PENNSYLVANIA SOME ACTIONS ALREADY TAKEN WEAKNESSES • The Pennsylvania Department of Health keeps state-level statistics on the counts of deaths from inland flooding and exposure to excessive heat. • Pennsylvania continuously tracks precipitation, stream flow, ground water levels, soil moisture, and reservoir levels, providing real-time data and analysis of drought and flooding conditions throughout the state. • The Pennsylvania Climate Impacts Assessment includes extensive information on modeling of future temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise, and projected impacts on different sectors throughout the state. • The Pennsylvania Climate Adaptation Planning Report contains a discussion of adaptation measures for infrastructure and public health to address current and future risks, including drought, sea level rise, precipitation, and temperature. • The State Water Plan incorporates climate change projections for temperature, precipitation and drought, and sea level rise into its policy recommendations intended to promote sustainable water services in the state. • No evidence of official state funding or policies across sectors examined to improve resilience against climate change-related extreme heat, inland flooding, drought, or coastal flooding. • Very little evidence of action to incorporate climate change projections associated with extreme heat or drought into state- level programs, investments, and activities across the sectors examined. No evidence of action to incorporate climate change projections associated with inland and coastal flooding. • The Pennsylvania Climate Adaptation Planning Report has not included formal incorporation of previous adaptation recommendations. Implementing Resilience Actions Addressing Current Risks Conducting Vulnerability Assessments Planning for Adaptation Extensive Strong Limited Fair None ACTION TAKEN: Extreme Heat Drought Wildfire Inland Flooding Coastal Flooding EXTREME HEAT: DROUGHT: WILDFIRE: INLAND FLOODING: COASTAL FLOODING: OVERALL: A B+ A — B+ B- A B C D F OVERALL GRADE: A Pennsylvania faces considerable and significantly increasing threat levels from extreme heat, drought, inland flooding and coastal flooding between now and 2050. Pennsylvania scores an overall grade of A on the Report Card, with grades ranging from a B- for coastal flooding to an A for drought. The grades are relative to other states, and relative to the magnitude of the climate threats themselves. The state is focused on taking strong action to address its current climate risks and a fair amount of action to address its future climate risks. However, the state has taken almost no action to implement programs that will mitigate future risks. For example, Pennsylvania’s climate change adaptation planning report for inland flooding has not been updated or utilized since it was published in 2009. By updating and finalizing this document, the state could make great strides in increasing its resilience to climate change.
Transcript
PENNSYLVANIA
SOME ACTIONS ALREADY TAKEN
WEAKNESSES
• The Pennsylvania Department of Health keeps state-level statistics on the counts of deaths from inland flooding and exposure to excessive heat.
• Pennsylvania continuously tracks precipitation, stream flow, ground water levels, soil moisture, and reservoir levels, providing real-time data and analysis of drought and flooding conditions throughout the state.
• The Pennsylvania Climate Impacts Assessment includes extensive information on modeling of future temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise, and projected impacts on different sectors throughout the state.
• The Pennsylvania Climate Adaptation Planning Report contains a discussion of adaptation measures for infrastructure and public health to address current and future risks, including drought, sea level rise, precipitation, and temperature.
• The State Water Plan incorporates climate change projections for temperature, precipitation and drought, and sea level rise into its policy recommendations intended to promote sustainable water services in the state.
• No evidence of official state funding or policies across sectors examined to improve resilience against climate change-related extreme heat, inland flooding, drought, or coastal flooding.
• Very little evidence of action to incorporate climate change projections associated with extreme heat or drought into state-level programs, investments, and activities across the sectors examined. No evidence of action to incorporate climate change projections associated with inland and coastal flooding.
• The Pennsylvania Climate Adaptation Planning Report has not included formal incorporation of previous adaptation recommendations.
Implementing Resilience Actions
Addressing Current Risks
Conducting VulnerabilityAssessments
Planning for Adaptation
Extensive
Strong
Limited
Fair
None
ACTION TAKEN:
Extreme Heat
Drought
Wildfire
Inland Flooding
Coastal Flooding
EXTREME HEAT:
DROUGHT:
WILDFIRE:
INLAND FLOODING:
COASTAL FLOODING:
OVERALL: AB+
A
—
B+
B-
ABCDF
OVERALL GRADE:
APennsylvania faces considerable and significantly increasing threat levels from extreme heat, drought, inland flooding and coastal flooding between now and 2050. Pennsylvania scores an overall grade of A on the Report Card, with grades ranging from a B- for coastal flooding to an A for drought. The grades are relative to other states, and relative to the magnitude of the climate threats themselves. The state is focused on taking strong action to address its current climate risks and a fair amount of action to address its future climate risks. However, the state has taken almost no action to implement programs that will mitigate future risks. For example, Pennsylvania’s climate change adaptation planning report for inland flooding has not been updated or utilized since it was published in 2009. By updating and finalizing this document, the state could make great strides in increasing its resilience to climate change.
0510152025 million
OVERALL:
DROUGHT:
WILDFIRE:
INLAND FLOODING:
EXTREME HEAT:
COASTAL FLOODING:
EXTREME HEAT: B+A
A
—
B+
B-
B+
KEY FINDINGS:
Lowest Highest
AVERAGE
THREAT LEVEL:
0% 100%
FAR ABOVE AVERAGE
PREPAREDNESS LEVEL:
The preparedness grade represents how well a state is preparing for its threat level, relative to all states evaluated for that threat. It compares a state’s position in the distribution of threat levels to its position in the distribution of preparedness scores. Thus two states with the same absolute preparedness score might receive different grades, depending on their levels of threat—a state with a higher threat level would receive a lower grade. For details, see the methodology.
Pennsylvania earns a B+ for its far above average level of preparedness in the face of an average overall extreme heat threat. Currently, Pennsylvania faces an average threat level among the lower 48 states. Like the majority of states, Pennsylvania has taken strong action to address its current heat risks. For example, both the Pennsylvania Department of Health and Emergency Management Agency have developed preparedness resources for preventing heat-related illnesses in households. By 2050, Pennsylvania is projected to continue to face an average threat level. Compared to most states, which have taken almost no action, Pennsylvania has taken a fair amount of action to address its future heat risks. With the publication of the Pennsylvania Climate Impacts Assessment and the Pennsylvania Climate Adaptation Planning Report, the state has the opportunity to implement activities outlined in these resources.
ABCDF
PENNSYLVANIA COMPARED TO OTHER STATES:
EXTREME HEAT THREAT DID YOU KNOW?Extreme Heat Threat to Vulnerable Populations†
Rank(among states) 19th 23rd
† Average number of heat wave days per year times total vulnerable popula-tion. A score of 1 represents 1 vulnerable person exposed to 1 heat wave day.
22nd
• Currently, Pennsylvania averages fewer than 5 days a year classified as dangerous or extremely dangerous according to the NWS Heat Index. By 2050, the state is projected to face more than 15 such days annually.
• By 2050, the typical number of heat wave days in Pennsylvania is projected to increase more than five-fold from 10 to approximately 55 days each year.
• Pennsylvania has more than 315,000 people 65 and older, or under 5 years old, living below the poverty line, which is above average among the lower 48 states. These groups are considered to be especially vulnerable to extreme heat.
Average annual number of heat wave days: Average number of days each year on which the maximum temperature exceeds the 95th percentile of daily maximum temperature in the baseline period (1991-2010) for at least three consecutive days.
PENNSYLVANIA
2000 2030 2050
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
EXTREME HEAT:EXAMPLE CRITERIA
B+A subset of the criteria used to develop Pennsylvania’s extreme heat preparedness grade.
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Ener
gy
Wat
er
Health
Com
mun
ities
Does the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover extreme heat?
Does the state have an extreme heat emergency response plan that is updated routinely?
Does the state provide extreme heat emergency communication materials for citizens?
Has the state published information on how the frequency or severity of extreme heat events may change in the future?
Has the state conducted extreme heat vulnerability assessments for each sector?
Is the state tracking extreme heat impacts?
Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering extreme heat?
Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation?
Does the state have sector-specific extreme heat adaptation plans?
Are there optional state guidelines for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Are there state requirements for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Is there evidence that the state is implementing extreme heat adaptation policy/guidelines?
ADDRESSING CURRENT RISKS
IMPLEMENTING RESILIENCE ACTIONS
PLANNING FOR ADAPTATION
CONDUCTING VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS
“n/a” indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.
PENNSYLVANIA
OVERALL:
DROUGHT:
WILDFIRE:
INLAND FLOODING:
COASTAL FLOODING:
EXTREME HEAT: B+
A
A—
B+
B-
PENNSYLVANIA
DROUGHT: A
Lowest Highest
BELOW AVERAGE
THREAT LEVEL:
0% 100%
FAR ABOVE AVERAGE
PREPAREDNESS LEVEL:
The preparedness grade represents how well a state is preparing for its threat level, relative to all states evaluated for that threat. It compares a state’s position in the distribution of threat levels to its position in the distribution of preparedness scores. Thus two states with the same absolute preparedness score might receive different grades, depending on their levels of threat—a state with a higher threat level would receive a lower grade. For details, see the methodology.
Pennsylvania is one of the leaders in preparing for drought risks, ranking second; it earns an A for its far above average level of preparedness in the face of a below average overall widespread summer drought threat. Currently, Pennsylvania faces an average threat among the 36 states assessed for drought, and it has taken strong action to prepare for its current drought risks. While most states have taken no action to prepare for future drought risks, Pennsylvania is one of the few states that have taken strong action. Pennsylvania’s State Water Plan provides policy recommendations based on years of research, data gathering, and evaluation of water management activities in the state. Sector-level programs that contribute to addressing the state’s current drought risks support this future planning.
ABCDF
PENNSYLVANIA COMPARED TO OTHER STATES:
KEY FINDINGS:
01020304050
DROUGHT THREATSummer Drought Threat (Index)
Rank(among states) 18th 30th 26th
• Currently, Pennsylvania’s severity of widespread summer drought is average among the 36 states analyzed for drought threats.
• By 2050, the severity of widespread summer drought is projected to see a below average increase of almost 50 percent, and its threat level is projected to drop to below average.
DID YOU KNOW?
Severity of widespread summer drought: Sum of soil moisture deficit (standard score) in the summer months for model grid cells where the standard score is less than -1, when at least 30% of grid cells in a state meet this criterion.
2000 2030 2050
DROUGHT:
PENNSYLVANIA
AEXAMPLE CRITERIAA subset of the criteria used to develop Pennsylvania’s drought preparedness grade.
“n/a” indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
NO
NO
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Ener
gy
Wat
er
Health
Com
mun
ities
Does the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover drought?
Does the state have a drought emergency response plan that is updated routinely?
Does the state provide drought emergency communication materials for citizens?
Has the state published information on how the frequency or severity of drought may change in the future?
Has the state conducted drought vulnerability assessments for each sector?
Is the state tracking drought impacts?
Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering drought?
Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation?
Does the state have sector-specific drought adaptation plans?
Are there optional state guidelines for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Are there state requirements for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Is there evidence that the state is implementing drought adaptation policy/guidelines?
ADDRESSING CURRENT RISKS
IMPLEMENTING RESILIENCE ACTIONS
PLANNING FOR ADAPTATION
CONDUCTING VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS
OVERALL:
DROUGHT:
WILDFIRE:
INLAND FLOODING:
COASTAL FLOODING:
EXTREME HEAT: B+
A
A
—
B+B-
PENNSYLVANIA
INLAND FLOODING: B+
Lowest Highest
AVERAGE
THREAT LEVEL:
0% 100%
ABOVE AVERAGE
PREPAREDNESS LEVEL:
The preparedness grade represents how well a state is preparing for its threat level, relative to all states evaluated for that threat. It compares a state’s position in the distribution of threat levels to its position in the distribution of preparedness scores. Thus two states with the same absolute preparedness score might receive different grades, depending on their levels of threat—a state with a higher threat level would receive a lower grade. For details, see the methodology.
Pennsylvania earns a B+ for its above average level of preparedness in the face of an average overall inland flooding threat. Currently, Pennsylvania faces a significant but below average threat among the 32 states assessed for inland flooding. Like most states, Pennsylvania has taken strong action to address its current inland flooding risks. Pennsylvania tracks the frequency of flooding, and associated health and community impacts. It has also taken strong action to understand its future vulnerabilities and to plan for them, unlike the majority of states that have taken limited action or less. However, Pennsylvania has taken only limited action to implement adaptation measures. While the state has several statewide and sector-level hazard mitigation programs, it has not updated or implemented its climate change adaptation plan. This plan would help the state better position itself to implement resiliency activities.
ABCDF
PENNSYLVANIA COMPARED TO OTHER STATES:
KEY FINDINGS:
01020304050
INLAND FLOODING THREATInland Flooding Threat Weighted by Vulnerable Populations (Index)
Rank(among states) 22nd 20th
Average annual severity of high flow events weighted by total vulner-able population and vulnerable population as a percentage of state population.
22nd
• More than 430,000 people in Pennsylvania are living in flood prone areas (defined as FEMA’s 100-year floodplain). This ranks in the top five states among the 32 assessed for inland flooding threat.
• The severity of Pennsylvania’s high runoff events, weighted by its vulnerable population, is below average and ranks in the bottom half of states.
• By 2050, Pennsylvania’s inland flooding threat is projected to increase by 40 percent (assuming the size of the vulnerable population stays the same), which is above average—one of the top 10 greatest percent increases.
DID YOU KNOW?
Average annual severity of high flow events: Sum of runoff volume per year that exceeds the 95th percentile of daily total runoff in the baseline (1991-2010) period.
2000 2030 2050
PENNSYLVANIA
INLAND FLOODING: B+EXAMPLE CRITERIAA subset of the criteria used to develop Pennsylvania’s inland flooding preparedness grade.
“n/a” indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Ener
gy
Wat
er
Health
Com
mun
ities
Does the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover inland flooding?
Does the state have an inland flooding emergency response plan that is updated routinely?
Does the state provide inland flooding emergency communication materials for citizens?
Has the state published information on how the frequency or severity of inland flooding may change in the future?
Has the state conducted inland flooding vulnerability assessments for each sector?
Is the state tracking inland flooding impacts?
Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering inland flooding?
Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation?
Does the state have sector-specific inland flooding adaptation plans?
Are there optional state guidelines for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Are there state requirements for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Is there evidence that the state is implementing inland flooding adaptation policy/guidelines?
ADDRESSING CURRENT RISKS
IMPLEMENTING RESILIENCE ACTIONS
PLANNING FOR ADAPTATION
CONDUCTING VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS
PENNSYLVANIA
B-
Lowest Highest
BELOW AVERAGE
THREAT LEVEL:
0% 100%
AVERAGE
PREPAREDNESS LEVEL:
The preparedness grade represents how well a state is preparing for its threat level, relative to all states evaluated for that threat. It compares a state’s position in the distribution of threat levels to its position in the distribution of preparedness scores. Thus two states with the same absolute preparedness score might receive different grades, depending on their levels of threat—a state with a higher threat level would receive a lower grade. For details, see the methodology.
Although Pennsylvania is not generally thought of as a coastal state, there are areas of the state at risk of coastal flooding from the tidal waters of the Delaware Bay. Pennsylvania earns a B- for its average level of preparedness in the face of a below average overall coastal flooding threat. Currently, Pennsylvania faces an average threat level in terms of total number of people at risk of a 100-year coastal flood, and a below average threat in terms of the percentage of state population at risk. Like the majority of states, Pennsylvania has taken strong action to address its current coastal flooding risks, and it has also taken strong action, more than most states, to understand its future risks and plan for them. However, the state has only taken limited action to implement programs, funding, or policies. The water sector has taken the most action through the State Water Plan, which incorporates future climate changes, including sea level rise, into its policy recommendations intended to promote sustainable water services in the state.
ABCDF
PENNSYLVANIA COMPARED TO OTHER STATES:
COASTAL FLOODING:
KEY FINDINGS:
01020304050 thousand
COASTAL FLOODING THREATPopulation at Risk of a 100-Year Coastal Flood
Rank(among states) 21st 21st 21st
• Currently, Pennsylvania has about 7,000 people at risk of a 100-year coastal flood, the second smallest population at risk among the 22 coastal states assessed.
• By 2050, Pennsylvania’s coastal flood risk is projected to almost double, putting an additional 6,000 people in the 100-year coastal floodplain.
• Pennsylvania has the smallest proportion of its total area currently in the 100-year coastal floodplain. By 2050, the area is projected double from 10 to more than 20 square miles.
DID YOU KNOW?
Total population at risk of a 100-year coastal flood.
OVERALL:
DROUGHT:
WILDFIRE:
INLAND FLOODING:
COASTAL FLOODING:
EXTREME HEAT: B+
A
A
—
B+
B-
2000 2030 2050
PENNSYLVANIA
B-COASTAL FLOODING:EXAMPLE CRITERIAA subset of the criteria used to develop Pennsylvania’s coastal flooding preparedness grade.
“n/a” indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
n/a
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Ener
gy
Wat
er
Health
Com
mun
ities
Does the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover coastal flooding?
Does the state have a coastal flooding emergency response plan that is updated routinely?
Does the state provide coastal flooding emergency communication materials for citizens?
Has the state published information on how the frequency or severity of coastal flooding may change in the future?
Has the state conducted coastal flooding vulnerability assessments for each sector?
Is the state tracking coastal flooding impacts?
Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering coastal flooding?
Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation?
Does the state have sector-specific coastal flooding adaptation plans?
Are there optional state guidelines for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Are there state requirements for resilient activities (e.g., construction)?
Is there evidence that the state is implementing coastal flooding adaptation policy/guidelines?
