Science & Technology and Infrastructure and Land Use Adaptation Public Forum - Shared screen with speaker view
Who can see your viewing activity?
Comments may be written into the chat at any time. We will save the chat.
Written comments are also accepted via email at email@example.com.
IPCC is the International Panel on Climate Change
I'm a Professional Forester and the Chair of the Working Group of the Yankee Division of the Society of American Foresters that produced a Position Statement "Southern New England Forest Management in an Era of Climate Change". A large group of foresters and forest scientists reviewed the literature and considered practical forest management experience to develop our statement. It will be provided in full in our written comments. I'll summarize, from my own words.
CIRCA is the Connecticut Institute for Resilience and Climate Adaptation - a research institute at UConn. Jim O'Donnell is the Executive Director. circa.uconn.edu
Continuing: Directed to the Scient Report Forestss are much more than carbon warehouses. Reducing this important topic to promote the novel and unproven "proforestation" hypothesis does not serve the science or society. The report should mention forest reserves as one option, while also listing the ma y challenges of a reserve-only approach. Forestry strategies belong in the forest and lands sub-group, where they can be discussed in the context of all of the benefits, resources, products, and challenges of sustaining healthy forests in a changing environment. Finally, the science is so far from understanding "proforestation", much less recommending it, that to place this quirkly idea at the top of the list of recommendaitons serves only to demean the real science.
If you did not respond to the survey earlier today, please send a private chat to Mary-beth with your choice of one of the four options: Science & Technology; Buildings and Land Use; Transportation; Utilities
One of the four options for break out sessions.
Feel free to use the chat to pose questions or comments for the presenters.
Now speaking for myself personally I'm dismayed by the narrow range of citations that are in the report supporting this "proforestation" hypothesis. I am expecting that a number of experienced forest scientists and forest managers will provide ample peer-reviewed scientific evidence and personal experience refuting this aburd idea. I sure hope that we can have a voice this time around, as the initial approach seemed designed serve some very narrow, pre-determined outcomes.
State Rep David Michel
If we do not protect the “frontlines of defense” against the devastating impacts of climate change we are in deep trouble. Those are the marine ecosystems and more. We are passengers on this spaceship and we are losing the operators, including those maintaining our life support system. They are disappearing one after the other. IF wee do not protect our biodiversity, keystone and apex species, then we really are in trouble. It should be as urgent and crucial to protect those systems responsible for carbon absorption equally to fighting the sources of the issues
If you joined a little late, the current presenter is Susan Masino, co-chair of the Science & Technology Working Group for the Governor's Council on Climate Change and professor at Trinity College.
Agree with including the nexus between food supply, water, and energy
State Rep David Michel
In the case of wind energy, it would be shooting ourselves in the foot to let the developers of renewables put profit before the preservation of our ecosystems. It works particularly well when the CLEAN techniques are also creating lots more job, as in the opportunity we could get with offshore wind. We have unique opportunities to actually develop a green new deal, protecting our future in protecting the environment and creating jobs. Hopefully we don’t miss the turbine.
Are there any plans in the work based on these concepts? What is the timeline?
or are these groups merely for research/
Re Meg: The Working Groups developed recommendations for the Governor's Council on Climate Change.
Science and Technology focused on providing an assessment of the impacts of climate change on Connecticut and also gave recommendations for research questions we need to address in Connecticut
To keep everyone on the same page. Susan was presenting on the findings of the Science & Technology Working Group. Matt Fulda (current presenter) is discussing the findings of the Infrastructure and Land Use Working Group in the areas of transportation, land use and buildings and utilities.
I apologize that I think there is a misunderstanding o the word proforestation. It is a single term for what is happening in National Parks, I was trying to keep this short.
All working groups were charged with integrating equity and environmental justice into their recommendations and particularly for adaptation and resilience recommendations - ensuring those recommendation prioritize vulnerable communities (those feeling the impacts of climate change first and worst)
In 2011 DEEP wrote its first climate adaptation plan - now nearly 10-years-old, the groups reviewed those recommendations to see if they are still relevant today.
All working groups for public review: https://portal.ct.gov/DEEP/Climate-Change/GC3/GC3-Working-group-reports
These strategies can be found in the Infrastructure and Land Use Working Group's report.
You will learn more about these three recommendations if you are in their break out session on land use and buildings. The report includes additional details as well.
If you have not selected your break out session yet, please send a private chat to Mary-beth Hart with your choice of one of four break out session areas: 1) Science & Technology; 2)Land Use and Buildings; 3) Transportation OR 4) Utilities
I cannot attend a breakout session.
Where is the evacuation plan as part of the Transportaton Plan, to get people out of the affected area. This should include emergency fueling along the evacuation route. Or is this too much in the weeds at this time?
If anyone saw photos of Vermont after Irene with road washouts that occurred there - that was largely due to undersized culverts that could not handle the large volume of flood waters
Re Lee - no please add feedback like that to the chat at any time
Rivers move water, sediment and large woody debris. It's not just about water.
Tidal and inland wetlands provide numerous ecosystem services including flood control and carbon sequestration. Most carbon sequestration is stored in highly organic soils associated with wetlands. The largest impact on wetlands is transportation so recommendations should coordinate with wetlands subgroup.
The actual plan will be developed and finalized after the recommendations are approved. Point well taken as to emergency fueling - we will make sure that this issue is addressed in the plan. Thanks for your input.
Assessing culverts, and replacing when necessary can be an incredibly effective solution for man-made infrastructure AND the connectivity and resilience of natural systems.