The Mississippi River Delta Cycle and Coastal Restoration

 

Click here – Video of a presentation by Prof. Edward Richards to the LSU Mineral Law Institute on the delta cycle and the coastal erosion lawsuit. (1.3gb file – works best if you download it before playing. Otherwise it will take up to 5 minutes to buffer before playing.)

Classic reports on the Geology of the Mississippi River and Delta

Humphreys, A. A., & Abbot, H. L. (1861). Report upon the physics and hydraulics of the Mississippi river: Upon the protection of the alluvial region against overflow; and upon the deepening of the mouths … Submitted to the Bureau of Topographical Engineers, War Department, 1861. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co.

Fisk, H.N., 1944, Geological investigation of the alluvial valley of the lower Mississippi River: U.S. Department of the Army, Mississippi River Commission, 78p.

Fisk, Harold Norman. Geological investigation of the Atchafalaya Basin and the problem of Mississippi River diversion. Waterways Experiment Station, 1952.

Kazmann, Raphael Gabriel, and David B Johnson. “If the Old River Control Structure Fails?” (1980).

Saucier, R. T., 1994, Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley: U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Surging Seas – Flood risks with climate change on the US coast

http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/

Excellent site for illustrating the current and future risk of sea level rise. It is also useful for showing what lower levees of hurricane storm tides would look like in a community, at least up to 10 feet.

Forest-Climate Working Group 2014 Policy Recommendations

Using private forests to mitigate climate change.

Forest-Climate Working Group 2014 Policy Recommendations

Pew Annual Report on Clean Energy Investment – 2013

Who’s Winning the Clean Energy Race? 2013 Edition

Overview
For the past five years, Pew has tracked investment and finance trends in the world’s leading economies. Over that period, the clean energy industry has been buffeted by a global recession, broad changes in energy markets, and uncertainty surrounding international policies on clean energy and climate change. Despite these challenges, the clean energy sector is now an annual $250 billion component of the world economy.1
Although global clean energy investment in renewable sources, biofuels, smart energy, and energy storage fell 11 percent in 2013, to $254 billion, a number of developments indicate a promising future for clean energy. First, the prices of leading technologies such as wind and solar have dropped steadily for decades; they are increasingly competitive with century-old and more financially volatile conventional power sources. Second, clean energy manufacturers are moving forward and have effectively weathered withering competitive pressures, consolidations, and policy changes. Investor confidence about the long-term future of renewable energy was reinforced in clean energy stock indexes in 2013, which rose sharply over the year. Third, markets in fast-growing, developing countries are prospering; these economies see distributed generation as an opportunity to avoid investments in costly transmission systems, comparable to the deployment of cellphones instead of costly landline infrastructure. Even in the contracting markets of Europe and the Americas, which have affected the overall industry, policymakers are recalibrating rather than abandoning clean energy policies

- See more at: http://www.pewenvironment.org/news-room/reports/whos-winning-the-clean-energy-race-2013-85899542979#sthash.3cjWPKdy.dpuf

Court rejects EPA Water Transfers Rule

Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A.

An excellent review of the Water Transfers Rule.

Gulf Coast Tsunamis – NOAA

Gulf Coast Tsunamis: What you need to know.

If you thought sinking land and rising seas were the only things we had to worry about in south Louisiana, think again.

Tsunamis have now joined the list.

Researchers with the National Weather Service say a 15-foot wall of water could roll across Grand Isle if a landslide occurred in the Mississippi Canyon, a trench in the Gulf of Mexico floor about 30 miles off the mouth of the Mississippi River.

Read more…

Caernarvon Freshwater Diversion

Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA), Modification of Caernarvon Freshwater Diversion Feasibility Study December 2009.

A Post-Katrina Assessment of the “Freshwater Diversion to Lake Pontchartrain Basin and Mississippi Sound”

Analysis of Fisheries-Independent Data for Evaluation of Species Distribution Responses to the Caernarvon Freshwater Diversion

Assessing the Effectiveness of Louisiana’s Freshwater Diversion Projects Using Remote Sensing

The Effect of the Caernarvon Diversion on Hurricane Driven Land Loss

The Impact Of The Caernarvon Diversion On Above- And Belowground Marsh Biomass In The Breton Sound Estuary After Hurricane Katrina (from the pro-diversion camp)

Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation

Geomorphology and Baldcypress Restoration of the Caernarvon Delta near the Caernarvon Diversion, Southeast Louisiana 2011 Report

2011 Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring Report for Caernarvon Diversion Outfall Management (BS-03a)

State of the Science Regarding River Diversions

 

Caernarvon Freshwater Diversion Annual Reports

Recent Hurricane Research – Climate, Dynamics, and Societal Impacts

Recent Hurricane Research – Climate, Dynamics, and Societal Impacts

Advances in Hurricane Research – Modelling, Meteorology, Preparedness and Impacts

Advances in Hurricane Research – Modelling, Meteorology, Preparedness and Impacts

Louisiana State-wide Perspective on Water Resources and Salt Water Intrusion

Louisiana State-wide Perspective on Water Resources. Prepared for: Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Public Works and Water Resources Division April 2010. - Good discussion of freshwater resources in Louisiana.

Heywood, C.E., and Griffith, J.M., 2013, Simulation of groundwater flow in the “1,500-foot” sand and “2,000-foot” sand and movement of saltwater in the “2,000-foot” sand of the Baton Rouge area, Louisiana: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013-1153, 79 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1153/. - Saltwater intrusion in the Baton Rouge area.

Managing Louisiana’s Groundwater Resources with Supplemental Information on Surface Water Resources. An Interim Report to the Louisiana Legislature Published March 15, 2012.

Environment and Conservation – East Baton Rouge Parish.  - Discusses saltwater intrusion.

Sources Of Salinization of the Baton Rouge Aquifer System: Southeastern Louisiana

Capital Area Groundwater Conservation District

Chamberlain, Elizabeth L, Jeffrey S Hanor, and Frank T-C Tsai. 2013. “Sequence Stratigraphic Characterization of the Baton Rouge Aquifer System, Southeastern Louisiana.” http://archives.datapages.com/data/gcags/data/063/063001/125_gcags630125.htm.

 

An Historical and Topographical Description of Louisiana and West-Florida – 1784

Hutchins, Thomas. An Historical Narrative and Topographical Description of Louisiana, and West-Florida Comprehending the River Mississippi with Its Principal Branches and Settlements, and the Rivers Pearl, Pascagoula, Mobille, Perdido, Escambia, Chacta-Hatcha, &C. : The Climate, Soil, and Produce Whether Animal, Vegetable, or Mineral : with Directions for Sailing into All the Bays, Lakes, Harbours and Rivers on the North Side of the Gulf of Mexico, and for Navigating between the Islands Situated Along That Coast, and Ascending the Mississippi River. Philadelphia: Printed for the author, and sold by Robert Aitken, near the Coffee-House, in Market-Street, 1784.

Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit Process

Corps permits are also necessary for any work, including construction and dredging, in the Nation’s navigable waters. The Corps balances the reasonably foreseeable benefits and detriments of proposed projects, and makes permit decisions that recognize the essential values of the Nation’s aquatic ecosystems to the general public, as well as the property rights of private citizens who want to use their land. During the permit process, the Corps considers the views of other Federal, state and local agencies, interest groups, and the general public. The results of this careful public interest review are fair and equitable decisions that allow reasonable use of private property, infrastructure development, and growth of the economy, while offsetting the authorized impacts to the waters of the US. The adverse impacts to the aquatic environment are offset by mitigation requirements, which may include restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving aquatic functions and values. The Corps strives to make its permit decisions in a timely manner that minimizes impacts to the regulated public.

The original link.

Articles

What Wetlands Are Regulated? Jurisdiction of the §404 Program

A Citizen’s Guide to the Corps of Engineers: The Regulatory Program Clean Water Act Section 404 Permits

 

Corps solicits comments on mid-Barataria diversion

Solicitation for comments – mid-Barataria diversion

Expert Panel On Diversion Planning Report 1

Expert Panel On Diversion Planning Report 1 - PowerPoint Slides from the Presentation

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The first meeting of the Expert Panel on Diversion Planning and Implementation focused on uncertainty and the ways in which scientific and engineering uncertainty could be understood and reduced to the maximum extent possible. Discussions centered around six themes: (1) the importance of data, (2) the absence of analogs, (3) uncertainty in ecological outcomes, (4) uncertainty in social and economic outcomes, (5) design and operational uncertainties, and (6) framing expectations in light of uncertainties. Panel recommendations covered methods by which biophysical data should be collected and disseminated, social data that should be incorporated and linked to biophysical data, models that should be developed and used as an ensemble, coordination and communication that should be undertaken, and types of additional simulations and experiments that should be conducted.

The Louisiana Coastal Restoration Authority then said it would be going forward, seemingly in the face of this report:

http://www.nola.com/environment/index.ssf/2014/02/louisiana_coastal_authority_ap.html#incart_flyout_

 

FEMA – Disaster Operations Legal Reference 2013

The Second Edition of the Disaster Operations Legal Reference (DOLR 2.0) describes the legal authorities for FEMA’s readiness, response, and recovery activities. It supersedes DOLR 1.0 issued in November 2011. Because this reference is not exhaustive, the legal authorities are subject to modification and change, and the specific facts surrounding an issue may change the legal analysis, use of the information contained here should be verified with the FEMA Office of Chief Counsel before becoming the basis for a final decision by the Agency.

June 2013FEMA – Disaster Operations Legal Reference 2013

EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS – Limiting Federal Fiscal Exposure

EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS: Limiting Federal Fiscal Exposure and Increasing the Nation’s Resilience GAO-14-364T: Published: Feb 12, 2014. Publicly Released: Feb 12, 2014.

What GAO Found

The federal government has opportunities to limit its exposure and increase the nation’s resilience to extreme weather events. Since 1980, the U.S. has experienced 151 weather disasters with damages exceeding 1 billion dollars each. This testimony focuses on 4 areas where the government could limit its fiscal exposure.

  • Property and crop insurance. The financial risks from two federal insurance programs—the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC)—create a significant fiscal exposure. In 2012, the NFIP had property coverage of over $1.2 trillion and the FCIC had crop coverage of almost $120 billion. As of December 2013, FEMA’s debt from flood insurance payments totaled about $24 billion. For various reasons, FCIC’s costs more than doubled from $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2001 to $7.6 billion in fiscal year 2012. In 2007, GAO found that the agencies responsible for these programs needed to develop information on their long-term exposure to climate change. The Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 requires FEMA to use information on future changes in sea levels and other factors in updating flood maps used to set insurance rates. Private insurers are also studying how to include climate change in rate setting. GAO is currently examining the extent to which private and federal insurance programs address risks from climate change.
  • Disaster aid. The federal government does not fully budget for recovery activities after major disasters, thus creating a large fiscal exposure. GAO reported in 2012 that disaster declarations have increased to a record 98 in fiscal year 2011 compared with 65 in 2004. Over that period, FEMA obligated over $80 billion for disaster aid. GAO’s past work recommended that FEMA address the federal fiscal exposure from disaster assistance.
  • Owner and operator of infrastructure. The federal government owns and operates hundreds of thousands of facilities that a changing climate could affect. For example, in its 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, the Department of Defense (DOD) recognized the risk to its facilities posed by climate change, noting that the department must assess the potential impacts and adapt. GAO plans to report later this year on DOD’s management of climate change risks at over 500,000 defense facilities.
  • Provider of technical assistance to state and local governments. The federal government invests billions of dollars annually in infrastructure projects that state and local governments prioritize, such as roads and bridges. Total public spending on transportation and water infrastructure exceeds $300 billion annually, with about 25 percent coming from the federal government and the rest from state and local governments. GAO’s April 2013 report on infrastructure adaptation concluded that the federal government could help state and local efforts to increase their resilience by (1) improving access to and use of available climate-related information, (2) providing officials with improved access to local assistance, and (3) helping officials consider climate change in their planning processes.

Why GAO Did This Study

According to the United States Global Change Research Program, the costs and impacts of weather disasters resulting from floods, drought, and other events are expected to increase in significance as previously “rare” events become more common and intense. These impacts pose financial risks to the federal government. While it is not possible to link any individual weather event to climate change, these events provide insight into the potential climate-related vulnerabilities the United States faces.

GAO focuses particular attention on government operations it identifies as posing a “high risk” to the American taxpayer and, in February 2013, added to its High Risk List the area Limiting the Federal Government’s Fiscal Exposure by Better Managing Climate Change Risks . GAO’s past work identified a variety of fiscal exposures—responsibilities, programs, and activities that may either legally commit the federal government to future spending or create the expectation for future spending in response to extreme weather events. This testimony is based on reports GAO issued from March 2007 to November 2013 that address these issues.

GAO is not making new recommendations but made numerous recommendations in prior reports on these topics, which are in varying states of implementation by the Executive Office of the President and relevant federal agencies.

For more information, contact Mark Gaffigan at (202) 512-3841 or gaffiganm@gao.gov.

Coastal Zone Management Resources

Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program Coastal Resources Management Plan - Rhode Island’s Coastal Program - The Enabling Act

NOAA Coastal Zone Management Resources

States

 

 

Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico – EIS Resources

Review Plan for the Post Authorization Change Decision Document of the Mississippi River and Tributaries, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico Hurricane Protection Project, LA – 2011

REVISED PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana – May 2013

Final Independent External Peer Review Report for the Mississippi River and Tributaries, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico Hurricane Protection Project, Louisiana – Post Authorization Change Decision Document – March 5, 2013

Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana Post Authorization Change Report and Revised Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement USACE Response to Independent External Peer Review Revised 17 June 2013

FLOOD INSURANCE – Strategies for Increasing Private Sector Involvement

FLOOD INSURANCE Strategies for Increasing Private Sector Involvement

What GAO Found

According to stakeholders with whom GAO spoke, several conditions must be present to increase private sector involvement in the sale of flood insurance. First, insurers need to be able to accurately assess risk to determine premium rates. For example, stakeholders told GAO that access to National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policy and claims data and upcoming improvements in private sector computer modeling could enable them to better assess risk. Second, insurers need to be able to charge premium rates that reflect the full estimated risk of potential flood losses while still allowing the companies to make a profit, as well as be able to decide which applicants they will insure. However, stakeholders said that such rates might seem unaffordable to many homeowners. Third, insurers need sufficient consumer participation to properly manage and diversify their risk, but stakeholders said that many property owners do not buy flood insurance because they may have an inaccurate perception of their risk of flooding.

Stakeholders identified several strategies that could help create conditions that would promote the sale of flood insurance by the private sector. For example,

  • NFIP charging full-risk rates. Congress could eliminate subsidized rates, charge all policyholders full-risk rates, and appropriate funding for a direct means-based subsidy to some policyholders. Stakeholders said full-risk NFIP rates would encourage private sector participation because they would be much closer to the rates private insurers would need to charge. The explicit subsidy would address affordability concerns, increase transparency, and reduce taxpayer costs depending on the extent and amount of the subsidy. The Biggert-Waters Act eliminates some subsidized rates, but some have proposed delaying these rate increases. Doing so could address affordability concerns, but would also delay addressing NFIP’s burden on taxpayers.
  • NFIP providing residual insurance. The federal government could also encourage private sector involvement by providing coverage for the highest-risk properties that the private sector is unwilling to insure. Providing residual coverage could increase the program’s exposure relative to the number of properties it insured, but NFIP would be insuring fewer properties, and charging adequate rates could reduce taxpayer costs.
  • NFIP as reinsurer. Alternatively, the federal government could serve as a reinsurer, charging a premium for assuming the risk of catastrophic losses. However, the cost of reinsurance premiums would likely be passed on to consumers, with higher rates potentially decreasing consumer participation.

Stakeholders identified other strategies including mandatory coverage requirements to ensure broad participation, NFIP purchasing reinsurance from the private sector rather than borrowing from the U.S. Treasury, and NFIP issuing catastrophe bonds to transfer risk to private investors. As the private sector increases its role in providing flood coverage, the federal government could collaborate with state and local governments to focus on other important roles, including promoting risk awareness among consumers, encouraging mitigation, enforcing building codes, overseeing land use agreements, and streamlining insurance regulations.

GAO – Making the Clean Water Act Work

CLEAN WATER ACT – Changes Needed If Key EPA Program Is to Help Fulfill the Nation’s Water Quality Goals, GAO-14-80

What GAO Found

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states each have responsibilities for developing and implementing pollution targets, known as total maximum daily loads (TMDL). EPA oversees states’ TMDL efforts by establishing in regulations minimum requirements TMDLs need for approval, providing funding, and furnishing technical assistance. States develop TMDLs and generally take the lead in implementing them by identifying pollutants that impair water quality and taking actions to reduce them.

Of about 50,000 TMDLs developed and approved, nearly 35,000 were approved more than 5 years ago, long enough for GAO to consider them long established. State officials GAO surveyed in its representative sample of 191 TMDLs reported that pollutants had been reduced in many waters, but few impaired water bodies have fully attained water quality standards.

The sample of 25 TMDLs reviewed by water resource experts GAO contacted seldom contained all features key to attaining water quality standards. According to the National Research Council and EPA, these features—some that are beyond the scope of EPA’s existing regulations—include identifying pollution-causing stressors and showing how addressing them would help attain such standards; specifying how and by whom TMDLs will be implemented; and ensuring periodic revisions as needed. The experts found, however, that 17 of 25 long-established TMDLs they reviewed did not show that addressing identified stressors would help attain water quality standards; 12 contained vague or no information on actions that need to be taken, or by whom, for implementation; and 15 did not contain features to help ensure that TMDLs are revised if need be. GAO’s review showed that EPA’s existing regulations do not explicitly require TMDLs to include these key features, and without such features in TMDLs—or in addition to TMDLs—impaired water bodies are unlikely to attain standards.

In response to GAO’s survey, state officials reported that long-established TMDLs generally do not exhibit factors most helpful for attaining water quality standards, particularly for nonpoint source pollution (e.g., farms and storm water runoff). The officials reported that landowner participation and adequate funding—factors they viewed as among the most helpful in implementing TMDLs—were not present in the implementation activities of at least two-thirds of long-established TMDLs, particularly those of nonpoint source TMDLs. Because the Clean Water Act addresses nonpoint source pollution largely through voluntary means, EPA does not have direct authority to compel landowners to take prescribed actions to reduce such pollution. In GAO’s survey, state officials knowledgeable about TMDLs reported that 83 percent of TMDLs have achieved their targets for point source pollution (e.g., factories) through permits but that 20 percent achieved their targets for nonpoint source pollution. In 1987, when the act was amended to cover such pollution, some Members of Congress indicated that this provision was a starting point, to be changed if reliance on voluntary approaches did not significantly improve water quality. More than 40 years after Congress passed the Clean Water Act, however, EPA reported that many of the nation’s waters are still impaired, and the goals of the act are not being met. Without changes to the act’s approach to nonpoint source pollution, the act’s goals are likely to remain unfulfilled.

NEPA Resources

The National Park Service NEPA Guide

This is an excellent and fairly detailed review of the law aimed at non-lawyers.

Introduction to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the CEQ Regulations – PowerPoint

US Forest Service NEPA resource page

 EPA NEPA Resources

Army Corps of Engineers Emergency Procedures for EIS reports for New Orleans Levees post-Katrina

USACE NEPA Questions & Answers

USACE Alternative Arrangements NEPA Process

USACE Alternative Arrangements NEPA Process Appendix

Articles

Rediscovering the national environmental Policy act:  Back to the Future

Ezekiel J. Williams & Kathy Schaeffer, “What Every Land Professional Should Know About NEPA,” 53 Rocky Mt. Min. L. Inst. 4-1 (2007) - an excellent introduction with oil and gas examples. (used with permission of the author)

Houck O., The US House of Representatives’ Task Force on NEPA: The Professors Speak. ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER NEWS AND ANALYSIS. 2005;35(12):10895.

NEPA/HEPA LITIGATION CHECKLIST – Elijah Yip, Esq. CADES SCHUTTE LLP August 27, 2007.

 

Why Coastal Restoration Cannot Succeed

This  article goes to the heart of the problem. Sea level rise pushes the wetlands inland. If you have barriers, the wetlands drown. The only thing the coastal restoration folks care about is building levees, but if they only push for levees, the environmentalists will kill the projects. Thus the myth of coastal restoration had to be created – the idea that you could build wetlands in front of the levees so there would be wetlands left after you build the levees. The related myth is the myth of coastal erosion. Erosion implies you can put the dirt back There is very little erosion. Pretty much all of the land is still there, it is just covered with water. The drivers of this inundation are subsidence (with faulting just being one contributor) and sea level rise.

The key to understanding the problem is recognizing that the narrow strip between the dry land and the water – the intertidal zone where the wetlands live – is not the delta. The delta is the mountain of land built up over hundreds of millions of years and extending upriver for about 200 miles and out into the gulf to the edge of the continental shelf. That delta is always building, it is even building now. But the location of the intertidal zone is not determined by moment to moment sediment, but by relative sea level. The intertidal zone has been in about the same place for the last 5-6k years because sea level has been pretty constant. Even during that period, the river moves and lobes come and go, with the same basic area, as plants and sediment build up and then subside away locally. Look at the Chandeleur Islands. Those are not barrier islands, they are old edge of the coast. The land between them and the current coast was mostly lost long before there were dams and levees on the river.

Sea level has risen 8 inches in the last 100 years. That is really fast in geologic terms. Combined with subsidence, that completely accounts for the land loss – it has just be drowned. Look at those trees in open water, when they were seedlings, that was not open water. But if the land were eroding, the trees would fall over. Sea level will continue to rise and the rate will likely increase, and subsidence will continue. Just as in every past period of sea level rise, the intertidal zone will migrate inland, at least until it hits a levee. Piling up sand and dirt at the edges with diversions and dredges will make no difference. Look at the elevation map and the flooding from Isaac – the inland areas are sinking below sea level. To have a coast, you have to land behind it that is higher than sea level. When people point to the Dutch, they forget three things.

1)  The Dutch destroyed all their coastal wetlands a long time ago.

2)  The Dutch do not get hurricanes – their 10,000 storm would be a small hurricane.

3)  The Dutch do not have anywhere else to go, so they spend several % of their GDP on levees and just accept the environmental damage.

But for the subsidies from the National Flood Insurance Program, and the federal government making disasters good business, LA would have faced these realities long ago and would have been moving away from the coast since Betsy. Sadly, the likely course will be levees and diversions to destroy the wetlands, and then it will all get swept away because you really cannot hold back the ocean in the long term. All of this coastal restoration is very short term. The only question is whether ocean rise is high enough to wipe out the coast by 2100. There is no question that it will do it by 2200. The real question is whether we just wait for the disasters or whether we try to move inland in an orderly way and preserve some of the culture.

Assuming that NO is lucky and dodges hurricanes for another 40 years, the commercial insurance market, which is not subsidized by the feds, will slowly price most businesses out of the city and continue its economic death spiral. The only thing propping up the economy now is residual federal Katrina spending and debt financed projects like the hospital construction. When that is complete, the cost of paying the bonds will be joined by the huge operating loss of the facility.

Louisiana Coastal Restoration Plan – 2015 Draft

Integrated Ecosystem Restoration and Hurricane Protection in Coastal Louisiana – 2015 Draft

 

Original Link

Historical Narrative And Topographical Description of Louisiana And West-Florida – 1784

The delta has been changing since long before dams and levees. Thomas Hutchins (1730-1789) writes in 1784 at page 25:

Below New Orleans the land begins to be very low on both sides of the river across the country, and gradually declines as it approaches nearer to the sea. This point of land which in the treaty of peace in 1762, is mistaken for an island, is to all appearance of no long date; for in digging ever so little below the surface, you find water and great quantities of trees. The many beaches and breakers, as well as inlets, which arose out of the channel within the last half century, at the several mouths of the river, are convincing proofs that this peninsula was wholly formed in the same manner. And it is certain that when La Salle sailed down the Mississippi to the sea, the opening of that river was very different from what it is at present.

Historical Narrative And Topographical Description of Louisiana And West-Florida – 1784

An HISTORICAL NARRATIVE and TOPOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION of LOUISIANA, and WEST-FLORIDA, comprehending the RIVER MISSISSIPPI with its Principal Branches and Settlements, and the RIVERS PEARL, PASCAGOULA, MOBILE, PERDIDO, ESCAMBIA, CHACTAHATCHA, &c. , the CLIMATE, SOIL, and PRODUCE whether ANIMAL, VEGETABLE, or MINERAL, with directions for Sailing into all the Bays, Lakes, Harbours and Rivers on the North Side of the Gulf of Mexico, and for Navigating between the islands situated along that Coast, and ascending the Mississippi River, By THOMAS HUTCHINS, GEOGRAPHER TO THE UNITED STATES, PHILADELPHIA: printed for the author, and, sold by Robert Aitken, near the coffee-house, in Market-street.  M.DCC.LXXXIV.

 

West Bay Diversion and Shoaling

WestBayrGeomorphicAssessment1DModeling

Charles D. Little, Mississippi River Geomorphology & West Bay Diversion

chetn-vii-9
Andrus_thesis
WestBayDiversion ERDC Draft Report 25 Nov 2009
45930901
west bay presentation_Introduction

Coastal Protection and Restoration in Jean Lafitte

Coastal Protection and Restoration in Jean Lafitte

Presentation by Mayor Timothy P. Kerner, Town of Jean Lafitte, arguing for dredging to build wetlands to protect the town, which is outside the levee system.

Sea Lake and Overland Surge from Hurricanes (SLOSH)

http://slosh.nws.noaa.gov/sloshPub/index.php?L=7#sloshDsp

Publications


Talks

 

    • Storm Surge 101 (ppt 9.6 Megs) (talk provided to Storm Surge workshop in Mobile AL, May 2011)

 

 

 

Environmental Research Web – Geoengineering

http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/subject/tag=geoengineering

Focus on Climate Engineering: Intentional Intervention in the Climate System

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/4/4/045101;jsessionid=625A3B85BB9B43FA186F913679972043.c3

INTRODUCTION

Part of Focus on Climate Engineering: Intentional Intervention in the Climate System

Geoengineering techniques for countering climate change have been receiving much press recently as a `Plan B’ if a global deal to tackle climate change is not agreed at the COP15 negotiations in Copenhagen this December. However, the field is controversial as the methods may have unforeseen consequences, potentially making temperatures rise in some regions or reducing rainfall, and many aspects remain under-researched.

This focus issue of Environmental Research Letters is a collection of research articles, invited by David Keith, University of Calgary, and Ken Caldeira, Carnegie Institution, that present and evaluate different methods for engineering the Earth’s climate. Not only do the letters in this issue highlight various methods of climate engineering but they also detail the arguments for and against climate engineering as a concept.

Further reading
Focus on Geoengineering at http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/subject/tag=geoengineering
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science is an open-access proceedings service available atwww.iop.org/EJ/journal/ees

Focus on Climate Engineering: Intentional Intervention in the Climate System Contents

Modification of cirrus clouds to reduce global warming
David L Mitchell and William Finnegan

Climate engineering and the risk of rapid climate change
Andrew Ross and H Damon Matthews

Researching geoengineering: should not or could not?
Martin Bunzl

Of mongooses and mitigation: ecological analogues to geoengineering
H Damon Matthews and Sarah E Turner

Toward ethical norms and institutions for climate engineering research
David R Morrow, Robert E Kopp and Michael Oppenheimer

On the possible use of geoengineering to moderate specific climate change impacts
Michael C MacCracken

The impact of geoengineering aerosols on stratospheric temperature and ozone
P Heckendorn, D Weisenstein, S Fueglistaler, B P Luo, E Rozanov, M Schraner, L W Thomason and T Peter

The fate of the Greenland Ice Sheet in a geoengineered, high CO2 world
Peter J Irvine, Daniel J Lunt, Emma J Stone and Andy Ridgwell

Assessing the benefits of crop albedo bio-geoengineering
Joy S Singarayer, Andy Ridgwell and Peter Irvine

Can we control El Niño?
Douglas G MacMynowski

Geoengineering by cloud seeding: influence on sea ice and climate system
Philip J Rasch, John Latham and Chih-Chieh (Jack) Chen

 

Dates
Issue 4 (October-December 2009)