Berms continued: what exactly is the plan?

 

[Note that, while I've been writing the post that follows this - on oil-eating bacteria - Jamie Friedland at The Political Climate blog has been following my comments on the berms in the process of writing an excellent post on the topic himself - well worth a visit, as well as his piece on bacteria.

Note also the very useful and compelling information and commentary provided by Coastal Geologist, Dallon Weathers, in the link included in his comment on my previous post]

I may be straying from the self-declared non-controversial nature of this blog, but the Louisiana sand berms project, and the issues surrounding it, are of vital importance in so many ways, that continuing to follow it strikes me as also important - and depressingly fascinating. The whole thing is now so embroiled in conflicting reports and emotional political posturing, that the din of axes grinding makes it daily more difficult to distinguish the wood from the trees, the wheat from the chaff, and the facts from the fictions. And a note to my US readers: when I refer to political posturing, it is not from the point of view of some mythical moral highground on this side of the Atlantic - it is, believe me, a condition of intellectual dementia that afflicts our politicians too. If, may the gods forbid, such a catastrophe occurred in the North Sea, a similar epidemic would ensue - and informed commentary would be welcome whatever its origins.

I began today by listening to the first of this year's Reith Lectures on BBC radio. This latest in the longstanding series is being given by the astrophysicist, Lord Rees, president of the Royal Society and the Astronomer Royal; he is keenly interested in the relationships between science and society and policy-makers, and the talk was titled "The Scientific Citizen." Some of his words were ringing in my ears as I tracked the latest pronouncements on the berms:

Winston Churchill once said that scientists should be “on tap, not on top.” And it is indeed the elected politicians who should make decisions. But the role of scientific advice is not just to provide facts to support policies. Experts should be prepared to challenge decision-makers, and help them navigate the uncertainties of science. But there's one thing they mustn't forget. Whether the context be nuclear power, drug classification, or health risks, political decisions are seldom purely scientific. They involve ethics, economics and social policies as well. And in domains beyond their special expertise, scientists speak just as citizens......

Everyone should engage with these choices [the doors that science should and shouldn't open] but their efforts must be leveraged by ‘scientific citizens’ - scientists from all fields of expertise - engaging, from all political perspectives, with the media, and with a public attuned to the scope and limit of science.

But back to the berms. What follows will, I fear, answer few questions or clarify very much at all. The extracts here not only serve to increase my own confusion but to illustrate the impressive volumes of smoke and dust (comparable to those of the Icelandic volcano) that are swirling around, obliterating the ability to perceive common sense.

First, the illustration at the head of this post clearly illustrates that berms (or levees or whatever term might be used for piles of sand) have already been under construction for some time. This is from the US Coastguard Visual Information Gallery; the picture is dated May 21 and titled " RAND ISLE, La. - An Army National Guard crew builds a levee across a portion of the beach on Elmer's Island, just west of Grand Isle, La." Then we have an article in Time Magazine, exquisitely titled "Dredge, Baby, Dredge: Can Sand Walls Stop the Oil?" (I will refrain from commenting on Sarah Palin's participation in this issue). The article  refers to the "toxic friction" that the issue has built up between Louisiana and the Administration, quotes Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen as saying that there are "a lot of doubts about whether this is a valid oil-spill-response technique" and goes on to describe the following:

Critics have accused Jindal [Louisiana Governor] and Nungesser [Plaquemines Parish president] of political grandstanding. As urgent as closing gaps like Pass Chandal may appear, the plan has more doubters than just Allen. Environmentalists and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — as well as BP — fear even temporary berms could mess with natural tidal flows as well as the integrity of naturally existing barrier islands. There are also questions about how well they hold up in storms, and about the effects of the massive dredging of ocean-floor sand required to construct them.

Berm backers say the sand and other material will be gathered from either waste sediment or shoals more than 10 miles offshore. That will assure no deepening of the Gulf waters close to the coast, which can strengthen hurricanes and their storm surges as they make landfall. They also plan to keep small spaces open at sites like Pass Chaland to maintain tidal flow. As for structural integrity, the state and the Army Corps plan to place the berm material in Hesco baskets, large protective barriers manufactured by Hesco Bastion USA in nearby Hammond, La., which the military uses to protect troop installations in war zones like Iraq. What's more, Hahn points out, Louisiana and Plaquemines parish have been preparing a proposal for restoration of the barrier islands ever since Hurricane Katrina ravaged them in 2005. That plan is similar to (but more permanent than) the berm-building process, he says, meaning state and local officials have already been studying what will and won't work.

There are any number of questions raised here, but the obvious ones are the following:

1. This is the first mention that I've seen of "Hesco baskets" rather than berms. This was certainly not part of the plan outlined (in scant detail) in the permit documentation that I quoted in the previous post, and represents an entirely different engineering approach with yet a further set of unknown consequences.
2. The bermers say that the sand will be dredged from "more than 10 miles offshore." This is completely different from the site (the "borrow" area - an unfortunate term, since borrowing implies returning) stipulated in the permit which was in the are of the Pass a Loutre in one the channels at the mouth of the Mississippi Delta. Is the assumption that just being ten miles offshore makes it all OK?
3. It's not at all clear that the Pass Chandal area referred to is in one of the four stretches of coast west of the delta that have been approved in the permit.

Then, in the local press, there was a very interesting piece a couple of days ago - "State scientists find flaws in coastal-barrier plan" was published online by The Houma Courier, a newspaper of Terrebonne Parish. While the website cautions against reproduction, I'll claim force majeure and reproduce some quotes here, because it contains important commentary - actually from scientists. It starts off saying that "state scientists are worried that the plan is misunderstood by the public at best and could hinder future restoration efforts on the eroding islands at worst" and goes on (the bold emphases are mine):

“There are reasonable concepts behind this. The idea that oil is much easier to clean up on a sandy beach than when it gets into the marshlands is a valid one,” said Denise Reed, a wetlands ecologist with the University of New Orleans and a Montegut resident.

But Reed added that residents of Terrebonne and Lafourche parishes should be aware that the plan is not a barrier-island restoration project, and any sand dredged and placed on the islands as part of that effort will not stay there for long. And sand resources to rebuild barrier islands are limited.

“From the permit I’ve seen, we’re talking about placing a big pile of sand on the near shore, the shallow area in front of the islands where the waves break,” Reed said.

The state hopes to dredge dirt to build something like a 6-foot-tall levee in front of the islands. Sand placed there would be heavily eroded by waves and “will be redistributed fairly quickly, particularly if we have an event like a tropical storm or hurricane,” Reed said.

“Anyone who’s built a little hill on sand on the beach knows that it would be washed away almost immediately, and the sand used to build those barriers will be washed away, scattered all over the bottom of Lake Pelto and Timbalier Bay,” said Kerry St. Pé, director of the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program.

After that, the sand can’t be used for restoration purposes again. That’s not good when you consider that only certain types of high-quality sand can be used for barrier island restoration projects, and this project is looking at mining some of the state’s best dredging areas. That includes one of Terrebonne’s most-valuable sites for rebuilding its own barrier islands, a sand mine known as Ship Shoal, and another called South Pelto to the south of the Isles Dernieres barrier islands.

“We might be using one of our best resources for a short-term thing,” Reed said........

St. Pé said there are well-established methods to building barrier islands that mimic their natural form — a gentle sloping sandy beach with a back barrier marsh that allows islands to be washed over by storms and break waves. Barrier islands have developed wide passes between them for a reason, St. Pé added. As large areas of open water have grown in wetland bases like Terrebonne and Lafourche, those bays need larger passes to drain into the Gulf of Mexico. Attempting to narrow or close barrier island passes with hard structures could cause rapid currents in the ones that remain open, sending oil shooting further inland into the estuary system.

Closing off currents would also have ramifications for marine life, which need to travel between the Gulf and wetland areas as a part of their life cycle.

“You’d be changing the whole hydrology, the time that water stays in our estuaries and the currents (and) the way these waves are hitting our barrier islands,” St. Pé said.

Yes, it's arguable that "scientists should be on tap, not on top," but it would be helpful if the tap were actually used for thoughtful and thorough risk assessment - and that that process were not referred to as "political paralysis." The following is a comment in the press - I won't link or say anything further since I don't think it's necessary (again, my emphasis):

Incredibly, the president's team has cited the fear that too many berms would alter tidal movements, as though that theoretical worry trumps the very real oil headed toward shore.

What? This is the kind of thing that makes those of us who try to restrict our public utterances to things we actually know something about look kind of stupid and naive.....

Comments

[TR]

The purpose of the berms is strictly for use as a anti-gubmint political bludgeon by the Drill Baby Drill TeaParty people who cheerleaded endlessly for oil companies and offshore drilling. Its too late to build them, the oil slick is the size of Texas so its too much coastline to protect, oil has already come ashore, they take 6-9+ months to build, they can be destroyed by a single storm, they could be harmful to the marshes and animals lucky enough to have survived the oil that has already come ashore.

No, the purpose of berms is the fanstasy-esque idea that berms would be helpful such that the Teaple can scream "Why isnt NoBama building berms?!" when not demanding that Obama turn over his birth cert. Its a self-defense mechanism from the same clownish crowd who just 43 days ago was pontificating on the near-pristine nature of offshore drilling. The same crowd who was screaming that the gubmint needs to get out of John Galt's way now wants the gubmint to clean up after John Galt.

Dredge Baby Dredge. Do the Brits mind taking Palin off our hands?

[Michael]

Thanks for the comment - and yes, we do mind!

[BrianR]

Michael, keep up the excellent blogging on this subject ... this is exactly the type of fast- and ever-changing event that suits the blog medium well.

I haven't had any time to read all these articles, reports, and digest them -- a very complex and interesting issue to say the least.

[suvrat]

very informative and urgently required series Michael.. and to your point:

"I may be straying from the self-declared non-controversial nature of this blog" .. you are getting good at it :)

[Sandglass]

Brian and Suvrat - your comments are much-appreciated! This certainly seems to be getting more attention than is normal for this blog!

[searoemer]

I don't kmow if berms will work---but the fact that BP and USA are not trusted to mitgate oil damage predicts this reaction, Lets have General Powell in charge and lets see some US Army and Navy Seabees patrolling the beech.