CPRE Protect : Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Applications by London Ashford Airport Ltd

APP/L2250/V/10/2131934 & APP/L2250/V/10/2131936

Site at London Ashford Airport Limited, , Romney Marsh, TN29 9QL

CPRE/07/B –Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Statement by Dr Geoff Meaden Ph.D. on behalf of Protect Kent (the Kent Branch of CPRE) on Flood Risk and Sea Level Rise

1.1 Protect Kent is the Kent Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural (CPRE). CPRE is a national charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside, as well as challenging proposals that will harm it. Founded in 1926, we have around 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. The Kent Branch was established in 1929.

1.2 My name is Dr Geoff Meaden. I have lived in , Kent, since 1974 and have worked until very recently as a Principal Lecturer in the Department of Geographical and Life Sciences at Canterbury Christ Church University. I am now retired, though I am still undertaking some research projects, consultancies and writing commitments. I specialised in three areas – biogeography, which is the study of the distribution of plants and animals on the planet, local physical geography of Kent which includes coastal geography and water supply in the region and a third area, that of Geographical Information System (GIS). These are computer-based mapping and analysis programmes. Fisheries GIS is my research area and I was the Director of the Fisheries GIS Unit at the University.

Page 1 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise 2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 My contribution in this document may be considered as an Appendix to the evidence produced by Sean Furey on behalf of CPRE Protect Kent. The intention here is to add considerations concerning the likely impacts of future sea-level rise on the Romney Marsh area generally and on the Lydd airport site in particular. I anticipate that the considerations contained herein will be of particular significance to this planning application because :  The original Environmental Statements (by Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd – January 2007) accompanying the planning applications (Y06/1647/SH and Y06/1648/SH) made no reference to future climate change and its flooding consequences.

 Although the supplementary Flood Risk Assessment Report (issued by BSF Consulting) does mention sea level rise, most of the information given on this appears to be erroneous.

 There is no acknowledgment that Romney Marsh represents a site that is not only already particularly vulnerable to flooding, but it will be highly vulnerable to the flooding that will be caused by future sea level rises.

2.2 Much of this present document is written in general terms because the discussion concentrates on future Climate Change and its consequences, and these have barely been considered by the applicants. However, several major paragraphs do examine in detail the specifics of the flood potential in the Lydd airport and the general Romney marsh areas. The present document covers both of the planning applications (Y06/1647/SH and Y06/1648/SH) because it is considered that the factors behind any potential flooding will not be significantly different in the cases of a terminal building or runway extension being developed. I have not discussed here the background to the planning for flood risk (PPS25) since this has been covered by Sean Furey in his section 3. 3 CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH EAST ENGLAND

3.1 Climate change is currently a major cause of rising sea levels, and for South East England this is a particularly worrying process because the effects will be seriously felt in this area. There are three factors that combine to exaggerate rates of sea level rise in the South East:

3.1.1 As with other areas climate change brings increased warming which in turn leads to increasing rates of melting of the world‟s ice and then to sea level rise.

3.1.2 Ice normally covers a significant proportion of the polar regions of the Earth‟s surface and this ice reflects much of the sun‟s heat. However, with reduced ice cover (especially in the Arctic areas) less heat is reflected and instead this heat is absorbed by sea water, causing the warmed water to expand and thus to rise (this is called thermal expansion). For the first time ever it is likely that within 30 years there will be no ice at all over the North Pole during the summer1, so thermal expansion generally can be expected to increase.

1 Wang, M., J.E. Overland, (2009) A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years? Geophysical Research Letters, VOL. 36, L07502, doi:10.1029/2009GL037820

Page 2 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

3.1.3 Furthermore the land in South East England is sinking by about 2mm a year. This is due to „isostatic recovery‟ following the last Ice Age2. If the land is sinking it also means that, relative to this, the sea level is rising.

3.2 For these collective reasons, sea levels in the South East are presently rising at almost one centimetre per year. However, it can be stated with certainty that temporal rates of rise in sea levels are occurring exponentially3. Even the more modest estimates suggest that sea levels will rise by nearly one metre by the end of this century4, and various predictions suggest that sea levels could rise by perhaps four or even five metres by the end of the next century.

3.3 It needs to be stated that predictions of sea level rise are extremely difficult to make with accuracy because this depends on who is doing the projection, where the base lines are set and the fact that there are so many uncertainties surrounding the predictions. For instance, we know that there will be so-called „tipping points‟. This means that if the temperatures rise above certain critical points then some new and potentially dangerous process can be triggered. An example of this is that there has recently been a huge increase in the rate of permafrost (frozen sub-soil) melting in North America and Siberia, and this is causing enhanced releases of methane into the atmosphere. Additional methane is one of the most dangerous causes of global warming. It is likely that there will be other tipping points that we are entirely unable to predict. It is also likely that the rates of glacier melt will be greatly accelerated above certain critical temperatures. Given these uncertainties, it is imperative that society acts responsibly and takes a precautionary approach to future climatic scenarios.

3.4 I believe that the sea level rises will be at the higher end of the present Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predictions, and indeed nearly all past estimations of the rates of rise have had to be adjusted upwards. Very recently the scientific adviser to the World Bank stated that within a short time period temperatures will be 4˚C above pre- industrial (1750) levels5, and this fact was recently agreed by Professor John Beddington, the British government‟s chief scientist. A temperature rise of this level will have catastrophic effects not only on sea level rise but it will also trigger mass extinctions of many of the planet‟s plants and animals who will not be able to adjust sufficiently to the enhanced temperatures and other climatic changes.

3.5 Climate change and increased warming means increased storm activity with more hurricanes and cyclones in tropical areas due to enhanced temperatures. But Britain will be similarly affected. Increased winds, especially in winters, will cause higher waves and thus a greater likelihood of flooding. If storms occur in conjunction with high tides then the

2 This means that the level of the Earth‟s crust is still readjusting itself to a level that existed prior to the last Ice Age.

3 They are rising at an accelerating rate.

4 See http://www.skepticalscience.com/sea-level-rise-predictions.htm (accessed 20/12/2010)

5 Reported in http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/06/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange (accessed 20/12/2010)

Page 3 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

flooding is increasingly likely to be on a very extensive scale. It was just such an event that occurred in 1953. A particular set of weather conditions occurred on January 31st of that year whereby an intense low pressure system moved south eastwards from northern Scotland towards Denmark. With this direction of movement very strong northerly winds during the night blew down the North Sea. Extensive flooding occurred along the low areas of eastern England in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and East Anglia. However, the worst flooding occurred on both sides of the southern North Sea, i.e. around the Thames estuary and in the low lying areas of Holland and Belgium. In the latter areas more than 2,000 people perished. Although casualties were lower in Britain, the costs of flood damage were exceedingly high, and it prompted the need for massive flood protection schemes. Indeed, this 1953 flood event was a major reason for building the Thames flood barrier near Woolwich, i.e. to save London from future marine flooding. In 2009 a similar storm surge was reported and threatened eastern England, and the fact that it caused little damage was fortuitous, i.e. because the surge did not exactly coincide with a high tide. 4 IMPACTS OF FLOOD ASSOCIATED FACTORS ON THE ROMNEY MARSH AREA OF KENT.

4.1 As part of this document, a series of maps has been prepared covering the Romney Marsh area. These maps show progressive amounts of sea level rise starting from the present situation (Map A below). The maps assume that no further defences would be built and that therefore these are the likely sea levels reached, i.e. at 1 metre sea level rise intervals. It is difficult to be precise when each level might occur, but using the latest information from a wide variety of sources, sea levels shown in Map B might occur by 2085, Map C by 2135, Map D by 2165, Map E by 2180 and Map F before 2200. These dates reflect the current exponential sea level rates of rise that are occurring, and will likely occur in the future. Of course it will be correctly argued that additional sea defences will be built and that therefore this might invalidate the mapped data. However, it needs to be stressed that in a severe flooding event, possibly activated by a storm surge occurring in conjunction with a high tide, wave heights might well be 6 to 7 metres above the AOD heights indicated in each map. Under these circumstances, and as occurred in the 1953 floods discussed in paragraph 5, water would spread rapidly across areas of the marsh immediately inland from any flood bank breaching point. So the maps give a clear indication of areas liable to be flooded given any breaches in the sea defences.

4.2 Each of the maps is now briefly described:

4.2.1 Map A shows the present coastline and the locations of selected main towns including Lydd have been included, as has the location of Lydd airport (in yellow). The marsh itself represents an extensive „fan‟ shaped area in green colouring denoting that it is low lying land. In reality virtually all of this low lying land is less than 5 metres above average sea level, with parts of the land being less than one metre above average sea level.

4.2.2 Map B shows the possible consequences of a one metre rise in sea level, i.e. it shows that land of less than one metre in height is now flooded. The term „possible consequences‟ is used because at present the local authorities, in conjunction with the Environment Agency, plan to maintain flood defences in

Page 4 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

order to protect this land from flooding. However, it should be recalled that the flood defences along the lower Mississippi were similarly designed to protect New Orleans from flooding, but they failed. In the UK the flood defences along the Humber estuary were designed to protect Kingston-upon-Hull (Hull) from flooding in 2007 but they too failed, and many people in the latter town still cannot return to their homes. From Map B it can be seen that salt water will be able to penetrate well inland past Rye and this will have severe consequences for the salinisation of soils and for local fresh water supplies. The area of Broomhill Sands has been especially indicated because the sea defences in this area are described by the Environment Agency as being in urgent need of upgrading (see footnote 9 – page 44), and it is likely to be a number of years before remedial action is taken here.

4.2.3 Map C shows that, in the event of a two metre rise in sea level, the marsh area will become fragmented and about 50% of it could be under salt water. Waters would have flooded along the Denge Sewer and the road connecting Lydd to the airport would have been cut. The whole of the Lydd area becomes part of an island and the airport itself is threatened. Paragraph 10 below provides more detail on the flooding problems at this stage.

4.2.4 With a three metre rise in sea level Map D shows that the situation regarding the airport is drastically worsened. Most of it is under surface water including all the terminal buildings. The town of Lydd would be almost entirely flooded, as would 80% of the marsh area. The Lydd/ area would be an offshore island though no doubt coastal flood protection would be given to the nuclear power stations. The costs of maintaining transport communications to the „Lydd/Dungeness‟ island would be huge. Romney Marsh is now becoming an area where functions are almost entirely restricted to natural ecosystems, e.g. nature reserves, coastal wetlands, salt marsh, etc.

4.2.5 The 4 metre sea level rise shown in Map E reveals that most of the marsh would be flooded with only four small island areas remaining above sea level. Effectively the whole marsh area is now uninhabited and economic activity would long since have ceased. It is highly likely that these remaining island areas would be eroded rapidly by a variety of coastal processes.

4.2.6 Map F finally reveals that the Marsh has effectively disappeared; the only areas above sea level might be some of the dunes near Camber (though those are likely to have been washed away), the shingle ridges around Dungeness, plus two insignificant islands. It is of interest to note that estuaries are now occupying the mouths of the Rother and the Isle of Oxney is again a true island. 260 square kilometres of valuable land has been lost, plus 1,000‟s of properties, built constructions, communications routes, etc, and 1,000‟s of jobs will have disappeared.

Page 5 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Figure 4-1: A. Romney Marsh – detail of physical topography showing present sea level

Figure 4-2: B. Romney Marsh - showing physical topography with ONE metre sea level rise

Page 6 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Figure 4-3: C. Romney Marsh – showing physical topography with TWO metre sea level rise

Figure 4-4: D. Romney Marsh – showing physical topography with THREE metre sea level rise

Page 7 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Figure 4-5: E. Romney Marsh – showing physical topography with FOUR metre sea level rise

Figure 4-6: F. Romney Marsh – showing physical topography with FIVE metre sea level rise

Page 8 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

4.3 So, the impact of sea level rise on the Romney Marsh area could be very significant indeed, and all the time that global warming continues the likelihood of catastrophic events in the area grows incrementally. Indeed, in order to prevent the scenario shown in Map F from becoming a reality (with the area being permanently lost to the sea), as mentioned in paragraph 12 below it will require a flood defence barrier of perhaps 13 metres in height to surround the whole of the seaward side of the Romney Marsh area. The Environment Agency recently noted that Romney Marsh is one of the top 10 areas in the UK in terms of flood risk6, and Shepway District Council notes in its Local Development Framework – Core Strategy “It is clear sea flooding is a major issue for Romney Marsh's low-lying land.”7. I predict that by the end of the next century, if we have a severe storm surge event, then nearly all the land that is presently at 5 metres or lower in the south Kent area will be flooded.

4.4 Looking now more specifically at the airport site. The likelihood of flooding here will be exacerbated by the rising underground water table. Thus, in a recent report, Royal Haskoning (2008) noted that with rising sea levels high tide events will be considerably extended in terms of the land levels being affected, and this will allow water penetration through the highly permeable Denge Gravels to extend much further inland8. Indeed, paragraph S 10.4 of the Environment Statement by Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd (December 2006)9 acknowledges that “Groundwater levels at the airport are high”, and in any case the most recent Water Level Management Plan (WLMP) for the area served by Lydd airport envisages maintaining higher water table levels10. Ground water levels will also be increased in winter through higher winter rains. High groundwater levels will impede surface drainage and thus will increase surface water during high rainfall events. A single flood event affecting any properties on the marsh has an average cost valued at 10% of the value of the property, though it is very much higher than this for people who are obliged to evacuate their properties. Increasingly we are going to find that insurance for any low lying properties is going to be harder to obtain or very much more expensive.

4.5 In Chapter 7 of the applicant‟s Environment Statement (paragraph 7.7.4) it is noted “that the entire LAA site is within a coastal flooding area and will be potentially exposed to a 1 in 200 year tide level of 5.47m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD). At such a level the potential impact of flooding is considered significant...” But Table 7.4 of Chapter 7 of the Environmental Statement notes that the crest of the flood bank at nearby Romney Sands is 6.5 metres above OD, and that “this is insufficient to stop overtopping during extreme high tide events”, and that flooding at nearby Greatstone sometimes occurs. So the EA flood level figures clearly seem to be out of date and indeed the EA (2008) note as an existing constraint “The need to provide coastal defences at Lade, between the existing defences

6 See http://www.romneymarshtimes.com/2009/06/shepway-in-top-10-of-flood-risk-areas.html

7 See http://consult.shepway.gov.uk/portal/core_strategy/csiob?pointId=1199449074761 (Chapter 7).

8 From: Environmental Scoping Report for the “Proposed Nuclear Development at Dungeness” Royal Haskoning – November 2008.

9 From: Non-Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement – LAA Proposed Terminal Replacement. (December 2006) Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd.

10 Dungeness Water Level Management Plan (1998).

Page 9 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

at Lydd-on-Sea and Greatstone.”(page 45)11. In other words we see that flooding from high sea levels is already occurring, and of course these sea levels are as nothing compared with estimated sea levels in 100 or 200 years time. And there are no flood defences in place at Lade which is only one mile from the proposed extended runway. Despite flooding already occurring the EA (2008)12 notes (page 101) that there will be “no active intervention (frontage is naturally accreting)” along the coast between Dungeness and Greatstone, and in the area immediately to the north (Greatstone to Littlestone South) the intention is to only „stabilise the dunes‟13. These actions seem to be totally inadequate given that these are the intentions for a 100 year future period. As shown in Map C, these dunes would allow no flood protection with even a two metre rise in sea level such that any severe storm could even now totally devastate areas inland from this point. But the situation at the Lydd Ranges (to the west of the Dungeness Power stations) seems considerably more worrying. To quote directly from the EA (2008) report “The present standard of defence, provided by a combination of annual beach profiling and the “green wall” embankment, gives a greater than 20% annual probability of flooding.”(page 44)14. This means that the defences here, only 3 miles from the Lydd airport, are only sustained to in 1 in 5 year standard which is totally inappropriate and unsatisfactory. A storm surge moving up the would easily overcome the existing defences at this location. And it will be “at least eight years” (p.93) before any scheme will be in place to protect this area15, during which time natural longshore drift processes will be relied upon to keep the sea at bay!16

4.6 Turning to the Flood Risk Assessment Report by BSF Consulting that accompanied the applicant‟s main Environmental Statement. In his evidence Sean Furey has already mentioned the incorrect status of the flooding probability declared for the area covered by the planning application. In paragraph 10.3 the claim is made that protection for a 1 in 200 year flood is given for Lydd by the present defences at a 5.64 metre AOD level. However, we have already mentioned in Paragraph 10 above that even today this level is insufficient, and it will certainly be completely inadequate by 2060. In paragraph 10.4 no mention is made as to whether the sea level rise rate of 6mm p.a. includes thermal expansion as well as actual water level rise and South Eastern land sink. And the rate of total sea level rise is exponentially increasing so it is totally illogical to give a 6mm consistent sea level rise rate for the years 2000 to 2050. Even if this is an averaged rate it does not match up with the rates given in paragraph 10.5 of 12mm p.a. rise for 2055 to

11 Environment Agency (May, 2008) to Cliff End Flood & Erosion Management Strategy (See http://www.grdp.org/static/documents/Research/sea_2049874.pdf).

12 Op cit.

13 Op cit (page 103)

14 Op cit.

15 Op cit. Any defences here will be expensive to address because of extensive sheet piling required and because of dangers from unexploded ordnance.

16 It is noteworthy that “Defend Our Coasts” share our concerns about the flooding *potential at both Lydd Ranges and in the Littlestone area. (See http://www.defendourcoast.org.uk/flood-defence- newsupdates/docs-response-to-ea-consultation/

Page 10 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

2085 and then a 15mm p.a. rise for 2085 to 2115, i.e. there is not an exponential rate indicated.

4.7 Paragraph 10.5 then says that a 200 year level is achieved by 2115 with no reason being given as to why the measurements should start at 1915 or how the figure of 6.4 m AOD is achieved. Paragraph 10.6 states that the MOD maintain the flood defence level at the Lydd Ranges to a 1 in 200 year protection level, but the Environment Agency (2008) document (see footnote 11) states that this MOD protection level is currently at less than a 1 in 5 year level (20%), i.e. this varies by a factor of 40! Paragraph 12.1.1 states that were there a flood then “The floodwater would rise steadily and allow a calm and controlled evacuation to be implemented.” This incorrectly assumes that floodwaters would be slowly rising. In fact it is very much more likely that the flood defences would be breached at perhaps a level of +5 metres, following which waters might swiftly pour through a rapidly widening breach (as happened in the 1953 North Sea floods and in the 2005 New Orleans flooding – both causing huge loss of life).

4.8 Recall that the new terminal floor level is to be only 3.3 m AOD, and that paragraph 4.5 of Sean Furey‟s evidence has corroborated the significant depth of flood waters that might accrue at the terminal site. We also know that the information given in paragraph 12.1.4 of the Flood Risk Assessment Report regarding the level of protection is totally out of date. It seems clear that all the source information reviewed in this Flood Risk Assessment Report will need to be reviewed and revised.

4.9 Added to this already unsatisfactory situation regarding future sea defence protection plans there will be an increase in storm activity such that wave heights may be 8% more by 2200. So, if the present 6.5 metre high flood defences can be shown to be insufficient, by the year 2200 we must envisage that the height of any flood defences must be at least 13 metres above present AOB, i.e. the present sea wall height (6.5 m), plus sea level rise (5 m), plus 8% wave height rise (60 cms)17, plus additional height to make up for present height inadequacy (90 cms). To protect the whole of Romney Marsh this defensive wall would need to be a minimum of 50 kms long, the cost of which could run into billions of pounds. Not only will there then be a huge challenge to preventing marine flooding in the future but the problems of disposing of any drainage waters from the marsh will be significantly increased.

4.10 For various reasons, it is difficult to be precise on any of the descriptions made above. For instance, the actual rate of sea level rise is constantly being re-modelled as further more detailed models are developed and as more data is gathered. And although the Environment Agency say that this coastline will be defended we have no way of knowing that this will be affordable. However, with accelerating sea level rises then obviously further flood protection cannot proceed indefinitely, and indeed already areas that were to be saved in the past have now been downgraded so allowing so-called „managed realignment‟ to occur18. Also, just as it was impossible to know where the Mississippi levees were to break causing New Orleans to flood, we cannot foretell where any Romney

17 See Grabemann and Weisse (2008) Climate change impact on extreme weather conditions in the North Sea: an ensemble study. In Ocean Dynamcis; 58(4); p199-212.

Page 11 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Marsh flood embankment breaching might occur18. This means that flooding locations and patterns might vary. Finally, the amount and extent of any single flooding event is totally unpredictable, i.e. depending on a combination of the state of the tide, wind strength, wave height and direction plus the local strength of the defences.

4.11 Recently, in the UK we have not had a large, catastrophic marine flood event. We have had severe flooding on inland rivers such as around Tewkesbury or Hull in 2007, but there are few examples of sea flooding. With increasing time gaps between flood events complacency sets in, and it is a proven fact that people begin to think that “it won‟t happen to us”. Yet, on a world scale, every year we see increasing natural disasters, one of the foremost of which is flooding. You can be very certain that the authorities in places such as New Orleans would have been confident that they had sufficient flood protection in place. But this was not the case. At the recent Cancun Climate Change negotiations, Britain‟s main representative Chris Huhne noted "The pattern of extreme weather events is alarming. In Britain, our insurers paid out £4.5 billion in flood damage in the last ten years compared with £1.5 billion in the previous ten years. This is a warning of worse to come.”19 The point is that we in Britain are not only getting significantly more serious flood events, but we will certainly have major marine flood events in the future, and the longer we wait for such events the more catastrophic they will be. Given the evidence outlined above, Romney Marsh is just such an area that is pre-eminently likely to suffer in the future.

18 Meaning that flood protected areas will be in retreat and therefore certain areas will be abandoned to the sea.

19 Reported in the Independent newspaper – December 8th 2010.

Page 12 of 13

CPRE Protect Kent: Proof of Evidence CPRE/07/B – Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

5 APPENDIX 1: REFERENCES

5.1 Wang, M., J.E. Overland, (2009) A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years? Geophysical Research Letters, VOL. 36, L07502, doi:10.1029/2009GL037820

Page 13 of 13