1. Review of Case Studies and Synthesis of Research to Date Kristy Schmit Tuesday, March 9, 2010

2. Outline Case Study Review The Wiki Cheat Sheet Future Work

3. Case Studies Review Process Located each case study and moved to one folder – /class_files/completed_projects/case_studies Took notes on where case study was found and what information was available (Table 1) Analyzed data by comparison of key values (Table 2) Summarized each case study Grouped case studies into categories based on similarities

4. Table 1: Case Study Navigation Analysis Case Study NameAuthor What's on the Wiki? Available in Google Group? Found elsewhe re?Comments Sebasti an Model? Includes project intro Date Comple ted Abstract/ Summary ?pdf? presentati on? Long Beach, USA Nathan ChaseNo YesN/A Link to Nathan's page only (doesn't link to case study report)Yesyes 1-Aug- 09 New Orleans, USA Marieta HansenNo YesN/AThis topic does not exist yetNono 1-Dec- 08 Auckland, New Zealand Jessica HinojosaNo YesN/AThis topic does not exist yetYes yes- needs changes though 11-Dec- 08 Bremenports, Germany Henning RoedelNoYes N/A Most text from report is on the webpageNoyes 9-Dec- 08 Houston/Galveston, USA Clare ThiekeNo YesThis topic does not exist yetNoyes 11-Dec- 08 Corpus Christi, USA Nick McIntyreNo YesThis topic does not exist yetNono 19-Mar- 09 New York/New Jersey, USA Davison VivitNo YesThis topic does not exist yetNono 1-Mar- 09 Chennai, India Kristen LenceN/A YesN/ANot on WikiNo yes- needs changes though 11-Dec- 08 Calloa, Peru Adam PearsonYesNoYesNoYes Link to doc (broken) and long abstract, strange bar across bottomNono 19-Nov- 09

5. Table 2: Case Study Comparison Case Study Name Existing DefenseRiver Storm Events Evaluated Other characteris tics Sediment Discharge Protection Strateges Considered Construction Cost Estimates Parameters used to Calculate TotalsTotal Cost Time to Construct Long Beach, Ca USA breakwater LA & San Gabriel 100 yr and 10,000yr port protected from waves 59000+490 00m 3 Seawall and levees, dike with a lock system see below tables Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: 1.7m Storm surge: 3.7m Design wave: 5.5m Freeboard: 0.5m Design river flood stage and runoff: 0m Estimated subsidence: 0m$3.6 billion5.8 yr New Orleans, La USA levees and locks Mississipp i100 yr 110 mi upstream from gulf, affected by hurricanes 396,000,00 0 tons per year closing MR-GO, improving floodwalls, and seawall construction Port Protector spreadsheet only Assumed SLR: 2m (although 1.2 m is discussed in report) $979 million1.5 yr Auckland, New Zealand None 100 yr and 10,000yrNone dike with a lock system, storm surge barrier, planned retreat same material table used, plus port protector spreadsheet Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: 3.3m Storm surge/tsunami runup: 1.8m Design wave: 8.4m Freeboard: 0.5m Estimated subsidence: 0m $493.3 million0.3 yr Bremenports, Germany dikes Weser River100 yrNone? wet-wet and wet- dry dikes and locks see below tables Assumed SLR: 2m $2.99 billion4.4 yr Houston- Galveston, Tx USA G- seawall H- Buffalo Bayou10,000yr very shallow bay, affected by hurricanes? Planned Retreat, Texas City Extension, and Super Dike plans (wet-wet) Port Protector spreadsheet only Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: 1.7m Storm surge: 5m Design wave: 5.5m Freeboard: 0.2m Estimated subsidence: $5.09 billion 2.5 yr (not considering delay for hurricane season)

6. Table 2: Case Study Comparison (cont’d.) Case Study Name Existing DefenseRiver Storm Events Evaluated Other characteristi cs Sediment Discharge Protection Strateges Considered Construction Cost Estimates Parameters used to Calculate TotalsTotal Cost Time to Construct Corpus Christi, Tx USA Mustang Island (3- kilometer wide barrier island) Nueces River100 yr bay and approaches very shallow, affected by hurricaneslarge 3 differnet dike designs Port Protector spreadsheet only Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: m Storm surge: m Design wave: m Freeboard: m Estimated subsidence: $498 million or $660 million with lock 0.5 yr or 1.5 yr with lock New York - New Jersey, USA natural barrier islands at Sandy Hook, NJ and along the southern coast of Long Island Hudson River, Hackensac k River, Passaic River and Raritan River10,000yr multiple ports, bays, and rivers? planned retreat, seawall extension, two wet-wet dikes with locks same material table used, plus port protector spreadsheet Assumed sea level rise: 2 m Mean high-high water: 1.8 m (Lower New York Bay) or 2.6 m (Long Island Sound) Storm surge: 7.2 m Design wave: 4.3 m Freeboard: 0.5 m Lower NY: $1.26 billion Long Island: $1.5 billion Lower NY: 1.4 yr Long Island: 1.8 yr Channai, India Breakwaters for inner and outer harbors Kuvam (Cooum) river100 yr region affected by tsunamis? Dike along breakwater w/ lock (wet-wet and wet- dry components), Sea wall along port (vertical) and dry- wet dike parts of Port Protector spreadsheet used Assumed sea level rise: 2 m Storm surge: 2.375 m Design wave: 9.39 m Dike w/lock: $752 million or Seawall- dike: $244 million Dike w/lock: 0.4 yr or Seawall- dike: 0.2 yr Calloa, Peru Isla San Lorenzo, an offshore island, and several breakwatersNone100 yr vulnerable to earthquakes and tsunamisNone SLR and SS: sea wall, dike and lock. SLR only: raising port infrastructure, sea wall, dike and lock same material table used, plus port protector spreadsheet SLR + SS: Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: 1.17m Storm surge: 5.6m Design wave: 6.48m Freeboard: 0.5m Estimated subsidence: negligible SLR only: Assumed SLR: 2m Mean high high water: 1.17m Freeboard: 0.5m (Design wave: 1 m) Raising port: $63 million +labor Sea wall: < 5yr, dike: up to 25 yr, raising port: 1-5 yr

7. Case Study Grouping Case Studies that include 2 or more ports: – Houston- Galveston, Tx, USA – NY-NJ, USA – Bremenports, Germany – LA – Long Beach, Ca, USA Affected by Hurricanes: – New Orleans, La, USA – Houston- Galveston, Tx, USA – Corpus Christi, Tx, USA Affected by Tsunamis: – Channai, India – Calloa, Peru

8. Case Study Overview Each case study has unique attributes and many go into great detail on weather, characteristics of the port, and past events  There is a lack of consistency with respect to the project background There was a variety of port types covered  There is not a Sebastian model for all case studies

9. Case Study Overview Most ports studied have plans to undergo improvements, modifications, or expansions. Only 1 of the current plans take into consideration the defenses needed against SLR. From review of case study data, it’s clear that SLR will have an impact on ports. I think this commonality signifies the importance of the Stanford project

10. The Wiki Organization – Fixed Links – Updated Formatting Name – Any winners from brainstorming? New Template? – If a new webpage is created, I suggest a different template with a little more flexibility

11. The Wiki- Format Suggestion

12. New Student “Cheat Sheet” Cheat Sheet to include: how to get access to websites

13. Future Work There is much more that can be done with the Wiki Webmaster role on project? Domain name Lots of great suggestions! Recommended Case Studies? Areas not subject to severe weather (tsunami, hurricanes, etc.)

14. Questions? http://www.cnsm.csulb.edu/departments/geology/people/bperry/GrantPhotos/CatalinaFeb06/013LongBeachLosAngelesHarborsFeb06L.jpg