Geoengineering Coastlines? From Accidental to Intentional

Murray, A. Brad; Gopalakrishnan, Sathya; Keeler, Andrew G.; Landry, Craig E.; McNamara, D. E.; Moore, Laura J.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-802748-6.00007-3

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But our findings do suggest that hazard from shoreline erosion might be stronger than it otherwise appears, placing diffuse but increased pressure on hazard mitigation. We propose that the cumulative, collective effect of beach nourishment on rates of shoreline change constitutes a quantitative signature of coastal geoengineering (Haff, ; Lazarus, ; Smith et al, ). An inclusive definition of geoengineering—one that extends beyond its typical reference to climate—is “the direct, large‐scale, purposeful intervention in or manipulation of the natural environments of this planet, e.g., land, lakes, rivers, atmosphere, seas, ocean, and/or its physical, chemical, or biological processes” (Verlaan, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A complex aspect of beach nourishment, at least as it manifests in the United States, is that local mitigation actions are deliberate, but their collective consequences are not (Lazarus, McNamara, et al, ; Smith et al, ). Much like related implications for “termination effects” in climate geoengineering (Royal Society, ) were beach nourishment along the U.S. Atlantic Coast to suddenly stop—unmasking true rates of coastal erosion—then the economic effects on the coastal communities that have come to depend on its protection (Gopalakrishnan, Landry, et al, ; NRC, ) would indeed be deleterious, widespread, long‐lasting, and severe.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Masked Shoreline Erosion at Large Spatial Scales as a Collective Effect of Beach Nourishment

Armstrong

Lazarus

2019

Earth's Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sea‐level rise along low‐lying coasts of the world's passive continental margins should, on average, drive net shoreline retreat over large spatial scales (>102 km). A variety of natural physical factors can influence trends of shoreline erosion and accretion, but trends in recent rates of shoreline change along the U.S. Atlantic Coast reflect an especially puzzling increase in accretion, not erosion. A plausible explanation for the apparent disconnect between environmental forcing and shoreline response along the U.S. Atlantic Coast is the application, since the 1960s, of beach nourishment as the predominant form of mitigation against chronic coastal erosion. Using U.S. Geological Survey shoreline records from 1830–2007 spanning more than 2,500 km of the U.S. Atlantic Coast, we calculate a mean rate of shoreline change, prior to 1960, of −55 cm/year (a negative rate denotes erosion). After 1960, the mean rate reverses to approximately +5 cm/year, indicating widespread apparent accretion despite steady (and, in some places, accelerated) sea‐level rise over the same period. Cumulative sediment input from decades of beach‐nourishment projects may have sufficiently altered shoreline position to mask “true” rates of shoreline change. Our analysis suggests that long‐term rates of shoreline change typically used to assess coastal hazard may be systematically underestimated. We also suggest that the overall effect of beach nourishment along of the U.S. Atlantic Coast is extensive enough to constitute a quantitative signature of coastal geoengineering and may serve as a bellwether for nourishment‐dominated shorelines elsewhere in the world.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Masked Shoreline Erosion at Large Spatial Scales as a Collective Effect of Beach Nourishment

Armstrong

Lazarus

2019

Earth's Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The relationship between the natural and anthropogenic drivers at various levels eventually leads to alteration of the Earth's surface. The interconnection between waves, underwater currents, changing sea levels, storms, and artificial reclaimed islands' responses is complex and increases more when people try to manipulate the coastal processes [90]. Therefore, the physical environment obviously influences the spatial patterns of artificial land construction in the sea, signifying that the development of a particular typology could be a useful means of understanding the process.…”

Section: Classification Of Different Geoengineered Reclaimed Lands In...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Palm resorts in Dubai [100], Amwaj Island in Bahrain [92], and the Pearl development in Doha are three notable examples in the region of sophisticated coastal dredging equipment. This quick progress of coastal land reclamation is also greatly helped by the technology revolution, which has led to significant geoengineering of the shoreline [4,90]. Increasing harbor and port capacity in response to a rise in trade and commerce appears to be a prevalent reason for land extension along the coast.…”

Section: Driving Forces Behind the Extensive Construction Of Land Bey...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Land in Water: The Study of Land Reclamation and Artificial Islands Formation in the UAE Coastal Zone: A Remote Sensing and GIS Perspective

Subraelu

Ebraheem

Sherif

et al. 2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United Arab Emirate’s rapid population growth is coupled with an increase in the consumption of natural resources such as fresh air, sunlight, land, and water. In the past two decades, the demand for land has augmented both away from the coast and significantly near the coast. Within coastal zones, artificial reclamation of land in the sea is the most desirable way to meet the demand for land necessary for the development of the most modern urban areas. Seaward reclamation (land in the water) necessitates the construction of artificially reclaimed areas that are extended into the sea using innovative modern construction techniques. The majority of these building requirements are necessitated by a number of key factors and have diverse outcomes. Even though this type of urban expansion is not new, the scale and motivations of land reclamation have been drastically altered due to geological and human-induced factors. The purpose of this paper is to assess the increase in seaward land expansion, particularly in the seven UAE coastal emirates. Using satellite data, particularly from 1990 to 2021, the total increase in land due to newly developed reclaimed areas in all UAE coastal emirates is calculated. Satellite images from the Landsat series are used to analyze the tremendous growth since the early 2000s. In addition, the study of shoreline maps of 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2021 for the seven emirates revealed that the 22 km long Ajman and UAQ front coast experienced a notable shoreline retreat with a net erosion area of 300 m2 and an annual rate of 30 my−1 over the past 21 years (2000–2021). Depending on the type of construction design used to describe the process, a methodical sorting is also recommended. The impacts of the Dubai offshore reclaimed islands on the adjacent coastlines in Ajman and Umm Al Quwain (UAQ), as well as the potential impact of earthquake tremors along the Zagros fold belt region, are the subjects of this study. In this study, all seven coastal emirates are considered, and the largest reclamation projects are located in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Ras-Al Khaimah (RAK), and Fujairah, with Dubai leading the way; it has expanded its coastal areas by more than 68 km2 at present, and another 35 km2 will be reclaimed soon to finish Palm Deira.

show abstract

“…However, modeled and observed shoreline changes on sandy coastlines still tend to show poor agreement over larger‐spatial (>10 1 km) and longer‐temporal (>10 1 years) scales (e.g., Gutierrez et al, ; French et al, ; Yates & Le Cozannet, ). The number and variety of controls and processes that can affect sandy shoreline change, including sea‐level rise (Ashton & Lorenzo‐Trueba, ; Leatherman et al, ; Moore et al, ; Moore et al, ; Murray & Moore, ; Plant et al, ); anthropogenic modifications (Armstrong & Lazarus, ; Hapke et al, ; Johnson et al, ; Miselis & Lorenzo‐Trueba, ; Rogers et al, ; Smith et al, ); geologic substrate (Cooper et al, ; Hauser et al, ; Lazarus & Murray, ; Moore et al, ; Valvo et al, ), nearshore bathymetry (Browder & McNinch, ; McNinch, ; Schupp et al, ), and regional geography (Cooper et al, ; Plant et al, ); wave climate (Anderson et al, ; Antolinez et al, ; Slott et al, ); and sediment grain size (Dean & Dalrymple, ; Komar, ), makes determining their relative contributions difficult, whether empirically or with numerical modeling. The influence of these factors changes with spatial scale (Lazarus et al, ; List et al, )—and at regional scales, a key but commonly overlooked driver of shoreline change is planform curvature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation Between Shoreline Change and Planform Curvature on Wave‐Dominated, Sandy Coasts

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low‐lying, wave‐dominated, sandy coastlines can exhibit high rates of shoreline change that may impact coastal infrastructure, habitation, recreation, and economy. Efforts to understand and quantify controls on shoreline change typically examine factors such as sea‐level rise; anthropogenic modifications; geologic substrate, nearshore bathymetry, and regional geography; and sediment grain size. The role of shoreline planform curvature, however, tends to be overlooked. Theoretical and numerical model considerations indicate that incident offshore waves interacting with even subtle shoreline curvature can drive gradients in net alongshore sediment flux that can cause significant erosion or accretion. However, these predictions or assumptions have not often been tested against observations, especially over large spatial and temporal scales. Here, we examined the correlation between shoreline curvature and shoreline change rates for spatially extended segments of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts (~1,700 km total). Where shoreline stabilization (nourishment or hard structures) does not dominate the shoreline change signal, we find a significant negative correlation between shoreline curvature and shoreline change rates (i.e., convex‐seaward curvature [promontories] is associated with shoreline erosion, and concave‐seaward curvature [embayments] with accretion) at spatial scales of 1–5 km alongshore and timescales of decades to centuries. This indicates that shoreline changes observed in these reaches can be explained in part by gradients in alongshore sediment flux acting to smooth spatial variations in shoreline curvature. Our results suggest that shoreline curvature should be included as a key variable in modeling and risk assessment of coastal change on wave‐dominated, sandy coastlines.

show abstract

Geoengineering Coastlines? From Accidental to Intentional

Cited by 7 publications

References 45 publications

Masked Shoreline Erosion at Large Spatial Scales as a Collective Effect of Beach Nourishment

Masked Shoreline Erosion at Large Spatial Scales as a Collective Effect of Beach Nourishment

Land in Water: The Study of Land Reclamation and Artificial Islands Formation in the UAE Coastal Zone: A Remote Sensing and GIS Perspective

Correlation Between Shoreline Change and Planform Curvature on Wave‐Dominated, Sandy Coasts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About