By Paul Roberts / For The Herald
The disastrous flooding in the Texas Hill Country is at the confluence of two crises: climate change and a torrent of U.S. debt. They are related, and the federal response is making both worse.
First, climate change: Current average global temperatures have exceeded 1.5 degrees above preindustrial levels. This is the low end of the threshold established in the Paris agreement to avoid tipping points on the planet. Warmer air holds more moisture, and heat and low humidity increase the risk of drought and wildfires. We are experiencing more frequent, severe and costly storms, droughts and fire events in the U.S. and across the globe; a new abnormal. The floods along the Guadalupe River and East Coast are the latest examples of extreme events.
Like the Texas flood waters, the costs of climate disasters are rapidly rising. In 2023 there were 28 separate weather and climate disasters with damages of $1 billion or more. The total cost of disaster in 2023 was $94.8 billion. The Asheville, North Carolina, floods in 2024 are estimated to have cost between $48 billion and $53 billion. The estimated cost of this year’s Los Angeles fires is between $135 billion and $150 billion. Guadalupe River flood damage is estimated between $18 billion and $22 billion.
The Trump administration has responded by waging a war on climate science. Virtually every climate science program in every agency has been eliminated or drastically cut including: NOAA, the National Weather Service, the EPA, NASA, Energy and FEMA. These are the programs that conduct climate research, provide early severe weather alerts, hurricane and fire warnings, and emergency management preparedness. They are also cutting funding to state and local governments for disaster relief while shifting more responsibilities to them. In addition, they have also cut tax credits for clean energy while increasing subsidies for fossil fuels. These policies are literally throwing gas on the fire and then cutting funds for the fire department. See “We can’t manage what we refuse to measure,” The Herald, June 7.
Second, debt, deficits and the budget: To be sure, current spending levels are unsustainable. The federal government has spent $1.34 trillion more than it has collected in fiscal year 2025. In 2024 the total was $1.83 trillion.
The national debt is the accumulation of all borrowing along with interest, currently in excess of $36 trillion. As reported by the The Economist: “Over the past 12 months America’s budget deficit has been an astonishing 6.7 percent of (gross domestic product) … and the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio will in about two years exceed the 106 percent reached after the second world war.”
Interest on that borrowing increases each year, thereby increasing the deficit and squeezing out spending for all other needs. The so-called Big Beautiful Bill will make matters worse. By all objective accounts, it will increase the national debt more than $4 trillion over the next 10 years. That will create structural deficits constraining all other spending priorities such as defense; climate disasters such as floods, heat, and hurricanes; fiscal downturns and growth.
The BBB also abolishes billions for green energy, solar and wind, electric vehicles, heat pumps and other provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act. It is estimated that it will increase energy costs, and increase carbon emissions by roughly 10 percent by 2030.
The July 5 Economist magazine feature story was “Big beautiful … bonkers” in which it described the BBB as a “big beautiful fairy tale … a showcase for fiscal incontinence and ideological exhaustion.”
It is based on rosy forecasts, unrealistic growth projections and low-balling deficit impacts. “The White House has devised a fiscal fantasyland to dispense with such tiresome facts, in which the BBB initiates such breakneck growth that revenues soar and debt plummets,” it said.
The administration and Republican-majority Congress are exhibiting the same disregard for math as they do for climate science. The Economist continues: “The bloating of the deficit — at a time when interest rates and inflation risks are high — is being waved away by a Republican Party that preaches about fiscal discipline when out of power, and spends with reckless abandon when in it.” Nowhere is this more apparent than failing to respond to growing climate emergencies across the nation.
The U.S. deficit requires serious attention. So does climate change, including adaptation to increasingly severe weather events, improvements to infrastructure and responding to disasters.
We are ignoring the laws of science and math at our peril. Tightening our belt in the wrong places — around our neck instead of our waist — is dangerous and expensive for the economy and environment.
Paul Roberts is retired and lives in Everett. His career spans five decades in infrastructure, economics and environmental policy including former Chair of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Board and advising Washington cities on climate change.
Eco-nomics
“Eco-nomics” is a series of articles exploring issues at the intersection of climate change and economics. Climate change (global warming) is caused by greenhouse gas emissions — carbon dioxide and methane chiefly — generated by human activities, primarily burning fossil fuels and agricultural practices. Global warming poses an existential threat to the planet. Successfully responding to this threat requires urgent actions — clear plans and actionable strategies — to rapidly reduce GHG emissions and adapt to climate-influenced events.
The Eco-nomics series focuses on mitigation and adaptation strategies viewed through the twin perspectives of science and economics. Find links to the series thus far at tinyurl.com/HeraldEco-nomics.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
