SEVERELY ERODING ERESSOS BEACH (LESVOS ISLAND) AND
Transcription
SEVERELY ERODING ERESSOS BEACH (LESVOS ISLAND) AND
Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology Kos island, Greece, 5 – 7 September 2007 SEVERELY ERODING ERESSOS BEACH (LESVOS ISLAND) AND POSSIBLE DAM IMPLICATIONS M.I. VOUSDOUKAS1, O. ANDREADIS1, G. ADAMAKIS1, A.F. VELEGRAKIS1, E. PASAKALIDOU1 and G. KOKOLATOS2 1 Department of Marine Sciences, Environmental School, University of the Aegean, Mitilene, 81100, Greece 2 Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, Mitilene, 81100, Greece e-mail: [email protected] EXTENDED ABSTRACT Small water storage dams are nowadays regarded as the ideal solution to waterhungry Aegean Sea islands. Many of such dams have been constructed and more are planned for the immediate future. However, these dams can also create problems to coastal areas, particularly to the downstream beaches found at the lower reaches of the dammed rivers. The present contribution reports the results of a study undertaken on the effects of such a dam located at Eressos basin, S. Lesvos. Eressos beach in recent years, shows evidence of erosion, which may be related to the reduction of river sediment load, due to the construction of the upstream dam. Estimation of the basin sediment yields and loads on the basis of the basin topography, sedimentology and land use and generalized soil erosion equations have shown that the dam stops more than half of the sediment load. Although other factors can also be responsible for the observed beach erosion (e.g. coastal defence works and changes of the annual wind climate), the dam’s contribution is regarded to be significant, particularly over the long term. Keywords: river discharge, beach erosion, dams, sediment transport, drainage basins 1. INTRODUCTION Coastal areas comprise highly dynamic zones, affected by atmospheric, marine and terrestrial processes, as well as their interaction [e.g. see 3]. Moreover, the already important human interference is steadily increasing, due to the high socio-economical importance of the coastal zone, with often unexpected implications [e.g. see 2]. Hydrological cycle and in particular sediment balance in the drainage basin and the coast is one of the most important components of the total system; rain water interaction with the land leads to soil erosion and transport mechanisms. The generated sediment load is finally deposited to the coast, a process initially responsible for the generation of beaches, and thus to a great extent vital for their conservation. On the other hand water demand is constantly increasing and in many cases dam construction appears as the only choice. 3800 km3 of fresh water is withdrawn annually from the world’s lakes, rivers and aquifers, twice the volume extracted 50 years ago. Furthermore world population has passed 6 billion and still hasn’t reached the peak point. As a result more than 45000 large dams have been built during the past decades and more are scheduled for construction [10]. Apart from their undisputable merits, dams have significant impacts since they affect downstream hydrology, morphology and ecology [e.g. 8]. They can trigger A-1534 morphological changes through change of sediment supply, affect water properties and quality downstream and threaten certain species [e.g. 4; 6]. Studies have shown that 30% of riverine water is retained in dams resulting in significant impacts on carbon balance, nutrients supply and biological production, thermo-saline balance and water circulation of basins and coastal morphodynamics [10]. Especially in small islandic areas, where sediment balance is very fragile, they pose a serious threat to beaches found downstream, erosion of which is a serious blow to such tourismbased economies [9]. This study is focusing on an islandic area (Eressos, Lesvos Island, Greece) consisting of a drainage basin where a small dam was constructed and the downstream beach, which is under a severely eroding state. Sediment transport processes in the watershed are studied numerically, while field topographic and sedimentological data are analyzed and discussed. 2. STUDY AREA The study area is located in the north western part of Lesvos island (see Figure 1), 100 km (55 in a straight line) away from the capital city, Mytilene. It is a catchment area of 57.6 km2 which includes two main inhabited areas the villages of Eressos and Skala Eressos (at the coast) with population of 1247 and 306 people respectively. The morphology of the area under consideration is semi-mountainous with ground slopes varying from less than 100 in the lower flood plain close to the coast areas, to steep rocky relieves on the northern part of the watershed. The main soils in the area, similar to the soils of most north western part of Lesvos, consist of mainly of volcanic rocks, with some amount of limestone in the lower coastal alluvial plains. Newer fluvial sediments are also present in these lower parts of the river basin as well. The watershed is crossed by a number of seasonal streams of short length and several secondary branches eventually ending up to the beach of Skala Eressos, via a couple of main streams the most important, in terms of size (14 km) and discharge is Chalandra. The dam is constructed along Chalandra, 5 km upstream of the outfall to the sea. The main type of ground cover appearing on the area is low shrubby type with scant tree canopy, restricted around the lower inhabited areas and especially Skala Eressos where olive trees are cultivated, along with stock-raising plants. The main human activities are tourist business, land cultivation and animal farming. The dam itself is constructed along Chalandra and it corresponds to 45% (26 km2) of the total Eressos catchment area. It is designed to store more than 2.500.000 m3 of water in the reservoir upstream for the cultivation and general water needs of the municipality. It was constructed in 1999 using 765.000 m3 of soil materials and has a height of 29 m and length of 340 m [1]. A-1535 Figure 1. Study area. (a) Aerial photo of the Eressos dam and (b) satellite image showing the location of the dam, Eressos village and the main streams of the drainage basin (Chalandra, Karasaris, Eleousas and Lifonakas). 3. METHODS 3.1. Drainage basin sediment transport model (UCLE equation) To calculate the sediment yield within the study area the RUSLE equation [7] was used. The acronym stands for Revised Universal soil Loss Equation and refers to an algorithm for calculating the amount of soil produced (A) by overland erosion in tons per hectare (tons/ha). The initial equation, USLE, was first developed in the United States to estimate the amount of soil loss caused by rainfall in tilled low gradient areas [11]. Thereafter it has evolved, modified and revised in order to be applicable in a variety of conditions around the world giving accurate results and hence receiving a universal character. Each parameter in the equation plays a significant role with respect to the physical phenomenon of soil erosion and their correct determination is crucial to the end result: (A)=(R)*(K)*(LS)*(C)*(P) Where, R - Rain erosivity is an energy factor that depends on the energy of the precipitation over a period of time and shows the potential of the rain to cause erosion. It is calculated by formulas developed through site specific experimentation and needs measurement of certain values like I30, which is the maximum rain intensity in a 30 minute recording period [e.g. 5]. K – Soil erodibility factor that counts for the sensitivity of the soil to the rainfall’s erosive action. It largely depends on its composition, texture and organic content. Experimental values of K represent the percentage of silt, clay and sand in the soil mixture of the surface sediment. LS – Relates to the ground slope and the length that it goes over. It is clear that higher slope values and long gradient lengths cause higher erosion levels and hence soil loss. A-1536 C – Land cover/use factor is a parameter that comes into the algorithm as a percentage in order to account for the effect of the various land covers and land uses, to soil erosion. P – Another parameter affecting the final amount of soil loss as it counts for the protection practices against soil erosion that take place by humans (terraces etc) in a similar manner as land cover. The above algorithm was run in ESRI Arc Map environment using the Raster Calculation function. A Digital Elevation Model (30m) was employed in order to extract some of the above parameters (LS) whereas others where calculated using tables produced for similar cases (K, C) and on site measurements (R). Figure 2. Soil erosion estimation flow chart 3.2. Other field and meteorological data Beach profile impressions were obtained at five stations along Eressos beach during September 2004, January 2005 and June 2006. Typical topographical survey equipment was used and the upper dry part of the profile was impressed until depths that not exceeded 1.5 m. Sediment samples were collected from several points along the beach, Chalandra stream’s bed, as well as from the dam’s bed. Mineralogic composition was studied using a X-Ray diffraction device (PHILIPS PW1820/00), with a PW1710/00 microprocessor, Cu tube and Νi filter for CuKa radiation, while the scanning area of 2θ angle was 3-63˚ and scanning speed 1.2 ˚/min. PC-APD (1994) software was used for automated input/processing of the digital scanned data. Prior to samples analysis, validation and sensitivity tests were carried out, and semi-quantitative identification of phasies took place on the grounds of counts certain diffractions, as well as density and Mass Absorption Coefficient CuKa values. Daily precipitation data (height, duration) of the period 2000-2006 were collected from the meteorological station of Andissa. 4. RESULTS-DISCUSSION A difficulty in sediment yield estimation, is to ascribe the proper values on the several terms of the USLE equation, and in particular the soil erosibility K, land use C and soil protection P terms. Most of the existing applications of the equation refer to United States areas and it is very likely that terms’ values found on the literature are not applicable for the case of Eressos. For that reason calculations for different cases were carried out. For a sand terrain case the dammed area sediment yield was found to be 6.1 t/km2/yr, almost 46% of the total (13.3 t/km2/yr) (see Figure 3a), while for the silt terrain case ( A-1537 Figure 3b) the estimated total production was 791 t/km2/yr, of which 367 is retained by the dam, a proportion similar to the sand case. A-1538 Figure 3. Drainage basin model results for two studied cases regarding soil characteristics. Both sand (a) and silt (b) cases show that 40-45% of the total produced sediment yield is retained from dam. The topographic data (Figure 4) show that the beach suffered from erosion during the monitoring period (2004-2006), showing a significant shoreline retreat of ≈ 10 m or even higher at some stations. The observed accretion on the westerly station also suggests the presence of longshore transport to that direction, but the amount of sediment deposited to the west, doesn’t correspond to the one lost form the rest of the beach, showing that cross-shore seaward transport is prominent. X-ray sediments analysis (Figure 5) showed significant similarities between the beach and stream bed samples, in contrast to the ones from the dam’s bed. The former suggests that Eressos beach is supplied by sediments found downstream of the dam, while produced suspended sediments yields upstream are retained on the artificial lake’s bed. All the above suggest that there may be a link between the observed erosion on Eressos beach and the dam construction. After several cases studied on the drainage basin model the overall conclusion is that more than 40 % of the available sediment is retained by the dam, a proportion high enough to disturb the area’s sediment balance. On the other hand, a recent dramatic change in the hydrodynamic regime cannot be excluded from the possible reasons for the observed erosion problem (not easily examined since relevant wave or wind data are not available), and further study of the area is required in order to reach to solid conclusions. A-1539 Figure 4. Beach profile impressions showing the ≈10 m shoreline retreat during the last two years. Beach accretion was observed only on the western station (e). The stations arrangement on the figure is similar to the one on the inset photo. Figure 5. X ray diffraction analysis results of samples from the beach (a, b), Chalandra stream bed (c) and the dam bed. The similarities on the first three figures suggest that sediments are characterized by similar compositions, in contrast to the dam’s sediments. The latter implies that the dam is trapping all the upstream sediments. A-1540 5. CONCLUSIONS Dam construction is nowadays considered a common practice solution to respond to the constantly increasing water demand; on the other hand, the negative impacts of dams have been clearly outlined, after extensive practice during the past decades. A small dam was constructed in the Eressos drainage basin for irrigation purposes and shortly after (5-years period) the beach downstream is suffering from major erosion problems. Eventhough it is not possible to exclude other factors as possible causes (mainly a dramatic change in the hydrodynamic regime), model results show that more than 40% of the total produced sediment yield of the area is retained by the dam. The statement above is also supported by the fact that materials on the dam’s bed have different characteristics compared to those form the rest of the area. All the above suggest that dam construction should be carefully practiced, always considering the possible consequences that may often be dramatic. The possible ‘loss’ of a beach on an area with tourism-dependent economy, like in the situation studied, is unfortunately, a good such example. REFERENCES 1. Apostolidis, K.P., Stefanou, C., Stergiopoulos, K. and Antonopoulou, E., 2000. Environmental impact assesment for the project: 'Exploitation of the S. Lesbos dam' (in Greek), Hellenic Ministry of Agriculture, Athens. 2. EUROSION, 2004. EUROSION. Living with coastal erosion in Europe: Sediment and Space for Sustainability, Directorate General Environment, European Commission. 3. Komar, P.D., 1998. Beach Processes and Sedimentation. Prentice Hall, N.J., USA, 544 pp. 4. Milliman, J.D. and Syvitski, J.P.M., 1992. Geomorphic/tectonic control of sediment discharge to the ocean: the importance of small mountainous rivers. Journal of Geology, 100: 525-544. 5. Novotny, V., 1995. Non Point Pollution and Urban Stormwater Management. Water Quality Management, Library Vol. 9. Technomic Publishing, Pensylvania. 6. Poulos, S.E. and Collins, M.B., 2002. Fluviatile sediment fluxes to the Mediteranean: a quantitative approach and the influence of dams. Geol. Soc. Am. Bul., 191: 227-245. 7. Renard, K.G., Foster, G.R., Yoder, D.C. and McCool, D.K., 1994. RUSLE revisited: status, questions, answers and the future. Soil and Water Conservation, 49: 213-220. 8. Stenberg, R., 2004. Damming a river: a changing perspective on altering nature. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews(1-33). 9. Velegrakis, A.F., Vousdoukas, M. and Meligonitis, R., 2005. Erosion of Islandic beaches: phenomenology and causes of the degradation of the largest natural resource of isclandic Greece. In: G. Tsaltas (Editor), Islandic Greece in the 21st century (in Greek). SIDERIS Publications, Athens, pp. 243-262. 10. W.C.D.Secretariat, 2000. Dams and global climate change. Thematic Review II.2. World Commission on Dams, Cape Town. 11. Wischmeier, W.H. and Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses, Agricaltural handbook 537. USDA. Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC. A-1541