Crossposting here:
Boston Harbor was in minor flood stage (12.5-14 ft tidal height) for two hours this morning, from about 7:00 to 9:00, peaking at 13.33 ft.
For perspective, this was the 29th highest crest recorded in Boston Harbor history.
While not unprecedented, this level of flooding is notable and not something that happens every month. The last tide this high was on January 13 when a storm brought a crest of 14.41 ft.
Today marks the third time Boston Harbor has reached flood stage this year after reaching that level four times last year and six times in 2022.
Looking at the bigger picture, Boston Harbor reaches flood stage much more often than in decades past. To demonstrate this fact, here are the number of times Boston Harbor has reached flood stage per decade, on record:
* through less than 4.5 years!
- 2020s: 25*
- 2010s: 21
- 2000s: 11
- 1990s: 10
- 1980s: 7
What was a once-a-year flood in the 1980-2009 period has become a six-times-a-year flood now.
Id like to reference these numbers.... source?Crossposting here:
Boston Harbor was in minor flood stage (12.5-14 ft tidal height) for two hours this morning, from about 7:00 to 9:00, peaking at 13.33 ft.
For perspective, this was the 29th highest crest recorded in Boston Harbor history.
While not unprecedented, this level of flooding is notable and not something that happens every month. The last tide this high was on January 13 when a storm brought a crest of 14.41 ft.
Today marks the third time Boston Harbor has reached flood stage this year after reaching that level four times last year and six times in 2022.
Looking at the bigger picture, Boston Harbor reaches flood stage much more often than in decades past. To demonstrate this fact, here are the number of times Boston Harbor has reached flood stage per decade, on record:
* through less than 4.5 years!
- 2020s: 25*
- 2010s: 21
- 2000s: 11
- 1990s: 10
- 1980s: 7
What was a once-a-year flood in the 1980-2009 period has become a six-times-a-year flood now.
I haven’t counted but I’d think this is where these numbers come from:Id like to reference these numbers.... source?
Id like to reference these numbers.... source?
I can't see this happening without Boston first experiencing some catastrophic, costly, flooding event that displaces some residents in affordable housing, floods a section of the Red Orange, and Green Lines, and shuts down Logan Airport (briefly). Only after such disaster would there be the will to actually get the massive harbor barrier project done.I think it’s time top officials at least start floating the idea of a full harbor barrier
I can't see this happening without Boston first experiencing some catastrophic, costly, flooding event that displaces some residents in affordable housing, floods a section of the Red Orange, and Green Lines, and shuts down Logan Airport (briefly). Only after such disaster would there be the will to actually get the massive harbor barrier project done.
I would wish Boston could just have a barrier before it happens, but realistically, it's going to be the other way around. The flood disaster will happen before a barrier is even committed to (let alone done to completion and operational).
...At the 15-acre power plant site, developers Hilco Redevelopment Partners and Redgate said they will build a $12 million, 659-foot-long sea wall. At the former Bayside Expo Center near the University of Massachusetts Boston, developer Accordia Partners plans a 2.7-acre waterfront park at its Dorchester Bay City project. That park, along with an estimated $18.5 million in resiliency improvements nearby and elevating the site itself, will protect both the project’s 36 acres and parts of South Boston and Dorchester behind it.
And in Charlestown, developer Flatley Co. plans to invest $50 million in a roughly half-mile-long barrier along the Mystic River near Sullivan Square — a wall that city development officials say will protect not just Flatley’s 1.8-million-square-foot project but also more than “200 acres of Charlestown, plus hundreds of acres of Somerville and Cambridge.”
And particularly problematic as development stalls for this cycle, leaving huge holes in the planned protection network.Globe article from April 5, on Boston's reliance on private developers to fund projects that provide resilience against near-term sea level rise.
Bostonâs defenses against rising seas lean on private development. What happens when the money dries up? - The Boston Globe
Several flood-protection projects like sea walls, berms, and elevated land are tangled up in large developments that now face slowdowns.www.bostonglobe.com
Boston Globe article today on just this point.With Hurricane Milton and Helene having wrecked havoc in the US South, I decided to compare the urban areas map tool with the flood maps. I kinda wish there was an easier way to compare both maps, but it seems like the amount of urban land in Boston that is low lying is extremely high, so a hurricane probably is able to to wipe most of Boston off the map. Perhaps at least half of Boston's residents will lose their homes completely when the next big cane comes?
The only densly populated areas that are on meaningfully high ground are: a strip of Somerville, a segment of Everett, some of Brighton and Brookline, most of Mattapan and Hyde Park, West Roxbury, Rozzie, Watertown, some of JP, a portion of Arlington, and a small strip of Southie.
Of those with transit access, only Brookline, JP, and Somerville have access to both rapid transit, and are on high enough ground to avoid losing their housing stock to hurricanes and/or flooding.
The storm surge in Hurricane Milton was up to 15 feet of surge. 15 feet of storm surge, is well, quite a lot.
View attachment 56773
Boston Globe article today on just this point.
Could a big hurricane whack New England? âMore of a question of when than if.â - The Boston Globe
As the Southeastern United States recovers from a pair of massive storms, how is climate change loading the dice for a hurricane to hit New England?www.bostonglobe.com
Bet you what we’ll get is this: neither.Thank goodness the Globe has stepped in just in time to report on this issue.
A city like Toronto, Chicago, or Edmonton; can devote a lot of time, attention, and funding into transit expansive to drive down emissions. Toronto, Chicago, and Edmonton can spend as much $ on transit expansion as they want without worrying about needing a giant flood barrier to protect themselves, since they are far inland.
Meanwhile Boston not only has to play several decades of catch-up in transit expansion, but also spend billions of a massive flood barrier. If Boston receives only a fraction of the funding, they could spend it on transit expansion, but that's just going to be flooded by the next summer the next hurricane strikes, if Boston opts to use funding to build the food barrier, now there will be no more transit expansion and we're not doing anything to drive down emissions, because the building the flood barrier eats all of that funding.
While it's true no one is talking about abandoning Logan Airport, that we need to protect all of this infrastructure, it's all vision talk and not actually in the budget. Where's Boston going to get funding for both a massive transit expansion and this big giant flood barrier? Unlike Toronto, Chicago, or Edmonton; Boston has got to somehow find funding for both transit expansion and the flood barrier.