Louisiana’s Coastal Science: A Tale of Money, Data and Politics

The state has poured more than $21 billion into a plan that aims to protect its shoreline. That money has funded research and engineering work that ranks among the world’s best in understanding how to save coastlines from erosion, sea‑level rise and industrial damage. Yet the people who should use this knowledge are often ignoring it or even working against it. Governors and lawmakers, claiming to hunt wasteful spending, have failed to act on the very studies they funded. A recent global study found that sea levels are higher than previously thought—by as much as a foot in some places. This means communities could be at risk sooner than expected, prompting many governments to seek emergency adaptation funds. Louisiana’s coastal scientists were not alarmed because the new numbers largely stem from earlier overestimates in poorer regions, not from a real increase in ocean height. Louisiana’s own measurements are the most accurate worldwide.The Coastwide Reference Monitoring System, operating for 20 years with nearly 400 stations, tracks elevation and subsidence along the coast. No other place has such a detailed record. A Tulane professor said the data is unmatched, and even European colleagues admire it. When Louisiana’s scientists combine this data with peer‑reviewed research on accelerated sea‑level rise, they produce the most precise roadmap for protecting communities along the state’s economically vital coast. Their findings show that fossil‑fuel emissions are pushing sea levels up fast enough to flood large areas below I‑10 in the coming decades. The logical step would be to reduce oil, gas and coal use—an approach many states and countries are adopting. But the governor, who has long denied climate change, opposes reforms that could hurt the oil and gas industry. He also killed river‑sediment diversions, a strategy proven by science to sustain the coast in the long run. This leader has spent $100 million on an LSU coaching error but seems willing to discard the results of a $21 billion investment in coastal science—because it threatens the profits he champions.