It’s the sediment, stupid

Coastal Plain All Out-Go, No In-Come

This is my soapbox column.

I know I am preaching to the choir – but from an environmental geoscience perspective I am presenting thoughts about some basic geologic process understandings that should be having more influence on a potentially multi-billion dollar reconstruction effort than they are having.

I begin with some geologic facts about the most important delta in the United States.

The coastal Louisiana landscape was built from sediments supplied by the Mississippi River and deposited on its delta or along adjacent shorelines, carried there by longshore currents.

Since the supply of sediments has been reduced in a substantial way by engineered structures that dam and confine the river, very little sediment from the river reaches these environments.

The wasting of the coastal plain is due in large part to the absence of major influxes of sediment, leaving the destructive mechanisms of subsidence and wetland attrition as the dominant forces there. Thus the root of the current dominance of subsidence in the delta and resulting wetland loss is the cutting off of floodwaters – and their sediment load – to most parts of the system.

Over the many years that restoration of the Mississippi delta plain in south Louisiana has been under consideration by the state and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the size of proposed restoration projects has been generally small consisting of small diversions – mostly of water to refresh marshes, not sediment to build land.

This has been accompanied by hand-wringing over the continued loss of delta-plain wetlands.

The fact is, there is no sustainable approach to preserving and growing land in the Mississippi delta that does not include restoring large-scale sediment delivery to distal wetlands. Available data suggest that despite historical reductions in sediment load, the lower Mississippi River still transports sufficient sediment to meaningfully counteract current subsidence and sea level rise – if that sediment is effectively delivered to subsiding delta wetlands.

Accomplishing this will require creative, out-of-the-box approaches that go beyond minor diversions over and through existing and planned engineered structures.

It will require major river diversions that distribute sediment currently channeled off the edge of the continental shelf into distal coastal wetland environments.

This will need to be accompanied by other measures, such as getting water and sediment currently moving down the Atchafalaya River into wetlands and perhaps pipelines to deliver sediment into some areas.

While past arguments in favor of coastal-plain habitat restoration have focused on natural system values and the economically important productivity of these systems, post-Hurricane Katrina planning – centered around the protection of lives and property from hurricane surges, waves and flooding – includes the natural landscape as an important component of a protection system.

With this human-centered rationale for restoring the delta plain, the substantial challenges related to the infrastructure and societal issues associated with large-scale sediment diversions should receive the creative attention that has been lacking in the past.

Without approaches that deliver quantities of sediment more on a scale of those that built the delta, meaningful restoration and protection of distal parts of the delta plain is not possible, and plans should be laid for abandonment of these areas.

Comments (0)


Division Column DEG

The Division of Environmental Geosciences (DEG), a division of AAPG, is concerned with increasing awareness of the environment and the petroleum industry and providing AAPG with a scientific voice in the public arena. Among its objectives are educating members about important environmental issues, supporting and encouraging research on the effects of exploration and production on the environment, and communicating scientific information to concerned governmental agencies.

View column archives

DEG Announces Candidate Slate

The AAPG Division of Environmental Geosciences has announced the following candidates for its next slate of officers:

Terms of office will begin July 1.

(2008-09; President 2009-10):
Michael A. Jacobs,
Pioneer Natural Resources USA, Midland, Texas.
Chacko J. John,
Louisiana Geological Survey, Baton Rouge, La.
Vice President (2008-09):
Mary K. Harris,
Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, S.C.
Kevin S. Hopson,
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Lubbock, Texas.
Editor (2008-10)
James W. Castle,
Clemson University, Clemson, S.C.
Dibyendu "Dibs" Sarkar,
University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio.

See Also: Bulletin Article

Organic-carbon–rich shales of the lower Marcellus Formation were deposited at the toe and basinward of a prograding clinothem associated with a Mahantango Formation delta complex centered near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Distribution of these organic-carbon–rich shales was influenced by shifts in the delta complex driven by changes in rates of accommodation creation and by a topographically high carbonate bank that formed along the Findlay-Algonquin arch during deposition of the Onondaga Formation. Specifically, we interpret the Union Springs member (Shamokin Member of the Marcellus Formation) and the Onondaga Formation as comprising a single third-order depositional sequence. The Onondaga Formation was deposited in the lowstand to transgressive systems tract, and the Union Springs member was deposited in the transgressive, highstand, and falling-stage systems tract. The regional extent of parasequences, systems tracts, and the interpreted depositional sequence suggest that base-level fluctuations were primarily caused by allogenic forcing—eustasy, climate, or regional thermal uplift or subsidence—instead of basement fault reactivation as argued by previous workers. Paleowater depths in the region of Marcellus Formation black mudrock accumulation were at least 330 ft (100 m) as estimated by differences in strata thickness between the northwestern carbonate bank and basinal facies to the southeast. Geochemical analysis indicates anoxic to euxinic bottom-water conditions. These conditions were supported by a deep, stratified basin with a lack of circulation.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/sequence-stratigrapy-and-depositional-environments-of.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 7963 Bulletin Article

In this study, seismic models and a Starfak and Tiger Shoal fields data set in the Gulf of Mexico Basin are used to investigate uncertainties caused by the frequency dependence of seismic data and solutions for avoiding pitfalls in seismic-stratigraphic and facies interpretation. Seismic amplitude and instantaneous attributes, along with stratigraphic interpretation of these attributes, are controlled by seismic interference, or tuning, between thin geologic units. Seismic-tuning effects include thickness tuning and frequency tuning, which cause nonlinear variations of reflection amplitude and instantaneous seismic attributes with thickness and/or data frequency. Seismic modeling shows that, whereas thickness tuning determines seismic-interference patterns and, therefore, occurrence of seismic events and seismic facies in layered rock, frequency tuning may further influence the nature of the correlation of seismic data and geologic time and modify seismic facies. Frequency dependence offers a new dimension of seismic data, which has not been fully used in seismic interpretation of geology.

Field-data examples demonstrate that a stratigraphic formation is typically composed of lithofacies of varying thicknesses, and a broadband, stacked seismic data set is not necessarily optimal for stratigraphic and facies interpretation. Although it is difficult to predict correct frequency components for interpretation of not-yet-known geologic targets, local geologic models and well data can be used to optimize the frequency components of seismic data to a certain degree and intentionally modify seismic-interference patterns and seismic facies for better seismic interpretation of geologic surfaces, sediment-dispersal patterns, geomorphology, and sequence stratigraphy.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/frequency-dependent-seismic.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3609 Bulletin Article

See Also: Online Certificate Course

This course introduces the learner to the fundamentals of shale gas, including current theories that explain its origin, and how to determine which reservoirs are commercially viable.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/oc-cc-introduction-to-shale-gas.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 1472 Online Certificate Course

See Also: Online e Symposium

This talk will present a brief overview of proppants followed by a comprehensive discussion of the major considerations that are driving proppant selection in these plays.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/oc-es-proppant-selection-drivers-in-unconventional-resources.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 1493 Online e-Symposium

See Also: Short Course

This course is designed to introduce participants to geosteering principals, interpretation practices, and lead to the ability to recognize potential pitfalls.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/ace2015-sc12-three-ps-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 14596 Short Course