Infrastructure Working Group

• Conduct vulnerability analysis of shoreline protection systems impacted by fluctuations in lake stage.
• Evaluate the vulnerability of existing port and harbor structures such as breakwaters and harbor walls.
• Elevate and reinforce transportation connections to critical infrastructure.
• Relocate or consolidate port functions.
• lnstall systems to adapt to current high lake levels and consider potential future lake level variability.
• Build adaptive facilities using waterproof materials in the interiors.
• Select tenants with environmental, social and governance goals.
• Identify options for and support adaptive recreational facilities such as floating dockage structures and modified boat launch ramps.
• Create a redundant system for industries by building sustainable rail connections.
• Implement marine highways for Interstate 94.
• Electrify and convert to solar for sustainable energy; use cool roofs.

• Pursue funding for elevating road and rail infrastructure.
• Update asset management models to include climate factors.
• Use sensors to monitor conditions and self-diagnose issues and use “smart structures” for higher cost-effectiveness.
• Pilot and transition to fossil free materials.
• Use hyper-performance materials.
• Use construction robots for pothole patching, joint repairs, crack detection, and sealing, and asset inspections.
• Partner with the private sector to establish electric-only bids for freight movement for long-haul and short-haul goods movement.

• Use updated rainfall data in hydrologic and hydraulic design.
• Evaluate and communicate methods for predicting future probability of annual peak discharge utilizing updated rainfall data.
• Inventory and prioritize stream crossing structures that are vulnerable to failure.
• Develop and promote a flooding risk-based approach (instead of a predefined “design storm” requirement) for drainage structure capacity analysis for urban drainage bridges and reservoirs.
• Use adaptive design approaches that allow for future modifications to be planned for in advance as a way to address climate change effects.
• Revise state and municipal design standards in administrative code and guidance documents to require updated design procedures for bridges, dams, drainage system structures as described above.
• Promote the use of sensors to monitor conditions and self-diagnose issues.
• Provide updated guidance on structure inventory, critical ecological/hydrologic/hydraulic design issues and the latest data on precipitation in hydrologic modeling approaches.
• Communicate the benefits of culvert (and bridge) design using a stream simulation design process.
• Provide guidance to use stream simulation design as well as other design approaches for stream crossing culverts, especially in rural areas, to assess vulnerability and produce more flood resilient designs that also protect aquatic communities.
• Communicate examples of culvert structures that have survived extreme floods to provide lessons learned and encourage municipalities and designers to design for flood resilience when possible.

• Conduct research and consolidate existing data to identify top construction material and construction process greenhouse gas emission issues in Wisconsin.
• Develop a metric for identifying embedded carbon content that can be applied to many materials, similar to an “Energy Star” designation.
• Develop and adopt specification and bidding procedures that value reduced carbon content materials.
• Provide contract flexibility for loss of working days due to extended rainfall or other climatic effects and also incentivize contractors to partner with the owner in planning to address climatic extremes that may be encountered during a particular contract performance timeframe.

• Assess programs to assess the potential for groundwater rise in areas of critical infrastructure.
• Assess community-wide impacts of structure flooding in areas determined to be vulnerable.
• Develop infrastructure facility master plans to include evaluation of climate change changes in saturated ground duration and elevation.
• Modify modeling guidance for urban and rural runoff quality modeling approaches to account for potential higher loading rates.
• Evaluate the vulnerability of existing stormwater quality infrastructure to increased runoff volume and nutrient/sediment loadings.
• Develop updated approaches to floodplain definition that combine FEMA standards for flood insurance and provide more comprehensive information for planning and floodplain land use limitations.
• Provide guidance for and require that urban drainage master plans include a climate change vulnerability analysis, specifically evaluate distributed green infrastructure, and provide some type of incentive funding for these evaluations.
• Provide technical and procedural guidance regarding the use of natural systems such as floodplain storage and wetland restoration as part of watershed quality management in rural areas and provide some type of incentive funding for these evaluations.

• Conduct vulnerability analysis of systems and treatment facilities to increased precipitation, street flooding, and groundwater elevations.
• Replace and repair leaking infrastructure.
• Consider increased infiltration and inflow when designing wastewater treatment facilities.
• Consider increased potential for infiltration and groundwater elevations in private septic system design.
• Raise outfall structures and wastewater treatment facilities where there is risk of backflow to the wastewater treatment facility during flood events.
• Upgrade equipment and facilities to reduce energy use.
• Change operations to improve plant efficiency.
• Promote more efficient utility customer energy use: for example, requiring or subsidizing more efficient water heating.
• Require long-term cost/benefit analysis of natural systems and green infrastructure as part of new infrastructure projects.
• Evaluate specific climate-related increased temperatures in all infrastructure operation equipment and facilities planning, especially public potable water supplies.
• Develop updated rainfall statistics for Wisconsin using latest techniques for both current and projected future conditions.
• Communicate new rainfall data to designers statewide.
• Develop and communicate updated recommendations for rainfall/runoff analysis to define climate and watershed land-use conditions that should be evaluated in existing conditions and future flooding calculation.
• Develop guidance from modeling standards for storm recurrence intervals and rainfall distributions appropriate for future precipitation conditions.

Create a Wisconsin Green Compact

Support the creation of a Wisconsin Green Compact for municipalities to accelerate adaptation and climate mitigation. The compact would ensure alignment with state, regional and national goals and provide a way to measure our collective impact. A compact would also be a good step in creating regional climate action and climate resilience plans.

Pursue Climate Bonds

Pursue climate bonds to accelerate green actions.

Build Financial Capacity

Build capacity for climate financing solutions in the transportation infrastructure sector.

Investigate Low-Carbon Transportation Alternatives

Investigate an integrated model such as the Transportation and Climate Initiative (including 12 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states), a regional low-carbon transportation program to reduce climate-changing emissions and invest in cleaner transportation, healthier communities, and more resilient infrastructure.

Besides technology solutions waiting to make it to market, there is other information infrastructure managers need to understand about the risks, return of investment and the opportunities of making infrastructure more resilient to the impact of climate change in Wisconsin and accelerating decarbonization.

The Business Case for Adapting Our Infrastructure

In response to the Infrastructure Working Group survey of infrastructure managers in Wisconsin, 49 percent of respondents said that adapting to climate change is too expensive. Yet, 23 years of data from the Federal Emergency Management Agency shows that there is at least a $4 return on every dollar invested in adaptation. If adaptation involves changes in administrative codes, such as building codes, subdivision ordinances, construction standards, and building design standards, the return can be as high as $7. It is clear that well-planned adaptation can save money. Adaptation returns $4 for every $1 invested

Assessing Community Resilience

What if there is major flooding in your community? You may know how many people may be impacted by the event. But do you know how resilient your community is, or how long will it take for people to recover from the event? These are questions that researchers are asking. In 2020 the U.S. Census produced its Community Resilience Estimates Dashboard that identified risk factors. The dashboard shows that, on average, a quarter of Wisconsin’s population have three or more risk factors, making these individuals more likely to have a hard time recovering from a disaster. Furthermore, 50 percent of Wisconsin’s residents have one or two of these risk factors.

Climigration

Climigration is a term for the planned relocation of communities in response to the impacts of climate change. The Midwest is positioning itself as a destination place for people displaced by environmental disaster. Municipalities are already considering how their current infrastructure can handle a potential influx of new residents. Climigration can be considered an opportunity for municipalities as people may flee from rising sea levels from the U.S. coasts, wildfires and poor air quality in the West, and extreme heat from many parts of the country.

Planning of Adaptation Projects

The planning process and prioritization of where investments are made (e.g., what side of town) can have huge implications for a community’s resilience in the face of environmental pollution and/or climate change. These planning decisions often include a cost-benefit analysis. This analysis should be based on a comprehensive vulnerability analysis and alternatives development and selection that includes the social costs of project impacts to properly ensure environmental and climate justice.

Reducing the Embedded Carbon Content of Construction Projects

As planners and contractors start thinking about how to account for the carbon emissions released to create construction products (the “embedded carbon content”), like concrete and steel, decision makers must ensure that the final process for doing so is equitable. Currently, Wisconsin is in the planning phases for considering these emissions. However, we know that smaller contracting businesses will be less equipped to make the large adjustments required to their business and processes. Decision makers must ensure these smaller businesses receive additional support in making transitions to sustainable practices so they are not left behind in the marketplace.