<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel> <title> Comments on: Retreat, Buyouts, and “Moral Hazard” </title> <atom:link href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/</link> <description>Sea Level Rise Expert</description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:37:11 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod> hourly </sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency> 1 </sy:updateFrequency> <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.2</generator> <item> <title> By: John Englander </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3063</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Englander]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:37:11 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3063</guid> <description><![CDATA[In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3062">John Moon</a>. Thanks John. It is interesting. I will give it some thought.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3062">John Moon</a>.</p> <p>Thanks John. It is interesting. I will give it some thought.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: John Moon </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3062</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Moon]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2020 19:36:07 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3062</guid> <description><![CDATA[John, I don’t know if this “legacy issue” from The Roman Empire will be of any interest. It does however highlight a very current problem, which seems to apply in both Florida and Wales, i.e. What is the best level of government to manage any particular issue? In The UK, the meme that decisions made more locally will always be better than those made far away, in political terms, is dominant. This means that in Wales, which is a devolved region of The UK rather than a state, province or territory, there are 22 local authorities which have to cooperate to do anything meaningful about some issues. Most of their effort goes into leveraging funds out of the two government levels above. The first link illustrates that there is “nothing new under the sun”, and the second illustrates my point about the, in this case three local authorities facing the same challenge, having to synchronise their responses. A section of The River Wye forming The Anglo Welsh Border avoids one problem. The Walesonline article is from 2009, LOL. In my book, The South Wales Mainline Railway and the M4 are strategic transport infrastructure. http://www.ggat.org.uk/cadw/historic_landscape/Gwent%20Levels/English/GL_Features.htm https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/flooding-fears-gwent-levels-seawall-2099679]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, I don’t know if this “legacy issue” from The Roman Empire will be of any interest. It does however highlight a very current problem, which seems to apply in both Florida and Wales, i.e. What is the best level of government to manage any particular issue? In The UK, the meme that decisions made more locally will always be better than those made far away, in political terms, is dominant. This means that in Wales, which is a devolved region of The UK rather than a state, province or territory, there are 22 local authorities which have to cooperate to do anything meaningful about some issues. Most of their effort goes into leveraging funds out of the two government levels above. </p> <p>The first link illustrates that there is “nothing new under the sun”, and the second illustrates my point about the, in this case three local authorities facing the same challenge, having to synchronise their responses. A section of The River Wye forming The Anglo Welsh Border avoids one problem. The Walesonline article is from 2009, LOL. In my book, The South Wales Mainline Railway and the M4 are strategic transport infrastructure.</p> <p><a href="http://www.ggat.org.uk/cadw/historic_landscape/Gwent%20Levels/English/GL_Features.htm" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.ggat.org.uk/cadw/historic_landscape/Gwent%20Levels/English/GL_Features.htm</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/flooding-fears-gwent-levels-seawall-2099679" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/flooding-fears-gwent-levels-seawall-2099679</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: John Englander </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3057</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Englander]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 02 Aug 2020 18:31:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3057</guid> <description><![CDATA[In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3056">John Moon</a>. Very good and relevant comments John. The policies of Flood Re and the UK government are commendable in terms of not incentivizing additional risk by investing further in the flood zone. Your concerns about the nuclear power plants are also good.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3056">John Moon</a>.</p> <p>Very good and relevant comments John. The policies of Flood Re and the UK government are commendable in terms of not incentivizing additional risk by investing further in the flood zone. Your concerns about the nuclear power plants are also good.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: John Moon </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3056</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Moon]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 02 Aug 2020 15:32:47 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3056</guid> <description><![CDATA[Increases in the intensity and frequency of fluvial and pluvial flooding events are the climate change issue that has affected The UK most acutely so far. Flood Re, a levy and pool system to manage the cost of providing insurance against one type of risk, was set in response. To avoid the scheme incentivising the building of homes on high flood risk land, houses that were built since 2009 are not covered by the scheme. In the past, the UK government offered money to help people relocate, as well as assisting with planning issues around new homes for them, but no such schemes are active today. Westminster will occasionally allocate UK tax payers money to protect strategic assets. Bacton Gas Terminal is one example, the gas fields supplying this interconnection point are in production run off so “holding the line” for twenty or so years is adequate and might make sense financially. The site will then be decommissioned to recover plant and scrap steel, then the North Sea will continue moving inland as it has since The Storegga Slides in approximately 6225–6170 BC. Geologically, East Anglia is predominantly “poorly consolidated glacial till”, a decent storm can move the high-tide line ~10m in a few hours. Check out the locations of Sizewell and Bradwell Nuclear Power Stations. Dungeness on the Kent coast looks like it might be in most need of managed retreat. The de-fuelling of Dungeness A was completed in June 2012 and demolition of the reactor buildings and final site clearance is planned for 2088 to 2098. The current closure date of Dungeness B is 2028, so you are looking at 2135 for final site clearance. “Don’t Panic”, after events at Fukushima Daiichi on 2011-03-11, EDF suddenly decided that relying on a shingle bank for storm protection might not be a good idea! I don’t think I would have chosen “Outfall Avenue” as a street name though.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Increases in the intensity and frequency of fluvial and pluvial flooding events are the climate change issue that has affected The UK most acutely so far. Flood Re, a levy and pool system to manage the cost of providing insurance against one type of risk, was set in response. To avoid the scheme incentivising the building of homes on high flood risk land, houses that were built since 2009 are not covered by the scheme.</p> <p>In the past, the UK government offered money to help people relocate, as well as assisting with planning issues around new homes for them, but no such schemes are active today. Westminster will occasionally allocate UK tax payers money to protect strategic assets. Bacton Gas Terminal is one example, the gas fields supplying this interconnection point are in production run off so “holding the line” for twenty or so years is adequate and might make sense financially.</p> <p>The site will then be decommissioned to recover plant and scrap steel, then the North Sea will continue moving inland as it has since The Storegga Slides in approximately 6225–6170 BC. Geologically, East Anglia is predominantly “poorly consolidated glacial till”, a decent storm can move the high-tide line ~10m in a few hours.</p> <p>Check out the locations of Sizewell and Bradwell Nuclear Power Stations. Dungeness on the Kent coast looks like it might be in most need of managed retreat. The de-fuelling of Dungeness A was completed in June 2012 and demolition of the reactor buildings and final site clearance is planned for 2088 to 2098. The current closure date of Dungeness B is 2028, so you are looking at 2135 for final site clearance. “Don’t Panic”, after events at Fukushima Daiichi on 2011-03-11, EDF suddenly decided that relying on a shingle bank for storm protection might not be a good idea! I don’t think I would have chosen “Outfall Avenue” as a street name though.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: John Englander </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3046</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Englander]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 03:34:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3046</guid> <description><![CDATA[In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3044">Sarah Lipuma</a>. Sarah -- you raise valid points. Still I believe the question needs to be asked, whether it is good public policy for the Federal Government to be the primary provider of flood insurance, expected to provide it at "reasonable rates" and then buy people out of vulnerable properties at full value. As you know better than most, the long term scenario for all this is not good.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3044">Sarah Lipuma</a>.</p> <p>Sarah — you raise valid points. Still I believe the question needs to be asked, whether it is good public policy for the Federal Government to be the primary provider of flood insurance, expected to provide it at “reasonable rates” and then buy people out of vulnerable properties at full value. As you know better than most, the long term scenario for all this is not good.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: John Englander </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3045</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Englander]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 03:23:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3045</guid> <description><![CDATA[In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3040">Anna Marie King</a>. That would be a good part of the solution Anna Marie.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3040">Anna Marie King</a>.</p> <p>That would be a good part of the solution Anna Marie.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Sarah Lipuma </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3044</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Sarah Lipuma]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:45:20 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3044</guid> <description><![CDATA[First, I'm looking forward to your upcoming book! Second, I only take umbrage with the assumption embedded in "People who choose to build in a high risk zone should be bearing the cost, not shifting it to the general public." I doubt that many individuals actually go about the process of building a home anymore. The majority of houses are bought from within developments or from existing housing stock. It isn't usually the fault of the individual who bought the house in a high risk zone, especially because in the majority of states there is no mandate for realtors to disclose flood risk until the NFIP paperwork is given over to the potential buyer (https://riskcenter.wharton.upenn.edu/digital-dialogues/improving-flood-risk-disclosure/). And not everyone can afford the price premium that comes with living outside of the floodplain. I would say that the developers should bear part of the cost for building in flood zones, the municipal government is at fault for allowing development in flood-prone areas, and ultimately the NFIP/FEMA is at fault for not enforcing their own floodplain management rules.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, I’m looking forward to your upcoming book! Second, I only take umbrage with the assumption embedded in “People who choose to build in a high risk zone should be bearing the cost, not shifting it to the general public.” I doubt that many individuals actually go about the process of building a home anymore. The majority of houses are bought from within developments or from existing housing stock. It isn’t usually the fault of the individual who bought the house in a high risk zone, especially because in the majority of states there is no mandate for realtors to disclose flood risk until the NFIP paperwork is given over to the potential buyer (<a href="https://riskcenter.wharton.upenn.edu/digital-dialogues/improving-flood-risk-disclosure/" rel="nofollow ugc">https://riskcenter.wharton.upenn.edu/digital-dialogues/improving-flood-risk-disclosure/</a>). And not everyone can afford the price premium that comes with living outside of the floodplain. I would say that the developers should bear part of the cost for building in flood zones, the municipal government is at fault for allowing development in flood-prone areas, and ultimately the NFIP/FEMA is at fault for not enforcing their own floodplain management rules.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Edith Mayfield </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3043</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Edith Mayfield]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:02:04 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3043</guid> <description><![CDATA[Thrilled to hear about Dr. Englander's upcoming book. Can't wait!]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thrilled to hear about Dr. Englander’s upcoming book. Can’t wait!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Anna Marie King </title> <link>https://johnenglander.net/retreat-buyouts-and-moral-hazard/#comment-3040</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Anna Marie King]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:27:28 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://johnenglander.net/?p=12164#comment-3040</guid> <description><![CDATA[Perhaps one solution to multiple buyouts would be to draw a line in the sand (so to speak). Grandfather in all buildings up to a specific date, after which the sale would be contingent upon a legal statement that the property would not be subject to government buyout should flooding cause an imminent threat.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps one solution to multiple buyouts would be to draw a line in the sand (so to speak).<br /> Grandfather in all buildings up to a specific date, after which the sale would be contingent upon<br /> a legal statement that the property would not be subject to government buyout should flooding cause<br /> an imminent threat.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>