Cleveland’s Climate Potential

With natural disasters on the rise, environmentalists are searching for cities to serve as a haven in cases of extreme migration due to the climate crisis. Could Cleveland become a climate haven in the near future?

Written by Ava Brennan

From detrimental hurricanes in the Southeast to raging wildfires in the West, the United States faces a multitude of natural disasters each year, displacing people from their homes and even wiping out communities. Unfortunately, natural disasters and climate crises only grow with each year, increasing fear and instability in the inhabitants of the disaster-prone areas.

There has been news circulating on social media platforms this past year, hinting at the possibility of Cleveland becoming a climate haven. A climate haven refers to a city or region that offers safety from climate disasters and has the ability to sustain an influx of residents if climate crises increase. Although the idea may seem promising, some sources shut down this possibility. 

John Van Stan, Ph.D., an environmental science professor at Cleveland State University, expressed his opinion on the possibilities and restrictions of Cleveland being a climate haven in the near future. 

“People look at the Great Lakes and say ‘up there we are safe from most of those big impact events’ because the disasters don’t typically reach that region of physical geography,” he said. “We also have an enormous portion of fresh water. So I think that’s why Cleveland is considered for [a climate haven.]” 

The fresh water security provided by Great Lakes and isolation from natural disasters is what puts Cleveland in the spotlight for a potential safe environment. The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) is an Environmental Protection Agency agreement that protects the lakes and prioritizes improving water quality. Under this act, a great sense of security comes with Cleveland and other regions near the Great Lakes to sustain a larger population, as far as water abundance.

However, Cleveland has some environmental flaws that could be considered setbacks. 

Van Stan believes there are two main obstacles for Cleveland being a proper climate haven presently. 

“In general, the air quality is still not good here. We have a legacy of industrial productivity that is a key part of Cleveland’s economy, which emits pollution,” Van Stan said. “We also receive a lot of airflow from other industrial cities.” 

Cleveland has some of the highest rates of asthma in the country, and pollution plays a huge part in this startling statistic. The amount of pollution due to industrial causes is something that state or national law would have to regulate and focus on to improve the situation.

Although large natural disasters do not seem to harm Cleveland directly, effects of climate change and disasters are still visible in our air quality. 

“We receive impacts of smoke from the wildfires in Canada and the west. We get fine particulate matter in our area which is dangerous because it's small enough to penetrate into the lungs,” he said. “This affects our summer air quality especially.” 

These factors of negative air quality may seem unchangeable for the time being by the general public, however, there are other ways civilians can choose to not further contribute to the cities already poor quality. 

 “We put a lot of our own air pollution into the air with our travels. The community of Cleveland does not use public transportation as much as it could,” Van Stan said. 

Further development in public transportation, like the RTA, can positively contribute to Clevelanders choosing the environmentally sound option, rather than driving their car. 

Van Stan shares that although Cleveland could potentially be environmentally sound to sustain a higher population, several infrastructural changes would need to take place before Cleveland could be a proper “climate haven.”

“It's going to require Cleveland to start making strategic decisions that will ensure that the city can realize this potential,” Van Stan shared. “Making sure that urban planning favors environmentally sustainable goals, like making green spaces.” 

Economically, these changes are difficult to pursue from an urban planning viewpoint. For urban planners and city officials to see these environmental changes as a priority, some type of natural disaster may have to occur first. 

“A building and a city block is going to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars no matter how much we value the trees. It's hard to show a city planner that a park is worth hundreds of millions of dollars in jobs,” Van Stan said. 

With the seemingly ever growing natural disasters and crisis, there is no telling if some type of “tipping point” would be reached to prompt the prioritization of proper steps needed to eventually sustain an influx in population. The idea of Cleveland becoming a climate haven sometime in the future is still very viable, yet several proper environmentally sound infrastructural changes would have to take precedence over economic priorities.