Beaches aren't the only area where economic disparities are hurting communities. Check out our video on how "levee wars" are making flooding worse: bit.ly/2ryAHcN
The only thing that I've got from this video is that you all hate the fact that despite the nourshment process costs 200 million to be done it receives in return 5x more in form of taxes. All of that because "you want to take care of those poor people who live close to the coast". In a nutshell: Useless video with no conclusion.
The problem is caused by the fact that cities/developments were built right on top of the dunes, in some cases bulldozing them completely. Under natural conditions beaches erode during storms but sand from the dunes naturally fall to fill the gaps and build the beach back up, under calm conditions beaches are actually continually growing due to rocks constantly eroding into sand which moves up the coast via longshore drift. That sand is blown up the dune by winds where it settles and replenishes the dune system. When you build on top of the dunes then as the beach erodes in storms it doesn't get replenished fast enough so it gets smaller and smaller until the oceans starts lapping up against the foundations of said building. So to solve the issue we just have to plan new communities better and perhaps begin a process of strategic retreat for existing communities to slowly set developments back from the shoreline and give the dunes a chance to regrow.
@@Lomaherp I'll have to disagree with you. I was curious and did a quick Wikipedia search (so who knows how reliable it is), I found that it has some positive and negative impact on the ecosystems. I encourage you to look into it!
@@morgankappes6282 Thanks! I will read a bit more about it. Just for me it makes sense that it wouldnt affect very much as beaches change naturally so much too.
The foolish man built his house upon the sand, and the wise man built his house upon the rock. The rich man built his house and industrial properties on the sand such that the government would be forced to provide insurance against natural erosion.
In Veneto (Italy), we place dams made with big rocks in order to destroy waves. Erosion still happen, but this rebuilding process is done as I remember each 10 years
Indeed, @Alexander Tabary. But breakwaters can also be the cause of erosion by actually changing ocean currents, possibly redirecting these erosive currents towards other parts of the coast. Breakwaters only move the problem.
it was in the recommended vids. Also, try to watch failon ngayon "manila bay: rehabilitation or reclamation", environmentalists and geologists explained why such projects in the area are not strategic and will pose harm to the people nearby in the future.
Then there's Figueira da Foz, Portugal, where the beach is actually expanding at a staggering rate, so the government has to actually remove sand. It currently extends for more than 2km from the shoreline to the sea, and keeps expanding almost 100 metres every year n
@@Rainkit and grow insanely slowly, are being pushed out by invasive plants and lower the land value as well as limit what you can do with the land. Hardly a sustainable approach.
@@afg3233 no it won't. I wish they'd mentioned this in the video but the reason these beaches are getting eroded is because properties placed so close to the shoreline stop part of a cycle called the sand cycle. The erosion from this cycle remains but the sand no longer gets built back onto the beach as it naturally should, causing the issue of erosion. This whole issue would be nonexistent if we hadn't built houses right on the shoreline, allowing the cycle to continue and allowing erosion the sand that was eroded to be replaced.
Look for 'sand motor', and see how the Dutch are doing beach nourishment better. For us, it's a necessary task in the pursuit of not getting 3/4th of the country flooded.
As a civil engineer specialized in coastal engineering, I can say that beach nourishment is the best solution we could come up with for now. Some would argue that concrete wave breakers could slow down the erosion cycle and some countries did implement that. However, reducing wave height and speed can cause a swamp like environment and could eventually change the marine ecosystem and for us humans, it would render the water unswimmable and thus undermining the economic and environmental value of the beach. So yeah, unless researchers could come with a way to make sand somehow resist the cyclic wave induced erosion and stick to its place, we have nothing better to do.
As a structural engineer l know the water hydrolicing can't be stopped by the typical mickey mouse attempts..... everyone wants to live where they should not
@@markomclane475 You're joking, right? When ice that's not in the water melts, it creates more water, raising the sea level. And when chunks of ice break off the ice shelf and fall into the water, it raises it too. This is pretty simple science.
or just don't build a beach. I live on an island and we know that some places have stronger foundations than others. Erosion on naturally-occurring beaches takes longer than man made beaches.
Nice video. As a physical geographer specialized in marine and fluvial deposits, I love it when a video pops up that highlights the interactions of humans with the ever changing landscapes. But. The video only states that beach nourishment is not a long term solution. Perfect. Completely agree with that. I respect the fact you need to be aware of the length of the video but human habitation is actually part of the problem of beach erosion. Beaches erode (among others) because their sand supply is hindered by development, for example because buildings and infrastructure fixed the sediment in other places that may act as natural supplies of beach sand with these depletion sites then being replenished by other sites. Another known factor is property development and marine infrastructure changing currents thus redirecting erosive currents towards the inhabited coast. So I was nicely surprised when the negative feedback loop came along at the end of the video. Finally the causes of the problems: humans! But. Maybe I missed it, but the video only mentioned that nourished beaches lead to bigger houses. That is not really a loop. It is simple cause and effect, if the effect doesn't influence the cause again itself. But if you mentioned bigger houses would lead to beach erosion then you have your feedback loop. Again, sorry for the nitpicking. And I do respect your choice on the content, but it felt as a missed opportunity not to mention the fact that our hunger of development actually causes the loss of development.
Derrick, respectfully I think you have misunderstood the point. A positive feedback loop has absolutely been established. Of course a loop necessarily also involves a chain of causation followed by a given effect/s. To suggest that a loop could only be established by showing that erosion leads to bigger houses is to misapprehend the point. It is easy to mistake the key cause here to be erosion when the key cause is actually the prevention of erosion ie nourishment. No amount of building will ever impact upon the tides. Increased nourishment inevitably leads to more building development due to the false sense of security this process engenders; which incidentally increases the value of the various economic interests at stake - which induces a positive feedback loop - enabling the government to better justify continuing the process of nourishment, as the protective benefits that accrue will always outweighs the costs. Put simply, nourishment leads to more development...which in turn justifies more nourishment which in turn will induce even more development and investment. Obviously this won’t continue on exponentially forever as development will become saturated, however in theory a feedback loop has definitely been established.
Yeah I read another person's comment who said the same thing! Now I wonder what happens in the areas where they take the sand from to do these beach rebuilding things that is if something does happen
Nope :( I imagine it’s fairly safe for wildlife, except for the unlucky bottom dwellers that get sucked into the boat tubes. Or any wildlife that gets hit by incoming sand during nourishment.
@@carolynthomas3938 The biggest impact on wildlife is the lack of habitat that used to be there. Which, ironically, is what was originally stopping the erosion.
@@carolynthomas3938 It's a complex issue but a wide variety of wildlife can be negatively effected by beach nourishment. Google "impact of beach nourishment on wildlife" for some papers/articles.
I did not know that there was something like beach nourishment till today and.... The risk vs rewards seem worth it. The video actually made me supportive of the process
Well the process is logical given the stupid building habits that make them necessary. But it would be much better to instead stop the stupid coastal developments that accelerate erosion.
Here in Germany we have a system where we place structures into the sea close to the beach. Their surface is built in a way that all the sand that flows away from the beach gets trapped there and so the beach therefore rebuilds itself over time. It's really old and was already used in the middle ages in a similar way. I don't know if it would also work in America but I guess it would at least help
This video is great but it leaves out some key factors. nourishments are only allowed on public property since half the funds come from federal money. No ones private beach house is getting nourished. This video kind of insinuates that only the rich get nourishments which isn’t true. In order for a nourishment to happen, the property behind the beach has to grant an easement essentially signing the land over for public use. Of course in more populated and touristy areas signing over the land for a promise of a beach always being there is appealing. All the properties have to do in return for nourishment is allow public access points to those beaches. It’s usually in those places where they haven’t given easement that they won’t receive nourishments. Those places that havent given easement also tend to be VERY rich places because they have more money than sense and are usually less populated because it’s neighborhoods with a ton of mansions and thus less structures per capita so don’t be confused by that stat comparing building size. Finally nourishments are funded by tax payer money so it only makes it fiscally solvent to invest in a coastline that will protect infrastructure. More tourists= more taxes= more funds to continue nourishment.
They “re-nourished” the beach on Palm Beach Island a few years ago and extended it by about 80 yards or so... Within just a few winter months ALL of the dredged up sand was gone, and it was just like it was before.
Funny how at 1:07 at the word "tourism" it cuts to Brighton beach, the least sandy beach in the whole of England and says "the visitors enjoy the sandy coasts"!? #pebbles
In my part of Florida, Pinellas County, our local honeymoon island beach only lasted a few months after being nourished. It used to be massive however in recent times it has rapidly eroded. Luckily, the property isn't a problem since it is within a state park.
I use to work as a life guard at a beach by a campground. My mom use to also work at that same beach as a lifeguard about 30 years earlier. When she visited me at the beach one day she informed me that about 100m of beach had been eroded away since she worked there, and that there use to be campsites where our life guard tower was place. My mom actually works as a civil engineer for the local government and they were planning on putting up rock barriers to stop the erosion on that beach and when I visited her at work her work one time she showed me some of their actual documentation with satellite photos of the erosion at the beach. Each year the beach would lose a few meters, some years it would lose 5m, some satellite photos taken before and after major storms even showed loses of 1-2m in just that one storm.
RafikiFreak What this video failed to mention is that while Beaches everywhere are naturally eroding, at the same time there are also beaches everywhere being created by natural wave soil deposit. In a perfect world we wouldn’t build permanent structures So close to naturally changing beaches and we would visit the beaches that are receiving deposit that year and then next season visit a different beach.
Many of the houses still get destroyed by hurricanes, so they're forever in a danger zone that costs taxpayer dollars. The dredging of sand also endangers the shore near where it's taken (and whatever is built on it), as gravity still applies and matter slides into place where the sand is taken from. An alternative to dredging is using ground up recycled bottles to replenish the sand. That won't stop the hurricanes though. More hurricane-resilient and flood-resilient design would help take the edge off it.
@@FireRupee I'm in ecological restoration. When I was in my senior year of college, I had to write a restoration prospectus for an area of my choice. I chose a beach in Texas and did a lot of research for my - ugh - 20-something page paper, not including diagrams, charts, images, and other visuals. It was sad to know that, even with all that work and the wonderful ideas and solutions that have been invented, it wouldn't last for very long.
@@X7rocks Well, that's good for Florida then. For five million households across America, NFIP is the only flood insurance they can get, and it's a pretty insufficient system. I'm not saying there should be no NFIP at all, but one that is thoroughly revised, beyond just higher premiums or more funding. "Severe repetitive loss properties" is the term for the 1% of properties that are 10% of the flood insurance claims. Something more would have to be done for these cases, like buying the properties to allow the homeowners to move to safer places.
Meh, I say if you are dumb enough to build/invest in beachfront buildings in this era, then I say you deserve to have your “investment” wash away as the sea level rises.
I agree with you except thanks to our national flood insurance program the homes will just be rebuilt at the taxpayers expense. It's cronyism at its finest!
I guess you weren't listening? It's not just about the properties, it's about the tourism and the massive impact that has on the economy in places like Florida.
That's a nice thought, however, this isn't the a rising seas problem. The land they are building on wouldn't be skinking into the sea if they weren't building on it and destroying the natural structures that have been standing there for thousands of years. But once it does, the people who did the right thing and built behind it, a little further away will have the same things happen to their homes and then when their homes are gone, it will be the homes behind them and so on untill the whole land mass has sunk into the sea.
That was really interesting. I've been living near the beach for several years now, and some winters it just disappears. Now I know where all that sand comes from and how it all works.
I really like these videos Vox puts out but i found myself getting frustrated because no actual solutions were put forward in place of beach nourishment. Things like increasing vegetation back from the beach in between the sand and development significantly reduces erosion. It's easy to get people riled up (and rightfully) about the disparity that rich and poor communities when it comes to beach nourishment funding, but it doesn't help drive change
@@derranlawston4052 - it's not only about hurricanes, normal storms and windy weather erodes coastal lines too! (not everything that works here will work everywhere, but maybe there's something in it..) next to that the replenishment solution also created new nature with birds and dunes etc.
@@derranlawston4052, I respectfully disagree. Beach erosion is not only caused by hurricanes. Not to mention the North Sea has his fair share of nasty winter storms and strong tidal forces.
@@derranlawston4052 The dutch know their coastlines though, they've spent the past few decades reclaiming land, and basically dug up most of their country from under the ocean, since they are technically mostly below sea level. There's a lot to be learned from their technology.
The mix of people complaining about "leftist propaganda", so called experts who give their one sentence solutions and typical youtube spam comments sure is interesting :D
@@PorscheJon Conservatives are total NPCs lmao.. Did you ever hear anyone complaining about Maxine Waters before Trump took office? They're just parroting what the buffon says...
Technically the sand is supposed to be put back by the ocean during the summer through a longshore current. Main reason erosion is happening is because not enough sediment is being input into the ocean from rivers due to dams blocking rivers from reaching the ocean fully.Less sand is recycled therefore more sand will keep being taken from the beaches by the ocean during winter tides.
That's actually not even nearly how it works. The problems is the houses being ON the beach where natural dunes and vegitation should be helping to prevent the erosion naturally.
Plaid Shirt Winter tides take away sand from the beach and summer tides put sand back on the beach. If there is less sediment to be recycled, maybe there will be less sand? I understand properties on the beach are causing issues with sea walls ruining public beaches but that’s not contributing to lack of sand entering the ocean through rivers.
@@gdspathe1130 True that too! Subsidies that drive otherwise uncompetitive exports, ruining local farms south of the border, all the while preaching "free trade" in Washington DC.
Vox forgot to mention How the world is running out of Beach Sand. As the sand is taken from Rivers, not the one from the desert as it is unfit for the beaches. It destroys the ecosystem of the rivers while rehabilitating it won't remain as a long term solution.
Another impact of rebuilding beaches worth noting is the loss of "beach combing" - in some areas this can also affect tourism. For example, not far from Lido Key, Venice beach has historically been referred to as the "shark's tooth capital of the world" and Venice holds a shark's tooth festival every summer. After those beaches were rebuilt, finding shark's teeth was nearly impossible. The shark's teeth are fossilized (tens of thousands of years old) - a significant number of finds were from the extinct megalodon, for example (which was bigger than a school bus - and the teeth could be several inches in length). Other fossils could be found along that beach as well, including horse, bison, mastodon and more (horses were in parts of North America thousands of years ago, then disappeared and then reappeared). These fossils are shown at the festival, some are also sold for several thousand dollars each. Once the beaches were rebuilt with sand from offshore, the ability to find these fossils was negatively impacted because the fossils were buried under several feet of new sand.
This seems like a case of confusing correlation with causation. Bigger houses aren't being built because of the beach nourishment, beach nourishment is just mostly happening in places with valuable economies, which are more likely to have bigger houses as well.
But if they stopped rebuilding the beaches, wouldn't that bring the 'reckoning' sooner? Wouldn't it make more sense to regulate the amount of construction along vulnerable areas?
@@reyesbb Uhhh? The new pictures of the project shows more trash than sand right now. And wouldn't it be better if the government prioritized the rehabilitation, ie make the water cleaner, rather than the beautification project?
@@reyesbb Constructive criticisms does not equal to negativity, man. People have the right to question the project. It's better to call out the government for their questionable action rather than praise them for this one. Toxic positivity is more destructive, imo.
I did a school project in geography for identifying the"best" option for solving the problem, in the long-term, was a managed retreat. This requires buildings to be moved, but returns it to a natural state where there is a flat coastline by removing current defenses and instead letting the formed cliffs erode.
@Packo_ Hubu ikaw ang bobo. Tagalugin ko para maintindihan mo. Walang katapusang paglilinis at reklamasyon ang mangyayari sa Manila bay para mamaintain ang kagandahan. At sana matutunan ng tao magpahalaga sa kapaligiran. BOBO! INUTIL!
@@eyhernandez Bobo ka, bakit mo ititigil ang pag mamaintain sa Manila Bay, yun ang number 1 na dapat gawin ng tao i-Maintain ng walang katapusan, yun ay reponsibilidad natin lahat, so ang gusto mo pag natapos wag na i maintain at linisin?? bobo ka talaga.
As a citizen of North Carolina, where all the beaches are on narrow islands, I have been to beaches that are nourished annually, and beaches that are almost never nourished which have homes getting surrounded, and ultimately destroyed, by the ocean
This is why where I live (which isn't in the US), the beach doesn't stay perfect during the winter. They make hills and holes instead, and the sand from those hills are used to fill the holes when the summer arrives.
I don't get what's wrong with beach nourishment. Without it we'd lose those houses. And it's economically beneficial too so why not do it? I was expecting some damage to ecosystem or something.
Look at Marco Island Florida. It's a success story and it's been over 25 years since the last project. The beach keeps growing and growing. In fact in an area that once had a seawall with waves breaking over it, you now must walk nearly a quarter mile to reach the water.
Grew up surfing in the South Bay of L.A.. Back in the late 60's early 70's, those beaches had nice sand bars, that would shift a little, but produced excellent surf given the right swell direction. Years later, those sand bars appeared to be scoured away, leaving dreadful surfing conditions.
Since the Army Core of Engineers specifically takes on jobs where there's high risk of expensive property damage, building large homes near the beach is NOT a recipe for a disaster, but rather a good way to ensure your beach will be nourished!
After hurricane Sandy hit the beaches and houses were completely destroyed it was really cool to look at never really thought about how the beaches got rebuilt untill now
The fact that they have so much "value" along the coastline is the reason why they get the nourishment in the first place. It totally makes sense that they continue to develop those spaces, they need to up the value to keep the sand pumping.
Vincent Cuevas i know its not a beach its a bay. And its not a waste of time and money dahil sa dami nang gustong pumunta dun at iba pang turista madali lang nilang mababawi ang pera na ginamit para ipagawa yan
@@justinsurla6043 tourists? we are in a middle of a pandemic, who knows when tourists will actually be able to go there, and the "sand" is already fading away. clearly a waste of time and money.
Manila Bay already has its sunset - tourists already go to Roxas Boulevard because of it. Ano ang silbi ng beach kung hindi naman pwedeng liguan ang tubig? At ano ang benefit ng beach nourishment for tourism purposes if the government needs to spend 300 million pesos every few years to replenish the dolomite lost to erosion?
Not all beaches are subject to erosion. Wildwood, NJ for example, has beaches that continue to grow, as the sand from some other beaches gradually build up in Wildwood.
Kapag inipaliwanag ko sa mga dds or Manila bay supporters na ganito ang mangyayari sa beach ng Manila bay ay tinawag nila agad ako dilawan. Pero hindi naman ako makadilaw at hindi din ako makaduterte nagbabase ako sa science kaya ko naisip na mawawala ang beach after 5-10 years at gagastos nanaman para mapanatili ang beach na ito
@Adept Marketing Solutions Ang main problem ko lang sa beach ng manila bay ay pwedeng gamitin yung pondo sa iba lalo na at every 2-10 years ay mawawala din naman. Pero kung sa tingin naman ng ating government ay worth it at maibabalik din naman yung perang ginamit ay ayos ako sa pagpapaganda ng manila bay.
@@spikespeagle8319 naiinis lang ako dahil kapag nagpapaliwanag ako ng opinion ko ay gigil na gigil lagi sa akin😂. Madami na akong napanood na interview tungkol dito kaya nagbago na ang opinion ko para dito salamat sa isang nagcomment dito
why not add plant life to the beach to help bind it all together, then tie that whole idea together with a couple market firms. That way you reduce erosion, thus expand the cycle times, which could make managing the whole thing easier. Well also changing what we view as a desirable beach, from the sandy featureless beaches to ones that have plant life, shade, and what you could call "the tropical experience". Now that would be the "cleaner" way of handling the situation i think, but you could also just devise engineering plans to stabilize the ground, reduce wave impact, and so forth.
0:59 "erosion becomes a problem when it reaches structures built by humans along the coast" are we sure Vox isn't made up of aliens making educational videos for their alien schools 0_0
the beach near my house is getting very eroded, it used to be decently wide with a basketball court and a bathroom, but a couple years ago big waves from an off shore storm eroded all the sand away leaving only small rocks and eroding the wooden deck area and the court. of course a more popular beach is near by so there are minimal efforts to repair the beach and the only repairs are being made at the houses that are now basically on top of the water
How does nourishment compare with alternative options for preserving coast lines? Nourishment obviously doesn’t stop rising sea levels, but this video did a pretty good job of convincing me it’s a worth while effort until the larger problems are addressed.
Building large rock/boulder walls and large sand bars several hundred yards from the shoreline is the best solution. It would entirely stop erosion but it will greatly reduce the overall effects. Ive lived in sarasota, (siesta key) and frequented neighboring Lido beach. thru the years seeing the erosion and dredge rebuilding, problem is.. as the sand is removed several yards away from the shoreline it further increases the strength of the waves, during storm season. Gulf beaches are now mostly man made. as it would take palmetto trees and mangroves to truly hold erosion back. as such, stone walls is the best solution, it also benefits in establishing coral reef growth. Puerto rico's san juan area is a perfect example to this idea. as it has both man made and natural reefs off shore, which does a fantastic job at stopping storm surge and errosion. Like florida, puerto rico beaches establish from shallow shore line waters, then after the reefs take a major drop off in depth. This natural feature also benefits beachs as the largest of waves meet are deflected by themselves as water is pushed upwards from the depths. That said, rising sea waters may make all means of defense redundant.
I live on an island that thrives on tourism and this is a serious problem in almost all sides. However, I was wondering what the natural replenishment of sand is. Since beaches erode quickly, how fast and how much sand can nature provide. Thanks! I enjoy this channel a lot.
People don't seem to understand that coastlines erode, if you don't want your house to be swept into the ocean then don't build or buy a house that close to the water. You can't cry foul because you choose not to understand natural processes
@@janusbartolome4878 boss hindi pa tapos yung project.. talagang mahahaluan pa yan ng black sand dahil may part pa na hinuhukay.. Saka nakailang ulan na ng malakas lagi nyo sinasabi na wala na wash out na yung white sand pero bakit andyan pa at pinagkakagukuhan pa rin.. Hahaha nakaka awa nagpapaka stress ka ng husto sa magandan namn na project😆
I wish you guys had touched on where the sand is going with this piece. The cases of Ocean City and Wildwood is perfect for this. Ocean City and Assateague have been merging into a single beach for decades, but we keep dredging them apart again. Wildwood, on the other hand, traps all the sand that should be naturally moving south (replenishing other beaches) because it's the last beach to sit north of the Cape May harbor. This means that Wildwood has an absurdly huge beach that is a full 500ft away from its boardwalk.
The Mississippi Gulf Coast beach is 26 miles of man made beach. Every 12 years or so it gets new sand pumped on it from a dredge. Even though I don’t use the beach much, I can’t imagine the Coast without it. I guess it would be like the days before the beach when water lapped up to the sea wall.
I don't see the problem at all, if the revenue from tourism is bigger than the cost of the buildings which it is, It makes a lot of sense to build an hotel, get the ROI in say 10 years, make a lot of money for other 10 years and maybe 20 years later your hotel will be destroyed by the sea. What is the problem? you got a lot of money form it, with the earning you can build hotels on non-beach areas or in other beaches or found hospitals or electrics cars or whatever. I don't see the problem at all.
That makes sense in a local perspective,but those tourists would have used their money somewhere else so if every place needs to spend lots and lots of money maintaining things there is no innovation, and no compounding of investment.
Beaches aren't the only area where economic disparities are hurting communities. Check out our video on how "levee wars" are making flooding worse: bit.ly/2ryAHcN
Nice video but did not learn anything I didn't already know.
Economic disparities are not things that can hurt anyone or anything. Nature hurts things.
g w what?
america: ''where the army DEFENDS beaches and its rich property-owning citizens again oh so scary normal sea behavior''
The only thing that I've got from this video is that you all hate the fact that despite the nourshment process costs 200 million to be done it receives in return 5x more in form of taxes. All of that because "you want to take care of those poor people who live close to the coast".
In a nutshell: Useless video with no conclusion.
'builds house on a ledge on sand"
WHY IS MY HOUSE SINKING WTF
In a nutshell. Figure that logic out.
Kaptain Kid more like a democrat voter.
@@josephglasscock8064 nope Trump
Well usually they build it pretty far away from the sand and then erosion happens.
I see this all the time when rich mainlanders come to Hawaii
Dubai left the chat.......
Why would dubai leave the chat?
Hahaha awesome
LOL
I’m on the palm (in Dubai) right now
The Alien LOL EARTHQUAKE COMES AND PALM WILL BE NONE
@Sunny Quackers
Dubai is a Dutch build.
Even if posible,we build sand motors,,free sand on the beach.
The problem is caused by the fact that cities/developments were built right on top of the dunes, in some cases bulldozing them completely. Under natural conditions beaches erode during storms but sand from the dunes naturally fall to fill the gaps and build the beach back up, under calm conditions beaches are actually continually growing due to rocks constantly eroding into sand which moves up the coast via longshore drift. That sand is blown up the dune by winds where it settles and replenishes the dune system.
When you build on top of the dunes then as the beach erodes in storms it doesn't get replenished fast enough so it gets smaller and smaller until the oceans starts lapping up against the foundations of said building. So to solve the issue we just have to plan new communities better and perhaps begin a process of strategic retreat for existing communities to slowly set developments back from the shoreline and give the dunes a chance to regrow.
you cant just use logic with americans
Loris Support Guides some
My city was built like this. We only have to nourish out beach after major hurricanes(cat 4 up)
This is why the dutch take great effort in keeping its dunes safe and have spend millions on rebuilding km of them
I see no problem spending $$$ to dump the sand back. Imagine how many Americans are wasting money on their grass......why can't they just let it grow?
I wish they mentioned how this impacted ecosystems
THANK YOUUU!!
@Jeremy Wansbrough people are more important than animals
Honestly it probably doesnt affect the ecosystems at all. There can be no complex and fragile ecosystems near beaches as it changes so much.
@@Lomaherp I'll have to disagree with you. I was curious and did a quick Wikipedia search (so who knows how reliable it is), I found that it has some positive and negative impact on the ecosystems. I encourage you to look into it!
@@morgankappes6282 Thanks! I will read a bit more about it. Just for me it makes sense that it wouldnt affect very much as beaches change naturally so much too.
So you’re saying my sandcastle I built is going to be gone soon?
yes,but probably due to other reasons. Edit:such as a person stepping on it like a psychopath.
The foolish man built his house upon the sand, and the wise man built his house upon the rock.
The rich man built his house and industrial properties on the sand such that the government would be forced to provide insurance against natural erosion.
CJusticeHappen21 but it brings in revenue. So it’s actually worth it for the government
This needs more likes lol
Oh the Bible quote. I always remember these metaphor. You smart bastard
Except the erosion isn't natural and is caused by "the foolish man".
Riley Dumont On this I can agree. Why Should people from Colorado pay to rebuild a beach in Florida.
Did spongebob teach us nothing? I think we should push the buildings away. Problem solved.
Jack Banker yeah because that’s easy, just moving buildings
@@derranlawston4052 It's a joke
Cooper King 🤦🏽♂️ damn... I’ve become one of those people
@@derranlawston4052 Its ok you can make it up by subscribing to Pewdiepie
Please don't let T-series win
@@cooperking1517 Ha another desperate to series hater
In Veneto (Italy), we place dams made with big rocks in order to destroy waves. Erosion still happen, but this rebuilding process is done as I remember each 10 years
man people are stupid
@@jakobholm6343 hahaha yeah...
But the Adriatic is a nothing sea compared to the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.
Indeed, @Alexander Tabary. But breakwaters can also be the cause of erosion by actually changing ocean currents, possibly redirecting these erosive currents towards other parts of the coast. Breakwaters only move the problem.
you're so handsome
Who else is watching this after the Filipino government started dumping sand on Manila Bay
imma reply early to this
Same
it was recommended after i have watched several updates on manila bay... lol
Well will see if we see the same thing happens lol
it was in the recommended vids. Also, try to watch failon ngayon "manila bay: rehabilitation or reclamation", environmentalists and geologists explained why such projects in the area are not strategic and will pose harm to the people nearby in the future.
Then there's Figueira da Foz, Portugal, where the beach is actually expanding at a staggering rate, so the government has to actually remove sand. It currently extends for more than 2km from the shoreline to the sea, and keeps expanding almost 100 metres every year n
Whaaat that’s so interesting
That's because of the river.
Why remove it seems pointless
Espera, o quê? Eu fui ao parque de campismo há uns tempos e a areia nunca mais acabava. É por causa disso? Sheesh, temos pra aí 1km ou mais de areia
It would have been cool if vox at least mentioned some of the several alternative solutions to beach erosion besides beach nourishment.
Theres not really anything else that is suitable for Florida.
@@chadleach6009 Restoring mangrove forests. They're the best method of natural soil erosion prevention and will even build up soil over time.
You'll just have to put up with trees on your beach
@@Rainkit and grow insanely slowly, are being pushed out by invasive plants and lower the land value as well as limit what you can do with the land.
Hardly a sustainable approach.
Venice is using big concrete blocks to act as a wave breaker
Here’s an idea. Hear me out. How about: WE DONT BUILD TOO CLOSE TO THE SHORE LINES.
This is frustrating.
Right and then the beach and sand will come closer to you over time lol
Luckily I’m on a island Long Island
Wait...
@@afg3233 no it won't. I wish they'd mentioned this in the video but the reason these beaches are getting eroded is because properties placed so close to the shoreline stop part of a cycle called the sand cycle. The erosion from this cycle remains but the sand no longer gets built back onto the beach as it naturally should, causing the issue of erosion. This whole issue would be nonexistent if we hadn't built houses right on the shoreline, allowing the cycle to continue and allowing erosion the sand that was eroded to be replaced.
LOL, nope! Read about the church in Trzesacz, Poland. There's no escape!
40% of the world lives 200 km from the ocean... yeah not too easy
Look for 'sand motor', and see how the Dutch are doing beach nourishment better. For us, it's a necessary task in the pursuit of not getting 3/4th of the country flooded.
Deltawerken JONGU
Just another thing that the us government does and is like GaRsH hOw Do We FiX iT OoPs No OtHeR cHoIcE
As a civil engineer specialized in coastal engineering, I can say that beach nourishment is the best solution we could come up with for now. Some would argue that concrete wave breakers could slow down the erosion cycle and some countries did implement that. However, reducing wave height and speed can cause a swamp like environment and could eventually change the marine ecosystem and for us humans, it would render the water unswimmable and thus undermining the economic and environmental value of the beach. So yeah, unless researchers could come with a way to make sand somehow resist the cyclic wave induced erosion and stick to its place, we have nothing better to do.
idk just glue the bottom of the beaches in place with rubber (watch the microplastic production tho)
As a structural engineer l know the water hydrolicing can't be stopped by the typical mickey mouse attempts..... everyone wants to live where they should not
Didn't even talk about rising sea levels. I'm sure that's not going to help.
Right, climate change.
Rising sea levels are most likely a myth
@@markomclane475 You're joking, right? When ice that's not in the water melts, it creates more water, raising the sea level. And when chunks of ice break off the ice shelf and fall into the water, it raises it too. This is pretty simple science.
@@jeffrowisdabest yeah I thought thats how it worked too
@@jeffrowisdabest ive noticed an increase in the severity of storms and flooding but overall no sea levels have risen
Life's a beach. Sigh.
and then you dive
@@elcelticojobro That's why we get high. Cause you never know when the water floooows
Yeah it shore is a beach to live on a beach
And we’re all on it
*Life's a beach and then you sigh.
in short don't build any property near any beach.
or just don't build a beach. I live on an island and we know that some places have stronger foundations than others. Erosion on naturally-occurring beaches takes longer than man made beaches.
You mean near Florida beaches... Other beaches are perfectly normal and NATURAL
Simple
You are clueless.
Nice video. As a physical geographer specialized in marine and fluvial deposits, I love it when a video pops up that highlights the interactions of humans with the ever changing landscapes.
But. The video only states that beach nourishment is not a long term solution. Perfect. Completely agree with that. I respect the fact you need to be aware of the length of the video but human habitation is actually part of the problem of beach erosion. Beaches erode (among others) because their sand supply is hindered by development, for example because buildings and infrastructure fixed the sediment in other places that may act as natural supplies of beach sand with these depletion sites then being replenished by other sites. Another known factor is property development and marine infrastructure changing currents thus redirecting erosive currents towards the inhabited coast.
So I was nicely surprised when the negative feedback loop came along at the end of the video. Finally the causes of the problems: humans!
But. Maybe I missed it, but the video only mentioned that nourished beaches lead to bigger houses. That is not really a loop. It is simple cause and effect, if the effect doesn't influence the cause again itself. But if you mentioned bigger houses would lead to beach erosion then you have your feedback loop.
Again, sorry for the nitpicking. And I do respect your choice on the content, but it felt as a missed opportunity not to mention the fact that our hunger of development actually causes the loss of development.
Thank you! Very insightful comment. - Carlos W.
No problem, @@Vox. Love your videos and also really like the respectful and constructive comment section.
Derrick, respectfully I think you have misunderstood the point. A positive feedback loop has absolutely been established. Of course a loop necessarily also involves a chain of causation followed by a given effect/s. To suggest that a loop could only be established by showing that erosion leads to bigger houses is to misapprehend the point.
It is easy to mistake the key cause here to be erosion when the key cause is actually the prevention of erosion ie nourishment. No amount of building will ever impact upon the tides.
Increased nourishment inevitably leads to more building development due to the false sense of security this process engenders; which incidentally increases the value of the various economic interests at stake - which induces a positive feedback loop - enabling the government to better justify continuing the process of nourishment, as the protective benefits that accrue will always outweighs the costs.
Put simply, nourishment leads to more development...which in turn justifies more nourishment which in turn will induce even more development and investment.
Obviously this won’t continue on exponentially forever as development will become saturated, however in theory a feedback loop has definitely been established.
Yeah I read another person's comment who said the same thing! Now I wonder what happens in the areas where they take the sand from to do these beach rebuilding things that is if something does happen
I remembered this video from 2 years ago when I saw that a building partially collapsed in Miami a few days ago.
Hello people, from the Dolomite Beach of Manila Philippines. 🇵🇭🏖️😂
awts.....
HGGHGHHHHG
AAAHHHH YESSS!!!
Orayttt😂😂😂😂
Kung matangay man ang buhangin. Lalabas lng yung dati. Malayo eto s manila bay. Sus
No mention of the impact on wildlife!?
Nope :( I imagine it’s fairly safe for wildlife, except for the unlucky bottom dwellers that get sucked into the boat tubes. Or any wildlife that gets hit by incoming sand during nourishment.
@@carolynthomas3938 The biggest impact on wildlife is the lack of habitat that used to be there. Which, ironically, is what was originally stopping the erosion.
@@carolynthomas3938 It's a complex issue but a wide variety of wildlife can be negatively effected by beach nourishment. Google "impact of beach nourishment on wildlife" for some papers/articles.
People with the conflict of interest don’t care about widelife.
Here's an example of what can happen: 'St. Augustine beach renourishment impacts sea turtles' th-cam.com/video/0eqXtuAJ-ho/w-d-xo.html
Don't build NEW houses by coastlines.
Anders Pihlgren true why put people through that
@@electric9049 r/woosh
@@electric9049 r/woosh
For a good view of the beach
Gator true personally I think it's more that rich people like looking at pretty beaches yet have really poor foresight
I did not know that there was something like beach nourishment till today and.... The risk vs rewards seem worth it. The video actually made me supportive of the process
Well the process is logical given the stupid building habits that make them necessary. But it would be much better to instead stop the stupid coastal developments that accelerate erosion.
I vaguely knew about it but didn't realize how much it actually occurs
@@ninjafruitchilled the problem is that if you can't build on land for fear it will wash away, you're wasting prime real estate and a lot of money.
You didn't? I knew it happened since Waikiki is probably the most nourished beach in the U.S., but I was unaware it was this common.
I still don’t see the problem with rebuilding the beach. They just want to find something to complain about.
Here in Germany we have a system where we place structures into the sea close to the beach. Their surface is built in a way that all the sand that flows away from the beach gets trapped there and so the beach therefore rebuilds itself over time. It's really old and was already used in the middle ages in a similar way. I don't know if it would also work in America but I guess it would at least help
This video is great but it leaves out some key factors. nourishments are only allowed on public property since half the funds come from federal money. No ones private beach house is getting nourished. This video kind of insinuates that only the rich get nourishments which isn’t true. In order for a nourishment to happen, the property behind the beach has to grant an easement essentially signing the land over for public use. Of course in more populated and touristy areas signing over the land for a promise of a beach always being there is appealing. All the properties have to do in return for nourishment is allow public access points to those beaches. It’s usually in those places where they haven’t given easement that they won’t receive nourishments. Those places that havent given easement also tend to be VERY rich places because they have more money than sense and are usually less populated because it’s neighborhoods with a ton of mansions and thus less structures per capita so don’t be confused by that stat comparing building size. Finally nourishments are funded by tax payer money so it only makes it fiscally solvent to invest in a coastline that will protect infrastructure. More tourists= more taxes= more funds to continue nourishment.
We should rake the coastline, so there won't be any erosion!
*fire
10/10 idea
You must be a genius
Probably very stable as well
Elvin deSouza i was also making a joke
@@BothHands1
I know, I'm tremendously tremendous.
They rake the beaches in the sahara and erosion doesnt occur so we should adopt that strategy
They “re-nourished” the beach on Palm Beach Island a few years ago and extended it by about 80 yards or so... Within just a few winter months ALL of the dredged up sand was gone, and it was just like it was before.
Can't complain, at least we got to give our taxes to a Wall Street family!
Extremely similar case over at Clearwater beach last year. Nuts, but it’s really cool seeing them nourish the beaches all night.
Funny how at 1:07 at the word "tourism" it cuts to Brighton beach, the least sandy beach in the whole of England and says "the visitors enjoy the sandy coasts"!? #pebbles
*face palm* erosion still happens.
Yeah laughed when Brighton was shown with those pebbles that get scorching hot
Pebble beaches are so much nicer, with the right sized pebbles. Devonshire has some amazing ones.
@@BrendenFP gotta add Devonshire to my list to check that out mate
@@BrendenFP You mean Devon.
Happening right now in Philippines manila bay
Yes, but it's a different case tho. They're nourishing their beaches in Florida to avoid erosion while in Manila Bay it's only for beautification.
And what seems to be the problem ba?
@@ryphex35 I was only saying that it's a different case... That's all... walang malisya hahaha
In my part of Florida, Pinellas County, our local honeymoon island beach only lasted a few months after being nourished. It used to be massive however in recent times it has rapidly eroded. Luckily, the property isn't a problem since it is within a state park.
I use to work as a life guard at a beach by a campground. My mom use to also work at that same beach as a lifeguard about 30 years earlier. When she visited me at the beach one day she informed me that about 100m of beach had been eroded away since she worked there, and that there use to be campsites where our life guard tower was place. My mom actually works as a civil engineer for the local government and they were planning on putting up rock barriers to stop the erosion on that beach and when I visited her at work her work one time she showed me some of their actual documentation with satellite photos of the erosion at the beach. Each year the beach would lose a few meters, some years it would lose 5m, some satellite photos taken before and after major storms even showed loses of 1-2m in just that one storm.
So... what's the alternative? I mean, it works as long as beaches have the funds to keep up with the nourishment, right?
RafikiFreak What this video failed to mention is that while Beaches everywhere are naturally eroding, at the same time there are also beaches everywhere being created by natural wave soil deposit. In a perfect world we wouldn’t build permanent structures So close to naturally changing beaches and we would visit the beaches that are receiving deposit that year and then next season visit a different beach.
Many of the houses still get destroyed by hurricanes, so they're forever in a danger zone that costs taxpayer dollars.
The dredging of sand also endangers the shore near where it's taken (and whatever is built on it), as gravity still applies and matter slides into place where the sand is taken from.
An alternative to dredging is using ground up recycled bottles to replenish the sand. That won't stop the hurricanes though. More hurricane-resilient and flood-resilient design would help take the edge off it.
@@FireRupee I'm in ecological restoration. When I was in my senior year of college, I had to write a restoration prospectus for an area of my choice. I chose a beach in Texas and did a lot of research for my - ugh - 20-something page paper, not including diagrams, charts, images, and other visuals. It was sad to know that, even with all that work and the wonderful ideas and solutions that have been invented, it wouldn't last for very long.
Yeah, that's exactly what I've thought. This video failed in showing us a possible alternative for the beach nourishing.
@@X7rocks Well, that's good for Florida then. For five million households across America, NFIP is the only flood insurance they can get, and it's a pretty insufficient system. I'm not saying there should be no NFIP at all, but one that is thoroughly revised, beyond just higher premiums or more funding.
"Severe repetitive loss properties" is the term for the 1% of properties that are 10% of the flood insurance claims. Something more would have to be done for these cases, like buying the properties to allow the homeowners to move to safer places.
Meh, I say if you are dumb enough to build/invest in beachfront buildings in this era, then I say you deserve to have your “investment” wash away as the sea level rises.
I agree with you except thanks to our national flood insurance program the homes will just be rebuilt at the taxpayers expense. It's cronyism at its finest!
Yeah but it gets you cash
Someone who makes sense here! What do people expect?!
I guess you weren't listening? It's not just about the properties, it's about the tourism and the massive impact that has on the economy in places like Florida.
That's a nice thought, however, this isn't the a rising seas problem. The land they are building on wouldn't be skinking into the sea if they weren't building on it and destroying the natural structures that have been standing there for thousands of years.
But once it does, the people who did the right thing and built behind it, a little further away will have the same things happen to their homes and then when their homes are gone, it will be the homes behind them and so on untill the whole land mass has sunk into the sea.
That was really interesting. I've been living near the beach for several years now, and some winters it just disappears. Now I know where all that sand comes from and how it all works.
Lol🤣🤣🤣🤣 it disappeared lol
I really like these videos Vox puts out but i found myself getting frustrated because no actual solutions were put forward in place of beach nourishment. Things like increasing vegetation back from the beach in between the sand and development significantly reduces erosion.
It's easy to get people riled up (and rightfully) about the disparity that rich and poor communities when it comes to beach nourishment funding, but it doesn't help drive change
So you like it because it doesn’t offer solutions?
Dutch beach projects near scheveningen, Netherlands have a long term replenishment solution.
@@K3end0 +
Ivar Brouwer But I don’t think they experience hurricanes, so it’s not comparable
@@derranlawston4052 - it's not only about hurricanes, normal storms and windy weather erodes coastal lines too! (not everything that works here will work everywhere, but maybe there's something in it..) next to that the replenishment solution also created new nature with birds and dunes etc.
@@derranlawston4052, I respectfully disagree. Beach erosion is not only caused by hurricanes. Not to mention the North Sea has his fair share of nasty winter storms and strong tidal forces.
@@derranlawston4052 The dutch know their coastlines though, they've spent the past few decades reclaiming land, and basically dug up most of their country from under the ocean, since they are technically mostly below sea level. There's a lot to be learned from their technology.
I swear the weirdest place on earth is the early comments sections of vox videos
The mix of people complaining about "leftist propaganda", so called experts who give their one sentence solutions and typical youtube spam comments sure is interesting :D
Yibber yabber floobdy flop swoops. Cat rabbit mewtoes.
Strange enough for you? 😂
@@Xmasadus spam comments? You mean like NPCs? How ironic
@@PorscheJon Conservatives are total NPCs lmao.. Did you ever hear anyone complaining about Maxine Waters before Trump took office? They're just parroting what the buffon says...
Very well observed
Manila Bay 😪
Technically the sand is supposed to be put back by the ocean during the summer through a longshore current. Main reason erosion is happening is because not enough sediment is being input into the ocean from rivers due to dams blocking rivers from reaching the ocean fully.Less sand is recycled therefore more sand will keep being taken from the beaches by the ocean during winter tides.
That's actually not even nearly how it works.
The problems is the houses being ON the beach where natural dunes and vegitation should be helping to prevent the erosion naturally.
Plaid Shirt Winter tides take away sand from the beach and summer tides put sand back on the beach. If there is less sediment to be recycled, maybe there will be less sand? I understand properties on the beach are causing issues with sea walls ruining public beaches but that’s not contributing to lack of sand entering the ocean through rivers.
So, you're sitting up in Montana and paying-through federal taxes-for the beach of some guy's mansion in Florida? 👎🏽
FEMA!
Yep. Taxing the people from landlocked states to pay for the people with beachfront property.
And you're sitting up in New York paying for subsidies for some guys farm in Nebraska?
@@gdspathe1130 True that too! Subsidies that drive otherwise uncompetitive exports, ruining local farms south of the border, all the while preaching "free trade" in Washington DC.
The southern states cost us all far more in taxes than they put in because they are so backwards!
Vox forgot to mention How the world is running out of Beach Sand. As the sand is taken from Rivers, not the one from the desert as it is unfit for the beaches. It destroys the ecosystem of the rivers while rehabilitating it won't remain as a long term solution.
they use ocean sand
That’s for glass homie
Actually, vox literally made a separate video about this very thing.. google "vox sand shortage"..
our pals over at Verge Science did a fantastic piece on this very subject! catch it here: th-cam.com/video/V2349cn0-T0/w-d-xo.html
They pump sand from one side of part of Queensland to the other because it just drifts on back down
Another impact of rebuilding beaches worth noting is the loss of "beach combing" - in some areas this can also affect tourism. For example, not far from Lido Key, Venice beach has historically been referred to as the "shark's tooth capital of the world" and Venice holds a shark's tooth festival every summer. After those beaches were rebuilt, finding shark's teeth was nearly impossible. The shark's teeth are fossilized (tens of thousands of years old) - a significant number of finds were from the extinct megalodon, for example (which was bigger than a school bus - and the teeth could be several inches in length). Other fossils could be found along that beach as well, including horse, bison, mastodon and more (horses were in parts of North America thousands of years ago, then disappeared and then reappeared). These fossils are shown at the festival, some are also sold for several thousand dollars each. Once the beaches were rebuilt with sand from offshore, the ability to find these fossils was negatively impacted because the fossils were buried under several feet of new sand.
Naku sana wg mangyare toh satin.
Lol
it wont.
This seems like a case of confusing correlation with causation. Bigger houses aren't being built because of the beach nourishment, beach nourishment is just mostly happening in places with valuable economies, which are more likely to have bigger houses as well.
Its probably both. Beaches are nourished because of bigger houses and people build more bigger houses because of the fancy beaches
But if they stopped rebuilding the beaches, wouldn't that bring the 'reckoning' sooner? Wouldn't it make more sense to regulate the amount of construction along vulnerable areas?
You are so naive.
The dolomite white sand Manila Bay project brought me here
its called beach nourishment. you see sand instead of trash. get over it
@@reyesbb Uhhh? The new pictures of the project shows more trash than sand right now. And wouldn't it be better if the government prioritized the rehabilitation, ie make the water cleaner, rather than the beautification project?
@@pUnkistaH12 idk man but i wish you a good day. people do be full of negativity sometimes.
@@reyesbb Constructive criticisms does not equal to negativity, man. People have the right to question the project. It's better to call out the government for their questionable action rather than praise them for this one. Toxic positivity is more destructive, imo.
@@reyesbb And in a few weeks, after a few storms, you see trash and no sand :)) Bye bye 500 million!
Manila has beach nourishment also today. 🥰
So istupeed da Manila Bay white sand project. 🥰
I did a school project in geography for identifying the"best" option for solving the problem, in the long-term, was a managed retreat. This requires buildings to be moved, but returns it to a natural state where there is a flat coastline by removing current defenses and instead letting the formed cliffs erode.
What you take from the ocean, the ocean will take it back sooner or later.
Sounds cool but isn't true
@@DjRenect You take the sand and the ocean takes it back. Its true.
This is a great video! Thanks heaps Vox!
The same fate will happen in the Manila bay. It's never ending cleaning and reclamation until the people learns how to value environment.
@Packo_ Hubu reading comprehension.
@Packo_ Hubu ikaw ang bobo. Tagalugin ko para maintindihan mo. Walang katapusang paglilinis at reklamasyon ang mangyayari sa Manila bay para mamaintain ang kagandahan. At sana matutunan ng tao magpahalaga sa kapaligiran. BOBO! INUTIL!
@@eyhernandez Bobo ka, bakit mo ititigil ang pag mamaintain sa Manila Bay, yun ang number 1 na dapat gawin ng tao i-Maintain ng walang katapusan, yun ay reponsibilidad natin lahat, so ang gusto mo pag natapos wag na i maintain at linisin?? bobo ka talaga.
@@jmsalvador86 bobo ka nga talaga kasi inulit mo lang din yung sinabi ko. Ipapasa mo pa sakin kabobohan mo.
@@eyhernandez En bobo ka nga,ano nirereklamo sa pag mamaintain?? itago mo yung kabobohan sa sarili mo wag ka magkalat dito sa youtube
Why do none of these beaches have groynes to help reduce longshore drift and erosion? Then the beaches will need less maintenance...
As a citizen of North Carolina, where all the beaches are on narrow islands, I have been to beaches that are nourished annually, and beaches that are almost never nourished which have homes getting surrounded, and ultimately destroyed, by the ocean
This is why where I live (which isn't in the US), the beach doesn't stay perfect during the winter. They make hills and holes instead, and the sand from those hills are used to fill the holes when the summer arrives.
Winter is not the same as typhoons/tsunamis/storm surges. That method won't do any good in Florida.
"Everyone who hears these words of mine, and doesn't do them will be like a foolish man, who built his house on the sand."
Please show this to the Philippines, especially the prime circus named "malacañang"🙂
I think BearSuelgi is the circus clown
I don't get what's wrong with beach nourishment. Without it we'd lose those houses. And it's economically beneficial too so why not do it? I was expecting some damage to ecosystem or something.
Look at Marco Island Florida. It's a success story and it's been over 25 years since the last project. The beach keeps growing and growing. In fact in an area that once had a seawall with waves breaking over it, you now must walk nearly a quarter mile to reach the water.
Grew up surfing in the South Bay of L.A.. Back in the late 60's early 70's, those beaches had nice sand bars, that would shift a little, but produced excellent surf given the right swell direction. Years later, those sand bars appeared to be scoured away, leaving dreadful surfing conditions.
3:55 Entering lost woods in legend of zelda, a link to the past
Since the Army Core of Engineers specifically takes on jobs where there's high risk of expensive property damage, building large homes near the beach is NOT a recipe for a disaster, but rather a good way to ensure your beach will be nourished!
I've been to Miami and always wondered how Miami got so lucky with such wide beaches. Now I know
If you look at photos of Miami Beach in the 1950's you will see all the wooden jetties jutting into the ocean in an attempt to stop the erosion.
After hurricane Sandy hit the beaches and houses were completely destroyed it was really cool to look at never really thought about how the beaches got rebuilt untill now
The fact that they have so much "value" along the coastline is the reason why they get the nourishment in the first place. It totally makes sense that they continue to develop those spaces, they need to up the value to keep the sand pumping.
Found this video very informative 👍
The Dutch are laughing
Indeed we are, but in a polite way and just to ourselves.
Im here because of manila bay
same. and, hindi naman beach ang manila bay. so, waste of time and money lang talaga ang ginawa nila.
Vincent Cuevas i know its not a beach its a bay. And its not a waste of time and money dahil sa dami nang gustong pumunta dun at iba pang turista madali lang nilang mababawi ang pera na ginamit para ipagawa yan
@@justinsurla6043 tourists? we are in a middle of a pandemic, who knows when tourists will actually be able to go there, and the "sand" is already fading away. clearly a waste of time and money.
@@vince_c The pandemic will be gone in a year or two, by then maybe tourists will start coming.
Manila Bay already has its sunset - tourists already go to Roxas Boulevard because of it. Ano ang silbi ng beach kung hindi naman pwedeng liguan ang tubig? At ano ang benefit ng beach nourishment for tourism purposes if the government needs to spend 300 million pesos every few years to replenish the dolomite lost to erosion?
Not all beaches are subject to erosion. Wildwood, NJ for example, has beaches that continue to grow, as the sand from some other beaches gradually build up in Wildwood.
I like the calm narration, it's so relaxing..
Kapag inipaliwanag ko sa mga dds or Manila bay supporters na ganito ang mangyayari sa beach ng Manila bay ay tinawag nila agad ako dilawan. Pero hindi naman ako makadilaw at hindi din ako makaduterte nagbabase ako sa science kaya ko naisip na mawawala ang beach after 5-10 years at gagastos nanaman para mapanatili ang beach na ito
@Adept Marketing Solutions Ang main problem ko lang sa beach ng manila bay ay pwedeng gamitin yung pondo sa iba lalo na at every 2-10 years ay mawawala din naman. Pero kung sa tingin naman ng ating government ay worth it at maibabalik din naman yung perang ginamit ay ayos ako sa pagpapaganda ng manila bay.
28 million on sand, in span of 5 to 10 years hindi ka na talo don sa economic benefits ng white sand na yon. Sama mo na yung malinis na bay
@@spikespeagle8319 naiinis lang ako dahil kapag nagpapaliwanag ako ng opinion ko ay gigil na gigil lagi sa akin😂. Madami na akong napanood na interview tungkol dito kaya nagbago na ang opinion ko para dito salamat sa isang nagcomment dito
@@erickmark2 panong nag bago ang opinyon mo dito? Sana namn ay positive outlook na yan tungkol sa beach preject ng manila bay
@@spikespeagle8319 ahh oo positive na ang opinion ko dati ay neutral lang
Manila Bay white sand brought me here HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Hello from Manila White Sand Beach 👋🏼
why not add plant life to the beach to help bind it all together, then tie that whole idea together with a couple market firms. That way you reduce erosion, thus expand the cycle times, which could make managing the whole thing easier. Well also changing what we view as a desirable beach, from the sandy featureless beaches to ones that have plant life, shade, and what you could call "the tropical experience".
Now that would be the "cleaner" way of handling the situation i think, but you could also just devise engineering plans to stabilize the ground, reduce wave impact, and so forth.
Great informative video once again Vox! The Army corps is doing exactly this right now in my area on the Jersey Shore
Morro Bay, California
Do any of y’all live near the ocean?
Nope
0:59 "erosion becomes a problem when it reaches structures built by humans along the coast"
are we sure Vox isn't made up of aliens making educational videos for their alien schools 0_0
Philippine government: dumps white sand
the beach near my house is getting very eroded, it used to be decently wide with a basketball court and a bathroom, but a couple years ago big waves from an off shore storm eroded all the sand away leaving only small rocks and eroding the wooden deck area and the court. of course a more popular beach is near by so there are minimal efforts to repair the beach and the only repairs are being made at the houses that are now basically on top of the water
What about stone piers, how permanent are those, this video seems very short.
Manila Bay be like;
wasssupp!
huh
This is happening in the Philippines lol
True haha
1:07 that’s the beach in Brighton which is where I live. It’s full of pebbles and is not sandy.
How does nourishment compare with alternative options for preserving coast lines? Nourishment obviously doesn’t stop rising sea levels, but this video did a pretty good job of convincing me it’s a worth while effort until the larger problems are addressed.
Building large rock/boulder walls and large sand bars several hundred yards from the shoreline is the best solution. It would entirely stop erosion but it will greatly reduce the overall effects. Ive lived in sarasota, (siesta key) and frequented neighboring Lido beach. thru the years seeing the erosion and dredge rebuilding, problem is.. as the sand is removed several yards away from the shoreline it further increases the strength of the waves, during storm season. Gulf beaches are now mostly man made. as it would take palmetto trees and mangroves to truly hold erosion back. as such, stone walls is the best solution, it also benefits in establishing coral reef growth. Puerto rico's san juan area is a perfect example to this idea. as it has both man made and natural reefs off shore, which does a fantastic job at stopping storm surge and errosion. Like florida, puerto rico beaches establish from shallow shore line waters, then after the reefs take a major drop off in depth. This natural feature also benefits beachs as the largest of waves meet are deflected by themselves as water is pushed upwards from the depths. That said, rising sea waters may make all means of defense redundant.
That's why Michigan beaches are "Superior" 😉
Aye state buddies?
Imagine not having enough sand
This post was made by coastal deserts gang
I wonder where they got that idea from cough* (the netherlands) cough*
I live on an island that thrives on tourism and this is a serious problem in almost all sides. However, I was wondering what the natural replenishment of sand is. Since beaches erode quickly, how fast and how much sand can nature provide.
Thanks! I enjoy this channel a lot.
People don't seem to understand that coastlines erode, if you don't want your house to be swept into the ocean then don't build or buy a house that close to the water. You can't cry foul because you choose not to understand natural processes
Anybody here after the Florida Condo collapse
This is part of the problem I guarantee it
Malaking kaibahan nito sa manila ay, kalmado ang dagat sa manila bay
Malakas rin alon ng manila bay lalo pag may bagyo..
@@janusbartolome4878 pag may bagyo..
@@spikespeagle8319 sabi ko nga db? Ngayon ngang wala pang bagyo kinakaen na ng dagat yung dolomite. Partida kalmado pa ang dagat. 😂
@@janusbartolome4878 boss hindi pa tapos yung project.. talagang mahahaluan pa yan ng black sand dahil may part pa na hinuhukay..
Saka nakailang ulan na ng malakas lagi nyo sinasabi na wala na wash out na yung white sand pero bakit andyan pa at pinagkakagukuhan pa rin..
Hahaha nakaka awa nagpapaka stress ka ng husto sa magandan namn na project😆
@@spikespeagle8319 over hype kaya pinupuntahan ng tao. 😂 yun nga ehh hindi pa man din tapos milyon na ang nasasayang. 😂
@4:24
Why are you living so close to the ocean I mean you have the money and you chose to live there at least a half-mile away from the shore.
my guess is its a relatively old building (maybe 50+ years) and back then the beach was about a half-mile away
I wish you guys had touched on where the sand is going with this piece. The cases of Ocean City and Wildwood is perfect for this. Ocean City and Assateague have been merging into a single beach for decades, but we keep dredging them apart again. Wildwood, on the other hand, traps all the sand that should be naturally moving south (replenishing other beaches) because it's the last beach to sit north of the Cape May harbor. This means that Wildwood has an absurdly huge beach that is a full 500ft away from its boardwalk.
Great video! I would be interested to know what kind of longer term solutions exist or are being researched that would help with this problem!
see how the dutch do this with a special technique and it works very well !
Every time I see bad water management or agricultural practice my dutch bones tingle
Was WW1 AND! 2 good for the environment?
Blue
None of this makes any sense
What is going on
They did eliminate millions of humans from the earth, reducing food, industrialized goods and energy consumption, so in a wicked way, yes.
I mean, less human = more sustainable planet, but does the technological innovations due to the war, outweigh the reduction of humans. I don’t know!?
This will happen in manila bay
huh
The Mississippi Gulf Coast beach is 26 miles of man made beach. Every 12 years or so it gets new sand pumped on it from a dredge. Even though I don’t use the beach much, I can’t imagine the Coast without it. I guess it would be like the days before the beach when water lapped up to the sea wall.
I don't see the problem at all, if the revenue from tourism is bigger than the cost of the buildings which it is, It makes a lot of sense to build an hotel, get the ROI in say 10 years, make a lot of money for other 10 years and maybe 20 years later your hotel will be destroyed by the sea. What is the problem? you got a lot of money form it, with the earning you can build hotels on non-beach areas or in other beaches or found hospitals or electrics cars or whatever. I don't see the problem at all.
That makes sense in a local perspective,but those tourists would have used their money somewhere else so if every place needs to spend lots and lots of money maintaining things there is no innovation, and no compounding of investment.