Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
National Conference on Ecosystem Restoration; July 23, 2009 PMNational Conference on Ecosystem Restoration; July 23, 2009 PM
Session 1 Session 1 -- Impacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem RestorationImpacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem Restoration
Planning for Future Sea Level
Thomas R. Kendall, Eric F. Jolliffe, Judy P. SheenThomas R. Kendall, Eric F. Jolliffe, Judy P. Sheen
USACE San Francisco DistrictUSACE San Francisco District
Planning for Future Sea Level Rise in the Corps of Engineers
2007 USACE Climate Change 2007 USACE Climate Change
Strategies White Paper Strategies White Paper “The water resources public works being “The water resources public works being
planned today must be robust and resilient to planned today must be robust and resilient to
future extreme events and designed with an future extreme events and designed with an
added degree of uncertainty in their readded degree of uncertainty in their re--
occurrence frequency and/or magnitude due to occurrence frequency and/or magnitude due to occurrence frequency and/or magnitude due to occurrence frequency and/or magnitude due to
[climate change]. The inventory of infrastructure [climate change]. The inventory of infrastructure
that we manage today must likewise be that we manage today must likewise be
maintained and, perhaps, upgraded to provide maintained and, perhaps, upgraded to provide
an extra degree of safety, resiliency and an extra degree of safety, resiliency and
reliability to address these uncertainties.” reliability to address these uncertainties.”
EC 1165EC 1165--22--211 211
Water Resource Policies and Authorities Water Resource Policies and Authorities Incorporating SeaIncorporating Sea--Level Change Considerations Level Change Considerations in Civil Works Programs in Civil Works Programs –– July 2009 (EC 1165July 2009 (EC 1165--22--211)211)
Should be posted at: Should be posted at: http://140.194.76.129/publications/enghttp://140.194.76.129/publications/eng--circulars/circulars/Should be posted at: Should be posted at: http://140.194.76.129/publications/enghttp://140.194.76.129/publications/eng--circulars/circulars/
Or contact me: Or contact me: [email protected]@usace.army.mil; ;
415415--503503--68226822Companion to Planning Guidance Notebook (ER Companion to Planning Guidance Notebook (ER 11051105--22--100 or “PGN”)100 or “PGN”)
Guidance on Sea Level Change: Guidance on Sea Level Change: Multiple Scenario ApproachMultiple Scenario Approach
Philosophy:Philosophy:–– We can’t predict the future without uncertaintyWe can’t predict the future without uncertainty
–– Be prepared to implement flexible planning and engineering Be prepared to implement flexible planning and engineering adaptations accounting for a range of possible changes adaptations accounting for a range of possible changes
–– Must be able to recognize meaningful changes that may require Must be able to recognize meaningful changes that may require additional response additional response
Scenario predictions are based on fundamentally different Scenario predictions are based on fundamentally different assumptions about the processes assumptions about the processes –– Inappropriate to combine different scenarios into a single Inappropriate to combine different scenarios into a single –– Inappropriate to combine different scenarios into a single Inappropriate to combine different scenarios into a single
prediction, then calculate an error distribution about itprediction, then calculate an error distribution about it
–– Scenarios should not be considered better or worse, must develop Scenarios should not be considered better or worse, must develop alternatives for eachalternatives for each
–– Different alternative plans can be evaluated as being better or Different alternative plans can be evaluated as being better or worse than others for the range of future scenariosworse than others for the range of future scenarios
Consider and seek to minimize the risk associated with Consider and seek to minimize the risk associated with multiple seamultiple sea--level rise scenarioslevel rise scenariosTeam set up to develop guidance (COE, NOAA, Team set up to develop guidance (COE, NOAA, CSO,..change the Planning Guidance Notebook)CSO,..change the Planning Guidance Notebook)P&G (Fed Planning Principles & Guidelines) update should P&G (Fed Planning Principles & Guidelines) update should address multiple scenariosaddress multiple scenarios
EC does and doesn’tEC does and doesn’t
EC provides direction on: EC provides direction on:
how to calculate impacts consistent with the existing how to calculate impacts consistent with the existing PGN; and PGN; and
conceptually how to plan for Sea Level Rise conceptually how to plan for Sea Level Rise
EC Does NOT:EC Does NOT:EC Does NOT:EC Does NOT:
clearly integrate Sea Level Rise considerations into the clearly integrate Sea Level Rise considerations into the Corps planning process (Plan selection process is not Corps planning process (Plan selection process is not explicit); norexplicit); nor
resolve the timing for implementation with existing COE resolve the timing for implementation with existing COE structures etc. (“Implementation of the guidance will be structures etc. (“Implementation of the guidance will be handled in a separate document")handled in a separate document")
EC Sea Level Rise RatesEC Sea Level Rise Rates
Eustatic Rise Ranges with advice on local Eustatic Rise Ranges with advice on local adjustments to determine relative riseadjustments to determine relative rise
Lowest Rate = Historic Relative RiseLowest Rate = Historic Relative Rise
CA setting:CA setting:CA setting:CA setting:–– SF area was subsiding => faster relative riseSF area was subsiding => faster relative rise
–– Humboldt area uplift => relative sea level Humboldt area uplift => relative sea level loweringlowering
–– SF Bay relative rise since the 1906 quake: SF Bay relative rise since the 1906 quake: 2.01 mm/year (8”/century @ Presidio gage). 2.01 mm/year (8”/century @ Presidio gage).
EC Sea Level Rise RatesEC Sea Level Rise Rates
revisits range from our Planning Guidance revisits range from our Planning Guidance
Notebook of 2000 (which has it’s roots in a 1987 Notebook of 2000 (which has it’s roots in a 1987
NRC report)NRC report)
recognizes the IPCC (2007) projected range of recognizes the IPCC (2007) projected range of recognizes the IPCC (2007) projected range of recognizes the IPCC (2007) projected range of
0.18 to 0.59m by 2100 (0.18 to 0.59m by 2100 (historic to 3Xhistoric to 3X) )
Recognizes criticism of IPCC 2007: doesn’t Recognizes criticism of IPCC 2007: doesn’t
adequately consider potential for extreme adequately consider potential for extreme
scenarios such as massive ice loss and melting scenarios such as massive ice loss and melting
from Antarctica and Greenland from Antarctica and Greenland
(IPCC, 2007)
Planning Guidance Notebook, Planning Guidance Notebook,
Appendix E, Section IV.EAppendix E, Section IV.E--24.k:24.k:
Potential relative sea level change should be Potential relative sea level change should be considered in every coastal and estuarine (as far considered in every coastal and estuarine (as far inland as the new head of tide) feasibility study inland as the new head of tide) feasibility study that the Corps undertakes.that the Corps undertakes.
A sensitivity analysis should be conducted to A sensitivity analysis should be conducted to A sensitivity analysis should be conducted to A sensitivity analysis should be conducted to determine what effect (if any) changes in sea determine what effect (if any) changes in sea level would have on plan evaluation and level would have on plan evaluation and selection.selection.
The analysis should be based, as a minimum, The analysis should be based, as a minimum, on the extrapolation of the local, historical record on the extrapolation of the local, historical record of relative sea level rise as the low level and of relative sea level rise as the low level and Curve 3 from the NRC report as the high level.Curve 3 from the NRC report as the high level.
Sea Level Change ScenariosSea Level Change Scenarios
High: modified High: modified
(updated) NRC (updated) NRC
1987 curve III1987 curve III
Intermediate: Intermediate:
modified (updated) modified (updated) modified (updated) modified (updated)
NRC 1987 curve INRC 1987 curve I
Low: extrapolation Low: extrapolation
of historic trend of historic trend
Key is to ask Key is to ask WhenWhen
is this likely to occuris this likely to occur
(i.e., look across (i.e., look across
the curves)the curves)
Note: IPCC 2007 does not provide intermediate data points, high and low SRES scenarios shown for reference to intermediate (modified) curve I
NRC Update Opportunity NRC Update Opportunity
CA/OR/WA/USGS/NOAA/COE CA/OR/WA/USGS/NOAA/COE funding an NRC update funding an NRC update next year that can become new NRC source for next year that can become new NRC source for guidance (more current than 1987 NRC source) guidance (more current than 1987 NRC source)
CA EXECUTIVE ORDER CA EXECUTIVE ORDER SS--1313--08 (11/14/2008)08 (11/14/2008) The California Resources The California Resources SS--1313--08 (11/14/2008)08 (11/14/2008) The California Resources The California Resources Agency… shall request that the National Academy of Agency… shall request that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) convene an independent panel to Sciences (NAS) convene an independent panel to complete the first California Sea Level Rise Assessment complete the first California Sea Level Rise Assessment Report and initiate,… an independent sea level rise Report and initiate,… an independent sea level rise science and policy committee made up of state, national science and policy committee made up of state, national and international experts.and international experts.
2009 scope: 2009 scope: provide values or a range of values of provide values or a range of values of global sea level rise for the years 2030, 2050, and 2100; global sea level rise for the years 2030, 2050, and 2100; and evaluate the uncertainties associated with these and evaluate the uncertainties associated with these values for each timeframe.values for each timeframe.
Planning Guidance Notebook, Planning Guidance Notebook,
Appendix E, Section IV.EAppendix E, Section IV.E--24.k:24.k:
If the plan selection is sensitive to sea level rise, If the plan selection is sensitive to sea level rise, then design considerations could allow for future then design considerations could allow for future modification when the impacts of future sea level modification when the impacts of future sea level rise can be confirmed rise can be confirmed [adaptive management].[adaptive management].
Feasibility studies should consider which Feasibility studies should consider which Feasibility studies should consider which Feasibility studies should consider which designs are most appropriate for a range of designs are most appropriate for a range of possible future rates of rise. possible future rates of rise.
Designs that would be appropriate for the entire Designs that would be appropriate for the entire range of uncertainty should receive preference range of uncertainty should receive preference over those that would be optimal for a particular over those that would be optimal for a particular rate of rise but unsuccessful for other possible rate of rise but unsuccessful for other possible outcomes.outcomes.
EC Steps 16EC Steps 16--1818
EC Steps 16EC Steps 16--1818
These steps are a function of a Principles & These steps are a function of a Principles & Guidelines rewriteGuidelines rewrite
WRDA 07WRDA 07 directs that the Principles & directs that the Principles &
Guidelines be Guidelines be revised revised to include more emphasis to include more emphasis Guidelines be Guidelines be revised revised to include more emphasis to include more emphasis
on on safety and adaptive managementsafety and adaptive management
'future safety' (resilience) may emerge as an 'future safety' (resilience) may emerge as an effective screening filter even though the effective screening filter even though the risks are not immediate but linked to risks are not immediate but linked to projections of future climate changeprojections of future climate change
P&G UpdateP&G Update
Council on Environmental Quality now involvedCouncil on Environmental Quality now involved
Webinar held July 2009 on rewrite of the Guidelines Webinar held July 2009 on rewrite of the Guidelines (with the update of procedures to follow in a (with the update of procedures to follow in a separate phase) separate phase)
Update is being considered for governmentUpdate is being considered for government--wide wide application, not just the Corps and other traditional application, not just the Corps and other traditional Update is being considered for governmentUpdate is being considered for government--wide wide application, not just the Corps and other traditional application, not just the Corps and other traditional WR Devmt agencies (Reclamation and NRCS)WR Devmt agencies (Reclamation and NRCS)
Final version will be subject to public and NAS Final version will be subject to public and NAS reviewreview
Federal Register notice:Federal Register notice:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9--15517.pdf15517.pdf
Principles and Guidelines, Principles and Guidelines,
U.S. Water Resources Council, U.S. Water Resources Council,
19831983Highest net benefit to the nation: National Highest net benefit to the nation: National Economic Development (NED)Economic Development (NED)
NED is only account that must be used in NED is only account that must be used in evaluating alternative plansevaluating alternative plansevaluating alternative plansevaluating alternative plans
Other Accounts:Other Accounts:
-- Environmental QualityEnvironmental Quality
-- Regional Economic DevelopmentRegional Economic Development
-- Other Social Effects (Safety) Other Social Effects (Safety)
EC 1105EC 1105--22--409 409
All planning studies will evaluate, display and compare the full range All planning studies will evaluate, display and compare the full range of alternative plans’ effects across all four Principles and Guidelines’ of alternative plans’ effects across all four Principles and Guidelines’ accounts. accounts. A plan may be a candidate for selection if it has, on balance, A plan may be a candidate for selection if it has, on balance, net net beneficial effects. beneficial effects. May select and recommend any one of the candidate plans May select and recommend any one of the candidate plans ––(ASA(CW) exception needed if not the NED or NER plan)(ASA(CW) exception needed if not the NED or NER plan)(ASA(CW) exception needed if not the NED or NER plan)(ASA(CW) exception needed if not the NED or NER plan)The basis for selection will consider the beneficial and adverse The basis for selection will consider the beneficial and adverse effects in all four accounts effects in all four accounts Must identify an NED/NER plan (for comparison)Must identify an NED/NER plan (for comparison)
Note: Identification of NED (or NER) is often to set cost sharing (any Note: Identification of NED (or NER) is often to set cost sharing (any incremental investment required beyond that plan to get to a more resilient incremental investment required beyond that plan to get to a more resilient recommendation is likely RIGHT NOW to be fully borne by sponsors).recommendation is likely RIGHT NOW to be fully borne by sponsors).
4 Criteria from the Principles & 4 Criteria from the Principles &
Guidelines Guidelines
Efficiency Efficiency
CompletenessCompleteness
AcceptabilityAcceptability
Effectiveness Effectiveness Effectiveness Effectiveness
can be applied to can be applied to underscore the benefits of aunderscore the benefits of a
resilient system, i.e. the resilient project may resilient system, i.e. the resilient project may
be more effective, acceptable, and complete be more effective, acceptable, and complete
than a less resilient project that is more costthan a less resilient project that is more cost--
effective and efficienteffective and efficient in the short term. in the short term.
Scenario Planning in P&G Update?Scenario Planning in P&G Update?
“Scenario planning addresses uncertainty by “Scenario planning addresses uncertainty by anticipating plausible scenarios (alternate anticipating plausible scenarios (alternate futures) and establishing a learningfutures) and establishing a learning--oriented oriented monitoring program so timely adjustments monitoring program so timely adjustments can occur.” (Williams, USFS)can occur.” (Williams, USFS)can occur.” (Williams, USFS)can occur.” (Williams, USFS)
One place the Corps really tries to do this is One place the Corps really tries to do this is with Beach Nourishment (projects with Beach Nourishment (projects considered to be continuously in considered to be continuously in “Construction”)“Construction”)
Coastal Planning Coastal Planning Guidance GroupGuidance Group
“The end goal of editing the text of the Planning Guidance Notebook “The end goal of editing the text of the Planning Guidance Notebook is to improve Corps’ Coastal Planners ability to make decisions is to improve Corps’ Coastal Planners ability to make decisions under uncertain future conditions.” under uncertain future conditions.” Group proposes to identify examples: Group proposes to identify examples: –– “These examples of decision tools will walk the user through multiple “These examples of decision tools will walk the user through multiple
analyses and give guidance on when a traditional singleanalyses and give guidance on when a traditional single--scenario scenario National Economic Development or Nat’l Ecosystem Restoration (NED National Economic Development or Nat’l Ecosystem Restoration (NED or NER), a cursory sensitivity, or a more robust multior NER), a cursory sensitivity, or a more robust multi--attribute, multiattribute, multi--or NER), a cursory sensitivity, or a more robust multior NER), a cursory sensitivity, or a more robust multi--attribute, multiattribute, multi--scenario utility analysis is appropriate.” scenario utility analysis is appropriate.”
Looking for preLooking for pre--draft Feasibility studies to be demonstrationsdraft Feasibility studies to be demonstrationsIWR to lead new task force on approaches to use for multiIWR to lead new task force on approaches to use for multi--scenario scenario planning (sea level is just one application of many for this tool) planning (sea level is just one application of many for this tool) Assuming P&G update supports, the PGN is to eventually reflect Assuming P&G update supports, the PGN is to eventually reflect scenarioscenario--based decision making (& not just for changing sea levels)based decision making (& not just for changing sea levels)NRC update to seaNRC update to sea--level rise scenario curves (& all subsequent level rise scenario curves (& all subsequent updates) and selection of multiupdates) and selection of multi--scenario planning techniques will be scenario planning techniques will be integral to the PGN update. integral to the PGN update. Implications of MultiImplications of Multi--Scenario Planning: Budget Priorities and CostScenario Planning: Budget Priorities and Cost--SharingSharing
South SF Bay Shoreline StudySouth SF Bay Shoreline Study
Salt Pond Salt Pond restoration and restoration and
tidal floodingtidal flooding protection protection
to Silicon Valley to Silicon Valley
First Interim:First Interim:
~8,000 acres former salt~8,000 acres former salt--~8,000 acres former salt~8,000 acres former salt--
production pondsproduction ponds
USFWS land ownershipUSFWS land ownership
~15 miles of shoreline~15 miles of shoreline
5050--yr period of analysisyr period of analysis
Currently running models of the without project inundation levels for 3 different future conditions of sea level.
Recent ChangesRecent Changes
San Pablo Bay (1951San Pablo Bay (1951--1983) 1983)
--22 million m22 million m33
((--0.7 0.7 mcmmcm/yr)/yr)
Suisun Bay (1942Suisun Bay (1942--1990) 1990)
--53 million m53 million m33
((--1.1 1.1 mcmmcm/yr)/yr)
Central Bay (1947Central Bay (1947--1979) 1979)
--51 million m51 million m33
SF Bar (1956SF Bar (1956--2005) 2005)
--92 million m92 million m33
((--1.9 1.9 mcmmcm/yr)/yr)
--51 million m51 million m((--1.6 1.6 mcmmcm/yr)/yr)
South Bay (1983South Bay (1983--2005) 2005)
+11 million m+11 million m33
(+0.5 (+0.5 mcmmcm/yr)/yr)
Estimated sediment loss in last 50 years =Estimated sediment loss in last 50 years =
240 million m240 million m33
(Barnard, 2009)
– 2,600 acres of tidal restoration for endangered species
– Beneficial placement of up to 24 mcy of dredged material from federal and private navigation channels
– Facilitation of closure of former
Hamilton and Bel Marin Keys Wetland Restoration ProjectsHamilton and Bel Marin Keys Wetland Restoration Projects
Construction of dredge-
material pipeline at
Hamilton
– Facilitation of closure of former Hamilton Army Airfield
Site plan for Bel
Marin Keys
Photo of Hamilton Army
Airfield
HamiltonHamilton--Bel Marin Keys Bel Marin Keys
Habitats:Habitats:
--MudflatMudflat
--Intertidal MarshIntertidal Marsh
--Seasonal WetlandSeasonal Wetland
--Upland (Wildlife corridor)Upland (Wildlife corridor)--Upland (Wildlife corridor)Upland (Wildlife corridor)
Hamilton site prep ongoing since 2005Hamilton site prep ongoing since 2005
Breach in 2013Breach in 2013
20 years natural sedimentation [13 years with fed funded 20 years natural sedimentation [13 years with fed funded adaptive mgmt and monitoring]adaptive mgmt and monitoring]
Similar timelines expected with additional BMK parcelSimilar timelines expected with additional BMK parcel
HamiltonHamilton--Bel Marin KeysBel Marin Keys
Consensus was reached on a mix of habitat Consensus was reached on a mix of habitat types (project outputs) that include a relatively types (project outputs) that include a relatively high component of seasonal (vs. tidal) wetlands high component of seasonal (vs. tidal) wetlands early in the project lifeearly in the project life
after a moderate amount of sea level rise after a moderate amount of sea level rise after a moderate amount of sea level rise after a moderate amount of sea level rise project will transition to a greater percentage of project will transition to a greater percentage of tidal wetlands tidal wetlands
Eventually 100% tidal Eventually 100% tidal
1.5m (by 2100?) would likely require additional 1.5m (by 2100?) would likely require additional actionsactions
HamiltonHamilton--Bel Marin KeysBel Marin Keys
Address potential risk of tidal flooding to Address potential risk of tidal flooding to adjacent communities (perimeter levees). adjacent communities (perimeter levees).
While the wetlands will absorb some tidal While the wetlands will absorb some tidal flooding and act as a sort of buffer to flooding, flooding and act as a sort of buffer to flooding, they don’t eliminate all flood risks to the adjacent they don’t eliminate all flood risks to the adjacent community community –– levees are still a part of the plan.levees are still a part of the plan.they don’t eliminate all flood risks to the adjacent they don’t eliminate all flood risks to the adjacent community community –– levees are still a part of the plan.levees are still a part of the plan.
Sufficient land interests must be kept available Sufficient land interests must be kept available along the perimeter in case it becomes along the perimeter in case it becomes necessary to increase levee heights and necessary to increase levee heights and footprints as sea level rises.footprints as sea level rises.
Emphasis on Emphasis on resilienceresilience in design in design
ReferencesReferences
Cayan, Dan et al, 2006, Cayan, Dan et al, 2006, Projecting Future Sea Level Rise; Projecting Future Sea Level Rise; a report from California Climate a report from California Climate Change Center, CECChange Center, CEC--500500--20052005--2020 SF2020 SFCayan, Dan et al, 2009, Cayan, Dan et al, 2009, Climate Change Scenarios and Sea Level Rise Projections for the Climate Change Scenarios and Sea Level Rise Projections for the California 2008 Climate Change Scenarios AssessmentCalifornia 2008 Climate Change Scenarios Assessment; a draft paper from California Climate ; a draft paper from California Climate Change Center, CECChange Center, CEC-- 500500--20092009--014014--D D Heberger, M. et al, 2009, Heberger, M. et al, 2009, The Impacts of SeaThe Impacts of Sea--level Rise on the California Coast, level Rise on the California Coast, a paper from the a paper from the California Climate Change Center, CECCalifornia Climate Change Center, CEC--500500--20092009--024024--F. Mar 2009F. Mar 2009Knuuti, K (2002). “Planning for SeaKnuuti, K (2002). “Planning for Sea--Level Rise: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Policy” in Solutions Level Rise: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Policy” in Solutions to Coastal Disasters ’02. ASCE, Alexandria, VA.to Coastal Disasters ’02. ASCE, Alexandria, VA.to Coastal Disasters ’02. ASCE, Alexandria, VA.to Coastal Disasters ’02. ASCE, Alexandria, VA.Meehl, G. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2007. Meehl, G. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2007. The Scientific Basis.The Scientific Basis.Mount, Jeffrey, 2007, Mount, Jeffrey, 2007, Sea Level Rise and Delta PlanningSea Level Rise and Delta Planning, letter from the CALFED Independent , letter from the CALFED Independent Science Board to M. Healey, lead scientist CALFED BayScience Board to M. Healey, lead scientist CALFED Bay--Delta Program, 6 Sep 2007Delta Program, 6 Sep 2007National Research Council, 1987. National Research Council, 1987. Responding to Changes in Sea Level: Engineering ImplicationsResponding to Changes in Sea Level: Engineering Implications, , National Academy Press, 148 p.National Academy Press, 148 p.San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, 2008. San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, 2008. Wetland Restoration and Projected Impacts from Climate Wetland Restoration and Projected Impacts from Climate Change: Recommendations for and by Partners of the San Francisco Bay Joint VentureChange: Recommendations for and by Partners of the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, , www.sfbayjv.org, November 2008www.sfbayjv.org, November 2008USACE, 2000. USACE, 2000. Planning Guidance NotebookPlanning Guidance Notebook, ER 1105, ER 1105--22--100, 22 April 2000100, 22 April 2000USACE, 2005. USACE, 2005. Planning in a Collaborative Environment, Planning in a Collaborative Environment, EC 1105EC 1105--22--409, 31 May 2005409, 31 May 2005USACE, 1986. USACE, 1986. Relative Sea Level ChangeRelative Sea Level Change, Distribution, Directorate of Civil Works, Distribution, Directorate of Civil WorksUSACE, 2009. USACE, 2009. Incorporating SeaIncorporating Sea--Level Change Considerations in Civil Works Programs, Level Change Considerations in Civil Works Programs, EC1165EC1165--22--211, 1 July 2009 211, 1 July 2009
