DOCSLIB.ORG

Storm Tide Simulations for Hurricane Hugo (1989): on the Significance of Including Inland Flooding Areas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Storm Tide Simulations for Hurricane Hugo (1989): on the Significance of Including Inland Flooding Areas STORM TIDE SIMULATIONS FOR HURRICANE HUGO (1989): ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INCLUDING INLAND FLOODING AREAS by DANIEL DIETSCHE B.S. Basle Institute of Technology, Switzerland, 1993 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2004 ABSTRACT In this study, storm tides are simulated by performing a hindcast of water surface levels produced by Hurricane Hugo (1989). The region of interest incorporates inundation areas between Charleston and Shallotte Inlet (120 miles northeast of Charleston) and includes Bulls Bay where the highest storm surge of about 20 feet occurred. The study domain also contains an important riverine system which is connected to the Winyah Bay: the Waccamaw River up to Conway including all pertinent tributaries (Sampit River, Black River, and Pee Dee River), and the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIW) within the Grand Strand (Myrtle Beach). Five different two-dimensional finite element models with triangular elements are applied in order to simulate the storm tides, allow for inundation, and provide a basis of comparison to assess the significance of including inundation areas and two extents of spatial discretization. Four computational regions comprise a semicircular mesh encompassing the South Carolina coast including all relevant estuaries and bays as well as the continental shelf. Two of these four computational regions include inland topography allowing the model to simulate inland flooding. One of the floodplain meshes is then incorporated into the Western North Atlantic Tidal (WNAT) model domain to produce a fifth computational region. ii The computation of the water surface elevations is obtained from the long-wave hydrodynamic ADCIRC-2DDI numerical code, which solves the nonlinear shallow water equations. The code is driven by wind field information (wind velocities and atmospheric pressure) and by astronomical tide forcings at the open ocean boundaries. Short wave action (wave set-up and run-up) is not described by the code. The primary focus of the study is the computation of two boundary conditions at Winyah Bay inlet and Nixon’s Crossroad on behalf of the National Weather Service’s Southeast River Forecast Center. Furthermore, the finite element meshes with and without inland topography exhibit whether incorporating inundation areas significantly improves the accuracy of the computed water elevations along the shorelines. A secondary product of this research is the assessment of near-inlet boundary locations with respect to forcings from storm surge hydrographs and astronomical tidal signals. Assessments between historical data and the simulated storm tides based on the various model domains are presented. The simulated results show good consensus with historical data along the South Carolina coast. While the results show that including inland topography significantly influences the accuracy of the computed water elevations, it was determined that a limited extent with a coarse mesh resolution is sufficient. The boundary condition assessment indicates that storm tide hydrographs are very spatially dependent near inlets, whereas astronomical tides have minimal variance. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express my appreciation to those people whose assistance and guidance helped me to finalize this research. First, I would like to thank Dr. Scott C. Hagen for his exceptional support, advise, and guidance on this project as well as the many beneficial and pleasant conversations I had with him during my stay at the University of Central Florida. I also would like to thank Dr. Gour-Tsyh Yeh and Dr. Manoj B. Chopra for agreeing to serve on my committee; Andrew T. Cox of Oceanweather Inc., for providing the wind field information; Yuji Funakoshi for his help on the mesh generation software SMS and his excellent support by developing some of the meshes used in this thesis; Mike Salisbury for his assistance with the Hydrology labs and updating the FORTRAN codes; and many thanks to the other lads in the lab: Peter Bacopoulos, Satoshi Kojima, and former colleague Ryan Murray. Last but not least, I am very thankful to the members of the Southeast River Forecast Center in Peachtree, Atlanta: Reggina Garza, Wylie Quillian, Jamie Dyer, and John Feldt for their help in collecting data and providing vital information for the success of this project. This study is funded in part from University Cooperation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) Subward No. UCAR S01-32794 pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA97WD0082 to the University of Central Florida. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA, its sub-agencies, or UCAR. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES ix ABBREVIATIONS xiii CONVERSION FACTORS xv CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Hurricane Impacts 1 1.2 Hurricane Hugo (1989) 3 1.2.1 The History of the Storm 6 1.2.2 Reported High Water Marks 8 1.3 Research Objective 9 CHAPTER 2. TROPICAL CYCLONES 12 2.1 Hurricane Origin 12 2.2 Hurricane Environment 14 2.3 Hurricane Development 18 2.4 Hurricane Classification 23 2.5 Hurricane Movement 23 2.6 Hurricane Weather 24 2.7 Hurricane Winds 25 2.8 Hurricane Land Impacts 26 2.8.1 Winds 27 2.8.2 Rainfall 27 2.8.3 Tornadoes 28 2.9 Hurricane Decay 28 2.10 Hurricane Modification 29 2.11 Hurricane Surveillance and Tracking 32 v 2.11.1 Aircraft Reconnaissance 33 2.11.2 Satellite Remote Sensing 34 2.12 Hurricane Prediction Models 35 CHAPTER 3. LITERATURE REVIEW 37 3.1 Pressure Surge, Long Wave, and Short Wave Processes 37 3.2 Short-wave Generation 41 3.3 Predicting Storm Surge 43 3.3.1 SLOSH Features 45 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL MODEL DOCUMENTATION 47 4.1 Tropical Wind Model 48 4.2 Meteorological Forcing Transformation into ADCIRC 53 4.3 Coastal Ocean Circulation Model 54 CHAPTER 5. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 60 5.1 Riverine System 61 5.1.1 Waccamaw River 61 5.1.2 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 62 5.1.3 Pee Dee River and Black River 63 5.2 Estuarine System 64 5.2.1 Winyah Bay 65 5.2.2 Bulls Bay 66 5.2.3 Charleston Harbor 67 CHAPTER 6. DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MESHES 69 6.1 The open-ocean Boundary Placement 70 6.2 South Carolina Study Domain 72 6.2.1 SC-1 76 6.2.2 SC-1-FP 77 6.2.3 SC-2 80 6.2.4 SC-2-FP 83 6.2.5 Comparison South Carolina Meshes 91 vi 6.3 Western North Atlantic Tidal Domain 93 CHAPTER 7. MODEL PARAMETERS AND PERFORMANCE 99 7.1 Computational Model Parameters 99 7.1.1 South Carolina Domain 99 7.1.2 Western North Atlantic Tidal model domain 100 7.2 Computational Performance 102 CHAPTER 8. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 104 8.1 Tidal Signal Verification 104 8.2 Inundation Areas 109 8.3 Storm Tide Hydrographs South Carolina Coast 115 8.3.1 Charleston Harbor 115 8.3.2 Bulls Bay 120 8.3.3 Winyah Bay Inlet 123 8.3.4 McClellanville 126 8.3.5 Awendaw 128 8.4 Winyah Bay Inlet Hydrograph Assessment 129 CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK 139 9.1 Conclusion 139 9.2 Future Work 141 APPENDIX A. ADCIRC 2DDI INPUT FILE: MESH DESCRIPTION SC-2-FP 143 APPENDIX B. ADCIRC 2DDI PARAMETERS SC-2-FP 145 APPENDIX C. WIND FIELD DESCRIPTION SC-1 150 LIST OF REFERENCES 152 vii LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Deadliest U.S. Hurricanes 1900-1996 (NOAA, 1996) 2 1.2 Costliest U.S. Hurricanes 1900-2000, damages inflation adjusted to Year 2000 (NOAA, 2000) 4 2.1 Total Number of Storm for each Genesis Region, Period 1952-71 (Pielke, 1990, p. 35) 13 2.2 North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones (Elsner and Kara, 1999, p.16) 19 2.3 General Characteristics of North Atlantic Hurricanes (Elsner and Kara, 1999) 22 2.4 The Saffir/Simpson Scale. The Table shows the five defined Hurricane Levels and their Features (Elsner and Kara, 1999, p.22) 24 3.1 Physical Processes associated with Storm Event 43 4.1 Computed Wind Field Information Hurricane Hugo 52 5.1 Annual average Freshwater inflows to Winyah bay (Johnson, 1972) 64 6.1 Characteristics of the South Carolina Model Meshes 92 7.1 Tidal Constituents used to force the ADCIRC-2DDI model 102 7.2 Computational Model Setup and Performance (1.75 days) 102 8.1 Peak Elevations at Winyah Bay Inlet in meters above MSL, recorded at Node 1 and Node 4 138 viii LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Hurricane Hugo Track (NOAA). September 11 to 25, 1989 5 1.2 Hurricane Landfall Region Charleston 7 1.3 South Carolina, Waccamaw River, and AIW 10 2.1 Global Tropical Cyclone Source Regions, Period 1952-71 (Pielke, 1990) 13 2.2 Schematic of Wind Motion within a Hurricane 16 2.3 Tropical Disturbance, Gulf of Mexico (USACE, 2003) 18 2.4 Tropical Depression, West Coast Africa (USACE, 2003) 20 2.5 Tropical Storm Claudette, 1997, East Coast USA (USACE, 2003) 20 2.6 Hurricane Hugo Perspective (NASA) 22 2.7 Schematic of Hurricane Winds in the Eye Wall 25 2.8 Hypothesis Hurricane Modification, Project “Stormfury” (NOAA) 31 3.1 The Definition of the Storm Surge and the Storm Tide (BoM) 39 3.2 Schematic of the Storm Surge Composition (UCAR) 39 3.3 SLOSH Basins in the Atlantic (NOAA) 44 3.4 SLOSH Contour Surface Envelopes of Hurricane Hugo (NOAA) 45 4.1 Wind Field Extent with respect to the Western North Atlantic Tidal (WNAT) Model Domain 51 4.2 Computed Wind Field Vectors at Time of Landfall, Charleston Harbor 52 5.1 South Carolina Study Domain 60 5.2 Study Domain Waccamaw River and AIW (Drewes and Conrads, 1995) 61 ix 5.3 Winyah Bay (Maptech Terrain Navigator 2002) 65 5.4 Bulls Bay (Maptech
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1989 Hurricane Hugo - September 1989
    1989 Hurricane Hugo - September 1989. Category 4 hurricane devastates SC and NC with ~ 20 foot storm surge and severe wind damage after hitting PR and the U.S. Virgin Islands; over $9.0 (13.9) billion (about $7.1 (10.9) billion in Carolinas); 86 deaths (57--U.S. mainland, 29--U.S. Islands). Hurricane Hugo was a powerful Cape Verde hurricane that caused widespread damage and loss of life in Guadeloupe, Saint Croix, Puerto Rico, and the Southeast United States. It formed over the eastern Atlantic near the Cape Verde Islands on September 9, 1989. Hugo moved thousands of miles across the Atlantic, rapidly strengthening to briefly attain category 5 hurricane strength on its journey. It later crossed over Guadeloupe and St. Croix on September 17 and 18 as a category 4 hurricane. Weakening slightly more, it passed over Puerto Rico as a strong category 3 hurricane. Further weakening occurred several hours after re-emerging into the Atlantic, becoming downgraded to a category 2 hurricane. However, it re-strengthened into a category 4 hurricane before making landfall just slightly north of Charleston, on Isle of Palms on September 22 with 140 mph sustained winds (gusts to more than 160 mph). It had devolved to a remnant low near Lake Erie by the next day. As of 2016, Hurricane Hugo is the most intense tropical cyclone to strike the East Coast north of Florida since 1898. Hurricane Hugo caused 34 fatalities (most by electrocution or drowning) in the Caribbean and 27 in South Carolina, left nearly 100,000 homeless, and resulted in $9.47 billion (1989 USD) in damage overall, making it the most damaging hurricane ever recorded at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane & Tropical Storm
    5.8 HURRICANE & TROPICAL STORM SECTION 5.8 HURRICANE AND TROPICAL STORM 5.8.1 HAZARD DESCRIPTION A tropical cyclone is a rotating, organized system of clouds and thunderstorms that originates over tropical or sub-tropical waters and has a closed low-level circulation. Tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes are all considered tropical cyclones. These storms rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere around the center and are accompanied by heavy rain and strong winds (NOAA, 2013). Almost all tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic basin (which includes the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea) form between June 1 and November 30 (hurricane season). August and September are peak months for hurricane development. The average wind speeds for tropical storms and hurricanes are listed below: . A tropical depression has a maximum sustained wind speeds of 38 miles per hour (mph) or less . A tropical storm has maximum sustained wind speeds of 39 to 73 mph . A hurricane has maximum sustained wind speeds of 74 mph or higher. In the western North Pacific, hurricanes are called typhoons; similar storms in the Indian Ocean and South Pacific Ocean are called cyclones. A major hurricane has maximum sustained wind speeds of 111 mph or higher (NOAA, 2013). Over a two-year period, the United States coastline is struck by an average of three hurricanes, one of which is classified as a major hurricane. Hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions may pose a threat to life and property. These storms bring heavy rain, storm surge and flooding (NOAA, 2013). The cooler waters off the coast of New Jersey can serve to diminish the energy of storms that have traveled up the eastern seaboard.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Marãa Tripled Stem Breaks and Doubled Tree Mortality Relative
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09319-2 OPEN Hurricane María tripled stem breaks and doubled tree mortality relative to other major storms María Uriarte 1, Jill Thompson2 & Jess K. Zimmerman3 Tropical cyclones are expected to intensify under a warming climate, with uncertain effects on tropical forests. One key challenge to predicting how more intense storms will influence these ecosystems is to attribute impacts specifically to storm meteorology rather than dif- 1234567890():,; ferences in forest characteristics. Here we compare tree damage data collected in the same forest in Puerto Rico after Hurricanes Hugo (1989, category 3), Georges (1998, category 3), and María (2017, category 4). María killed twice as many trees as Hugo, and for all but two species, broke 2- to 12-fold more stems than the other two storms. Species with high density wood were resistant to uprooting, hurricane-induced mortality, and were protected from breakage during Hugo but not María. Tree inventories and a wind exposure model allow us to attribute these differences in impacts to storm meteorology. A better understanding of risk factors associated with tree species susceptibility to severe storms is key to predicting the future of forest ecosystems under climate warming. 1 Department of Ecology Evolution and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027, USA. 2 Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB, UK. 3 Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00925, USA. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to M.U. (email: [email protected]) NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | (2019) 10:1362 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09319-2 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications 1 ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09319-2 yclonic storms (hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons) exposure to wind or the structure and composition of forests at Crepresent the dominant natural disturbance in coastal the time the storm struck.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Andrew in Florida: Dynamics of a Disaster ^
    Hurricane Andrew in Florida: Dynamics of a Disaster ^ H. E. Willoughby and P. G. Black Hurricane Research Division, AOML/NOAA, Miami, Florida ABSTRACT Four meteorological factors aggravated the devastation when Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida: completed replacement of the original eyewall by an outer, concentric eyewall while Andrew was still at sea; storm translation so fast that the eye crossed the populated coastline before the influence of land could weaken it appreciably; extreme wind speed, 82 m s_1 winds measured by aircraft flying at 2.5 km; and formation of an intense, but nontornadic, convective vortex in the eyewall at the time of landfall. Although Andrew weakened for 12 h during the eyewall replacement, it contained vigorous convection and was reintensifying rapidly as it passed onshore. The Gulf Stream just offshore was warm enough to support a sea level pressure 20-30 hPa lower than the 922 hPa attained, but Andrew hit land before it could reach this potential. The difficult-to-predict mesoscale and vortex-scale phenomena determined the course of events on that windy morning, not a long-term trend toward worse hurricanes. 1. Introduction might have been a harbinger of more devastating hur- ricanes on a warmer globe (e.g., Fisher 1994). Here When Hurricane Andrew smashed into South we interpret Andrew's progress to show that the ori- Florida on 24 August 1992, it was the third most in- gins of the disaster were too complicated to be ex- tense hurricane to cross the United States coastline in plained by thermodynamics alone. the 125-year quantitative climatology.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from Hurricane Hugo: Implications for Public Policy
    LEARNING FROM HURRICANE HUGO: IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY prepared for the FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 500 C Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20472 under contract no. EMW-90-G-3304,A001 June 1992 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................... 1.............I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STORM . 3 Wind Speeds .3 IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS 5 ................................ Biological Systems ....... .................................5 Dunes and Beaches ....... .5............................... Beach Nourishment . .................................7 IMPACTS ON HUMANS AND HUMAN SYSTEMS ............................ 9 Deaths and Injuries ............................ 9 Housing ............................ 9 Utilities ................... 10 Transportation Systems .1................... 10 The Economy ................... 11 Psychological Effects ................... 11 INSURANCE .......................... 13 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT .......................... 14 Setbacks ........................... 15 Coastal Protection Structures .......................... 16 PERFORMANCE OF STRUCTURES ..... .... 18 Effects of Wind and/or Water ...... .... 18 Effects of Water, Waves, or Erosion . .. .18 Effects of Wind .............. .... 19 Foundations .................. .... 21 Slabs ................ .... 22 Piers and Columns ....... .... 22 Pilings............... .... 22 Elevation .................. .... 23 Lower Area Enclosures .... .... 23 Connections ................. ....24 Manufactured Housing .......... .... 24
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Natural and Mechanical Dune Performance in a Post-Hurricane Environment
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Assessing Natural and Mechanical Dune Performance in a Post-Hurricane Environment Jean T. Ellis * and Mayra A. Román-Rivera Department of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 1 April 2019; Accepted: 29 April 2019; Published: 2 May 2019 Abstract: The purpose of this study is to document the geomorphic evolution of a mechanical dune over approximately one year following its installation and compare it to the recovery of a natural dune following the impact of Hurricane Matthew (2016). During the study period, the dunes’ integrity was tested by wave and wind events, including king tides, and a second hurricane (Irma, 2017), at the end of the study period. Prior to the impact of the second hurricane, the volumetric increase of the mechanical and natural dune was 32% and 75%, respectively, suggesting that scraping alone is not the optimal protection method. If scraping is employed, we advocate that the dune should be augmented by planting. Ideally, the storm-impacted dune should naturally recover. Post-storm vegetation regrowth was lower around the mechanical dune, which encouraged aeolian transport and dune deflation. Hurricane Irma, an extreme forcing event, substantially impacted the dunes. The natural dune was scarped and the mechanical dune was overtopped; the system was essentially left homogeneous following the hurricane. The results from this study question the current practice of sand scraping along the South Carolina coast, which occurs post-storm, emplacement along the former primary dune line, and does not include the planting of vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Sandy: an Educational Bibliography of Key Research Studies
    HURRICANE SANDY: AN EDUCATIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF KEY RESEARCH STUDIES Chris Piotrowski University of West Florida (Research Project Completed on April 10, 2013) HURRICANE SANDY: AN EDUCATIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF KEY RESEARCH STUDIES ABSTRACT There, undoubtedly, will be a flurry of research activity in the ‘Superstorm’ Sandy impact area on a myriad of disaster-related topics, across academic disciplines. The purpose of this study was to review the disaster research related specifically to hurricanes in the educational and social sciences that would best serve as a compendium bibliography for researchers, academic faculty, and policymakers in the Hurricane Sandy impact area. To that end, this study, based on a content analysis procedure, identified key articles on hurricanes based on the extant literature indexed in the database PsycINFO. Of the 1,408 references identified, 1000 were scholarly qualitative and quantitative research articles. The author developed a bibliography of 100 key citations to articles, categorized across select topical areas, based on issues central to investigatory efforts following natural disasters. Future research should recommend research designs that address specific concerns of both researchers and policymakers in high-impact, heavily populated areas of the U.S. susceptible to major tropical storm or hurricane damage. Introduction The field of disaster studies has grown at an exponential pace over the past 30 years and, accordingly, the knowledge base of the field is presently quite voluminous (Rodriguez et al., 2007)). While investigations on the impacts of natural disasters in the areas of climate science and the general sciences have a long history, research on the human impact of hurricanes is a more recent phenomenon in the social sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • What Happened? Irma and Maria -- the Back-To-Back Category 5 Hurricanes of September 2017 in the US Virgin Islands
    What Happened? Irma and Maria -- the back-to-back Category 5 Hurricanes of September 2017 in the US Virgin Islands OCEAN AND COASTAL OBSERVING – VIRGIN ISLANDS, INC. (OCOVI) WWW.OCOVI.ORG Two weeks apart, hurricanes Irma (September 6th) and Maria (September 20th) followed paths that sandwiched the Virgin Islands. Both remained Category 5 storms as they transited the VI region. Irma set a record of ~ 3¼ days in Category 5. What makes our region particularly prone to tropical storms or hurricanes? Abundant warm ocean water, Temperature ≥ 80◦F (26.5◦C) --the ocean water’s heat provides the energy for convection which creates storms; Start-up moisture and spin from pre-existing systems (e.g., waves coming from the African continent); Favorable distance from the equator in order to maximize the spin (Latitude > 4◦ is necessary to maintain the necessary spin; the VI is located around 18◦ N); Remoteness from competing continental systems which can deplete atmospheric moisture; Remoteness from sources of wind shear; Wind shear disrupts Minimal land surface (less debilitating friction, less convection deprivation of moisture). columns Who are we? Where are we? Hurricanes since 1851 Significant quote Alexander Hamilton describing the 1772 hurricane on St. Croix in the Royal Danish American Gazette, August 31,1772: … Good God! what horror and destruction—it's impossible for me to describe—or you to form any idea of it…. A great part of the buildings throughout the Island are levelled to the ground—almost all the rest very much shattered—several persons killed and numbers utterly ruined …our harbour is entirely bare…”.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Ready for the Next Storm By: Shanti Menon
    SPECIAL REPORT FALL 2020 Prepared for EDF Members Getting ready for the next storm By: Shanti Menon Attorney Agustín Carbó survived Hurricane Maria and the devastating blackout that followed. Now he’s working to build a stormproof energy system for Puerto Rico. Three years have passed since Hurricane Maria tore into Puerto Rico, uprooting trees, utility poles and cellphone towers; flooding homes; and plunging the entire island into darkness. The storm destroyed the island’s fragile electric grid, battered two weeks earlier by Hurricane Irma. Without access to power, clean water, refrigeration and health care, an estimated 3,000 people died. Some remained without power for nearly a year. Today, Puerto Rico’s grid is still unstable, and thousands of families endured this hurricane season with nothing over their heads but tattered blue FEMA tarps installed after Maria tore off their roofs in 2017. It’s only a matter of time before the next big storm hits. Puerto Rico lies in Hurricane Alley, a system of warm Atlantic waters that fuels hurricanes, now supercharged by climate change. Agustín Carbó, a former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency attorney, Puerto Rico’s first energy commissioner and founder of a U.S.-Latin American climate think tank, lived through the tragedy of Hurricane Maria and is now leading EDF’s work on energy policy reform in his native island. “I have a responsibility on my shoulders to make sure what we do is helping the people,” he says. “We have been through so much.” It took nearly a year to fully restore electric service after Hurricane Maria.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.1 the Climatology of Inland Winds from Tropical Cyclones in the Eastern United States
    1.1 THE CLIMATOLOGY OF INLAND WINDS FROM TROPICAL CYCLONES IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES Michael C. Kruk* STG Inc., Asheville, North Carolina Ethan J. Gibney IMSG Inc., Asheville, North Carolina David H. Levinson and Michael Squires NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, NC landfall than do weaker storms. For these reasons, the 1. Introduction primary impact areas of tropical cyclones are generally found along coastal (or near coastal) regions. Most In the United States, the impacts from tropical previous studies involving the inland-extent of tropical cyclones often extend well-inland after these storms cyclones have generally focused on their expected or make landfall along the coast. For example, after the modeled rate of decay post landfall (e.g., Tuleya et al. passage of Hurricane Camille (1969), more than 150 1984, Kaplan and DeMaria 1995; Kaplan and DeMaria casualties occurred in the state of Virginia, some 1300 2001), while others have focused on recurrence km inland from where the storm originally made landfall thresholds or probabilities of landfalls along a given along the Louisiana coast (Emanuel 2005). According to portion of the United States coastline (e.g., Bove et al. Rappaport (2000), a large portion of fatalities often occur 1998; Elsner and Bossak 2001; Gray and Klotzbach inland associated with a decaying tropical cyclone’s 2005; Saunders and Lea 2005). Results from Kaplan winds (falling trees, collapsed roofs, etc.) and heavy and DeMaria (1995) showed an idealized scenario for flooding rains. In the 1970s, ‘80s, and ‘90s, freshwater the maximum possible inland wind speed of a decaying floods accounted for 59 percent of the recorded deaths tropical cyclone based on both intensity at landfall and from tropical cyclones (Rappaport 2000), and such forward motion for the Gulf Coast and southeastern floods are often a combination of meteorological and United States, and for the New England area (Kaplan hydrological factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Damage Report & Dive Sector Needs Assessment Commonwealth of Dominica, Post Hurricane Maria Funded By
    Marine Damage Report & Dive Sector Needs Assessment Commonwealth of Dominica, Post Hurricane Maria Funded by OAS Consultant Arun Madisetti Independent Marine Biologist Needs Assessment for Commonwealth of Dominica Following Hurricane Maria Introduction The Commonwealth of Dominica is known for experiencing extreme weather conditions and earthquakes. The island lies within the hurricane belt and has been impacted by many hurricanes and tropical storms. The most damaging storms in recent years include Hurricane David in 1979, Hurricane Hugo in 1989, Hurricane Marilyn in 1995, Hurricane Lenny in 1999, and Tropical Storm Erika in 2015.2 On August 27, 2015, Tropical Storm Erika hit Dominica. Rainfall of approximately 38 centimeters was recorded in southern Dominica, but because of the peaked topography of the island, it is likely that even higher levels of rainfall occurred in the interior of Dominica due to Tropical Storm Erika. The large amount of rainfall over such a short period caused landslides and flash-floods which resulted in carnage throughout much of the country—the most severe of which was reported on the western and south-eastern coasts. Tragically, 31 people died as a result of the storm and many more were displaced or experienced property loss or damage. The total estimated damage from T.S. Erika in Dominica alone was $483 million USD. The extensive impact of Tropical Storm Erika on Dominica emphasized the significance of hazard preparedness and climate change risk management, particularly at the government level.2 Most recently, Hurricane Maria (Figure 1) struck Dominica the evening of September 18, 2017 and bisected the island from southeast to northwest (Figure 2) during a period of about 8 hours with sustained wind speeds of 160 miles per hour (mph) and wind gusts well in excess of 250 mph (Figure 3).
    [Show full text]
  • RCED-91-150 Disaster Assistance: Supplemental Information On
    lJtlit,ttd Statm General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable GAO Ernest F. Hollings, U.S. Senate DISASTER ASSISTANCE Supplemental Information on Hurricane Hugo in South Carolina IllllIllHll 144188 RELEASED --Not fo be mleawd outside the ~~!omceunlessspecin~ appmwd by the OffIce of Congresteionf4l BaldOMB --- ~;Ao/I1~:ISI~-!Jl-lr,o Uuited States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20648 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-242801 May 21,199l The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings United States Senate Dear Senator Hollings: As agreed with you on March 6, 1991, we are providing additional infor- mation to supplement our report entitled Disaster Assistance:Federal, State, and Local Responsesto Natural Disasters Need Improvement (GAO/RCED-91-43,Mar. 6, 1991). This information pertains only to South Carolina and includes: (1) the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency ’s (FEMA)efforts to provide temporary housing assistanceto the victims of Hurricane Hugo, which struck South Carolina on September22, 1989; (2) South Carolina counties’ local emergencymanagement officials ’ responsesto our disaster assistancesurvey; and (3) cost-sharing arrangements between FEMAand state and local governmentsto fund public assistanceprojects in South Carolina. In a federally declared disaster, FEMAcan provide grants directly to vic- tims for housing needswhile other requests affecting the general popu- lation such as water, generators, and debris removal are made by local governments. In South Carolina, the state emergencyoperations plan directs that local governments channel their assistanceneeds through the county to the State EmergencyPreparedness Office established for that purpose. The state can fully respond to somerequests and may request assistancefrom FEMAto meet other needs.Under a cost-share arrangement with state and local governments,FEMA can also provide funds for the restoration of publicly owned facilities damagedor destroyed by a federally declared disaster.
    [Show full text]