\u201cA ship in a harbor is safe, but that\u2019s not what ships are for\u201d [1] could very well be the unofficial slogan of the US Naval Service.\u00a0 While this is certainly true, the reactor servicing, propulsion plant maintenance, and weapons systems work that are performed in a shipyard are critically important to maintaining naval fleet readiness [2].\u00a0 The naval shipyard can be seen as the last-mile portion of a supply chain that brings materials, equipment, and skilled technicians to a ship in need of maintenance.\u00a0 This process begins when personnel at the US Naval Supply System apply technical requirements to an order with a vendor, and terminates when that equipment has been successfully installed onboard a warship at a shipyard under the oversight of the US Naval Sea Systems Command [3].<\/p>\n
An essential characteristic of this last mile is the dry dock<\/em>, a large container that a ship can be sailed into such that the ship is surrounded on all sides.\u00a0 The dry dock can then be sealed off from the ocean by means of a caisson<\/em>, a large watertight plug that allows the dry dock to be drained, permitting work to be performed that requires cutting the ship\u2019s hull below the waterline.\u00a0 Because dry docks are located by necessity at sea level, rising ocean levels pose a threat to the US Navy\u2019s ability to use them to maintain ships\u2014in the vicinity of some Naval shipyards, sea levels are anticipated to rise between 3.5 feet and 5 feet by 2100 [4].\u00a0 Given that some US Navy shipyards already flood during exceptionally high tides [5], naval shipyards and their dry docks in particular are in danger of becoming inoperable as global temperature rises.<\/p>\n There\u2019s no quick fix for a dry dock that is slipping beneath the waves of a rising tide.\u00a0 As significant capital investments, dry docks see high demand and continuous use over the course of many years.\u00a0 For example, Dry Dock 1 at Norfolk Naval Shipyard, built in 1833, was the first dry dock built in the western hemisphere and is still used today to house US Navy ships during maintenance [6]. Other dry docs are similarly old\u2014the average age of a dry dock owned by the US Navy is greater than 80 years [7].\u00a0 Given this lengthy time horizon, it is not entirely surprising that current dry docks were not constructed with a rising global temperature in mind.\u00a0 To complicate matters, defense budgets that prioritize funding current operations over maintaining infrastructure have resulted in dry docks that are desperately in need of maintenance and modernization [7].\u00a0 These circumstances present a bleak picture of Naval preparedness for climate change\u2014most dry docks were built before rising sea levels were anticipated, re-fitting dry docks to accommodate higher sea levels will be expensive, and funds with which to do so are in short supply.<\/p>\n This is not to say that the US Navy has neglected to prepare for climate change entirely. The Navy is currently working to relocate roads and buildings that are threatened by rising sea levels, and stringently requires justification, flood barriers, and backup systems when a planned new building is within two meters of sea-level-rise forecasts [8].\u00a0 Additionally, the US Navy is working to build higher piers to allow docking ships in higher seas [9]; while many maintenance items could be performed at these higher piers, any work that requires hull cuts beneath the waterline would still require use of a dry dock.\u00a0 Taking an attitude of prevention, the US Navy has also worked to reduce its own carbon footprint by increasing the use of biofuels [8].\u00a0 However, the U.S. Navy has been publically silent regarding its plan to prepare dry docks for rising sea levels, either near-term or long-term.<\/p>\n While current actions taken by the US Navy in response to rising sea levels are appropriate, additional work must be performed to ensure that rising sea levels do not prevent naval ships from receiving essential maintenance that can only be provided in dry docks.\u00a0 Specifically, studies should be undertaken immediately to determine if existing dry docks can be modified (e.g., constructing flood barriers and embankments, augmenting existing dry dock drain systems, extending the height of caissons) to accommodate higher sea levels, or if new dry docks must be constructed.\u00a0 Given the long-term construction and use of capital investments at naval shipyards, it would be prudent to begin this effort before waters rise too much higher.<\/p>\n The risk posed to dry docks by rising sea levels also begs an additional important question: What other shoreline naval infrastructure is at risk of sinking in the next hundred years? (770)<\/p>\n Citations:<\/p>\n [1] Fred R. Shapiro, The Yale Book of Quotations<\/em> (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006), Section John A. Shedd, p. 705.<\/p>\n [2] \u201cUS Naval Shipyards: Supporting the Fleet Today and Preparing for the Future\u201d, Undersea Warfare <\/em>52 (Fall 2013): 4-13.<\/p>\n [3] US Naval Supply System, \u201cNaval Supply Chain Management,\u201d https:\/\/www.navsup.navy.mil\/ public\/navsup\/wss\/nscm, accessed November 2017.<\/p>\n [4] Union of Concerned Scientists, \u201cOn the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Maine\u201d, http:\/\/www.ucsusa.org\/global-warming\/global-warming-impacts\/sea-level-rise-flooding-portsmouth-naval-shipyard-maine#.WgtBDrQ-fld, accessed November 2017<\/p>\n [5] National Geographic, \u201cWho\u2019s Still Fighting Climate Change? The U.S. Military\u201d, https:\/\/news.nationalgeographic.com\/2017\/02\/pentagon-fights-climate-change-sea-level-rise-defense-department-military, accessed November 2017.<\/p>\n [6] US Naval Sea Systems Command: Norfolk Naval Shipyard, \u201c250 Years of Excellence\u201d, http:\/\/www.navsea.navy.mil\/Home\/Shipyards\/Norfolk\/About-Us\/History\/, accessed November 2017<\/p>\n [7] LT Sean Getway, USN; \u201d80-Year-Old Drydocks Don\u2019t Cut It\u201d, US Naval Institute: Proceedings<\/em> Vol. 143\/6\/1,372 (June 2017)<\/p>\n [8] Reinhardt, Forest L. and Toffel, Michael W., \u201cManaging Climate Change: Lessons from the U.S. Navy\u201d, 性视界 Business Review <\/em>(July-August 2017 issue): 102-111.<\/p>\n [9] Copp, Tara, \u201cPentagon is still preparing for global warming even though Trump said to stop\u201d, https:\/\/www.militarytimes.com\/news\/your-military\/2017\/09\/12\/pentagon-is-still-preparing-for-global-warming-even-though-trump-said-to-stop, accessed November 2017<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Difference of a Few Degrees on Shipbuilding in the US Navy<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10044,"featured_media":23616,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","categories":[1218,1701,1409,3351],"class_list":["post-23615","hck-submission","type-hck-submission","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-climate-change","category-defense","category-infrastructure","category-us-navy","hck-taxonomy-organization-us-navy","hck-taxonomy-industry-public-administration","hck-taxonomy-country-united-states"],"connected_submission_link":"https:\/\/d3.harvard.edu\/platform-rctom\/assignment\/rc-tom-challenge-2017\/","yoast_head":"\n