OVERALL GRADE: ALABAMA OVERALL: D- ACTION TAKEN: SOME ACTIONS ALREADY TAKEN WEAKNESSES EXTREME HEAT: D+ DROUGHT: C- WILDFIRE: F INLAND FLOODING:

Transcription

1 OVERLL GRE: - OVERLL: - WILIRE: INLN LOOING: OSTL LOOING: labama faces considerable and significantly increasing threat levels from extreme heat, drought, wildfire, and coastal flooding between now and labama scores an overall grade of - on the Report ard, with grades ranging from an for wildfire and coastal flooding to a for drought. The grades are relative to other states, and relative to the magnitude of the climate threats themselves. Like the majority of states, labama has taken strong action to address its current climate risks. However, the state has taken only limited action toward understanding its most of its future climate risks. There is no evidence that the state has published information acknowledging or assessing its climate vulnerabilities. labama has taken no action to plan for its future climate risks or implement adaptation strategies. TION TKEN: Extensive Strong air Limited None Extreme Heat rought Wildfire Inland looding oastal looding ddressing urrent Risks onducting Vulnerability ssessments Planning for daptation Implementing Resilience ctions SOME TIONS LREY TKEN The State Hazard Mitigation Plan, technical assistance programs, disaster response plans, emergency communications materials, and sector-specific programs are helping the state prepare for its current climate risks. The state climatologist publishes monthly climate reports; these reports are records of climatological data and trends that could be used to assess the state s climate change vulnerabilities. WEKNESSES No evidence of a detailed statewide climate change vulnerability assessment across the sectors examined. No evidence of detailed statewide climate change adaptation plans across the sectors examined. No evidence of dedicated state funding, policies, or guidelines to improve resilience against climate change-related extreme heat, drought, wildfire, or coastal flooding. No evidence of action to incorporate climate change projections associated with extreme heat, drought, wildfire, or coastal flooding into state-level programs, investments, and activities. No evidence of public outreach about climate change-related risks.

2 EXTREME HET: + OVERLL: - LM WILIRE: INLN LOOING: OSTL LOOING: labama earns a + for its average level of preparedness in the face of an above average overall extreme heat threat. urrently, labama faces an above average threat from extreme heat among the lower 48 states. Like most states, it has taken strong action to address its current risks through its State Hazard Mitigation Plan, public health information on heat illness, and energy efficiency programing. y 2050, labama s threat level is projected to see an above average increase and remain above average. While the state climatologist does publish monthly climate reports containing temperature records and trends, labama has taken almost no action to address its future heat risks. There is no evidence that the state has conducted a detailed climate change vulnerability assessment or adopted an adaptation plan. LM OMPRE TO OTHER STTES: THRET LEVEL: PREPRENESS LEVEL: Lowest OVE VERGE Highest 0% 100% VERGE 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. or details, see the methodology. KEY ININGS: EXTREME HET THRET Extreme Heat Threat to Vulnerable Populations 25 million Rank (among states) th 7 th 7 th verage number of heat wave days per year times total vulnerable population. score of 1 represents 1 vulnerable person exposed to 1 heat wave day. verage annual number of heat wave days: verage number of days each year on which the maximum temperature exceeds the 95th percentile of daily maximum temperature in the baseline period ( ) for at least three consecutive days. I YOU KW? urrently, labama averages 25 days a year classified as dangerous or extremely dangerous according to the NWS Heat Index. y 2050, the state is projected to see more than 90 days a year. y 2050, the typical number of heat wave days in labama is projected to increase from 15 to more than 70 days a year, the third greatest increase for a state. labama has more than 160,000 people aged 65 and older, or less than 5 years old, living below the poverty line. These groups are considered to be especially vulnerable to extreme heat.

3 EXTREME HET: + EXMPLE RITERI subset of the criteria used to develop labama s extreme heat preparedness grade. Transportation Energy Water Health ommunities RESSING URRENT RISKS oes the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover extreme heat? oes the state have an extreme heat emergency response plan that is updated routinely? oes the state provide extreme heat emergency communication materials for citizens? ONUTING VULNERILITY SSESSMENTS 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? PLNNING OR PTTION Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering extreme heat? Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation? oes the state have sector-specific extreme heat adaptation plans? IMPLEMENTING RESILIENE TIONS re there optional state guidelines for resilient activities re there state requirements for resilient activities Is there evidence that the state is implementing extreme heat adaptation policy/guidelines? indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.

4 OVERLL: - WILIRE: INLN LOOING: OSTL LOOING: labama earns a for its below average level of preparedness in the face of an average overall widespread summer drought threat. urrently, labama faces an average threat among the 36 states assessed for drought; like most states, it has taken strong action to address its current risks through its State Hazard Mitigation Plan and labama rought Management Plan. y 2050, labama s threat level is projected to see an average increase and remain average among the states assessed. However, it has taken almost no action to address its future drought risks; the majority of states have taken limited action or more. While labama does track drought trends, there is no evidence that it has published information on future drought risks, conducted a detailed climate change vulnerability assessment, or adopted an adaptation plan. LM OMPRE TO OTHER STTES: THRET LEVEL: PREPRENESS LEVEL: Lowest VERGE Highest 0% 100% ELOW VERGE 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. or details, see the methodology. KEY ININGS: Summer rought Threat (Index) Rank (among states) ROUGHT THRET th 18 th 20 th I YOU KW? urrently, labama s severity of widespread summer drought is average and ranks in the bottom half of states among the 36 states assessed for drought. y 2050, the severity of widespread summer drought is projected to see an average increase of about 85 percent; labama s threat level is projected to remain average among the states assessed. 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.

5 EXMPLE RITERI subset of the criteria used to develop labama s drought preparedness grade. Transportation Energy Water Health ommunities RESSING URRENT RISKS oes the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover drought? oes the state have a drought emergency response plan that is updated routinely? oes the state provide drought emergency communication materials for citizens? ONUTING VULNERILITY SSESSMENTS 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? PLNNING OR PTTION Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering drought? Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation? oes the state have sector-specific drought adaptation plans? IMPLEMENTING RESILIENE TIONS re there optional state guidelines for resilient activities re there state requirements for resilient activities Is there evidence that the state is implementing drought adaptation policy/guidelines? indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.

6 WILIRE: OVERLL: LM - WILIRE: INLN LOOING: OSTL LOOING: labama earns an for its below average level of preparedness in the face of an average overall wildfire threat. urrently, labama faces an average threat among the 24 states assessed for wildfire, and like most states it has taken strong action to address its current risks with its State Hazard Mitigation Plan, orestry ommission resources, and irewise program. y 2050, labama s threat level is projected to see an average increase and remain average. While the majority of states have taken limited action or more, labama has taken almost no action to address its future wildfire risks. lthough it does have records of past wildfire events, there is no evidence that it has published information on its future wildfire risks. labama has not conducted a detailed climate change vulnerability assessment on future wildfire risks, and it has not adopted an adaptation plan. LM OMPRE TO OTHER STTES: THRET LEVEL: PREPRENESS LEVEL: Lowest VERGE Highest 0% 100% ELOW VERGE 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. or details, see the methodology. KEY ININGS: nnual ays With High Wildfire Potential Rank (among states) WILIRE THRET th 6 th 7 th I YOU KW? Nearly 2.8 million people in labama live within the wildland-urban interface, where developed and wild lands converge and intersperse, and vulnerability to wildfire is elevated. This represents almost 60 percent of labama s population, an above average proportion. urrently, the number of days with high wildfire potential, weighted by vulnerable population, is average among the 24 states assessed for wildfire threats. y 2050, this indicator is projected to increase by almost 80 percent. y 2050, labama s average number of days with high wildfire potential is projected to double from 25 to nearly 50 days a year. verage nnual Number of ays with High Wildfire Potential: verage number of days each year with Keetch-yram rought Index values exceeding 600.

7 WILIRE: EXMPLE RITERI subset of the criteria used to develop labama s wildfire preparedness grade. Transportation Energy Water Health ommunities RESSING URRENT RISKS oes the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover wildfire? oes the state have a wildfire emergency response plan that is updated routinely? oes the state provide wildfire emergency communication materials for citizens? ONUTING VULNERILITY SSESSMENTS Has the state published information on how the frequency or severity of wildfires may change in the future? Has the state conducted wildfire vulnerability assessments for each sector? Is the state tracking wildfire impacts? PLNNING OR PTTION Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering wildfire? Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation? oes the state have sector-specific wildfire adaptation plans? IMPLEMENTING RESILIENE TIONS re there optional state guidelines for resilient activities re there state requirements for resilient activities Is there evidence that the state is implementing wildfire adaptation policy/guidelines? indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.

8 OSTL LOOING: OVERLL: LM - WILIRE: INLN LOOING: OSTL LOOING: labama has the worst preparedness score for coastal flooding among the 22 states assessed it earns an for its far below average level of preparedness in the face of a below average overall coastal flooding threat. urrently, labama faces an average threat in terms of total number of people and percentage of state population at risk of a 100-year coastal flood, and it has taken strong action to address its current coastal flooding risks, primarily through its State Hazard Mitigation Plan. y 2050, labama is projected to continue to face an average coastal flooding threat level, but it has taken almost no action to address its future risks, while the majority of coastal states have taken a fair amount of action or more. lthough labama has records of coastal flooding incidents and the impacts on coastal communities, there is no evidence that it has published information on its future coastal flooding risks. The state has taken no action to plan for or adapt to its future risks (the majority of states have taken at least limited action). LM OMPRE TO OTHER STTES: THRET LEVEL: PREPRENESS LEVEL: Lowest ELOW VERGE Highest 0% 100% R ELOW VERGE 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. or details, see the methodology. KEY ININGS: Population at Risk of a 100-Year oastal lood Rank (among states) OSTL LOOING THRET 50 thousand th 16 th 16 th I YOU KW? urrently, labama has nearly 27,000 people at risk of a 100-year coastal flood, and ranks in the bottom five states among the 22 coastal states assessed. y 2050, labama s coastal flood risk is projected to increase by 25 percent, putting an additional 7,000 people in the 100-year coastal floodplain. mong the 22 coastal states assessed, labama currently has approximately 200 square miles in the 100-year coastal floodplain, which is a below average percentage of the state s area. y 2050, this is projected to double to nearly 400 square miles. Total population at risk of a 100-year coastal flood.

9 OSTL LOOING: EXMPLE RITERI subset of the criteria used to develop labama s coastal flooding preparedness grade. Transportation Energy Water Health ommunities RESSING URRENT RISKS oes the State Hazard Mitigation Plan cover coastal flooding? oes the state have a coastal flooding emergency response plan that is updated routinely? oes the state provide coastal flooding emergency communication materials for citizens? ONUTING VULNERILITY SSESSMENTS 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? PLNNING OR PTTION Is there a statewide climate change adaptation plan covering coastal flooding? Is there a statewide implementation plan for climate change adaptation? oes the state have sector-specific coastal flooding adaptation plans? IMPLEMENTING RESILIENE TIONS re there optional state guidelines for resilient activities re there state requirements for resilient activities Is there evidence that the state is implementing coastal flooding adaptation policy/guidelines? indicates that the sector is either insensitive to the threat or the state does not have a significant role.