dw.com
Ground Subsidence Threatens Major US Cities
A study by Columbia Climate School finds that groundwater extraction, geological processes, and building weight are causing 25 of the 28 largest U.S. cities to sink at varying rates, affecting over 34 million people and potentially damaging infrastructure.
- How do varying subsidence rates across a single city affect infrastructure, and what role does the weight of buildings play?
- The study, using satellite data, shows varying subsidence rates across cities, with Houston experiencing the fastest sinking. Uneven sinking, where some areas sink faster than others, poses a significant risk to buildings and infrastructure. The weight of buildings also contributes to the problem.
- What are the long-term implications of uneven land subsidence for urban planning and infrastructure management in the affected cities?
- Continued population growth, increased water usage, and droughts will likely worsen the situation. The differential movement of land, where some areas rise while others sink, introduces additional stress on infrastructure, particularly in dense urban cores where approximately 29,000 buildings are at risk. Long-term impacts could include costly repairs and infrastructure failures.
- What are the primary causes of land subsidence in major U.S. cities, and what is the immediate impact on populations and infrastructure?
- A new study reveals that 25 out of 28 of the most populous U.S. cities are sinking, affecting over 34 million people. Ground subsidence is primarily caused by groundwater extraction (80%), exacerbated in Texas by oil and gas pumping. This uneven sinking creates stress on infrastructure.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the negative consequences of urban land subsidence, highlighting the potential risks to infrastructure and the large number of people affected. The headline and opening sentences immediately establish a sense of urgency and concern. While this is understandable given the nature of the study, a more balanced framing could include a section on existing solutions or ongoing research to address the problem, thus avoiding an overly alarmist tone.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral and factual, relying on data and expert quotes. Words like "hunden" (sink) are used descriptively, accurately reflecting the scientific findings. The use of terms like "agrava" (worsens) might be considered slightly loaded, but it is consistent with the gravity of the situation described in the research.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the sinking of US cities due to human activities and natural processes. While it mentions the contribution of natural forces like post-glacial rebound and the weight of buildings, it doesn't delve deeply into the specifics of these factors or explore potential mitigation strategies related to them. Further investigation into the geological specifics of each city and potential technological solutions would provide a more complete picture. The article also omits discussion of government responses and policies aimed at addressing land subsidence.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights land subsidence in major US cities, impacting infrastructure and potentially causing damage to buildings and other structures. This directly relates to SDG 11, which aims to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable. The sinking of cities threatens the safety and resilience of urban areas, impacting the lives of millions.