Report on the Impact of Climate-Induced Flooding on Water Infrastructure and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Climate-fueled flooding events are increasingly threatening access to clean water and sanitation across the United States, directly impeding progress on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The combination of aging infrastructure and intensified storms creates a critical risk to public health, community resilience, and environmental sustainability. This report analyzes the multifaceted threats posed by flooding to water systems, highlights vulnerable regions, and examines policy decisions that conflict with SDG targets. Achieving SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 13 (Climate Action) requires urgent investment in resilient infrastructure and a decisive shift away from fossil fuels.

1.0 Threat Analysis: Flooding’s Impact on SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation)

Extreme weather events, exacerbated by climate change, directly compromise the core targets of SDG 6. Recent incidents in North Carolina and Kentucky illustrate the severe disruption to water services.

1.1 Infrastructure Failure and Service Disruption

• Physical Damage: Floods have destroyed essential infrastructure, including major water pipes in Asheville, NC, following Hurricane Helene, severing the connection between treatment plants and communities.
• Power Outages: Storms frequently knock out the electricity required to operate water and wastewater treatment facilities, as seen in Kentucky, leaving tens of thousands without water or under boil advisories.
• Overwhelmed Systems: Filtration systems become overwhelmed by excessive sediment and debris, as occurred in Asheville’s reservoir, rendering them ineffective and prolonging water service restoration.

1.2 Water Contamination and Public Health Risks (SDG 3)

Floodwaters introduce a range of hazardous contaminants into water sources, posing a significant threat to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

• Bacterial Contamination: Post-hurricane testing in North Carolina revealed that 40% of private wells were contaminated with E. coli and coliform bacteria.
• Agricultural and Industrial Runoff: Flooding of factory farms and industrial sites releases raw sewage, chemicals, and fertilizer runoff into waterways, contaminating both municipal sources and the private wells that 43 million Americans rely on.

2.0 Geographic Vulnerability and Urban Resilience (SDG 11)

The risk of water system failure due to flooding is not evenly distributed, with certain regions facing a disproportionately high threat. This vulnerability undermines SDG 11, which aims to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.

2.1 High-Risk Water Systems

Analysis indicates that 15 large community water systems, serving over 5 million people, have more than half of their service area in high-risk flood zones. The states with the most vulnerable systems include:

1. Florida (10 systems)
2. New Jersey
3. Louisiana
4. Massachusetts

2.2 Case Study: Florida’s Compounding Crises

Florida, with 1.8 million people served by its 10 most at-risk systems, exemplifies the challenge to urban resilience. Hurricanes Milton and Helene led to widespread consequences:

• Service Shutdowns: Officials in St. Petersburg shut down water and sewer services to prevent contamination and system backups.
• Widespread Advisories: At their peak, the storms placed 20 Florida counties under boil water notices.
• Saline Contamination: Storm surges contaminated freshwater reservoirs, forcing residents in cities like Bradenton to rely on bottled water for extended periods.

3.0 Policy Misalignment with Climate Action and Infrastructure Goals (SDG 13 & SDG 9)

Current policy trends present a significant obstacle to achieving climate and infrastructure-related SDGs. A lack of investment and continued support for fossil fuels directly contradicts the objectives of SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure).

3.1 The Infrastructure Investment Gap

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates a $1.3 trillion funding need for U.S. water and wastewater systems to meet existing standards, a figure that does not account for necessary climate adaptation measures. Without federal support, the financial burden shifts to local utilities and ratepayers, potentially compromising water affordability and access, which relates to SDG 1 (No Poverty).

3.2 Contradictory Climate and Funding Policies

• Fossil Fuel Promotion: Governmental support for the fossil fuel industry through deregulation and new leases on public lands directly fuels the climate crisis, increasing the frequency and intensity of the floods that damage water infrastructure. This is in direct opposition to SDG 13.
• Defunding of Critical Programs: Proposed eliminations and cuts to the EPA’s State Revolving Funds—the primary federal funding source for water infrastructure—would dismantle the financial mechanisms needed to build the resilient systems required by SDG 9 and SDG 11.

4.0 Recommendations for Aligning with Sustainable Development Goals

To mitigate these risks and advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a coordinated strategy focused on infrastructure investment and climate mitigation is essential.

1. Secure Long-Term Infrastructure Funding: Pass legislation such as the WATER (Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability) Act to provide dedicated, long-term federal funding for water infrastructure upgrades and climate resilience projects, directly supporting SDG 6 and SDG 9.
2. Prioritize Climate Action (SDG 13): Implement policies to phase out fossil fuels and transition to renewable energy sources to address the root cause of climate-intensified flooding.
3. Strengthen Federal and State Regulatory Oversight: Ensure robust funding for the EPA and state environmental agencies to enforce clean water protections and support communities in developing climate adaptation plans, contributing to SDG 6 and SDG 11.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
   • The article’s central theme is the threat to clean drinking water posed by climate-fueled floods and failing infrastructure. It explicitly discusses the lack of access to “our most essential resource: clean drinking water” in places like Asheville, NC, and Kentucky, and the contamination of water sources.
2. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • The article directly attributes the increasing frequency and intensity of floods to the “growing climate crisis” and “climate-wrecking pollution” from fossil fuels. It criticizes policies that support the oil and gas industry and calls for an end to this pollution as a necessary step to protect water resources.
3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • A major focus is on the vulnerability of “aging infrastructure.” The text describes how floods damage treatment plants, pipes, pumps, and stormwater drains. It highlights the urgent need for massive federal investments to build resilient water systems capable of withstanding climate disasters.
4. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The article discusses the impact of floods on communities, particularly urban areas like Asheville, NC, and St. Petersburg, FL. It addresses the need for cities to have resilient infrastructure to protect residents from water-related disasters and ensure the continuity of essential services like water supply.
5. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The health risks associated with contaminated water are a key concern. The article mentions the contamination of wells with “E. coli and coliform bacteria” and “fecal matter” after hurricanes, leading to “boil water advisories” to prevent illness from waterborne pathogens.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation):
   • Target 6.1: Achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all. The article demonstrates how this target is threatened, citing instances where thousands of people in Kentucky were left “without water” and residents in Asheville and Florida had to rely on bottled water.
   • Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution. The article details how floods lead to pollution, describing reservoirs overwhelmed by “massive amounts of dirt” and wells contaminated by “E. coli,” “fecal matter,” and sewage from flooded factory farms.
2. Under SDG 13 (Climate Action):
   • Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters. The article’s call to “invest in our nation’s infrastructure” to prepare it for a “climate-changed world” directly aligns with this target. It highlights that current systems were “never designed for such extreme storms.”
   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies. The article criticizes the Trump administration’s policies for doing the opposite of this target by supporting fossil fuels and cutting environmental funding, thereby undermining efforts to combat climate change.
3. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure. The entire argument for investing in water systems to withstand floods is about achieving this target. The article points out that the EPA estimates a need of “$1.3 trillion” to bring water and wastewater systems up to standard, let alone adapt them for climate change.
4. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.5: Significantly reduce the number of people affected by disasters, including water-related disasters. The article quantifies the number of people affected, such as the “17,000 people without water” in Kentucky and the “5 million people” served by water systems in high-risk flood zones, directly relating to this target.
5. Under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):
   • Target 3.9: Substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and water pollution and contamination. The article’s focus on water contamination from bacteria like E. coli and sewage directly addresses the sources of illness this target aims to reduce.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation):
   • Number of people lacking access to water: The article states “more than 17,000 people without water” in Kentucky.
   • Number of people under boil water advisories: It mentions “more than 28,000 under boil water advisories” in Kentucky and notices issued for “20 Florida counties” after Hurricane Helene.
   • Percentage of water sources contaminated: The article reports that after Hurricane Helene, “40% of private wells tested” were contaminated with E. coli and coliform bacteria.
2. For SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Population living in high-risk disaster zones: The analysis found that 15 large water systems serving “more than 5 million people” have over half their service area in “high-risk” flood zones.
   • Number of water systems at risk: The article identifies “15 large water systems” where over half the service area is in high-risk flood zones.
3. For SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure):
   • Financial investment in water infrastructure: The article provides a clear financial indicator of need, citing the EPA’s estimate that “$1.3 trillion” is required. It also discusses the proposed elimination of the “EPA’s State Revolving Funds,” a key funding source.
4. For SDG 13 (Climate Action):
   • Government policies on fossil fuels: The article implies an indicator by describing policies that run counter to climate action, such as ordering agencies to “fast-track new fossil fuel projects” and mandating “more oil and gas leases on public lands and waters.”

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foodandwaterwatch.org