New Jersey's Costly Climate Change Crisis

 This past summer I lived with my uncle near the shore in Point Pleasant, New Jersey. Every evening, we went out to walk the beach. When I returned for a visit in February, I was shocked to see how much the landscape of the beach had changed. Huge piles of sand now lined the beach, and the distance from ocean to the dunes was very irregular. I learned that the large piles of sand had been brought in from various beaches along the Jersey shore to replenish the depleted shoreline, and that large-scale shoreline replenishment projects like this had been occurring along the coast of New Jersey for years. These measures are necessary because of the growing effects of climate change.   

    Sea levels across the globe have been rising rapidly due to climate change and are projected to continue rising. New Jersey is likely to experience sea level rise of 1.3 to 2.7 feet by 2070, and up to 4 feet by 2100. (Rutgers, pg. 2). This increase in sea level is causing New Jersey’s shorelines to be depleted at an alarming rate. Alan Dechert, a New Jersey native, reported that his beachside home in Avalon sat 75 yards from the beach in the late 1970s when he first purchased it. Today, due to coastal erosion, it stands at just under 30 yards from the beach (Rodas, pg. ). Climate change has also contributed to warmer ocean temperatures, which in turn has led to stronger, more devastating storms that are able to erode the shoreline much faster. David Robinson, New Jersey’s State Climatologist, states that “With added warmth, there is a more energized atmosphere [that] can hold more water vapor, and evaporation is more effective from warmer ocean waters. In terms of beach erosion, the key here [is] storms that are somewhat stronger than what they likely would have been without the added warmth and energy. This results in stronger winds and more wave action” (Lewis, pg. 4). 

Point Pleasant is not the only beach in New Jersey utilizing these remedial measures. Since the 1990s, New Jersey and the Army Corps have been dumping sand onto beaches as part of periodic “nourishment” cycles. The most recently completed project took place over a 2.6 mile stretch of shoreline in Cape May City and utilized 517,000 cubic yards of sand. However, climate change has been worsening at an alarming rate, and as a result beaches must be replenished more often. In 2015, the state spent $57.6 million, 12 months, and 4.2 million cubic yards of sand replenishing a stretch of shoreline encompassing Strathmere, Ocean City, and Sea Isle. By 2019, almost all of the sand had been eroded away, and that year another 2.4 million cubic yards of sand was dumped onto the same stretch of beach, along with $32.5 million. This past summer, these beaches and dunes were replenished once again with over 456,000 cubic yards of sand (Lewis, pgs. 5-6).

New Jersey is desperate to preserve its shoreline. The state’s beaches are vital to its economy, bringing in $25 billion of revenue each year (Lewis, pg. 5). However, the state must find another way to preserve its beaches, as this current method is not a viable long-term option. The sand used for beach replenishment is taken from fourteen offshore sites and five inland sites. Inland sites refill with sand over time, while offshore sites do not. Norbert Psuty, a retired professor who works with the Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve at Rutgers, explains that at offshore sites “The amount of sediment…is finite and that is why they have limits to the dredging and the effects on the local ecology.” The answer seems simple: find more offshore sites, so sand is not repeatedly drawn from the same locations. However, this is more of a challenge than it first sounds, as nature can be unpredictable in the way it pushes the sand around the ocean floor. Establishing a location to mine suitable sand can be very difficult, and then calculations must be made on how much sand can be mined, how deep mining can take place, and how large of an area can be mined. All the while, the surrounding ecosystem must be monitored around the clock. Many Army Corps officials have compared the difficulty of mining the sand to that of mining oil (Rodas, pgs. 14-15).

As of now, beach replenishment must keep occurring to keep beaches from being closed and people out of harm's way. According to Steven Hafner, the project manager for Stockton University’s Coastal Research Center, North Wildwood, New Jersey, would “reach crisis mode” and see its beach along with hundreds of homes disappear in five to six years if beach replenishment were to be halted (Rodas, pg. 4). Beach replenishment is the best option available at the moment, despite its extreme costs. The brunt of beach replenishment costs (65%) fall on the Federal government while the rest (35%) are taken care of by state and local municipalities (Lewis, pg. 2). However, the situation has become so dire that private businesses have also begun to step in. This past spring, Ocean Casino Resort in Atlantic City used $700,000 of its own money to replenish their stretch of beach that was in danger of being closed. Based on erosion calculations, sand to replenish the beach wasn’t due from the Federal government for one to two more years. However, climate-change fueled severe winter storms drastically increased the rate of erosion.

The best and safest option is to simply stop building in high-risk areas close to the shore. This can be accomplished by slowing or completely stopping Federal bailouts, which will disincentivize new construction and property purchases in these areas. Another option, although extremely unpopular, is to consider “managed retreat.” This strategy involves pushing back sections of the shoreline (relocating things like parking lots and bike paths inland) and requiring property owners to move elsewhere (Rutgers, pg. 6). It doesn’t appear as though these alternative methods will be embraced in the near future, as the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has allotted the Shore Protection Program an increase of $20 million in the past two years (Rodas, pg. 22). New Jersey is refusing to look into possible alternatives – much less heavily invest in them. Instead, the state is planning to continue pursuing barely effective shoreline replenishment projects. The revenue from the tourism industry may be keeping the costs of beach replenishment at bay for now, but time (and sand) is running out. As the effects of climate change grow stronger, New Jersey’s shoreline will only become weaker. 

Works Cited

Lewis, Andrew. “Sand dollars: NJ’s costly beach replenishment cycle faces climate change challenge.” NJ Spotlight News. 18, January 2024. https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2024/01/climate-change-rising-sea-levels-stronger-more-frequent-threaten-nj-shore-beach-replenishment/

New Jersey Climate Change Resource Center. “Climate Change in New Jersey: A Brief Introduction.” Rutgers University. May 2020. https://njclimateresourcecenter.rutgers.edu/climate_change_101/climate-change-in-new-jersey-a-brief-introduction/

Rodas, Steven. “The disappearing beach.” nj.com. 22 June 2023. https://www.nj.com/news/2023/06/the-disappearing-beach.html