Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
61 APPENDIX B Scenario 1: Sea Level Rise 1 introduCtion The subject of this case study scenario is long-term sea level rise. The main reasons for sea level rise are ther- mal expansion of the earthâs water masses and melting of glaciers. Natural changes are aggravated by human activity. Sea level rise can have a great impact on coastal areas. Although it is a slowly approaching climatic threat, the anticipated impacts of sea level rise on existing infra- structure and societies can be so severe that adaptation has to start now. According to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global mean sea level rose by 0.19 meter (7.5 inches) between 1901 and 2010 (1). There is high confidence that the global mean sea level rose at an average rate of 1.7 millimeters (0.07 inch) per year over the period 1901 to 2010, 2.0 millimeters (0.08 inch)/year over 1971 to 2010, and at a rate of 3.2 millimeters (0.13 inch)/ year from 1993 to 2010. Tide gauge and satellite altim- eter data, available since the early 1990s, are consistent regarding the higher rate of the latter period. A source of uncertainty is the effect of the melting of glaciers. Quoting Bamber and Aspinall, one source notes, âCombined with melting glaciers and ice caps and thermal expansion of the ocean, Bamber and Aspinall gave a range of 33â132 centimeters (13â52 inches), with 62 centime- ters (24.4 inches) the average estimate, for sea level rise by 2100. Itâs still uncertain, but itâs the best estimate we have for nowâ (2). There is evidence that the contribution to sea level due to mass loss from Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating to 5.4 mm (0.21 inch)/year by 2100 (2). Sea level rise varies from year to year due to short-term natural climate variability (e.g., El NiÃ±o). There are also large differences along the coastlines due to local ocean temperature variations, salinity, currents, or because of uplift or sinking (subsidence) of the coastal land areas. Uplift due to postglacial rebound in areas that were covered with glaciers during the last Ice Age is favor- able for the relative sea level rise. This potential uplift includes land areas in Canada, the West Coast and northern part of the United States, and Scandinavia. Subsidence, on the contrary, increases the relative sea level rise and creates a serious problem in some areas. Subsidence is caused by pumping groundwater, oil and gas extraction, compression under heavy construction, and land use. Damming rivers has reduced sedimenta- tion in some deltas, causing subsidence in areas such as the Mississippi River delta. One of the most dramatic examples of subsidence is in Louisiana, where land is subsiding at a rate of approximately 0.9 meter (3 feet) per century (3). Parts of the city of New Orleans, Louisi- ana, are subsiding by 28 mm per year. This subsidence is due to drainage systems within metro New Orleans and construction of river levees, which starve the wetlands of sediment and fresh water (4). In addition to long-term sea level rise, an expected increase in storm activity will increase the threat from storm surge, when especially high sea levels occur. Storm surge is usually forecast and is managed as a forecast river flood or storm. The consequences of storm surge are, nevertheless, concrete examples of impacts brought by long-term sea level rise. Several large storm surge events in Europe (5) and the United States (6) have caused loss
62 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s i l i e n c e of life and damage in the past century. The North Sea storm surge in 1953 killed more than 2,000 people and caused massive damage to properties along the southern coastline of the North Sea (7). Hurricane Katrina in the United States in 2005 resulted in the deaths of between 1,245 and 1,836 people and caused $108 billion (e84 bil- lion) in damage. As the sea level rises, resulting impacts from hurricanes and sea storms will be intensified. In the United States, the greatest impacts will be in the Gulf Coast and East Coast states, and in Europe, the lowland coastal regions of the North Sea (8). A study of 136 major coastal cities showed that vulnerability to sea level rise is high (9). Because flood defences have been designed for past conditions, even a moderate rise in sea level would lead to substantial losses. Inaction is not an option. Even with better protec- tion, the magnitude of losses will increase, often by more than 50%, when a flood does occur. 2 imPaCts of sea level rise on transPortation (10) Navigation â¢ Port facilities are placed on the waterâs edge and are therefore potentially vulnerable to sea level rise. â¢ Sea level rise and storm surges can damage essen- tial protective infrastructure. â¢ Storm surges and flood-related scouring can weaken bridges, quays, and pier foundations. â¢ Docks, jetties, and other facilities are deliberately set at an optimal elevation relative to historic water lev- els and therefore a rise in sea level leaves them at a sub- optimal elevation. (However, these facilities tend to be rebuilt relatively frequently compared with the time it takes for a substantial rise in sea level.) â¢ Sea level rise could result in a reduced need for dredging and easier navigation for deeper-draft vessels in particular channels (small effect compared with the draft of most vessels). Saltwater advancing upstream can alter the point at which flocculation leads to sedimenta- tion and creation of shoals. â¢ Storm surge and storms could cause difficulties with docking and congestion. â¢ Sea level rise could cause decreased clearance under bridges, which could limit the ability of boats to pass underneath a bridge (probably a problem for smaller boats and smaller bridges). â¢ Port services could be affected by high sea level and flooding because storm surges and flooding of port facili- ties prevent vehicle movements. â¢ Goods handling and storage can be affected by storm surge and flooding (e.g., damage or restriction of crane operations or loading of bulk, flooding of stor- age platforms and facilities, damages, material losses of infrastructure, spoiling of goods). â¢ Ports can become inoperable if critical inland net- works fail. Aviation â¢ Sea level rise is a problem for coastal cities, where airports are built along tidal waters, sometimes on filled areas. The runways are vulnerable to flooding and splash- ing from waves. Storms can move rocks and debris onto runways, causing damage to the pavement and costs to clear the debris. â¢ Protection zones around runways are exposed to erosion, requiring erosion measures and monitoring. Roads â¢ Coastal roads and railways on fillings are exposed to increased erosion when sea water levels are high, and drainage systems can become less effective, increasing the risk of flooding. â¢ Subsea tunnels are exposed to wave splashing or flooding if entrances are low, and they are also exposed to higher water pressure on the tunnel walls. â¢ Wave splashing of coastal and island roads is a traffic safety problem before the roads are flooded. â¢ Flooding of roads causes road closure, a serious problem if the road is the only access to coastal commu- nities and/or if the road is used as an evacuation route. â¢ Increased flooding increases evacuation times, which increases the risk to life or requires emergency officials to begin an evacuation sooner. Railways â¢ Railroads often cut across marsh areas in coastal zones. Low-lying tracks are often flooded, and the beds may be vulnerable to sinking from compaction of marsh peat. This situation makes them more vulnerable in the future climate. â¢ Tunnels may also become more vulnerable because the risk of their entrances and vents flooding will be greater and because the hydraulic pressure on the tunnel walls increases as water tables rise. Examples of Protection Measures (11) â¢ In-shore protection and strengthening of trans- portation infrastructure, as well as physically raising existing transportation structures or relocating trans-
63A P P E N D I X B : s c E N A r I o 1 : s E A l E v E l r I s E portation infrastructure, will help maintain existing infrastructure. â¢ Constructing seawalls, bulkheads, retaining struc- tures, revetments, dikes, dunes, tide gates, and storm surge barriers will protect beaches and coastal areas. â¢ Beach nourishment or sand replacement adds material to a beach to make it higher, wider, and less vulnerable to the sea. â¢ Further protection is afforded by converting erod- ing beaches to a cobble or pebble beach and placing hard structures offshore. 3 vulnerability study: gulf of mexiCo The U.S. Gulf Coast states (Texas, Louisiana, Missis- sippi, Alabama, and Florida) have been identified as highly vulnerable to sea level rise. The vulnerability of the transportation infrastructure to projected sea level rise and increases in storm surge is a critical area of uncertainty for communities in the extremely low-lying and flat northern Gulf Coast zone. White, young adult, and nonpoor populations have shifted over time away from zones with higher risk of wind damage, while more vulnerable population groupsâthe elderly, Afri- can Americans, and the poorâhave actually increased in the higher-risk areas (12). A rapidly growing population along some parts of the northern Gulf of Mexico coast- line is further increasing transportation development, thus increasing the impacts of projected sea level rise in the region, where observed relative rise rates range from 0.75 to 9.95 millimeters (Â¾ to 4 inches) per year on the Gulf Coast of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. By 2100, a worst case scenario could be a 75- to 200-centimeter (2.5- to 6.6-foot) rise. A detailed study on the potential impacts of climate change on transportation systems in the Gulf Coast region was conducted by the Federal Highway Adminis- tration (FHWA) (13). The vulnerability of transportation highways, bus transit, ports, rail, aviation, and pipeline components to weather events and long-term changes in climate was assessed. The focus was on those transporta- tion components that are most critical to economic and societal functions. Phase 1 of the study (completed in 2008) examined the impacts of climate change on the transportation infrastructure at a regional scale. Phase 2 (completed in 2015) focused on Mobile, Alabama. The main features of the study are as follows. â¢ Climate assumptions. In Phase 1, scenarios of 61 and 122 centimeters (2 and 4 feet) of relative sea level rise were selected as inputs. In Phase 2, scenarios of 30 centimeters (1 foot) of global sea level rise by 2050 and 75 centimeters (2.5 feet) and 200 centimeters (6.6 feet) of global sea level rise by 2100 were used. Global sea level rise values were adjusted based on local data on subsi- dence and uplift of land. In addition, 11 storm scenarios were applied. â¢ Criticality assessment. A scoring system was devel- oped that ranked each assetâs criticality as high, medium, or low. Criticality was evaluated using mode-specific cri- teria related to socioeconomic importance, use and oper- ational characteristics, and the health and safety role in the community. â¢ Vulnerability screening. Several hundred assets were considered to be highly critical. Because detailed vulnerability assessments could not be conducted on each asset, this study identified appropriate indicators of the three components of vulnerability (exposure, sensi- tivity, and adaptive capacity). These indicators are char- acteristics of an asset that may suggest how projected changes in climate may affect the exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of each asset. According to this study, relative sea level rise of approximately 1.2 meters (4 feet) could permanently inundate more than 2,400 miles of roads, over 70% of the existing port facilities, 9% of the railway lines, and three airports (Figure 1); in the case of a 5.5-meter storm surge (less than that of Katrina), more than 50% of Inter- state and arterial roads, 98% of port facilities, 33% of railways, and 22 airports in the U.S. Gulf Coast could be affected (14). These results should be viewed in relation to another finding of the study, that is, that the connec- tivity of intermodal systems, including goods movement to and from ports, can be severely disrupted even if short segments of roadways are flooded. A more recent study on the exposure of the U.S. Gulf Coast critical infrastruc- ture assets has suggested that critical port facilities are the most vulnerable to extreme weather and storm surge, together with critical coastal rail lines; the extent of inun- dation of critical transportation assets from storm surge will be much greater than that due to long-term sea level rise, which will, however, exacerbate the severity of storm surge; and pipelines have the lowest fractional extent of exposure (3% to 16% of exposed pipeline miles), while exposure varies (16% to 62% of the road length) for the critical roads depending on the scenario (15). Transportation impacts from increased relative sea level rise in the area will make existing infrastructure more prone to permanent and/or frequent inundation from tropical storms and storm surges. A total of 27% of the major roads, 9% of the rail lines, and 72% of the ports are built on land with an elevation of or below 1.2 meters (4 feet). Therefore, increased storm intensity may lead to infrastructure damage and service disruption: more than half of the areaâs major highways (64% of Interstates, 57% of arterials), almost half of the rail miles, 29 airports, and virtually all seaports are below 7 meters
64 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s i l i e n c e (23 feet) in elevation and subject to flooding and possible damage due to hurricane-induced storm surges (15). Key findings from the FHWA study (16) include the following: â¢ Highways appear to be vulnerable to storm surge and sea level rise. â¢ The port and marine waterway systems are vulner- able to storm surge and sea level rise. â¢ Airports are considered to have low vulnerability to sea level rise and storm surge due to higher elevations or inland locations. â¢ Rail lines appear to be most vulnerable to sea level rise and storm surge due to location. â¢ Critical transit facilities could be exposed to sea level rise and storm surge depending on location. â¢ On-shore pipelines have relatively low vulnerabil- ity to climate change due to the fact that they are often buried underground or are located in areas not expected to be exposed to extreme events. Pumping stations are the most vulnerable part of a pipeline system to sea level rise and storm surge. 4 vulnerability study: frenCh mediterranean Coast The Mediterranean Coast of France is exposed to inun- dation during storms and splashing from waves and ero- sion, which causes problems for coastal communities and for infrastructure. Both physical assets and services are affected (17â19; G. Le Cozanett, Marie Colin, and Jerome Duvernoy, personal communication). A vulnerability study was conducted in the LanguedocâRoussillon region; this study also extended to other coastal areas of mainland France.1 Languedocâ Roussillon covers 215 kilometers of the Mediterranean shoreline between the border of Spain and the RhÃ´ne delta (Figure 2). The area suffered significant damage in storms in 1982, 1997, and 2003. Projections of global sea level rise add to the concerns. Adaptation measures have been implemented for years; they include beach nourishments, the placement of coastal defense struc- tures, and the relocation of a coastal road and other exposed assets (21). Demographic trends and trends in coastal develop- ment are contributing to the vulnerability of the region. The coast is increasingly popular; the concentration of housing and enterprises in coastal municipalities is grow- ing. Exposure to the sea is actually the basis for one of the main sources of income, which is tourism. To conduct the vulnerability analysis, researchers made several assumptions: 1 This study was one of the preliminary studies (2008) leading to the French National Adaptation Plan. Systematic work has been done in France on adaptation to climate change. See, for example, the newly published National Climate Change Adaptation Plan: Transportation Infrastructures and Systems (20). FIGURE 1 Predicted inundation along the Gulf Coast with a 4-foot sea level rise. (sourCe: https://www3.epa.gov/ climatechange/impacts/transportation.html.)
65A P P E N D I X B : s c E N A r I o 1 : s E A l E v E l r I s E â¢ Due to established uncertainties, especially con- cerning modeling the development in the Mediter- ranean, the vulnerability assessment was based on a conservative assumption of a sea level rise of 1 meter (3 feet) by 2100 (Figure 2). This was somewhat higher than IPCCâs projections at the time (IPCC Fourth Assessment Report), but it was consistent with some more recent models and estimates (22, 23). The pro- jected sea level rise was also in accordance with the âcommon methodologyâ developed in 1995 (24). â¢ An additional 1-meter sea level rise was chosen as the level of future temporary inundation for a 100-year storm. â¢ The zone exposed to severe erosion by 2100 was chosen to be 500 meters (1,640 feet), covering large local differences in various morphologies. â¢ The effect of the existing coastal protection is not taken into account because it will have no effect in the given scenario unless adjusted or resized. The area that would be submerged and eroded by 2100 was estimated. Population and residence density models were overlaid with the estimates of eroded and inundated areas to calculate exposure. Demographic assumptions, however, correspond to present-day demographic statistics. The impacts on the communities in the Languedocâ Roussillon region were significant (although the rough assumptions have to be taken into consideration). â¢ Irreversible erosion or permanent inundation will lead to the displacement of 80,000 people and the loss of 140,000 residences. â¢ People and residences will be exposed to a higher hazard of marine inundation, in both extent and fre- quency. The final estimates of people potentially affected by temporary inundation hazard by 2100 lie between 40,000 and 80,000 (between 60,000 and 140,000 resi- dences). These estimates are with the limitation due to the hypothesis of constant stake. FIGURE 2 The LanguedocâRoussillon region in southern France. (sourCe: http://www.languedoc-roussillon.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/local/cache- vignettes/L480xH502/Les_reseaux _de_transports_en_LR_V4_Light_cle745349- 2-11334.jpg.)
66 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s i l i e n c e Costs were assessed for loss of assets, buildings, and transportation infrastructure (direct) and loss of use of the destroyed properties (indirect). The costs of damage from coastal erosion and permanent inundation are estimated to be â¬e60 billion ($69 billion) by 2100 for loss of buildings, but over â¬e140 billion ($161 billion) if land loss is included. Costs of temporary inundation, estimated to be e6 billion ($6.9 billion) by 2100, must be added to that figure. Data from road and rail databases were used to sup- ply the map with infrastructure. Ecologically valuable areas were taken into consideration by including the low-water areas (ponds and marshes), as they can be crossed by roads or railways, and are often included in ecological zoning. For the entire mainland of France, the linear transport infrastructure estimated to be inundated by a sea level rise of 1 meter (39 inches) is close to 17,000 kilometers (10,500 miles). This estimate includes 2.9% of motor- ways, 1.7% of national roads, and 6.3% of the railway network. For the LanguedocâRoussillon area, approximately 2,500 kilometers (1,553 miles) of roads will, according to this study, be inundated by 2100. Of the submerged roads, 85 kilometers (53 miles) are national roads and highways. Due to data availability, the assessment of costs was limited to the major national infrastructure networks in mainland France managed by the state, or ânational roads.â Although this limitation corresponds to only 1.2% of the total length of the French road network, it is responsible for 25% of the total traffic on French roads. For coastal submersion, it seems reasonable to consider that the overall sea level rise of 1 meter would mean costs for national roads in mainland France (excluding high- ways and âother roadsâ) of up to e2 billion ($2.3 bil- lion), excluding the costs of the loss of use. This cost was assessed by applying an estimate of the mean monetary cost of road asset loss of e10 million/kilometer ($18.5 million/mile) and of reclamation of temporarily sub- merged roads of e250/kilometer ($463/mile). The port of Leucate, which has petrochemical facilities, is among the structures exposed to coastal hazards and sea level rise. It experiences flooding. The major Medi- terranean port of Marseilles, located approximately 80 kilometers (50 miles) east of LanguedocâRoussillon, is one of the 136 cities covered by the study âFuture Flood Losses in Major Coastal Citiesâ (9). Although Marseilles is on a âclosedâ sea, the impact of sea level rise cannot be neglected (25). Key Findings and Proposed Measures â¢ The analysis suggests that the cost of current coastal risks is negligible in comparison to the expected costs by 2100. The costs of potential damages due to erosion and permanent inundation are larger than those due to temporary inundation. â¢ This study highlights the importance of defining long-term management strategies for the coastal zone, taking into account current risks and predictions of addi- tional future risks due to climate change. âAt a mini- mum, it is advisable to reduce short-term coastal risks and to discourage urbanisation and population growth in low-lying, high-risk areasâ (26). â¢ The knowledge base is important: regular data acquisition at study sites, maps, and data sets (e.g., natu- ral phenomena, hazard estimation, vulnerability, asset exposure, damages, costs) will better support effective planning. â¢ It is necessary to reinforce the application of regu- lations; take into account coastal risks due to climate change in local-, regional-, and national-level strategic plans; and consider future climate change in the manage- ment of coastal sediment supplies (e.g., with the acquisi- tion of land by the Conservatoire du Littoral2). 5 issues raised by the Cases The areas of the two studies are very different: Languedocâ Roussillon is an agricultural and tourist region on the coast of the âclosedâ Mediterranean Sea, and the Cen- tral Gulf Coast region is a critical location of the entire United States for the import and export of industrial, commercial, and agricultural products and oil and gas. Both regions, however, confirm the trend of increasing pressure on attractive coastal areas. The LanguedocâRoussillon study illustrates the prob- lems lack of data can cause, such as uncertain sea-level rise projections, taking into account local morphologi- cal differences, data on damage costs of previous events, and uncertain demographic projections. Vulnerability and criticality were estimated only on the basis of loca- tion and available data. [Criteria for vulnerability and criticality are described in the 2015 National Climate Change Adaptation Plan: Transportation Infrastruc- tures and Systems (20).] Both studies show that the connections and interde- pendency regarding area use (transportation, housing, tourism and nature, industry) require solutions that see the system as a whole. The long-term challenge requires long-term planned solutions that will result in a gradual reduction of the pressure on the coastal areas. 2 The Conservatoire du Littoral (Coastal Protection Agency) is a French public organization created in 1975 to ensure the protection of outstanding natural areas on the coast, banks of lakes, and stretches of water of 10 square kilometers or more. The Conservatoire is a member of the World Conservation Union.
67A P P E N D I X B : s c E N A r I o 1 : s E A l E v E l r I s E 6 researCh Possibilities and oPPortunities Sustainability Questions Some questions of sustainability as raised by the French ONERC3 report, The Coastline in the Context of Cli- mate Change (27), include the following: â¢ Should we really be extending our infrastructure into maritime areas at a time when sea levels are rising rapidly and coastal flooding is already a fact of life for many coastlines? â¢ Do we need to build new sea defenses? â¢ Should we withdraw from coastal areas and scale back our socioeconomic exploitation of these zones? â¢ Do we need to relocate property? â¢ How do we find the right balance between the pressing needs of spatial occupation and resource use? â¢ The effects of climate change serve as a reminder that our planet is not infinite. How do we respond to the facts that our resources are not unlimited and that inac- tion is not a viable option? â¢ How do we mobilize and face the challenges of the present, together, while preparing for the challenges of the future? Possible Research Topics â¢ How can vulnerability assessment related to sea level rise be carried out in the best possible way on the asset level and on the system level? What do we need to know? â Regional climate scenarios, sea level projections, storm surge projections, wave height; â Basis for analyses for vulnerability: geographic information service maps, the effect of protective areas; and â Criteria for estimating vulnerability and criticality. â¢ How can we design assets and systems for better resilience to sea level rise? â Design values of high sea level and wave loading and â Flexible design for future adjustments. â¢ How do we identify, and maintain the focus on, the interdependencies among different sectors and infra- structures in order to avoid disruptions due to sea level rise? â¢ How can different modal transport agencies col- laborate and coordinate their responses to sea level rise? â¢ How can we go about long-term gradual transition to a less vulnerable infrastructure? 3 ONERC is the Observatoire national sur les effets du rÃ©chauffement climatique (National Observatory on the Effects of Global Warming). aCKnowledgments The authors thank GonÃ©ri Le Cozannet (BRGM), Marie Colin (CEREMA), and JÃ©rÃ´me Duvernoy (MinistÃ¨re de lâEnvironnement, de lâÃnergie et de la Mer) for providing additional information about LanguedocâRoussillon. referenCes Abbreviations CCSP U.S. Climate Change Science Program IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ONERC Observatoire national sur les effets du rÃ©chauffement climatique (National Observatory on the Effects of Global Warm- ing) UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 1. IPCC. Fifth Assessment Report. 2014, 2015. 2. http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ sea-level-rise-2/dealing-uncertainty-predicting-future-sea- level-rise/. 3. Meyer, M., M. Flood, J. Keller, J. Lennon, G. McVoy, C. Dorney, K. Leonard, R. Hyman, and J. Smith. NCHRP Report 750: Strategic Issues Facing Transportation. Vol- ume 2: Climate Change, Extreme Weather Events, and the Highway System: Practitionerâs Guide and Research Report. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2014. doi 10.17226/22473. 4. http://www.nola.com/homegarden/index.ssf/2015/02/ shifting_doorframes_cracking_d.html. 5. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/ storms-and-storm-surges-in-europe-1/assessment-1. 6. http://www.stormsurge.noaa.gov/event_history.html. 7. http://www.metofficegov.uk/news/in-depth/1953-east- coast-flood. 8. European Commission. Regions 2020: The Climate Change Challenge for European Regions. Brussels, 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/ working/regions2020/pdf/regions2020_climat.pdf. 9. http://www.oecd.org/newsroom/future-flood-losses-in- major-coastal-cities.htm. 10. http://climate.dot.gov/documents/workshop1002/titus. pdf. 11. http: / /www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-art i cle/2009-11-01/strategies-managing-sea-level-rise. 12. http:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC 4410365/. 13. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/ adaptation/ongoing_and_current_research/gulf_coast_ study/.
68 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s i l i e n c e 14. CCSP and Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Impacts of Climate Change and Variability on Trans- portation Systems and Infrastructure: Gulf Coast Study, Phase I (M. J. Savonis, V. R. Burkett and J. R. Potter, eds.), U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2008. 15. UNECE. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation for International Transport Networks. http://www.unece. org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp5/publications/cli mate_change_2014.pdf. 16. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/ adaptation/case_studies/gulf_coast_study/. 17. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00509836/document. 18. ONERC. Le Littoral dans le Contexte du Changement Climatique. Report to the Prime Minister and Parliament, 2015. 19. http://www.languedoc-roussillon.developpement-dura ble.gouv.fr/. 20. http://www.infra-transports-materiaux.cerema.fr/ national-climate-change-adaptation-plan-a5978.html. 21. http://www.languedoc-roussillon.developpement-dura ble.gouv.fr/contenu-du-projet-programme-de-l-opera tion-a2537.html. 22. Rahmstorf, S. A. A Semi-Empirical Approach to Projecting Future Sea-Level Rise. Science, Vol. 215, 2007, pp. 368â 369. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/315/5810/368. 23. Grinsted A., J. C. Moore, and S. Jevrejeva. Reconstruct- ing Sea Level from Paleo and Projected Temperatures 200 to 2100 AD. Climate Dynamics, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2009, pp. 461â472. https://www.researchgate.net/publica tion/225104718_Reconstructing_sea_level_from_paleo_ and_projected_temperatures_200_to_2100AD. 24. http://www.univie.ac.at/geographie/fachdidaktik/FD/site/ pdf/nicholls.pdf. 25. http://www.connexionfrance.com/Marseille-flood- OECD-Hallegatte-trillion-14977-view-article.html. 26. G. Le Cozannet, N. LenÃ´tre, M. Y. Michelin, P. Nacass, B. Colas, C. Perherin, C. Peinturier, C. Vanroye, C. Hajji, B. Poupat, C. Azzam, J. Chemitte, and F. Pons. Climate Change Impact, Adaptation and Associated Costs for Coastal Risks in France. In Littoral 2010: Adapting to Global Change at the Coast: Leadership, Innovation, and Investment. London, September 21â23, 2010. EDP Sci- ences, 2011. doi:10.1051/litt/201115001. 27. ONERC. The Coastline in the Context of Climate Change. Foreword and Executive Summary. Report to the Prime Minister and Parliament, 2015. http://www.developpe ment-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/ONERC_Extrait_Rap port_Littoral_CC_EN_VF.pdf. additional resourCe U.S. National Climate Assessment. http://nca2014.glo balchange.gov/report/our-changing-climate/extreme- weather.