The Challenge of Overhauling FEMA In a Climate Changed World

SEvening Storms struck the Pittsburgh region earlier this week – by cutting three and causing generalized power outages in the region.

He is the last of a series of deadly storms in the United States – at least 24 people were killed after storms hit the South and the Midwest early AprilAnd at least 32 people were killed when storms have swept away a large part of the country mid-March. After the two storms, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) intervened to provide assistance to individuals and counties.

Although Pittsburgh may not need help FEMA, if the Trump administration does it, many communities across the country could be left in the idea of ​​resumption after sinister, while the administration seeks to dismantle the agency and change their response to disasters to states. And climate change only complicates.

The reality to leave the response to states to the states would be “devastating”, explains Allison Reilly, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Maryland. “Fema exists because there are times when the state may simply not answer.”

Trump first posed the idea of ​​revising the FEMA during the visit of the North Carolina the day after the Hurricane Helene in January. “I would like to see the states take care of disasters, let the state take care of tornadoes and hurricanes and all the other things that happen. And I think you will find it much cheaper. You will do it for less than half and you will get a much faster response,” he said.

One of his first decrees was to create a council to assess the efficiency of the intervention agency in the event of a disaster. Only a few days before the Pittsburgh storm, Trump appointed 13 people, including the Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, and the interior security Kristi Noem – to see FEMA again. The group should submit a report to the president within 180 daysAccording to the decree.

Trump's decision to dismantle the agency comes when extreme weather events are only becoming more common and more expensive. In 2024, the United States experienced 27 weather and climatic disasters with at least $ 1 billion in damages, only until 2023, which had $ 28 billion. And researchers predict a Hurricane season higher than average is on the horizon.

“There is a formidable opportunity for the national emergency management capacity to invest in … The impacts of climate change, and how can we better prepare ourselves,” explains Jeff Schlegelmilch, associate professor of professional practice and director of the National Center for Disaster PREPAREDNES at the Columbia Climate School.

FEMA was not designed to respond to our changing climate. “FEMA and the structure of the response to disasters and its creation were really designed to manage perhaps one or two major recoveries in the event of a disaster at the same time. And currently there are more than 100, ”explains Schlegelmilch. “The recovery mechanisms for the response to disasters are widely exceeded.”

Traditionally, FEMA has worked alongside representatives of the state – not independent of them. The agency is more than simply giving money: FEMA deploys experts in response to disasters and recovery and maintains stocks of emergency equipment. Outsourcing to this to states is more expensive, depending on the search for The Atlantic Council– and could lead to auctions for emergency supplies and expertise in the event of a natural disaster.

In the absence of FEMA, states should hire their own experts in response to disasters to be pending. “This means that each state must have such a large number of people who could respond to a disaster, but for extremely rare events,” said Riley. “You are going to need a lot of people in the staff without doing anything for a long time until the disaster occurs. Or you are going to have states that are simply poorly prepared, which is probably more likely to happen. ”