Yamil Lage/AFP/Getty Images
As Hurricane Irma continues to head north, now downgraded to a “tropical depression”, it leaves behind a trail of destruction across the Caribbean and southern Florida.
Caribbean islands including St Martin, Puerto Rico, Barbuda and Cuba were hit hardest. At the time of writing, 37 people in the Caribbean and 10 in the US are thought to have been killed by the hurricane. On the island of Barbuda more than 90 per cent of buildings were destroyed.
The French and UK governments have sent aid workers, food and medical equipment to their overseas territories to start the long process of reconstruction there. Many of these islands are strongly reliant on tourism and will continue to feel the economic impact of Irma for a long time into the future.
Advertisement
For many places across the region, the priority will be to ensure residents have access to safe drinking water, food and shelter. After the hurricane comes an increased risk of disease, partly because stagnating water attracts mosquitoes that can carry diseases like dengue fever. In Haiti the concern is that cases of cholera will increase; in the wake of 2016’s Hurricane Matthew, the affected parts of Haiti experienced a 50 per cent increase in cholera cases thanks to a lack of clean drinking water.
Another priority will be to restore power to the millions of people that have been without electricity for several days. At its peak, Irma knocked out power to at least two-thirds of Florida: some 6.5 million homes. Much of Puerto Rico may be without electricity for four months.
The financial cost of Irma across the region, which came just over a week after Hurricane Harvey caused up to $180 billion of damage in Texas, is still to be calculated.
Flood mapping
In Florida, technology has helped people keep on top of the disaster. A flood-mapping app created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology let people use Twitter, Facebook or Telegram to crowdsource information about the depth of water and risks in different areas, allowing them to avoid the most dangerous regions.
As the waters recede and highways become accessible again, people will begin the slow process of returning to their homes. In Florida, 6.3 million people were evacuated. Some of those who find their homes and communities destroyed may decide to move away rather than face the risk of another disaster, says Elizabeth Fussell at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. Twelve years after Hurricane Katrina, the population of New Orleans is still lower than its pre-Katrina levels.
Those who do return home may find themselves forced to live in flood-prone areas because they cannot afford to pay the higher rents in safer areas. There will be “growing economic inequality” in cities hit by Irma, says Fussell.
In the long-term, Irma could reshape how cities like Miami, which are extremely exposed to rising sea levels and an increasing number of hurricanes, are developed.
“We [have] some very hard questions to ask about which places we should return to mother nature,” says Eric Klinenberg at New York University. “It used to be the case that when something went down, you built it bigger and better than before.” With the threat of climate change, it might be time to rethink that mindset, he says.
Worse to come?
But the US federal government is taking the opposite stance. Just 10 days before Hurricane Harvey hit Texas, President Donald Trump overturned Obama-era rules that made it harder for developers to build on floodplains.
Companies looking to redevelop parts of Florida hit by Irma will want reassurance that they can get flood insurance, says Andrew Lakoff at the University of Southern California. But out-of-date federal flood insurance maps mean that insurance estimates don’t take into account the increased flooding risk brought about by climate change.
Because of this, developers are likely to end up building on vulnerable areas despite the risks, knowing they will be bailed out by the government’s National Flood Insurance Program if disaster strikes again. Trump’s government, it seems, is already creating the conditions for the next disaster. “They’ve had more than enough chances to change their minds on this,” Lakoff says.
“I think Americans should be worrying as much about the planning disasters and wasted money that will happen now as they are about the next acute disaster,” says Klinenberg.
More on these topics: