Scientists have made a startling discovery that could impact more than 15 million Americans – nearly all of the US East Coast is sinking.
Virginia Tech researchers identified ‘hotspots’ from Florida to New Hampshire that are dropping as much as five millimeters a year due to groundwater extraction and the weight of infrastructure. [emphasis, links added]
The team collected data from space-based radar sites to build digital terrain maps of the East Coast to show where sinking landscapes present risks to the health of vital infrastructure.
Particularly hard-hit population centers such as New York City and Long Island, Baltimore, Maryland, Virginia Beach, and New Haven, Connecticut are seeing areas of rapid ‘subsidence.’
Lead author Leonard Ohenhen, a graduate student at Virginia Tech, said: ‘Continuous unmitigated subsidence on the East Coast should cause concern.
‘This is particularly in areas with a high population and property density and a historical complacency toward infrastructure maintenance.‘
The team found several areas along the mid-Atlantic coast of more than 1,400 square miles are sinking more than five millimeters per year, more than the current four millimeters per year global rate of sea level rise.
There are 25 millimeters in one inch.
‘The percent land area within each county affected by subsidence on the US East Coast has important implications for flood frequency and severity in the different communities,’ reads the study published in PNAS.
‘Land subsidence can potentially increase the flooded area during coastal storm events by modifying the base flood elevations and topographic gradients.’
Ohenhen and his professor Manoochehr Shirzaei used satellite data from 2007 to 2020 published by the United States Geological Survey.
‘We highlight 12 metropolitan cities affected by spatially variable land subsidence: Boston (Massachusetts [MA]), Providence (Rhode Island [RI]), New Haven (Connecticut [CT]), New York (New York [NY]), Atlantic City (New Jersey [NJ]), Baltimore (Maryland [MD]), Norfolk (Virginia [VA]), Wilmington (North Carolina [NC]), Charleston (South Carolina [SC]), Jacksonville (FL), and Miami (FL),’ reads the study.
The team found that most of the East Coast is sinking by two millimeters yearly, impacting around 2.1 million people.
According to the study, that amount does not include the 16 million others living in regions dipping more significantly.
Several areas in Atlantic City, Savannah, and Charleston were observed to be subsiding with rates faster than four millimeters per year.‘
Parts of New Jersey and Delaware have subsidence rates of at least three millimeters per year.
The team also broke down the data by county, revealing that 138 to 163 counties have sinking averages of one millimeter per year and 56 to 152 counties at two millimeters per year.
The sinking land also impacted major infrastructure like roads, trains, and railways across the East Coast.
That also included popular airports: John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) is sinking 1.7 mm per year, LaGuardia Airport 1.5 mm per year, Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) 1.4 mm per year, and Boston Logan International Airport has a median subsidence rate of 1.1 mm per year.
‘Here, the problem is not just that the land is sinking. The problem is that the hotspots of sinking land intersect directly with population and infrastructure hubs,’ said Ohenhen.
‘For example, significant areas of critical infrastructure in New York, including JFK and LaGuardia airports and its runways, along with the railway systems, are affected by subsidence rates exceeding two mm per year.
‘The effects of these right now and into the future are potential damage to infrastructure and increased flood risks.’
Read more at Daily Mail
Venice Italy is sinking at a rate of 1-2 mm/yr. This has been known for some time.
Surprising that it was just noticed now that the east coast has sections sinking at more than twice that rate.
And to Climate alarmist the land sinking is the same as the sea rising, and all due to climate warming. Which is true if you take into account the land is subsiding due to the vast glaciers melting about 10,000 years ago.
I was always taught that when you build a skyscraper, you take so much earth out of the ground, for the foundations, that you actually make the land lighter.
In addition, most of that subsidence, I understand, is a reaction to rising land nearby, as a continuing reaction to the retreat of the glacial ice sheets from the last ice age.
Also, how is a 2 or 3mm annual subsidence going to affect cities for the foreseeable future? It will certainly take hundreds of years of sustained subsidence before anybody will notice. By that time the subsidence may have long ended, or a new ice age will change the dymamics. The Lord only knows.
In the mean time, we should be making the lives of the current people the best we can, not abandon modern civilization with any more crazy and worthless “plans”.
I’m curious, just where does all the water utilized go after we’re done? Back into the ground again? Evaporates & falls back as precipitation? Gets recycled? It just doesn’t disappear out of existence! And precisely & where do they measure & come up w/ this Infinitesimal “sinkage of 5 mill/year”?
The “wisdom” of the climate change movement and recent initiatives in California can be applied to this problem, at least as far as sinking being caused by groundwater extraction. The climate change advocates want to just leave fossil fuels in the ground. The same can be applied to ground water in the impact areas. Just leave what remains in the ground. California’s toilet to tap water initiative shows how the eastern coast can get by when less water is extracted. They need to start building plants to process sewage water to go into the municipal supply. The climate change movement says that 60% of the emission reduction needs to be from people degrading their life style. One example is no one would own any kind of car except the elite. One life style change to save water would be limiting showers to no more than once a week. Clothing wouldn’t be laundered until worn for seven days. Minimum clothing or no clothing would be worn in places where that is possible. I’m not seriously advocating these “solutions,” but viewing them applied to another problem area shows how they are not desirable.