In September of last year, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers revealed a groundbreaking proposal to protect the greater New York and New Jersey metro area from future devastating floods. With an estimated cost of $52.6 billion, this project would be the most expensive ever proposed by the Corps. However, it is important to recognize the limitations of relying solely on massive shoreline structures for flood protection.
The Corps’s plan includes the construction of floodwalls, levees, and berms stretching for dozens of miles along the shoreline, as well as the installation of 12 storm surge barriers across various waterway entrances in the region. While these measures may seem comprehensive, they would only safeguard a small portion of the most vulnerable areas from storm surge flooding, leaving the majority of the region at risk.
New York City is particularly susceptible to coastal storm flooding, as demonstrated by the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy in 2012. The city ranks as the most vulnerable in the United States due to rising sea levels caused by climate change. Other cities facing similar threats, such as Rotterdam, London, and St. Petersburg, have successfully implemented harborwide surge barriers to protect their coastal areas while still allowing for recreational use of the waterfront.
In contrast, the Corps’s proposal relies heavily on floodwalls and levees, which would disrupt public access to the waterfront along significant stretches of developed waterfronts and parks. This would have a detrimental effect on recreational activities and the overall connection between people and the water. In addition, the construction of floodwalls would necessitate the installation of numerous gates to allow pedestrian and vehicular access, potentially causing significant disruptions during storms.
Moreover, the Corps’s plan fails to adequately protect low-income or smaller communities with lower property values. Approximately 40% of vulnerable areas would still be at risk of coastal flooding under the proposed plan. This demonstrates a clear bias in the cost-benefit methodology used, which prioritizes areas with higher property values. It is important to address this issue and ensure that all communities are equally protected.
There are also concerns from environmental groups about the impact of surge barriers on narrow waterways with poor tidal flushing. These waterways, such as Newtown Creek and the Gowanus Canal, are already heavily polluted, and the installation of surge barriers may exacerbate existing environmental problems.
It is crucial to understand why the Corps has proposed a plan with such glaring weaknesses, and why New York State, New Jersey, and New York City have endorsed it. One reason may be a lack of collaboration and the failure to seek the best possible plan. The partnership between state and federal agencies has resulted in a plan that may not adequately address the region’s needs.
Fortunately, alternative options have been presented, such as the use of a regional storm surge barrier system. Experts have suggested that a barrier system would be a better choice in the long run, considering the rapid rise in sea levels. A regional system could effectively protect the entire harbor area while maintaining normal water levels. Additionally, the closure of offshore surge gates could be mechanized and centrally controlled, minimizing the need for individual gate closures during storms.
Addressing the challenges posed by sea level rise would require careful planning and consideration of tidal flow disruption. Raising streets and walkways near the shore could help prevent flooding from high tides and smaller storms, while offshore barriers would only need to be closed for medium to large storms.
The city previously resisted the idea of harborwide barriers due to unanswered questions. However, many of these concerns have now been addressed, and it is crucial to reevaluate the proposed plan to ensure the long-term safety and resilience of the region.
In conclusion, while the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ proposal to protect the greater New York and New Jersey metro area from catastrophic floods is ambitious, it falls short in several key areas. By considering alternative solutions, such as a regional storm surge barrier system, the region can achieve comprehensive flood protection without sacrificing public access to the waterfront. It is imperative that we prioritize the safety and well-being of all communities, regardless of income or property value, in our efforts to combat the threats posed by climate change.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
