies and dependencies among them?
The Interdependencies and Dependencies among NYC’s Infrastructure
This entry was posted in 3/05 - Energy in the City; Concepts of Time and Place (Week 6). Bookmark the permalink.
1. I think the interdependence of NYC’s energy infrastructure is such that damage inflected on one can and would trigger a domino effect. A singular natural disaster that hits our energy system generates problems that depend on this very same system, ranging from transportation all the way to telecommunication. I think the only benefit we can draw from this interdependence is the overwhelming vulnerability and thus imperative it brings to our conversations about climate change and adaptation. Because a natural disaster like Sandy can cause the damage that it did, it is crucial that we improve our infrastructure to adapt.
2. The current plans for infrastructure adaptation seem focus on short-term quick fixes as opposed to critical adaptations in infrastructure that would make them more suitable for a changing climate. This sort of short-term thinking will have many negative repercussions further along the line.
3. From an economic perspective, I think it all depends on the cost benefit analysis associated with natural disasters. If the monetary and political costs are cheaper for these companies to patch up and repair as these problems as they come along rather than completely overhauling the system to provide for climate change, I would argue that they would. And judging from what the “Four Storms in Quick Succession Expose the Flaws in New York City’s Electrical System” it seems like that’s the mindset among these corporations.
To be fair, the reading does mention that interdependencies within infrastructures are a strength in the system. It might be there that could be focused upon; by strengthening interdependencies within infrastructures, it would allow for increased flexibility because it would be like a parallel circuit; the loss of one won’t collapse the whole system. By keeping one infrastructure up longer, it would sustain other infrastructures longer as well. For instance, by insulating more of the grid, the act would potentially keep the telecommunications system up longer, or perhaps it would cut down on the downtime in such a climatic event.
What New York is lacking, for the most part, is space. New York City is extremely dense; any changes to major infrastructural areas may cause more immediate problems, both aesthetic and practical. The expanded subway track, for example, has caused a number of noise complaints, as well as physical damages or alterations to intercepting infrastructure (I believed a water main or two have been intercepted before, though I may be mistaken).
It’s also difficult for New York to renovate all of its infrastructure. As stated in the post-hurricane reading, the funds for doing such a task would be astronomical, and they only stated electricity as their proposed fix. It is doable, however, so long as funds are allocated properly, i.e. immediately for shoreline structures (though since most major infrastructural plants are located on the waterfronts, that could still be a major challenge).
In the end, New York City will not likely be sufficiently prepared for another Sandy-like storm in the immediate future. The needed processes are not moving quickly enough; partly due to typical bureaucracies (some understandable, others shamefully filibuster-like), partly due to funds, partly due to physical practicality. The resources aren’t just being utilized to their fullest extent.
Interdependency with the city’s infrastructure is a strength if the right decisions are made on time; fail to coordinate efforts and the city crumbles down.
Take for example the proposed waterproofing of the electric power system. A fix in that area will have a direct and positive impact in transportation and communication. The improvement would kill two birds with one stone.
What I think is lacking in New York City’s current plan for infrastructure adaptation to climate change is a wider panorama of years ahead of us. As days pass from the Sandy aftermath, the conversation looses volume. New York City can’t afford to rebuild what can be built in a more lasting and enduring way.