DOCSLIB.ORG

Hurricane Ivan Spurs Effort to Construct Pensacola Wastewater Reclamation Facility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hurricane Ivan Spurs Effort to Construct Pensacola Wastewater Reclamation Facility Hurricane Ivan Spurs Effort to Construct Pensacola Wastewater Reclamation Facility Tim Haag ensacola has an unfortunate but well doc - distance from Pensacola Bay, which is separated umented history with hurricanes. The from the Gulf of Mexico by Santa Rosa Island, Tim Haag is the director of utility services city’s claim to the title of oldest European a narrow barrier island that is home to a por - and planning for the Emerald Coast Utili - Psettlement on the continental U.S., dating back tion of Gulf Islands National Seashore. The ties Authority in Pensacola. He wishes to to 1559, was impacted by a direct hurricane current plant site encompasses approximately acknowledge and express his appreciation strike only one month after the Spanish settle - 19 acres and has been utilized as a wastewater for editorial assistance in completing this ment was founded. That hurricane was the first treatment plant site since the 1930s. article to Steve Sorrell, P.E., ECUA execu - of many recorded tropical systems that struck The existing plant was constructed in the tive director; Pat Byrne, P.E., ECUA deputy this historic northwest Florida city. late 1970s, designed as a high-purity-oxygen executive director of utility operations; Don The storm associated with this article, treatment process. The plant process has been Palmer, P.E., ECUA director of water recla - Hurricane Ivan, made landfall as a Category 3 modified since its construction and essentially mation; Bill Johnson, P.E., ECUA director of hurricane in the early morning hours of Sep - provides an advanced secondary treatment engineering; Steve Holcomb, P.E., ECUA tember 16, 2004, near Gulf Shores, Alabama— level, incorporating a fluidized bed dryer for manager of water reclamation engineer - approximately 40 miles west of Pensacola. This processing bio-solids. ing; Rebecca Peterson, ECUA dontract landfall location put Pensacola in the most in - The plant is permitted by the Florida De - project coordinator; Nathalie Bowers, tense part of the storm system, the right front partment of Environmental Protection ECUA public information officer, and David quadrant, and brought winds of over 100 (FDEP) to treat 20 million gallons per day Carr, P.E., CWRF project manager, miles per hour into the area, along with a 15- (MGD), with effluent discharge directly into Baskerville Donovan Inc. foot storm surge. Pensacola Bay. In the timeframe immediately Hurricane Ivan’s impact on Pensacola was preceding Hurricane Ivan, the plant routinely far-reaching and included a number of fatali - was treating flows in the range of 14-16 MGD. ties. This article will examine Ivan’s influence Prior to Hurricane Ivan, the Main Street properties. Any upset in the plant process that on the Emerald Coast Utilities Authority’s Plant served as a regional processing center for results in odor problems impacts a significant (ECUA’s) wastewater treatment system— waste biosolids, septage hauling, and grease. number of people. specifically the recovery and operation of its The ECUA received the grease and septage at Other issues of concern with the existing Main Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, an on-site pre-treatment system (these mate - site are the lack of reject storage capacity to con - which is located approximately 300 yards from rials are now received and treated at a separate tain a discharge in the event of a process upset, Pensacola Bay in downtown Pensacola. off-site processing facility). the absence of an operable filter, and the direct The ECUA is an independent special dis - The primary and waste sludge from both discharge of plant effluent to Pensacola Bay. trict unit of government, created by the on-site and off-site sources is processed Florida Legislature in 1981 to own, manage, through screens and on-site centrifuges. The 2003 Study and operate the water and wastewater utility resulting sludge “cake” is then further The ECUA’s board of directors initiated a systems that previously were owned by both processed in a fluidized bed dryer, which re - study in 2002 to consider either the continued the city of Pensacola and Escambia County. sults in a final product that meets U.S. Envi - operation of the Main Street Plant at its cur - The ECUA is governed by a five-member ronmental Protection Agency standards for rent location or pursuing the option of re - elected board of directors. Class AA biosolids. placing the plant by construction of a new The article will also explain the process In instances when the dryers may be down facility at a different location. The study pro - and many of the issues related to the ECUA’s for maintenance, the ECUA disposes of the vided a comprehensive analysis of issues re - decision to replace the Main Street Treatment sludge in a landfill. The importance of this fact lated to and impacting the operation of the Plant with a newer water reclamation facility at is that a number of smaller wastewater treat - plant, including population and flow projec - a site away from the coastal floodplain, thereby ment facilities in the western Florida Panhandle tions, local comprehensive plan requirements, removing the possibility of flooding from a fu - did rely on the Main Street Plant for processing wastewater treatment processes, an analysis of ture tropical system’s storm surge and the re - their biosolids, so operation of this facility is crit - the existing collection system, reclaimed water sulting loss or interruption of sewer service to ical for not only the Pensacola area, but also for reuse/disposal alternatives, potential treatment a large percentage of the greater Pensacola area. the western Florida panhandle region. and reuse/disposal sites, analysis of two sepa - Despite the fact that the ECUA has in - rate “take no action” alternatives, cost com - Pre-Ivan Situation: vested a considerable amount of money in parison of alternatives, and identification of Main Street Plant odor-control equipment and processes, odor potential funding sources. still remains a concern at the Main Street The study resulted in a report that the Plant Description Plant. In large part, this is because of the board accepted in late 2003. The report detailed The ECUA’s Main Street Wastewater Treat - plant’s location within the downtown area in the 20-year present worth of five alternatives, ment Plant is located in downtown Pensacola. close proximity to the downtown business dis - with estimates of capital costs, operating & As stated previously, the plant is only a short trict, as well as residential and commercial Continued on page 14 12 • OCTOBER 2009 • FLORIDA WATER RESOURCES JOURNAL Above: Aftermath of Hurri - cane Ivan: Street flooding at the perimeter of the Main Street Plant in Pensacola (September 2004). Right: FEMA aerial photo showing Main Street Plant in relation to Pensacola Bay and area in downtown Pensacola flooded by Hurricane Ivan (September 2004). Continued from page 12 maintenance (O&M) costs (20-year present worth), and present-worth remaining value at 20 years. The 2003 study’s conclu - sions included recognition that, despite the assessment that the “take no action” alter - native was the lowest cost alternative, keeping the Hurricane Ivan: 09/16/04 By September 14, Ivan had entered the Main Street Plant operational at its current site Gulf of Mexico and ECUA staff members, would involve significant expenditures to main - The decision to proceed with the con - along with other local government agencies tain the facility, including substantial capital ex - struction of a new water reclamation facility along the Gulf Coast, were well along with their penditures over the 20-year present worth to replace the Main Street Wastewater Treat - storm preparation procedures. Ivan weakened period. The report went on to say that even more ment Plant was moving forward through the to category 3 status as it approached the cen - substantial expenditures would be required if first eight months of calendar year 2004, based tral Gulf Coast. As the storm made landfall on regulatory action or public pressure were to ne - on the board’s action; however, natural events September 16, the eye diameter of approxi - cessitate removal of the plant’s effluent from Pen - would intercede and force ECUA officials to mately 40-50 nautical miles brought some of sacola Bay. This potential regulatory action restructure priorities related to the considera - the strongest winds through the greater Pen - would make the “take no action” option the most tions to replace the plant. sacola area. At landfall, some of Hurricane expensive of the five alternatives examined. Hurricane Ivan initially formed from a Ivan’s surface winds were calculated at approx - The board of directors, after receiving the tropical wave that came off the west coast of imately 105 knots (~120 mph), with gusts esti - findings of the 2003 study, deliberated through Africa on August 31. The system gained trop - mated at approximately 135 knots (~155 mph) early 2004 and chose to move forward with the ical depression status by September 2 and be - as the storm approached the coast. alternative of replacing the Main Street Plant came Tropical Storm Ivan on September 3, Ivan’s winds, rain and 15-foot storm surge with a new water reclamation facility at an al - steadily strengthening, and was upgraded to caused extensive damage to the coastal areas in ternate site. The consideration to construct a hurricane status early on September 5. Hurri - and around Pensacola. In addition to causing a new plant hinged, in large part, on the capa - cane Ivan went through a series of intensifica - number of deaths in the Pensacola area, the bilities of a new water reclamation facility in tion and weakening cycles as it traveled west surge destroyed approximately a quarter-mile meeting regulatory requirements, securing a through the Atlantic Ocean, the Caribbean of the Interstate-10 Bridge across Escambia Bay funding source(s), and the unknown aspects Sea, and eventually into the Gulf of Mexico, at - and leveled much of the dune system on the and potential economic impact of the future taining category 5 status on three separate oc - two barrier islands to the south of Pensacola: O&M costs of the existing plant.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tropical Cyclone Report for Hurricane Ivan
    Tropical Cyclone Report Hurricane Ivan 2-24 September 2004 Stacy R. Stewart National Hurricane Center 16 December 2004 Updated 27 May 2005 to revise damage estimate Updated 11 August 2011 to revise damage estimate Ivan was a classical, long-lived Cape Verde hurricane that reached Category 5 strength three times on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale (SSHS). It was also the strongest hurricane on record that far south east of the Lesser Antilles. Ivan caused considerable damage and loss of life as it passed through the Caribbean Sea. a. Synoptic History Ivan developed from a large tropical wave that moved off the west coast of Africa on 31 August. Although the wave was accompanied by a surface pressure system and an impressive upper-level outflow pattern, associated convection was limited and not well organized. However, by early on 1 September, convective banding began to develop around the low-level center and Dvorak satellite classifications were initiated later that day. Favorable upper-level outflow and low shear environment was conducive for the formation of vigorous deep convection to develop and persist near the center, and it is estimated that a tropical depression formed around 1800 UTC 2 September. Figure 1 depicts the “best track” of the tropical cyclone’s path. The wind and pressure histories are shown in Figs. 2a and 3a, respectively. Table 1 is a listing of the best track positions and intensities. Despite a relatively low latitude (9.7o N), development continued and it is estimated that the cyclone became Tropical Storm Ivan just 12 h later at 0600 UTC 3 September.
    [Show full text]
  • 10R.3 the Tornado Outbreak Across the North Florida Panhandle in Association with Hurricane Ivan
    10R.3 The Tornado Outbreak across the North Florida Panhandle in association with Hurricane Ivan Andrew I. Watson* Michael A. Jamski T.J. Turnage NOAA/National Weather Service Tallahassee, Florida Joshua R.Bowen Meteorology Department Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida Jason C. Kelley WJHG-TV Panama City, Florida 1. INTRODUCTION their mobile homes were destroyed near Blountstown, Florida. Hurricane Ivan made landfall early on the morning of 16 September 2004, just west of Overall, there were 24 tornadoes reported Gulf Shores, Alabama as a category 3 across the National Weather Service (NWS) hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Tallahassee forecast area. The office issued Scale. Approximately 117 tornadoes were 130 tornado warnings from the afternoon of 15 reported associated with Ivan across the September until just after daybreak on 16 southeast United States. Eight people were September. killed and 17 were injured by tornadoes (Storm Data 2004; Stewart 2004). The most The paper examines the convective cells significant tornadoes occurred as hurricane within the rain bands of hurricane Ivan, which Ivan approached the Florida Gulf coast on the produced these tornadoes across the Florida afternoon and evening of 15 September. Panhandle, Big Bend, and southwest Georgia. The structure of the tornadic and non-tornadic The intense outer rain bands of Ivan supercells is examined for clues on how to produced numerous supercells over portions better warn for these types of storms. This of the Florida Panhandle, Big Bend, southwest study will focus on the short-term predictability Georgia, and Gulf coastal waters. In turn, of these dangerous storms, and will these supercells spawned dozens of investigate the problem of how to reduce the tornadoes.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Hurricane Katrina
    PARTPART 33 IMPACTIMPACT OFOF HURRICANESHURRICANES ONON NEWNEW ORLEANSORLEANS ANDAND THETHE GULFGULF COASTCOAST 19001900--19981998 HURRICANEHURRICANE--CAUSEDCAUSED FLOODINGFLOODING OFOF NEWNEW ORLEANSORLEANS •• SinceSince 1559,1559, 172172 hurricaneshurricanes havehave struckstruck southernsouthern LouisianaLouisiana ((ShallatShallat,, 2000).2000). •• OfOf these,these, 3838 havehave causedcaused floodingflooding inin NewNew thethe OrleansOrleans area,area, usuallyusually viavia LakeLake PonchartrainPonchartrain.. •• SomeSome ofof thethe moremore notablenotable eventsevents havehave included:included: SomeSome ofof thethe moremore notablenotable eventsevents havehave included:included: 1812,1812, 1831,1831, 1860,1860, 1915,1915, 1947,1947, 1965,1965, 1969,1969, andand 20052005.. IsaacIsaac MonroeMonroe ClineCline USWS meteorologist Isaac Monroe Cline pioneered the study of tropical cyclones and hurricanes in the early 20th Century, by recording barometric pressures, storm surges, and wind velocities. •• Cline charted barometric gradients (right) and tracked the eyes of hurricanes as they approached landfall. This shows the event of Sept 29, 1915 hitting the New Orleans area. • Storm or tidal surges are caused by lifting of the oceanic surface by abnormal low atmospheric pressure beneath the eye of a hurricane. The faster the winds, the lower the pressure; and the greater the storm surge. At its peak, Hurricane Katrina caused a surge 53 feet high under its eye as it approached the Louisiana coast, triggering a storm surge advisory of 18 to 28 feet in New Orleans (image from USA Today). StormStorm SurgeSurge •• The surge effect is minimal in the open ocean, because the water falls back on itself •• As the storm makes landfall, water is lifted onto the continent, locally elevating the sea level, much like a tsunami, but with much higher winds Images from USA Today •• Cline showed that it was then northeast quadrant of a cyclonic event that produced the greatest storm surge, in accordance with the drop in barometric pressure.
    [Show full text]
  • A FAILURE of INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina
    A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina U.S. House of Representatives 4 A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Union Calendar No. 00 109th Congress Report 2nd Session 000-000 A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Report by the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoacess.gov/congress/index.html February 15, 2006. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed U. S. GOVERNMEN T PRINTING OFFICE Keeping America Informed I www.gpo.gov WASHINGTON 2 0 0 6 23950 PDF For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COVER PHOTO: FEMA, BACKGROUND PHOTO: NASA SELECT BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE PREPARATION FOR AND RESPONSE TO HURRICANE KATRINA TOM DAVIS, (VA) Chairman HAROLD ROGERS (KY) CHRISTOPHER SHAYS (CT) HENRY BONILLA (TX) STEVE BUYER (IN) SUE MYRICK (NC) MAC THORNBERRY (TX) KAY GRANGER (TX) CHARLES W. “CHIP” PICKERING (MS) BILL SHUSTER (PA) JEFF MILLER (FL) Members who participated at the invitation of the Select Committee CHARLIE MELANCON (LA) GENE TAYLOR (MS) WILLIAM J.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Ivan Damage Survey
    P 7.4 HURRICANE IVAN DAMAGE SURVEY Timothy P. Marshall* Haag Engineering Co. Dallas, Texas 1. INTRODUCTION The author conducted aerial and ground damage surveys along the Florida and Alabama coasts after Hurricane Ivan. The purpose of these surveys was to: 1) determine the height of the storm surge, 2) acquire wind velocity data, 3) determine the timing of each, and 4) assess the performance of buildings exposed to wind and water effects. Particular emphasis was placed on delineating wind and water damage. A similar study has just been published by FEMA (2005). The author rode out Hurricane Ivan near Pensacola, FL then conducted hundreds of site specific inspections the year following the hurricane. Most buildings examined were wood-framed structures. Remaining buildings consisted of concrete masonry as well as Figure 1. Enhanced color infrared satellite image of multi-story, steel-reinforced, concrete structures. Hurricane Ivan at landfall near Gulf Shores, AL around Various building failure modes were observed. 0700 UTC (2a.m.) on the morning of 16 September Typically, wind exploited poorly anchored or attached 2004. Arrow indicates location of author. Image roofs and vinyl siding whereas wave action courtesy of NOAA/NWS. undermined, collapsed and destroyed buildings near the coast. Wind damage generally began at roof levels Analysis of radar data revealed that Hurricane Ivan whereas wave damage attacked the bases of buildings. had a closed eyewall until it was about 100 km (62 Both lateral and uplift forces were applied to the miles) from the Alabama coast. According to Stewart buildings from wind and water and examples of such (2005), a combination of dry air from Louisiana, failures will be shown in this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean
    NATURAL DISASTERS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 2000 - 2019 1 Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) is the second most disaster-prone region in the world 152 million affected by 1,205 disasters (2000-2019)* Floods are the most common disaster in the region. Brazil ranks among the 15 548 On 12 occasions since 2000, floods in the region have caused more than FLOODS S1 in total damages. An average of 17 23 C 5 (2000-2019). The 2017 hurricane season is the thir ecord in terms of number of disasters and countries affected as well as the magnitude of damage. 330 In 2019, Hurricane Dorian became the str A on STORMS record to directly impact a landmass. 25 per cent of earthquakes magnitude 8.0 or higher hav S America Since 2000, there have been 20 -70 thquakes 75 in the region The 2010 Haiti earthquake ranks among the top 10 EARTHQUAKES earthquak ory. Drought is the disaster which affects the highest number of people in the region. Crop yield reductions of 50-75 per cent in central and eastern Guatemala, southern Honduras, eastern El Salvador and parts of Nicaragua. 74 In these countries (known as the Dry Corridor), 8 10 in the DROUGHTS communities most affected by drought resort to crisis coping mechanisms. 66 50 38 24 EXTREME VOLCANIC LANDSLIDES TEMPERATURE EVENTS WILDFIRES * All data on number of occurrences of natural disasters, people affected, injuries and total damages are from CRED ME-DAT, unless otherwise specified. 2 Cyclical Nature of Disasters Although many hazards are cyclical in nature, the hazards most likely to trigger a major humanitarian response in the region are sudden onset hazards such as earthquakes, hurricanes and flash floods.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane Michael
    Willis Re Hurricane Damage Survey Report Hurricane Michael Executive summary On October 10, Hurricane Michael, the eleventh named storm of 2018, made landfall on the Florida Panhandle as a Category 4 hurricane. More than any other, the cities of Mexico Beach, Lynn Haven and Panama City suffered extensive property damage due to Michael’s extreme winds and storm surge. Extensive infrastructure interruption ensued across the region, including power outages, obstruction of roads and contamination of potable water. Willis Re’s damage reconnaissance team spent four days assessing Michael’s damage. The objective was to research and collect examples of property damage due to wind and storm surge, and to identify elements of properties that exhibited both good and poor resistance. The team traveled nearly 1,000 miles, covering various properties exposed to the storm including in Panama City Beach, Panama City, Lynn Haven, Tyndall AFB, Mexico Beach, Port St. Joe, Apalachicola, South Port, Youngstown, Fountain, Marianna and Tallahassee in Florida; Bainbridge, Georgia; and Dothan, Alabama. In this report, we present their findings. Hurricane Michael’s estimated wind speeds on the ground for Marianna, Panama City, Lynn Haven and Mexico Beach were in the order of 120 mph to 160 mph, above the 700-year return period wind gust according to ASCE 7-10. The majority of homes in Panama City, Lynn Haven, Mexico Beach and Marianna, as to be expected, were not designed to resist 700-year return period wind gusts. In general, the direct wind damage to insured properties that we observed ranged from minor impacts to major structural failures.
    [Show full text]
  • Bonaire National Marine Park Hurricane Matthew – Reef Damage Assessment
    Bonaire National Marine Park Hurricane Matthew – Reef Damage Assessment On the evening of the 29th September 2016 Hurricane Matthew passed north of Bonaire by approximately 240km, with maximum sustained wind speeds over 120km/h. After passing Aruba as a category 2 hurricane, the path of Matthew slowed its forward progress and turned north-northeast. Heavy storm surge generated by Matthew continued to strike the coastline and on the 4th-5th of October, a resurgence of waves ranging from 1.4-1.7 m height pounded the northern and western (leeward) shores of Bonaire and Klein Bonaire. After the waves subsided, STINAPA immediately sent survey forms to dive operators requesting information on reef conditions and offered assistance in removing large debris. Bonaire National Marine Park rangers took photos of damage to piers, docks, ladders, etc. and began removing large debris from the reef (Appendix II: Image 7). On the 6th to 7th of October 2016, STINAPA staff, interns and volunteers surveyed sites along the leeward shore of Bonaire to assess the initial impact of Hurricane Matthew. Fig 1. Path of Hurricane Matthew. Image from NOAA’s National Hurricane Center: Matthew Graphics Archive. KONSERVANDO NATURALESA PA MEDIO DI MANEHO SANO NATUUR BEHOUD DOOR VERANTWOORD BEHEER NATURE CONSERVATION THROUGH SOUND MANAGEMENT PO Box 368 – Bonaire, Dutch Caribbean – Tel (599) 717 8444 – Fax (599) 717 7318 – E-mail [email protected] - Website: www.stinapa.org Banks: MCB acc.nr. 868.420.00 – RBC acc.nr. 8400000023068753 Methods Surveyors assessed a total of 18 sites via SCUBA in buddy teams on 6-7 Oct. 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flooding of Hurricane Ivan: How Far Ahead Can We Predict?
    P1.7 THE FLOODING OF HURRICANE IVAN: HOW FAR AHEAD CAN WE PREDICT? Michael P. Erb*, Douglas K. Miller National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center University of North Carolina – Asheville, Asheville, North Carolina 1. INTRODUCTION will be modeled using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model. Naturally, since On September 17th 2004, Hurricane Ivan (by this is only a case study, the results found here then a tropical depression) began making its will not answer the question in a general sense. way along the western edge of North Carolina, But it is hoped, at the very least, that they should threatening to bring a deluge of rainfall to give interested parties a better understanding of regions surrounding the Appalachian Mountains. the problem at hand. Many of these places had been flooded by Another reason for this research is that it Hurricane Frances only two weeks before and, ties in with the goals of the Renaissance still not fully recovered, feared a repeat of those Computing Institute (RENCI), an organization events. All indicators pointed to Ivan being on based in North Carolina which is dedicated to the same scale as Frances, and forecasters solving complex, multidisciplinary problems that called for heavy rain and yet more flooding. People there, understandably, prepared for the worst. (Figures 1 and 2 show the tracks of Hurricanes Ivan and Francis.) What actually happened over the next few days turned out to be on a somewhat smaller scale. The rain did come, but not to the extent forecasters had predicted. In places where Frances had dumped 20 or more inches of rain – Mount Mitchell, NC, for instance – Ivan brought 15 or less.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial and Temporal Variability of Tropical Storm and Hurricane Strikes
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2007 Spatial and temporal variability of tropical storm and hurricane strikes in the Bahamas, and the Greater and Lesser Antilles Alexa Jo Andrews Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Andrews, Alexa Jo, "Spatial and temporal variability of tropical storm and hurricane strikes in the Bahamas, and the Greater and Lesser Antilles" (2007). LSU Master's Theses. 3558. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3558 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIABILITY OF TROPICAL STORM AND HURRICANE STRIKES IN THE BAHAMAS, AND THE GREATER AND LESSER ANTILLES A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by Alexa Jo Andrews B.S., Louisiana State University, 2004 December, 2007 Table of Contents List of Tables.........................................................................................................................iii
    [Show full text]
  • Evacuee Perception of Geophysical Hazards for Hurricane Irma
    JANUARY 2019 S E N K B E I L E T A L . 217 Evacuee Perception of Geophysical Hazards for Hurricane Irma JASON SENKBEIL Department of Geography, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama JENNIFER COLLINS School of Geosciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida JACOB REED Department of Geography, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Manuscript received 27 February 2018, in final form 15 November 2018) ABSTRACT Hurricane Irma was one of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes in history before landfall and caused a large evacuation. A total of 155 evacuees at interstate rest areas were asked to rank their concern about damage at their residence for six different geophysical hurricane hazards. Additionally, they were asked about their perceived maximum wind speeds (PMWS) and the wind speeds at which they thought damage would occur (DW) at their residence. These wind speeds were then compared to the actual peak wind gusts (APG) nearest to each resident’s location. Results show a significantly greater concern for wind and storm size, compared to other hazards (tornadoes, rainfall/flooding, storm surge, falling trees). The mean PMWS of evacuees was greater than the mean APG, suggesting widespread misperception of wind speeds. Furthermore, the mean APG was less than the mean DW, and the mean PMWS was also higher than the DW. Additional tests found no significant differences in wind perception between residents with previous storm experiences and no ex- perience, and no significant differences between those who resided in mandatory evacuation zip codes and those who did not. These results suggest that wind speed risk is poorly understood, even though it is a high concern for evacuees from hurricanes.
    [Show full text]
  • SUMMARY of METHODS Contract No
    HURRICANE IVAN SURGE INUNDATION MAPS SUMMARY OF METHODS Contract No. EMW-2000-CO-0247 Task Order Nos. 351 (FL) & 352 (AL) 1. Introduction Hurricane Ivan made landfall as a Category 3 hurricane on September 16, 2004, near Gulf Shores, Alabama, with hurricane force winds extending up to 105 miles outward from the center of the storm. Many of the barrier islands exposed to Hurricane Ivan's strongest winds are low lying and could not contain the storm surge associated with the storm. Coastal storm surge flooding crossed the barrier islands, undermining buildings and roads, and opening new island breaches. In addition to the storm surge, breaking waves eroded dunes and battered structures. The purpose of this project is to provide immediate coastal flood hazard information to local, regional, State and Federal agencies via high resolution maps that illustrate coastal flood impacts from Hurricane Ivan, which can be used during recovery, mitigation, and redevelopment. 2. Methodology The storm surge inundation maps were developed for the four coastal counties most severely affected by the storm: Baldwin County, Alabama, and Escambia, Santa Rosa, and Okaloosa Counties, Florida. In addition to showing effective Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data, the maps provide the following information: 9 Surveyed coastal high water mark (HWM) flood elevations; 9 Coastal flood inundation limits; 9 Inland limits of waterborne debris; 9 Coastal storm surge elevation contours; and 9 Approximate recurrence interval(s) associated with the observed flood elevations. The methods for generating each of these elements are discussed in greater detail below. 2.1 High Water Mark Collection Under separate task orders, field and survey crews from URS and URS Team subconsultants, Dewberry and PBS&J, were deployed to interview residents, find evidence of coastal high water levels, take digital photographs, and survey coastal HWMs from Hurricane Ivan.
    [Show full text]