Originally published as a Real Clear Energy op-ed, January 2025
Natural disasters are projected to cost the U.S. nearly $40 billion annually by 2075, highlighting the escalating financial burden of climate-driven disasters. The mounting devastation caused by these extreme events underscores a sobering reality: inaction on current and future construction will only deepen the economic and human toll.
The Trump administration and new Congress must act decisively to protect the economy’s stability and our communities’ safety. At the MIT Concrete Sustainability Hub, we advance research and develop tools that empower stakeholders—policymakers, insurance companies, code officials, and developers—to enhance building strength and durability by integrating materials science, structural engineering, and economic modeling. We propose enforcing updated building and infrastructure codes, prioritizing the use of stronger materials, and instituting tax incentives to encourage stronger construction.
Since the 1980s, annual post-disaster recovery costs have quadrupled, driven by the increased number of assets in harm’s way and greater vulnerability to increasingly intense hazards. Increasingly frequent and severe natural disasters have made parts of the U.S. essentially uninsurable, posing a mounting issue for homeowners and all levels of government as private insurers exit the market.
As the Trump administration seeks to ensure the efficient use of taxpayer dollars, now is the time to prioritize a wise investment that saves money in the long run: Stronger construction—buildings and infrastructure systems that withstand natural disasters, save homes, lives, and communities, and reduce future disaster expenses. The Trump administration and the new Congress must enable stronger construction across the country with market-driven approaches that achieve long-term savings.
We can start by reimagining how buildings and infrastructure are built. Currently, the structural codes—the minimum construction standards mandated by governments—do not sufficiently address the required strength for buildings and infrastructure located in hazard-prone regions. We’ve found that urban areas with uniformly arranged buildings face wind speeds up to 50 percent higher than current models predict and codes require. It is important to consider the configuration of urban settings when designing buildings and estimating the climate loads. Updating codes to reflect standards like ASCE 7-22, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, and account for wind load direction and building arrangements is a cost-effective step to reduce risks to people and property.
However, we’ll need more than just updated codes to build stronger. Another proactive way to reduce disaster impacts is by choosing building materials suited to local hazards. Innovations in concrete deliver high-performance or self-healing functions, positioning it as an essential material for risk-mitigating construction and retrofit. Repurposing industrial by-products enhances concrete durability and fire resistance in hazard-prone regions. As our buildings and infrastructure systems better withstand natural disasters, they will be more insurable and require less assistance from the federal government down the road. Investing in these innovations means that funds will be more precisely directed to where they are most needed, benefiting as many people as possible.
Along with updating codes and adopting stronger materials, we must provide clear signals to encourage the widespread adoption of stronger construction. Creating targeted incentives—such as tax credits, low-interest loans, or grants—encourages the use of stronger building techniques and materials. Congress took a promising step by introducing the Disaster Savings and Resilient Construction Act of 2021, which proposed a tax credit for buildings designed to withstand disasters. The groundwork has been laid for future efforts to promote resilience and safeguard communities. Similar incentives should be strongly supported and implemented through bipartisan efforts to promote rebuilding or retrofitting to higher standards after natural disasters.
The catastrophic events of the past year—like wildfires in California and hurricanes with extreme flooding in the Southeast—highlight the immense losses we incur due to a lack of foresight and proactive planning. Investing in disaster resilience is more than a social responsibility or moral imperative; it’s a prudent fiscal strategy that saves homes and lives, protects taxpayers, and generates long-term savings for the federal government and insurance companies.
Building and infrastructure stakeholders, including policymakers, insurance companies, code officials, and developers, should take advantage of the opportunity to lead by example: incentivizing stronger construction as a cost-effective approach to disaster preparedness. Current policies for disaster response prioritize repair and recovery over long-term solutions, burdening taxpayers and straining government budgets.
By building stronger and investing in resilience, the Trump administration and Congress can cut long-term disaster recovery costs while safeguarding communities against disaster.