Chapter 4
The Physical Impact of SeaLevel Rise in the Area of Charleston, South Carolina
Timothy W. Kana, Jacqueline Michel,Miles O. Hayes, and John R. Jensen
INTRODUCTION
This chapter reports on a pilot study to determine the shoreline impact from accelerated rises insea level due to anthropogenic (man induced) factors. The methods developed have been applied to thecoastal city of Charleston, South Carolina, to determine the effects of various accelerated sea level risescenarios for the years 2025 and 2075.In the last few decades, there have been numerous studies on the trends and rates of both eustatic andlocal sea level changes. Eustatic changes are global in nature due to a general rise of the sea level comparedto local changes for a specific area due to the relative rise or subsidence of the land surface with respect toa stationary, general sea level. There has been an overall rise in sea level of about 40 m (130 ft) since thelast glacial epoch, called the Wisconsin ice age, which ended about 14,000 years ago. From 7,000 to 3,000years ago, sea level along the east coast of the United States rose at a rate of about 0.3 cm (0.1 in) per year(Kraft, 1971). Studies of sea level over the last two centuries have estimated that global sea level is risingat a rate of 0.10-0.12 cm/yr (0.04-0.05 in/yr). For the Charleston case study area, Hicks and others (1978,1983) have estimated that the total sea level
rise since 1922 has been 0.25 cm/yr (0.1 in/yr).*
*Based on a global (eustatic) rise of 0. 12 cm/yr (0.05 in/yr) plus local subsidence of 0. 13 cm/yr (0.05 in/yr).
?
Sea Level Rise Physical Impact in Charleston
For our analysis, the local rate was assumed to be 0.25 cm/yr (0. 10 in/yr), and the eustatic rates used werea baseline of 0.12 cm/yr (0.05 in/yr) and the low, medium, and high scenarios discussed in Chapters 1 and3. These scenarios are outlined in Table 4-1 for the years 2025 and 2075.This chapter describes the physical responses of coastal land forms in Charleston to accelerated sealevel rise. Three types of response are addressed: shoreline changes due to landward displacement of thewater line after a sea level rise (in some geomorphic settings, where sediment supply is great, the shorelinemay accrete or keep pace with a sea level rise.); storm surges that affect new or higher elevations after a sealevel rise; and groundwater changes caused by the intrusion of seawater to higher levels in aquifers.The chapter is organized as follows. First, the Charleston case study area is described. Then, in turn,we discuss the methodology used in the study: modeling shoreline changes, mapping methods, historicalshoreline trends, and storm surge and groundwater analyses. Finally, the results and an analysis of themethodology used are presented.
CHARLESTON CASE STUDY AREAHistory of Human Development
The first European settlers arrived in Charleston around 1670. Since that time, the peninsula city hasundergone dramatic shoreline changes, predominantly by landfilling of the intertidal zone. Early maps showthat over one-third of the peninsula has been "reclaimed." Much of the landfilling occurred on the southerntip of Charleston, behind a high seawall and promenade, known as the Battery. Many of the buildings onthe lower peninsula are of historic value and play an important role in the area's major industry-tourism.These areas already experience frequent flooding during intense rainstorms and unusually high tides andwould high priority for any protection/mitigation actions to prevent further flooding due to sea level rise.The port of Charleston, which dominates the eastern shore of the city, has an active merchant shipport, along with a large U.S. Navy base along the Cooper River (Figure 4-1, the area described is in thevicinity of station number 29). Maintenance of the ship channels to the port has generated large volumesof dredge spoil, which have been disposed of at every possible nearby site. There are only two sites currently
Sea Level Rise Physical Impact in Charleston
authorized for spoil disposal, and the addition of other sites is unlikely. Plans call for construction of dikesas high as necessary to retain spoil in the designated sites.The mainland to the east and west of Charleston is primarily residential; much of it is of low density.The trend has been toward slow encroachment on farmland with more intensive development near theharbor, along the Intracoastal Waterway, or on the larger creeks. Sullivans Island and Isle of Palms,developed before World War II, have a large year-round population. These barrier islands northeast of Charleston Harbor are also the principal recreational beaches for the metropolitan area.
Site Description
The Charleston area has a complex coastal plain morphology which has been significantly alteredby man in the last 100 years (Figure 4-1). The outer shore to the north is composed of geologically young,developed barrier islands (e.g., Sullivans Island) which are relatively flat; elevations typically average lessthan 3 m (10 ft) above mean sea level (MSL) on the islands in the study area. Sheltered by the barrierislands is an extensive, intertidal salt marsh/tidal creek system. At the edge of the marsh/ mainland contact(Figure 4-1, dashed line beginning at station number 46 in Mount Pleasant), there is a break in slope anda distinct change to terrestrial vegetation. Elevations on the lower Charleston peninsula are generally 3 m(10 ft), with small areas up to 5.5 m (18 ft). The study area west of the Ashley River is very flat, withelevations generally about 3 m (10 ft). The Charleston shoreline has a characteristic dendritic drainagepattern typical of drowned coastal plain areas.The highly populated Charleston peninsula is formed by the junction of three rivers which dischargeinto Charleston Harbor: the Cooper, Ashley, and Wando Rivers (shown in Figure 4-1). The Cooper Riverdominates the discharge into the harbor, with an average flow of 450 m?/s [15,600 ft?/s (cfs)], whichincludes flow from the Santee River (a large river originating in the mountains) diverted for hydroelectricpower in 1942. The diversion has reportedly caused a significant increase in sedimentation in CharlestonHarbor, requiring increased dredging from 400,000 m
3
(525,000 yd
3
) per year to over 7,500,000 m
3
(10,000,000 yd
3
) per year (S.C. Water Resources Commission, 1979). Studies have shown that diversionis responsible for 85 percent of the sedimentation in Charleston Harbor (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,1966). To alleviate this problem, the flow will be rediverted back to the Santee River by 1985, reducingdischarge to one-fifth its present volume. The natural harbor shoreline is dominated by fringing salt marshfrom several meters to over a kilometer wide. As will be shown from the historical shoreline trend data,most of the marshes have accreted since diversion of the Santee into Charleston Harbor.The entrance to Charleston Harbor has also been modified by the construction of jetties in the 1890sto stabilize the navigation channel. The jetties have caused large-scale changes in sediment transportpatterns, producing up to 300 m (1,000 ft) of deposition along the barrier islands (Sullivans and Isle of Palms) to the north. Concomitant with accretion north of the harbor, extensive erosion has occurred southof the jetties, including over 500 m (1,700 ft) of erosion along Morris Island (Stephen et. al., 1975). Anotherman-made change in the system is the Intracoastal Waterway, dredged to 4 m (12 ft), which has altered flowpatterns in the marsh behind the barrier islands.
Physical Processes
South Carolina's climate is mild, with an average temperature for the coastal region ranging between10.1
E
C (50.2
E
) in December and 27.2
E
C (81.0
E
F) in July. An average of 1.4 hurricanes and tropical stormsaffect the coast annually- Winds are somewhat seasonal, with northerly components dominating in fall andwinter and southerly components dominating in spring and summer (Landers, 1970). The tidal rangeincreases considerably from north to south along the state's shoreline, from approximately 1.7 m (5.5 ft) atthe northern border to 2.7 m (8.8 ft) at the southern border. The increasing tidal prism (volume of waterflowing in and out of a harbor or estuary with the movement of the tides) has several effects as one movessouthward along the South Carolina coast: tidal inlets become more frequent and are larger in order to
of 00
Environmental Protection Agency: Challenge chapter4
119 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 01/26/2008 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment