Next Article in Journal
Dynamic Intervisibility Analysis of 3D Point Clouds
Previous Article in Journal
A GIS-Based Approach to Estimate Electricity Requirements for Small-Scale Groundwater Irrigation
 
 
Correction published on 19 January 2022, see ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2022, 11(2), 73.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Comprehensive Analysis of Hurricane Damage across the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts Using Geospatial Big Data

Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies (CURDS), School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10(11), 781; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110781
Submission received: 17 September 2021 / Revised: 10 November 2021 / Accepted: 12 November 2021 / Published: 17 November 2021 / Corrected: 19 January 2022

Abstract

:
(1) Background: Hurricane events are expected to increase as a consequence of climate change, increasing their intensity and severity. Destructive hurricane activities pose the greatest threat to coastal communities along the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Coasts in the conterminous United States. This study investigated the historical extent of hurricane-related damage, identifying the most at-risk areas of hurricanes using geospatial big data. As a supplement to analysis, this study further examined the overall population trend within the hurricane at-risk zones. (2) Methods: The Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model and the HURRECON model were used to estimate the geographical extent of the storm surge inundation and wind damage of historical hurricanes from 1950 to 2018. The modeled results from every hurricane were then aggregated to a single unified spatial surface to examine the generalized hurricane patterns across the affected coastal counties. Based on this singular spatial boundary coupled with demographic datasets, zonal analysis was applied to explore the historical population at risk. (3) Results: A total of 775 counties were found to comprise the “hurricane-prone coastal counties” that have experienced at least one instance of hurricane damage over the study period. The overall demographic trends within the hurricane-prone coastal counties revealed that the coastal populations are growing at a faster pace than the national average, and this growth puts more people at greater risk of hurricane hazards. (4) Conclusions: This study is the first comprehensive investigation of hurricane vulnerability encompassing the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts stretching from Texas to Maine over a long span of time. The findings from this study can serve as a basis for understanding the exposure of at-risk populations to hurricane-related damage within the coastal counties at a national scale.

1. Introduction

Hurricanes are extreme meteorological events that are likely to be affected by climate change, of which global warming and sea level rise are two foreseeable changes that could impact the consequences of hurricane disasters. The frequency and/or intensity of hurricanes are projected to increase in the coming decades, producing high-speed winds and heavy precipitation [1,2,3,4,5]. Hurricanes have historically proven to be some of the most devastating and costliest natural disasters in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coast regions of the United States, having the highest average event cost (USD 21.5 billion per event), and causing the highest number of fatalities (6593) and the largest economic losses (USD 945.9 billion total of all natural disasters between 1980 and 2020) [6,7,8]. The primary causes of the massive damage and loss of life are storm surge flooding and high-speed winds. In particular, drownings from storm surges are responsible for most hurricane-related casualties and injuries [9,10,11,12].
U.S. coastal populations are already experiencing the risk of hazards such as hurricanes, storm surges, sea level rise, and coastal erosion. The fast-growing coastal population and demographic shifts along the coastal regions are playing a major role in substantially aggravating the consequences of hurricanes [2,13,14,15]. Approximately 123.3 million people, which amounts to 39% of the total U.S. population, resided in hurricane-prone coastal areas in 2010, increasing to 127 million people in 2016. The population was expected to grow to 134 million (i.e., an 8% increase) from 2010 to 2020 in coastal zones. Coastal populations are projected to increase up to 144 million people (i.e., 20% increase) by 2025 within 100 km of the coastal areas in the United States, thereby continuously increasing coastal populations’ vulnerability to natural hazards [16,17].
Increasingly destructive hurricane activities pose a threat to these coastal communities along the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coasts. Rapid coastal population growth puts more people in harm’s way, and rising property values by accelerating urbanization and intensive development have placed more environment-related stresses on coastal areas. The burgeoning coastal settlement and coastal-dependent economic activities (e.g., shipping, tourism, fisheries, and petroleum industry) are attracting more people to move to the hurricane coasts [13,14]. Specifically, the Gulf of Mexico regions have seen an 8.5% increase in population employed in construction industries and a 10.8% increase in employment in maintenance occupations, which is higher than the national rate [18]. Overdevelopment due to the high demand for second homes and coastal real estate has increased the risk and exposure of people and infrastructure to hurricane-related damage more than ever before [2,13,19,20,21].
Estimating exposure to hurricane risk is a fundamental step in comprehending the geophysical vulnerability of coastal populations [22]. Most research investigating hurricane hazards has been largely based on various hydrodynamic models such as the Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH), H*Wind (hurricane wind analysis system), or Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) coupled with ADvanced CIRCulation (ADCIRC) models. Each of these models requires a unique set of parameters using different wind model equations and have their strengths and weaknesses [11,23,24,25,26]. The majority of the existing literature applies these models in the field of coastal engineering and atmospheric research. Recently, an R package called “stormwindmodel” simplified the complicated modeling procedure for Atlantic Basin tropical storms, allowing researchers to facilitate rapid application for hurricane exposure assessment [27,28].
To date, numerous studies have assessed hurricane vulnerability on a case-by-case basis, focusing on the most devastating hurricane events that have caused enormous societal losses. Such case-specific studies do not necessarily show the long-term effects of hurricane risks in coastal regions and provide a limited picture in assessing the comprehensive vulnerability to hurricane hazards over time. This brings into question the spatial patterns of cumulative hurricane-related damage (particularly storm surge and wind-induced damage) based on past and recent hurricane events and their consequential effect on coastal population growth in hurricane-prone areas in the United States. The definition of “hurricane-prone region” has been restricted to flooding hazards in the current literature, which impedes the implementation of comprehensive hurricane vulnerability assessment using demographic datasets. One longitudinal study by Logan and Xu (2015) modeled hurricane-related hazards to capture spatial patterns of actual hurricane exposures that occurred from 1950 to 2005 [29]. Despite the importance of long-term research in hurricane vulnerability, there remains a paucity of longitudinal studies that systematically examine long-term trends of populations at increased risk of hurricane damage.
The objective of this study is therefore to estimate the geographic distribution of hurricane-related damage that has occurred in the United States throughout its history by modeling storm surge and wind damage. Specifically, this research is designed to answer the following research questions: (1) What are the spatial extent and intensity of storm surge inundation and wind damage caused by hurricanes along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts in the United States from 1950 onwards? (2) What regions have been particularly hard hit by hurricanes in the U.S. coastal counties over the past decades since 1950? (3) How has the overall population changed within the U.S. hurricane coastal counties over time? The increased risk of hurricane hazards has the potential to impact populations and residential infrastructure within at-risk areas, making it essential to identify the areas with greater hurricane exposure. Hurricanes can negatively affect individuals and local communities through economic losses and infrastructure damage, among other ways. However, this study limits the scope to estimate the potential biophysical vulnerability of hurricanes through the estimation of historical hurricane damage at the national level. The social and economic consequences of hurricane damage on society are broadly defined, and thus consideration of these various sectors lies beyond the scope of this study.
The remainder of this paper has been divided into four sections. Section 2 provides a brief overview of the study area, datasets, and methods adopted in the analysis. The coastal areas impacted by storm surge inundation and wind damage are presented at the national level in Section 3. In addition, this section also shows the total populations that have been exposed to hurricane-related damage during the study period. Section 4 presents the conclusions, significance, and limitations of this research that can be further investigated in the future.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Modeling Large-Scale and Long-Term Historical Hurricanes

Vulnerability science has been extensively applied to a wide variety of academic fields such as ecology, public health, sustainable science, environmental justice, and disaster risk management [30]. The question is what exposes people and places to greater harm from environmental hazards? Within risk, hazard, and disaster scholarship, vulnerability science has long encompassed three different but intersecting domains: physical/natural systems (e.g., exposure, intensity, frequency of occurrence), human systems including social systems and built environment (e.g., socio-demographic characteristics of at-risk populations, the degree of urbanization), and local spatial characteristics of places (e.g., location-specific conditions such as proximity to hazardous areas) [31,32]
With the abundance and increasing accessibility of georeferenced big data, vulnerability and environmental sciences are evolving to incorporate new methodologies to handle increasingly complex datasets that describe the complexity of human–environment interactions and the dynamic characteristics of natural hazards [33]. This era of big data has led to advances in vulnerability research in estimating, predicting, and visualizing potential risk or vulnerability to natural hazards using large volumes of data and a variety of data-driven computing approaches [34,35,36,37]. Big data can be defined in a variety of ways depending on the disciplines and subjects being studied. However, there are three components that can be considered the fundamentals of big data termed the “three Vs”: (1) volume—the quantity of data that are collected, stored, and processed; (2) velocity—how fast the data are collected and processed; and (3) variety—the types/sources of data [38,39,40]. This study aimed to highlight the usefulness of the longest track records of the Atlantic hurricane public database in tandem with multiple geospatial data and hurricane modeling techniques in order to identify the most vulnerable areas to hurricanes in a spatially explicit manner.
There has been limited analysis of longitudinal hurricane-related damage in geographic scholarship that applies a variety of geospatial datasets and hurricane modeling techniques. Identifying the spatial extent of historical hurricane damage is crucial to examine the evolving physical and social vulnerability within the at-risk zone. For the purpose of comprehensive vulnerability assessment, this study provides a synoptic view of hurricane vulnerability in the United States on a large geographic scale using storm surge and wind damage modeling for a long period of time (1950–2018) at the national level. The current study does not incorporate inland flooding due to heavy rainfall, since this study relies on the accumulated hurricane events, not a single hurricane event.
Since historical geospatial data of hurricane impacts are seldom available, it is necessary to reconstruct to what extent past and recent hurricanes have affected coastal regions. Figure 1 shows the trajectories of all hurricanes and tropical storms that reached the U.S. East Coast, Florida, and Gulf Coast area during the study period. The hurricane-affected areas are nationwide, and states bordering the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean have borne the brunt of the catastrophic hurricane damage [13]. To reflect the full areal extent of the U.S. hurricane coasts, this study includes all hurricanes that made landfall along the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts up until 2018, encompassing a total of 22 states and the District of Columbia. This extensive hurricane modeling is in line with the three Vs of geospatial big data analytics.
The major data source of this hurricane-related damage modeling is the public Hurricane Database (known as the revised Atlantic hurricane database, HURDAT2). The HURDAT2 is the second-generation hurricane database maintained and updated annually by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) at the National Hurricane Center (NHC). This dataset can be obtained from the NHC Data Archive (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/, accessed on 1 October 2021), and it contains the best-estimated track records of all historical hurricanes, tropical storms, and subtropical storms of the Atlantic Basin, including the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, since 1851 [41,42]. The HURDAT database provides a sufficient temporal resolution with position estimates for every synoptic time (0000, 0600, 1200, and 1800 UTC), and this allows researchers to capture the progress of each storm. Figure 2 presents the synoptic points of all hurricanes and tropical storms in the North Atlantic from 1851 to 2018. Each storm can be identified by its name and identifier number with its six-hourly information on date, time, position that geocodes the center of the storm (latitude and longitude), intensity (i.e., maximum sustained wind in knots), central pressure, and size [41,42,43]. These parameters are used to compute the storm surge heights and wind damage resulting from hurricanes by considering hurricane gust factors.
Oceanographic and atmospheric conditions also come into play in modeling the water surface caused by hurricanes and storms [44]. Topographic data or digital elevation models (DEM) are crucial in determining storm surge inundation because the shape of the terrain is highly related to how water flows and drains along and off a surface. The primary dataset used in this study was the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED), which includes seamless elevation data covering the conterminous United States at different spatial resolutions [45]. In this study, the 1/3 arc-second (approximately 10 m) DEM dataset was selected for coastal inundation mapping and can be acquired from the USGS National Map Viewer.
Astronomical tidal information is also required to generate a water surface as an input value in storm surge modeling. The geographic location of tide level stations can be found at the NOAA Tides and Currents website. The SLOSH display program was then used to retrieve the initial water level (i.e., astronomical tide) for each hurricane at the nearby tide gauge station referring to the hurricane path observed 18 h before nearest approach (or landfall) in most storm situations. It is noteworthy to mention that the SLOSH model adopts National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) as its vertical datum, meaning it is imperative to transform tidewater level to NGVD for consistent and reliable modeling results [29,46,47]. The description of the main attributes and software information employed in this study is summarized in Table 1.

2.2. Methods

The majority of damage and loss of life are associated with storm surges and high winds in the wake of hurricanes, and impacts have been unevenly distributed across the U.S. during the past several decades. This study intended to determine the geographic extent of storm surges and wind damage over an extended period of time from 1950 to 2018 to identify the comprehensive locational vulnerability to hurricane impacts. Figure 3 represents the methodological procedures used to obtain an estimate of the overall hurricane-related damage.

2.2.1. Estimation of Storm Surge Inundation

In an attempt to overcome data scarcity in historical GIS hurricane data, this study adopted a hydrodynamic model, called the Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model, in obtaining the spatial extent and intensity of storm surges. The SLOSH model was used to simulate the storm surges induced by each track over the study period. The SLOSH model is currently being used by the NHC for real-time forecasting of potential hurricane storm surges across the entire seaboard of the United States [10,11,46]. A major advantage of the SLOSH model is its ability to reproduce historical hurricane storm surges based on the HURDAT2 dataset [23,46,48].
The SLOSH model is a two-dimensional numerical coastal model that computes the maximum water heights considering the dynamic flow of water over land and water based on pre-determined grid cells referred to as a basin. Currently, there are 32 basins covering the entirety of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Coasts, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, and the Bahamas (Figure 4). All hurricanes and tropical storms that made landfall along the coastal regions can be modeled with the operational SLOSH basins. If a hurricane impacted a larger extent of the area, multiple basins were considered in the modeling procedure. Depending on the region, the basins have different shapes (mostly polar or hyperbolic/elliptical) composed of thousands of grid cells, and these are one of the primary inputs of the meteorological parameters that must be entered in the modeling process [49]. The closer to the primary area of interest such as a bay or a region immediately adjacent to the coastline, the finer the resolution of the grid cells. Meanwhile, the spatial resolution of the grid cells is coarser in the deep open oceans due to a low significance in simulation. The basins integrate geographical characteristics of the particular area along the coasts that influence storm surges such as topography, shoreline structure, levees, bathymetry of ocean areas, and continental shelves [23,50]. The accuracy of the estimated surge height is known to be within ± 20% of the observed water heights. The model uncertainties can be attributed to several components such as the basin’s spatial resolution, vertical accuracy of terrain data/high water marks, and the meteorological/geophysical parameters resulting from the complexity of hurricane and astronomical tides [10,44,51].
The left side of Figure 3 depicts the overall procedure of storm surge simulation. Modeling storm surges requires the following meteorological parameters as input parameters to generate the wind field that drives the storm surge inundation: storm track positions (i.e., latitude and longitude at 6-h intervals), intensity (i.e., storm central pressure at 6-h intervals), radius of maximum wind (RMW, i.e., size—the distance between the center of a storm and the location where the strongest wind is generated, at 6-h intervals), forward speed, and landfall time [46,52]. The stm.file consists of 13 time points of these input parameters for model operation to describe an hourly progression of the hurricane before and after landfall. Considering these input parameters coupled with a selected basin, the SLOSH model can determine the flow of storm surges across the surface and then estimate the maximum envelope of water in each basin grid during a storm’s life cycle.
The outputs of the SLOSH model consist of three files: (1) the *.rex file is a time-lapsed animation file that contains the simulated water levels at every grid cell over the duration of the storm; (2) the *trt.file is an expansion of the stm.file providing hourly values, resulting in 100 h of input data; and (3) the *.env.file provides the envelope of high water levels. The .rex file can be converted to a shapefile for additional geoprocessing. The SLOSH model does not include the wave components (i.e., astronomical tides or wind-driven wave heights) and antecedent precipitation on top of the surge, and thus the astronomical tides can be added to the model results [10,29,53,54,55]. As a result, the SLOSH model generates time-dependent storm surge water levels at every grid cell at a specific interval of time at each basin. As an example, Figure 5 and Figure 6 show a simulated storm surge height during Hurricane Harvey (2017) based on the SLOSH simulation. The resulting individual storm surge output was compared with the existing SLOSH model from NOAA. The interpolated raster for each hurricane can be further analyzed to generate the final layer that represents the extent of inundation and the flood depth by adding the astronomical tides.
Spatial analysis can be conducted to derive the inundation extent and the depth of a storm surge using the simulated water height from the SLOSH model and DEM data. The maximum surge water height generated from the SLOSH model can be converted to a GIS file format to create centroids of SLOSH basin outputs and then interpolate water level heights using the natural neighbor method. It is important to note that each dataset refers to a different vertical datum: the SLOSH model output references the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29); the initial tidewater level refers to mean lower low water (MLLW); the elevation data are based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). All elevations are based on different vertical datums and cannot be directly used to compute storm surge heights. Therefore, it is required to maintain a consistent vertical datum between the estimated storm surge inundation height and the terrain elevation data using a transformation to derive the depth of a storm surge accurately. In this study, Corpscon, Version 6.0 was utilized to conduct vertical conversions between the NGVD 29 and the NAVD 88. To process large amounts of GIS datasets and vector- and raster-based analysis, this study employed batch processing using ArcGIS and R in conjunction.

2.2.2. Estimation of Wind Damage

Strong hurricane winds often cause severe structural damage to infrastructure, residential structures, and commercial structures [21]. This study adopted a meteorological model, HURRECON (Hurricane Reconstruction), which is based on published empirical studies of hurricanes in the New England, Puerto Rico, and Gulf Coasts [29,56,57], in order to reconstruct the intensity of wind damage by each hurricane. The HURRECON model was developed to estimate the basic structure of a storm’s surface wind conditions such as sustained wind velocity, peak gust velocity, and wind direction of movement over a specified surface cover type (water and land). It has been widely applied to study the impact of hurricane wind disturbance on forestry landscapes [56,57,58] and hurricane wind damage assessment [29,59].
As described on the right side of Figure 3, the HURRECON model also uses the meteorological parameters of a storm (i.e., storm track and wind speed) from the HURDAT2 database as input data. The individual hurricane position data (*.pos file, a tab-delimited text file) should contain year, month, day, hour, minute, latitude/longitude, and maximum sustained wind in meters per second (m/s). The model also requires a rectangular geographic file (i.e., 16-bit IDRISI raster file format) to distinguish the land cover type (water or land) in estimating the surface wind speed and direction. The raster grid should be equally divided per cell to produce a more accurate modeling result. The parametric equations are well documented in the literature [29,56,57,60]. The HURRECON model can be implemented in a series of separate programs. First, the HTRK program can be run to create a track file of interpolated input parameters. Next, the HURRECN program can be utilized to estimate wind velocity and direction for a given geographic location. The output from the HURRECON program can then be operated to convert the outputs to Fujita scale damage (Figure 7).
In this model, the predicted wind damage is adjusted for hurricane wind field estimation and then classified into the modified Fujita scale classes (no damage, F0, F1, F2, F3)—originally proposed by Fujita [61] to characterize the wind intensity and damage by tornadoes—by correlating the maximum quarter-mile wind speed with wind damage intensity [56,57,60,61]. The original F-scale (Fujita scale) was devised to assess and categorize actual wind damage by its intensity and area on a wind speed scale, ranging from F0 (light damage in gale-force wind) to F5 (incredible damage). It has been utilized by the U.S. National Weather Service for tornadoes and hurricanes since the 1970s. The F-scale has been recently updated with the improved scale, called the Enhanced Fujita (EF) scale, based on a rating of tornadoes but not applicable to hurricane intensity [62,63]. In response to this, Boose, Foster, and Fluet [60] developed a modified F-scale rating tailored to hurricane damage levels. This modified F-scale was used in this study as opposed to the Saffir–Simpson scale in order to adhere to the model specifications of the HURRECON model.
The modified F-scale was extended to reveal widespread exterior structural damage by hurricane-force wind to buildings, (e.g., damaged roof shingles, broken windows or chimneys, and destruction of buildings), vehicles/infrastructure (e.g., unrooted traffic lights or utility poles, destroyed roads and rails), and the natural environment (e.g., blown down trees). It is ranked on an ordinal scale (F0, F1, F2, and F3) based on sustained wind speed and its corresponding post-hurricane damage level: F0 = 18–25 m/s (minor damage to buildings/trees), F1 = 26–35 m/s (houses unroofed or damaged, and single or isolated groups of trees blown down), F2 = 36–47 m/s(houses unroofed or destroyed and extensive tree blowdowns), and F3 = 48–62 m/s (houses blown down or destroyed, most trees down, and heavy automobiles lifted or overturned). The F-scale is beneficial for broad applications and can be universally applied across regions, since it does not rely on construction practices in a particular area in the United States, such as the International Building Code (IBC) or International Residential Code (IRC) [64].
The HURRECON model can generate the prediction of wind damage for an individual site as a table or for the entire area of interest as an IDRISI raster format (16-bit), which is compatible with TerrSet Geospatial Monitoring and Modeling software (formerly IDRISI). It is required to convert the raster outputs to 32-bit raster images using resampling techniques to be displayed in ArcGIS software. The predicted wind damage by Hurricane Harvey is shown in Figure 7 as an example. The original HURRECON model was written in Pascal language coupled with IDRISI. The model has recently been updated in both the R (HurreconR) and Python (HurreconPython) packages for operating system compatibility, and these packages are available in public repositories of GitHub (https://github.com/hurrecon-model/HurreconR, accessed on 1 October 2021).
The HURRECON model is subject to certain limitations. First, it does not consider non-meteorological factors that could affect wind damage at the local level such as construction materials of residential/commercial buildings, building code changes, and topographic effects. Hence, the results from the model cannot be interpolated to the local level or small geographical areas (e.g., census tracts or Census Block Groups) [29]. Second, the estimated wind model does not take into account the antecedent precipitation, lacking the capacity to model the impact of inland flooding. Given the unit of analysis being studied for wind damage assessment, the model outputs still produce reasonable estimation in spite of its limitations.

3. Results

3.1. Cumulative Hurricane Risk

The modeled results from every hurricane were aggregated to a single unified spatial surface, reflecting the long-term hurricane impacts across the entire coastal areas for decades. The resultant unified geographic extent of all hurricane-related damage is based on 190 hurricanes and tropical storms during the study period from 1950 to 2018, serving as a baseline to examine at-risk populations to hurricane-related damage along the coastal counties in the following section.
Figure 8 represents the coastal regions that have been exposed to the impact of one foot or higher of storm surge since 1950. The result is consistent with the NOAA/National Weather Service/National Hurricane Center Storm Surge Unit’s storm surge inundation map [45]. Storm surge damage is highly localized along coastal areas. Overall, a stretch of the Gulf Coast from South Texas to the Florida Panhandle has borne the brunt of storm surge damage over time. Southeastern Louisiana (especially the Lower Mississippi River Delta region), Alabama, Mississippi, and the northwestern Panhandle of Florida have been hard hit by the most intensive storm surges more than twenty-one times, with the maximum frequency of thirty-nine for the past several decades. Western Louisiana, Southwestern Florida, and West Central Florida have also experienced frequent exposure to storm surge impacts. In the southeastern coastal regions, the Charleston area in South Carolina, the Outer Banks, and the coastal counties near Brunswick, New Hanover, Pender, and Onslow Counties have been affected by storm surges at least eleven times. In contrast, the Mid-Atlantic region has been relatively less affected by storm surge inundation. In particular, the Chesapeake Bay area—especially the southeastern shore of Virginia (Hampton Roads region) and the southern tip of the Delmarva Peninsula—has been flooded by storm surges at least ten times. It is not unusual to observe fairly frequent storm surge inundation in the Eastern Long Island regions (Nassau and Suffolk Counties) and southwestern Connecticut. New England regions have also been subject to coastal inundation for decades. These regions are increasingly becoming more susceptible to hurricane strikes due to climate change and sea level rise [13,65,66].
The HURRECON-modeled results were compiled to show a more complete picture of wind damage for the entirety of the coastal regions on the Fujita scale since 1950 (Figure 9). As hurricanes make landfall along the coast, wind speeds rapidly weaken due to the higher frictional effects of land surfaces and a lack of moisture and latent heat energy from the ocean [67]. Occasionally, hurricanes can travel hundreds of miles deep into the interior counties after landfall, intensifying their power. Hence, the areas affected by hurricane winds are not just limited to the immediate vicinity of coastal regions but also areas further inland.
Panel A in Figure 9 shows the spatial extent of hurricane risk in which a total of 764 counties have experienced F0 wind damage (the loss of leaves and branches) over time, stretching from Southeast Texas to the far stretches of Maine. The counties within 100 miles of the coastline have been exposed to F0 wind strengths more than five times. Panel B reveals the areal extent of F1 damage (scattered blowdowns), and 455 counties have been exposed to F1-strength wind forces. As can be seen from Panel C, the areas exposed to F2 or F3 (extensive blowdowns) wind strengths are concentrated along the coastal regions of North Carolina, South Florida, and the Gulf of Mexico. As expected, F0- and F1-intensity winds traveled further inland compared to F2- and F3-scale winds that are more localized along the coastline (Panel D).
The areal extent of hurricane-driven storm surge is geographically concentrated along the coastal shoreline counties, whereas hurricane winds tend to affect the inland areas to a larger extent, penetrating deep into the inland areas of the United States. This is more apparent in northeastern states. A previous study showed that hurricanes that move north along the Atlantic Coast tend to have greater forward speed than hurricanes making landfall along the southern states due to the interaction of northern air masses, leading to greater inland penetration and, consequentially, higher damage impacts [68]. In comparison with the wind speed map defined by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the previous study by Logan and Xu [29] for the Gulf Coast region, this generalized damage boundary from storm surge and hurricane-force wind damage demonstrates similar findings, providing validation to the SLOSH and HURRECON modeling performed in this study.

3.2. At-Risk Populations in the Hurrican-Prone Coastal Counties

Based on the modeling of hurricane-related damage, this study defines “hurricane-prone coastal counties” as counties that are exposed to one form of hurricane damage, as shown in Figure 10. The modeled outputs of all hurricanes were aggregated into a singular geographic area to represent long-term historic cumulative damage over the past six decades. Combining the spatial extent of hurricane-damaged areas of F0, F1, F2, and F3 winds (Figure 10A) and storm surges (Figure 10B), the spatial coverage of this study area consists of 775 counties over 22 states (Figure 10C). The list of coastal counties defined in this study is set out in Appendix A. The areal extent defined in this study through hurricane modeling is similar to the coastal counties defined by Ache et al. [69] and Marsooli et al. [70], validating the result. However, the modeled output presents a more detailed profile of the affected counties, encompassing inland counties exposed to historical hurricane wind penetrations. This was used to describe the at-risk coastal populations susceptible to hurricane hazards in the United States.
The aggregated geographic extent of all hurricane-related damage shows a generalized and standardized pattern, with no seasonal or random variation across time and space [29]. The affected coastal counties in the Gulf Coast cover the majority of counties that are affected by hurricanes, up to approximately 200 miles from coastal shorelines. Meanwhile, the affected coastal counties of the Atlantic Coast are located up to 400 miles from the coast, reaching further inland than the Gulf Coast. The hurricane-prone coastal counties are geographically restricted to the Gulf of Mexico coastline and the eastern Atlantic Coast of the United States (i.e., the North Atlantic Basin region), excluding the Pacific Coast and the Great Lakes region, providing a baseline for describing the human settlement of the hurricane-impacted coastal shorelines [16,69,71].
To supplement this analysis, this study further examined how many people have been living in residential areas in the U.S. hurricane coastal counties from 1970 to 2018 using the U.S. Decennial Census (1950, 1960) and the U.S. County Intercensal Datasets (1970–2018) in conjunction with the national land use/land cover data. To determine the number of people within each hurricane-affected zone, this study first calculated the percentage of developed/residential areas in each county/census tract that have been affected by wind damage and storm surges (i.e., damage fraction hereafter) by applying zonal analysis operations. The product of the damage fraction of storm surge and wind damage with the total population counts produced the number of at-risk populations exposed to cumulative hurricane damage over the decades. This filtered areal weighting interpolation approach was adopted to disaggregate total populations to a target area—in this case, hurricane-affected zones—on the basis of the areal extent of storm surge damage and wind damage (measured by the Fujita scale—F0, F1, F2, and F3) [72,73,74].
The coastal counties are more overcrowded than the nation as a whole, and they are expected to grow in the future [16]. The total number of people living in coastal areas was 73 million in 1970, growing by a total of 100 million people between 1970 and 2000 (Figure 11). Although the population growth rate consistently declined after 2000, along with the national trend, there was a 63% increase in the coastal population from 1970 to 2018, exceeding 119 million in 2018. The population density of coastal counties is substantially greater than that of inland counties [16,75]. Coastal populations are facing multiple threats such as climate change and coastal hazards, exposing 36.5% of the U.S. total population to increasingly vulnerable situations (Figure 12). Along with rapid population growth and an economic construction boom, the coastal populations have been racially diversified, thereby further exacerbating their social vulnerability to hurricane hazards in the coastal counties over time [13,76].
Figure 13 presents how many people have been exposed to hurricane-related damage in absolute terms. It is apparent that the total population has continuously increased within each hurricane-affected area from 1950 to 2018. Wind damage is separated into different categories based on intensity (i.e., F0, F1, F2, and F3). While some of this growth might be due to the national trend, there is a higher exponential growth trend in F0 and F1 areas than the national trend. Approximately 165 million people are affected by some degree of wind damage during the study period.
Generally, as hurricanes make landfall along the coast, wind speeds rapidly weaken due to the higher frictional effects of land surfaces and a lack of moisture and latent heat energy from the ocean [67]. However, tropical storms and hurricanes can travel hundreds of miles deep into interior counties after landfall, and the remnants of hurricanes may occasionally intensify or maintain their power for an extended period of time, possibly due to various physical processes and storm dynamics [77]. For instance, as seen from Hurricane Sandy, when a low-pressure storm system encounters the polar jet stream in the mid-latitudes, strong temperature gradients occur, and this may re-intensify its strength after making landfall. This process is known as “baroclinic enhancement”. In addition, land surface characteristics (e.g., soil water content, vegetation types, land use, land cover) can play a major role in maintaining a tropical cyclone’s intensity over land. Wet ground or soil with abundant moisture after precipitation events can be a latent source, providing enough heat energy to the storm (i.e., brown ocean effect) [78,79]. Therefore, the affected areas are not just limited to the immediate vicinity of coastal regions but also extend hundreds of miles from the immediate coastal shorelines (Figure 10).
In contrast, storm surge damage and F3 wind are highly localized along coastal areas, as shown in Figure 10. From the data in Figure 13, we can see that 5 million people resided in the residential areas that are affected by storm surge damage, and 3 million people resided in high-intensity wind (F3 scale) areas, as of 2018. To summarize, the overall demographic trends within hurricane-impacted areas reveal that the coastal populations are faster growing than the national average, and this growth puts more people at greater risk of hurricane hazards. This poses a challenge to policymakers as they need to understand a more complex population in order to make more informed decisions in mitigating coastal vulnerability to hurricane hazards.

4. Discussion

Hurricanes pose the greatest natural risk of damage to the United States’ hurricane coasts and society [13]. Physical or locational vulnerability can be assessed based on the impacts, magnitude, and frequency of natural hazards, and geographical proximity to the source of natural hazards [22,29,80]. Hurricanes tend to occur at certain geographical locations, and the general patterns of occurrence are less likely to change in the future. Therefore, estimating and representing the cumulative hurricane patterns can offer a useful means to assess current and future hurricane risk. Due to the scarcity of data regarding historical hurricane-impacted areas, this study sought to determine the spatial extent and intensity of hurricane wind and storm surge damage of all hurricanes that made landfall along America’s hurricane coasts from 1950 to 2018 [13]. Both the spatial extent and intensity of all hurricanes were estimated by utilizing geospatial big data datasets. The extensive results of the hurricane modeling were aggregated into a single surface, representing the longitudinal risk of hurricanes. As a result, 775 counties were found to comprise the hurricane at-risk zones that have experienced at least one instance of hurricane damage over the last six decades. Historical hurricanes that have affected the Gulf and Atlantic coastal areas revealed that storm surge damage in these areas extends up to approximately 41,000 km2, and the largest extent of wind damage (F0) extends to approximately 1,300,000 km2, in the conterminous United States.
This project is the first comprehensive investigation of hurricane vulnerability encompassing the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts stretching from Texas to Maine. The current study proposed the geographical extent of 775 hurricane-prone coastal counties that border the Gulf of Mexico and the eastern Atlantic Coast of the United States, excluding the Pacific Coast (Appendix A). By integrating the past and recent hurricane damage over long periods of time, the results delineate the zones at a high risk of hurricanes more accurately than arbitrarily defining the study areas. This delineation can be used as a tool in assessing coastal population vulnerability by federal agencies and researchers. For instance, the spatially explicit hurricane-prone regions can assist policymakers in developing targeted interventions for the national flood insurance program and coastal wind pool insurance. The estimation of hurricane wind was based on the same parameters used in a previous empirical study that modeled historical hurricanes along the Gulf Coast [29]. Different parameters may result in more accurate estimations for storms that made landfall on the Atlantic Coast.
The population density of coastal counties is denser than the nation as a whole, and the populations in these counties are expected to grow in the future. Along with rapid population growth and an economic construction boom, the coastal populations have been racially diversified, thereby further exacerbating the potential social impact of hurricane hazards in the coastal counties [13,16,76]. Thus, based on the geographic extent of hurricane at-risk zones and land use data, this study performed zonal analysis to further examine how many coastal populations are exposed to the hurricane damage categories—storm surge damage and F0/F1/F2/F3 wind damage—within the residential areas. The findings from this study provide a fundamental basis for understanding the exposure of at-risk populations to hurricane-related damage within the coastal counties at a national scale. The resulting output of the hurricane-prone coastal counties also opens the potential to further examine the specific demographic characteristics of the at-risk populations, allowing for a further assessment of social vulnerability in these areas.
To provide a complete picture of place-based and population vulnerability within the hurricane at-risk areas, future studies should take into account more detailed demographic variables such as race/ethnicity, age groups, and income level. Exploring the demographic changes within the hurricane at-risk areas was purely descriptive; it was not possible to determine a causal relationship between long-term hurricane damage and population change. This study did not evaluate the hurricane-forced internal or intra-regional residential displacement, either temporarily or permanently, associated with post-disaster recovery processes and community resilience to these hurricane hazards. The spatial patterns of hurricane-induced residential mobility and its mechanism remain to be elucidated for further investigation. Future studies need to examine the links between the impacts of hurricane-related damage on local population change based on empirical statistical analysis and mixed method approaches more closely.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data used in the present study are publicly available on the website of the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Hurricane Center (NHC), https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/, accessed on 1 October 2021. The HURRECON model for estimating hurricane wind speed, direction, and damage is available at the Environmental Data Initiative (EDI) Data Portal (https://doi.org/10.6073/pasta/0878074e6c87ec8b43cb56601ff00472, accessed on 16 September 2021).

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the School Research Committee and School of Geography, Politics and Sociology at Newcastle University for publication. The author would like to thank to anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions on the first version of this paper. The author also would like to express her gratitude to the Department of Geography at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for their encouragement and support at the earlier stages of this project. The author has read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. Hurricane-Prone Coastal Counties (n = 775) along the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts Defined in this Study

FIPSGeographyFIPSGeography
01001Autauga County, Alabama01123Tallapoosa County, Alabama
01003Baldwin County, Alabama01125Tuscaloosa County, Alabama
01005Barbour County, Alabama01127Walker County, Alabama
01007Bibb County, Alabama01129Washington County, Alabama
01011Bullock County, Alabama01131Wilcox County, Alabama
01013Butler County, Alabama09001Fairfield County, Connecticut
01015Calhoun County, Alabama09003Hartford County, Connecticut
01017Chambers County, Alabama09005Litchfield County, Connecticut
01019Cherokee County, Alabama09007Middlesex County, Connecticut
01021Chilton County, Alabama09009New Haven County, Connecticut
01023Choctaw County, Alabama09011New London County, Connecticut
01025Clarke County, Alabama09013Tolland County, Connecticut
01027Clay County, Alabama09015Windham County, Connecticut
01029Cleburne County, Alabama10001Kent County, Delaware
01031Coffee County, Alabama10003New Castle County, Delaware
01035Conecuh County, Alabama10005Sussex County, Delaware
01037Coosa County, Alabama11001District of Columbia, District of Columbia
01039Covington County, Alabama12001Alachua County, Florida
01041Crenshaw County, Alabama12003Baker County, Florida
01045Dale County, Alabama12005Bay County, Florida
01047Dallas County, Alabama12007Bradford County, Florida
01051Elmore County, Alabama12009Brevard County, Florida
01053Escambia County, Alabama12011Broward County, Florida
01055Etowah County, Alabama12013Calhoun County, Florida
01057Fayette County, Alabama12015Charlotte County, Florida
01061Geneva County, Alabama12017Citrus County, Florida
01063Greene County, Alabama12019Clay County, Florida
01065Hale County, Alabama12021Collier County, Florida
01067Henry County, Alabama12023Columbia County, Florida
01069Houston County, Alabama12027DeSoto County, Florida
01075Lamar County, Alabama12029Dixie County, Florida
01081Lee County, Alabama12031Duval County, Florida
01085Lowndes County, Alabama12033Escambia County, Florida
01087Macon County, Alabama12035Flagler County, Florida
01091Marengo County, Alabama12037Franklin County, Florida
01093Marion County, Alabama12039Gadsden County, Florida
01097Mobile County, Alabama12041Gilchrist County, Florida
01099Monroe County, Alabama12043Glades County, Florida
01101Montgomery County, Alabama12045Gulf County, Florida
01105Perry County, Alabama12047Hamilton County, Florida
01107Pickens County, Alabama12049Hardee County, Florida
01109Pike County, Alabama12051Hendry County, Florida
01111Randolph County, Alabama12053Hernando County, Florida
01113Russell County, Alabama12055Highlands County, Florida
01119Sumter County, Alabama12057Hillsborough County, Florida
01121Talladega County, Alabama12059Holmes County, Florida
12061Indian River County, Florida13031Bulloch County, Georgia
12063Jackson County, Florida13033Burke County, Georgia
12065Jefferson County, Florida13037Calhoun County, Georgia
12067Lafayette County, Florida13039Camden County, Georgia
12069Lake County, Florida13043Candler County, Georgia
12071Lee County, Florida13045Carroll County, Georgia
12073Leon County, Florida13049Charlton County, Georgia
12075Levy County, Florida13051Chatham County, Georgia
12077Liberty County, Florida13053Chattahoochee County, Georgia
12079Madison County, Florida13061Clay County, Georgia
12081Manatee County, Florida13065Clinch County, Georgia
12083Marion County, Florida13069Coffee County, Georgia
12085Martin County, Florida13071Colquitt County, Georgia
12086Miami-Dade County, Florida13073Columbia County, Georgia
12087Monroe County, Florida13075Cook County, Georgia
12089Nassau County, Florida13077Coweta County, Georgia
12091Okaloosa County, Florida13079Crawford County, Georgia
12093Okeechobee County, Florida13081Crisp County, Georgia
12095Orange County, Florida13087Decatur County, Georgia
12097Osceola County, Florida13091Dodge County, Georgia
12099Palm Beach County, Florida13093Dooly County, Georgia
12101Pasco County, Florida13095Dougherty County, Georgia
12103Pinellas County, Florida13097Douglas County, Georgia
12105Polk County, Florida13099Early County, Georgia
12107Putnam County, Florida13101Echols County, Georgia
12109St. Johns County, Florida13103Effingham County, Georgia
12111St. Lucie County, Florida13107Emanuel County, Georgia
12115Sarasota County, Florida13109Evans County, Georgia
12117Seminole County, Florida13125Glascock County, Georgia
12119Sumter County, Florida13127Glynn County, Georgia
12121Suwannee County, Florida13131Grady County, Georgia
12123Taylor County, Florida13143Haralson County, Georgia
12125Union County, Florida13145Harris County, Georgia
12127Volusia County, Florida13149Heard County, Georgia
12129Wakulla County, Florida13153Houston County, Georgia
12131Walton County, Florida13155Irwin County, Georgia
12133Washington County, Florida13161Jeff Davis County, Georgia
13001Appling County, Georgia13163Jefferson County, Georgia
13003Atkinson County, Georgia13165Jenkins County, Georgia
13005Bacon County, Georgia13167Johnson County, Georgia
13007Baker County, Georgia13173Lanier County, Georgia
13017Ben Hill County, Georgia13175Laurens County, Georgia
13019Berrien County, Georgia13177Lee County, Georgia
13021Bibb County, Georgia13179Liberty County, Georgia
13023Bleckley County, Georgia13183Long County, Georgia
13025Brantley County, Georgia13185Lowndes County, Georgia
13027Brooks County, Georgia13189McDuffie County, Georgia
13029Bryan County, Georgia13191McIntosh County, Georgia
13193Macon County, Georgia22023Cameron Parish, Louisiana
13197Marion County, Georgia22025Catahoula Parish, Louisiana
13201Miller County, Georgia22029Concordia Parish, Louisiana
13205Mitchell County, Georgia22031De Soto Parish, Louisiana
13209Montgomery County, Georgia22033East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana
13215Muscogee County, Georgia22035East Carroll Parish, Louisiana
13223Paulding County, Georgia22037East Feliciana Parish, Louisiana
13225Peach County, Georgia22039Evangeline Parish, Louisiana
13229Pierce County, Georgia22041Franklin Parish, Louisiana
13233Polk County, Georgia22043Grant Parish, Louisiana
13235Pulaski County, Georgia22045Iberia Parish, Louisiana
13239Quitman County, Georgia22047Iberville Parish, Louisiana
13243Randolph County, Georgia22049Jackson Parish, Louisiana
13245Richmond County, Georgia22051Jefferson Parish, Louisiana
13249Schley County, Georgia22053Jefferson Davis Parish, Louisiana
13251Screven County, Georgia22055Lafayette Parish, Louisiana
13253Seminole County, Georgia22057Lafourche Parish, Louisiana
13259Stewart County, Georgia22059La Salle Parish, Louisiana
13261Sumter County, Georgia22063Livingston Parish, Louisiana
13267Tattnall County, Georgia22065Madison Parish, Louisiana
13269Taylor County, Georgia22067Morehouse Parish, Louisiana
13271Telfair County, Georgia22069Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana
13273Terrell County, Georgia22071Orleans Parish, Louisiana
13275Thomas County, Georgia22073Ouachita Parish, Louisiana
13277Tift County, Georgia22075Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana
13279Toombs County, Georgia22077Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana
13283Treutlen County, Georgia22079Rapides Parish, Louisiana
13285Troup County, Georgia22081Red River Parish, Louisiana
13287Turner County, Georgia22083Richland Parish, Louisiana
13289Twiggs County, Georgia22085Sabine Parish, Louisiana
13299Ware County, Georgia22087St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana
13301Warren County, Georgia22089St. Charles Parish, Louisiana
13303Washington County, Georgia22091St. Helena Parish, Louisiana
13305Wayne County, Georgia22093St. James Parish, Louisiana
13307Webster County, Georgia22095St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana
13309Wheeler County, Georgia22097St. Landry Parish, Louisiana
13315Wilcox County, Georgia22099St. Martin Parish, Louisiana
13319Wilkinson County, Georgia22101St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
13321Worth County, Georgia22103St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana
22001Acadia Parish, Louisiana22105Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana
22003Allen Parish, Louisiana22107Tensas Parish, Louisiana
22005Ascension Parish, Louisiana22109Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana
22007Assumption Parish, Louisiana22111Union Parish, Louisiana
22009Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana22113Vermilion Parish, Louisiana
22011Beauregard Parish, Louisiana22115Vernon Parish, Louisiana
22013Bienville Parish, Louisiana22117Washington Parish, Louisiana
22019Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana22121West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana
22021Caldwell Parish, Louisiana22123West Carroll Parish, Louisiana
22125West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana25017Middlesex County, Massachusetts
22127Winn Parish, Louisiana25019Nantucket County, Massachusetts
23001Androscoggin County, Maine25021Norfolk County, Massachusetts
23003Aroostook County, Maine25023Plymouth County, Massachusetts
23005Cumberland County, Maine25025Suffolk County, Massachusetts
23007Franklin County, Maine25027Worcester County, Massachusetts
23009Hancock County, Maine28001Adams County, Mississippi
23011Kennebec County, Maine28005Amite County, Mississippi
23013Knox County, Maine28007Attala County, Mississippi
23015Lincoln County, Maine28015Carroll County, Mississippi
23017Oxford County, Maine28019Choctaw County, Mississippi
23019Penobscot County, Maine28021Claiborne County, Mississippi
23021Piscataquis County, Maine28023Clarke County, Mississippi
23023Sagadahoc County, Maine28025Clay County, Mississippi
23025Somerset County, Maine28029Copiah County, Mississippi
23027Waldo County, Maine28031Covington County, Mississippi
23029Washington County, Maine28035Forrest County, Mississippi
23031York County, Maine28037Franklin County, Mississippi
24001Allegany County, Maryland28039George County, Mississippi
24003Anne Arundel County, Maryland28041Greene County, Mississippi
24005Baltimore County, Maryland28043Grenada County, Mississippi
24009Calvert County, Maryland28045Hancock County, Mississippi
24011Caroline County, Maryland28047Harrison County, Mississippi
24013Carroll County, Maryland28049Hinds County, Mississippi
24015Cecil County, Maryland28051Holmes County, Mississippi
24017Charles County, Maryland28053Humphreys County, Mississippi
24019Dorchester County, Maryland28059Jackson County, Mississippi
24021Frederick County, Maryland28061Jasper County, Mississippi
24023Garrett County, Maryland28063Jefferson County, Mississippi
24025Harford County, Maryland28065Jefferson Davis County, Mississippi
24027Howard County, Maryland28067Jones County, Mississippi
24029Kent County, Maryland28069Kemper County, Mississippi
24031Montgomery County, Maryland28073Lamar County, Mississippi
24033Prince George's County, Maryland28075Lauderdale County, Mississippi
24035Queen Anne's County, Maryland28077Lawrence County, Mississippi
24037St. Mary's County, Maryland28079Leake County, Mississippi
24039Somerset County, Maryland28083Leflore County, Mississippi
24041Talbot County, Maryland28085Lincoln County, Mississippi
24045Wicomico County, Maryland28087Lowndes County, Mississippi
24047Worcester County, Maryland28089Madison County, Mississippi
25001Barnstable County, Massachusetts28091Marion County, Mississippi
25003Berkshire County, Massachusetts28097Montgomery County, Mississippi
25005Bristol County, Massachusetts28099Neshoba County, Mississippi
25007Dukes County, Massachusetts28101Newton County, Mississippi
25009Essex County, Massachusetts28103Noxubee County, Mississippi
25011Franklin County, Massachusetts28105Oktibbeha County, Mississippi
25013Hampden County, Massachusetts28109Pearl River County, Mississippi
25015Hampshire County, Massachusetts28111Perry County, Mississippi
28113Pike County, Mississippi36039Greene County, New York
28121Rankin County, Mississippi36047Kings County, New York
28123Scott County, Mississippi36051Livingston County, New York
28127Simpson County, Mississippi36055Monroe County, New York
28129Smith County, Mississippi36059Nassau County, New York
28131Stone County, Mississippi36061New York County, New York
28147Walthall County, Mississippi36071Orange County, New York
28149Warren County, Mississippi36073Orleans County, New York
28153Wayne County, Mississippi36079Putnam County, New York
28157Wilkinson County, Mississippi36081Queens County, New York
28159Winston County, Mississippi36085Richmond County, New York
28161Yalobusha County, Mississippi36087Rockland County, New York
28163Yazoo County, Mississippi36101Steuben County, New York
33001Belknap County, New Hampshire36103Suffolk County, New York
33003Carroll County, New Hampshire36111Ulster County, New York
33005Cheshire County, New Hampshire36119Westchester County, New York
33007Coos County, New Hampshire37003Alexander County, North Carolina
33009Grafton County, New Hampshire37005Alleghany County, North Carolina
33011Hillsborough County, New Hampshire37007Anson County, North Carolina
33013Merrimack County, New Hampshire37009Ashe County, North Carolina
33015Rockingham County, New Hampshire37013Beaufort County, North Carolina
33017Strafford County, New Hampshire37015Bertie County, North Carolina
33019Sullivan County, New Hampshire37017Bladen County, North Carolina
34001Atlantic County, New Jersey37019Brunswick County, North Carolina
34003Bergen County, New Jersey37023Burke County, North Carolina
34005Burlington County, New Jersey37025Cabarrus County, North Carolina
34007Camden County, New Jersey37027Caldwell County, North Carolina
34009Cape May County, New Jersey37029Camden County, North Carolina
34011Cumberland County, New Jersey37031Carteret County, North Carolina
34013Essex County, New Jersey37035Catawba County, North Carolina
34015Gloucester County, New Jersey37037Chatham County, North Carolina
34017Hudson County, New Jersey37041Chowan County, North Carolina
34019Hunterdon County, New Jersey37045Cleveland County, North Carolina
34021Mercer County, New Jersey37047Columbus County, North Carolina
34023Middlesex County, New Jersey37049Craven County, North Carolina
34025Monmouth County, New Jersey37051Cumberland County, North Carolina
34029Ocean County, New Jersey37053Currituck County, North Carolina
34031Passaic County, New Jersey37055Dare County, North Carolina
34033Salem County, New Jersey37061Duplin County, North Carolina
34035Somerset County, New Jersey37063Durham County, North Carolina
34039Union County, New Jersey37065Edgecombe County, North Carolina
36003Allegany County, New York37069Franklin County, North Carolina
36005Bronx County, New York37071Gaston County, North Carolina
36009Cattaraugus County, New York37073Gates County, North Carolina
36013Chautauqua County, New York37077Granville County, North Carolina
36021Columbia County, New York37079Greene County, North Carolina
36027Dutchess County, New York37083Halifax County, North Carolina
36037Genesee County, New York37085Harnett County, North Carolina
37091Hertford County, North Carolina42035Clinton County, Pennsylvania
37093Hoke County, North Carolina42041Cumberland County, Pennsylvania
37095Hyde County, North Carolina42043Dauphin County, Pennsylvania
37097Iredell County, North Carolina42045Delaware County, Pennsylvania
37101Johnston County, North Carolina42047Elk County, Pennsylvania
37103Jones County, North Carolina42051Fayette County, Pennsylvania
37105Lee County, North Carolina42055Franklin County, Pennsylvania
37107Lenoir County, North Carolina42057Fulton County, Pennsylvania
37109Lincoln County, North Carolina42061Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania
37117Martin County, North Carolina42067Juniata County, Pennsylvania
37119Mecklenburg County, North Carolina42071Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
37125Moore County, North Carolina42075Lebanon County, Pennsylvania
37127Nash County, North Carolina42081Lycoming County, Pennsylvania
37129New Hanover County, North Carolina42083McKean County, Pennsylvania
37131Northampton County, North Carolina42087Mifflin County, Pennsylvania
37133Onslow County, North Carolina42091Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
37135Orange County, North Carolina42097Northumberland County, Pennsylvania
37137Pamlico County, North Carolina42099Perry County, Pennsylvania
37139Pasquotank County, North Carolina42101Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
37141Pender County, North Carolina42109Snyder County, Pennsylvania
37143Perquimans County, North Carolina42111Somerset County, Pennsylvania
37145Person County, North Carolina42117Tioga County, Pennsylvania
37147Pitt County, North Carolina42119Union County, Pennsylvania
37153Richmond County, North Carolina42123Warren County, Pennsylvania
37155Robeson County, North Carolina42133York County, Pennsylvania
37159Rowan County, North Carolina44001Bristol County, Rhode Island
37163Sampson County, North Carolina44003Kent County, Rhode Island
37165Scotland County, North Carolina44005Newport County, Rhode Island
37167Stanly County, North Carolina44007Providence County, Rhode Island
37177Tyrrell County, North Carolina44009Washington County, Rhode Island
37179Union County, North Carolina45003Aiken County, South Carolina
37181Vance County, North Carolina45005Allendale County, South Carolina
37183Wake County, North Carolina45009Bamberg County, South Carolina
37185Warren County, North Carolina45011Barnwell County, South Carolina
37187Washington County, North Carolina45013Beaufort County, South Carolina
37189Watauga County, North Carolina45015Berkeley County, South Carolina
37191Wayne County, North Carolina45017Calhoun County, South Carolina
37193Wilkes County, North Carolina45019Charleston County, South Carolina
37195Wilson County, North Carolina45021Cherokee County, South Carolina
42001Adams County, Pennsylvania45023Chester County, South Carolina
42009Bedford County, Pennsylvania45025Chesterfield County, South Carolina
42011Berks County, Pennsylvania45027Clarendon County, South Carolina
42013Blair County, Pennsylvania45029Colleton County, South Carolina
42017Bucks County, Pennsylvania45031Darlington County, South Carolina
42021Cambria County, Pennsylvania45033Dillon County, South Carolina
42023Cameron County, Pennsylvania45035Dorchester County, South Carolina
42027Centre County, Pennsylvania45037Edgefield County, South Carolina
42029Chester County, Pennsylvania45039Fairfield County, South Carolina
45041Florence County, South Carolina48163Frio County, Texas
45043Georgetown County, South Carolina48167Galveston County, Texas
45049Hampton County, South Carolina48175Goliad County, Texas
45051Horry County, South Carolina48177Gonzales County, Texas
45053Jasper County, South Carolina48183Gregg County, Texas
45055Kershaw County, South Carolina48185Grimes County, Texas
45057Lancaster County, South Carolina48187Guadalupe County, Texas
45061Lee County, South Carolina48199Hardin County, Texas
45063Lexington County, South Carolina48201Harris County, Texas
45067Marion County, South Carolina48209Hays County, Texas
45069Marlboro County, South Carolina48215Hidalgo County, Texas
45071Newberry County, South Carolina48217Hill County, Texas
45075Orangeburg County, South Carolina48225Houston County, Texas
45079Richland County, South Carolina48239Jackson County, Texas
45081Saluda County, South Carolina48241Jasper County, Texas
45085Sumter County, South Carolina48245Jefferson County, Texas
45089Williamsburg County, South Carolina48247Jim Hogg County, Texas
45091York County, South Carolina48249Jim Wells County, Texas
47091Johnson County, Tennessee48255Karnes County, Texas
48001Anderson County, Texas48261Kenedy County, Texas
48005Angelina County, Texas48271Kinney County, Texas
48007Aransas County, Texas48273Kleberg County, Texas
48013Atascosa County, Texas48283La Salle County, Texas
48015Austin County, Texas48285Lavaca County, Texas
48021Bastrop County, Texas48287Lee County, Texas
48025Bee County, Texas48289Leon County, Texas
48027Bell County, Texas48291Liberty County, Texas
48029Bexar County, Texas48297Live Oak County, Texas
48035Bosque County, Texas48309McLennan County, Texas
48039Brazoria County, Texas48311McMullen County, Texas
48041Brazos County, Texas48313Madison County, Texas
48047Brooks County, Texas48321Matagorda County, Texas
48051Burleson County, Texas48323Maverick County, Texas
48055Caldwell County, Texas48325Medina County, Texas
48057Calhoun County, Texas48331Milam County, Texas
48061Cameron County, Texas48339Montgomery County, Texas
48071Chambers County, Texas48347Nacogdoches County, Texas
48073Cherokee County, Texas48351Newton County, Texas
48089Colorado County, Texas48355Nueces County, Texas
48091Comal County, Texas48361Orange County, Texas
48099Coryell County, Texas48373Polk County, Texas
48123DeWitt County, Texas48391Refugio County, Texas
48127Dimmit County, Texas48395Robertson County, Texas
48131Duval County, Texas48401Rusk County, Texas
48139Ellis County, Texas48403Sabine County, Texas
48145Falls County, Texas48405San Augustine County, Texas
48149Fayette County, Texas48407San Jacinto County, Texas
48157Fort Bend County, Texas48409San Patricio County, Texas
48419Shelby County, Texas51093Isle of Wight County, Virginia
48423Smith County, Texas51095James City County, Virginia
48427Starr County, Texas51097King and Queen County, Virginia
48453Travis County, Texas51099King George County, Virginia
48455Trinity County, Texas51101King William County, Virginia
48457Tyler County, Texas51103Lancaster County, Virginia
48459Upshur County, Texas51107Loudoun County, Virginia
48463Uvalde County, Texas51109Louisa County, Virginia
48465Val Verde County, Texas51111Lunenburg County, Virginia
48469Victoria County, Texas51113Madison County, Virginia
48471Walker County, Texas51115Mathews County, Virginia
48473Waller County, Texas51117Mecklenburg County, Virginia
48477Washington County, Texas51119Middlesex County, Virginia
48479Webb County, Texas51125Nelson County, Virginia
48481Wharton County, Texas51127New Kent County, Virginia
48489Willacy County, Texas51131Northampton County, Virginia
48491Williamson County, Texas51133Northumberland County, Virginia
48493Wilson County, Texas51135Nottoway County, Virginia
48505Zapata County, Texas51137Orange County, Virginia
48507Zavala County, Texas51139Page County, Virginia
50025Windham County, Vermont51145Powhatan County, Virginia
50027Windsor County, Vermont51147Prince Edward County, Virginia
51001Accomack County, Virginia51149Prince George County, Virginia
51003Albemarle County, Virginia51153Manassas city, Virginia
51007Amelia County, Virginia51153Manassas Park city, Virginia
51011Appomattox County, Virginia51153Prince William County, Virginia
51013Arlington County, Virginia51157Rappahannock County, Virginia
51021Bland County, Virginia51159Richmond County, Virginia
51025Brunswick County, Virginia51165Rockingham County, Virginia
51029Buckingham County, Virginia51171Shenandoah County, Virginia
51033Caroline County, Virginia51173Smyth County, Virginia
51036Charles City County, Virginia51175Southampton County, Virginia
51037Charlotte County, Virginia51177Spotsylvania County, Virginia
51041Chesterfield County, Virginia51179Stafford County, Virginia
51047Culpeper County, Virginia51181Surry County, Virginia
51049Cumberland County, Virginia51183Sussex County, Virginia
51053Dinwiddie County, Virginia51185Tazewell County, Virginia
51057Essex County, Virginia51191Washington County, Virginia
51059Fairfax County, Virginia51193Westmoreland County, Virginia
51065Fluvanna County, Virginia51197Wythe County, Virginia
51073Gloucester County, Virginia51199York County, Virginia
51075Goochland County, Virginia51550Chesapeake city, Virginia
51077Grayson County, Virginia51650Hampton city, Virginia
51079Greene County, Virginia51683Manassas city, Virginia
51081Greensville County, Virginia51685Manassas Park city, Virginia
51083Halifax County, Virginia51700Newport News city, Virginia
51085Hanover County, Virginia51730Petersburg city, Virginia
51087Henrico County, Virginia51760Richmond city, Virginia
51800Suffolk city, Virginia54039Kanawha County, West Virginia
51810Virginia Beach city, Virginia54047McDowell County, West Virginia
54005Boone County, West Virginia54055Mercer County, West Virginia
54023Grant County, West Virginia54057Mineral County, West Virginia
54027Hampshire County, West Virginia54081Raleigh County, West Virginia
54031Hardy County, West Virginia54109Wyoming County, West Virginia

References

  1. Arkema, K.K.; Guannel, G.; Verutes, G.; Wood, S.A.; Guerry, A.; Ruckelshaus, M.; Kareiva, P.; Lacayo, M.; Silver, J.M. Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2013, 3, 913–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Changnon, S.A.; Pielke, R.A., Jr.; Changnon, D.; Sylves, R.T.; Pulwarty, R. Human factors explain the increased losses from weather and climate extremes. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2000, 81, 437–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Emanuel, K. Global warming effects on US hurricane damage. Weather Clim. Soc. 2011, 3, 261–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  5. Rahmstorf, S. Rising hazard of storm-surge flooding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 11806–11808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Diaz, H.F.; Pulwarty, R.S. Hurricanes: Climate and Socioeconomic Impacts; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  7. NOAA Office for Coastal Management. Fast Facts—Hurricane Coasts. Available online: https://coast.noaa.gov/states/fast-facts/hurricane-costs.html (accessed on 16 September 2021).
  8. Weinkle, J.; Landsea, C.; Collins, D.; Musulin, R.; Crompton, R.P.; Klotzbach, P.J.; Pielke, R. Normalized hurricane damage in the continental United States 1900–2017. Nat. Sustain. 2018, 1, 808–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dolan, R.; Davis, R.E. Coastal storm hazards. J. Coast. Res. 1994, 103–114. [Google Scholar]
  10. Glahn, B.; Taylor, A.; Kurkowski, N.; Shaffer, W.A. The role of the SLOSH model in National Weather Service storm surge forecasting. Natl. Weather Dig. 2009, 33, 3–14. [Google Scholar]
  11. Lin, N.; Emanuel, K.A.; Smith, J.A.; Vanmarcke, E. Risk assessment of hurricane storm surge for New York City. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2010, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Lin, N.; Emanuel, K.; Oppenheimer, M.; Vanmarcke, E. Physically based assessment of hurricane surge threat under climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 462–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Cutter, S.L.; Johnson, L.A.; Finch, C.; Berry, M. The US hurricane coasts: Increasingly vulnerable? Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 2007, 49, 8–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lam, N.-N.; Arenas, H.; Li, Z.; Liu, K.-B. An estimate of population impacted by climate change along the US coast. J. Coast. Res. 2009, 1522–1526. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25738044 (accessed on 1 September 2021).
  15. Donner, W.; Rodríguez, H. Population composition, migration and inequality: The influence of demographic changes on disaster risk and vulnerability. Soc. Forces 2008, 87, 1089–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Crossett, K.A.; Brent; Pacheco, P.; Haber, K. National Coastal Population Report: Population Trends from 1970 to 2020; NOAA Office for Coastal Management: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  17. Maul, G.A.; Duedall, I.W. Demography of Coastal Populations. In Encyclopedia of Coastal Science; Finkl, C.W., Makowski, C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 692–700. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cohen, D.T. About 60.2M Live in Areas Most Vulnerable to Hurricanes. Available online: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/07/millions-of-americans-live-coastline-regions.html (accessed on 16 September 2021).
  19. Pielke, R.A. Vulnerability to hurricanes along the US Atlantic and Gulf coasts: Considerations of the use of long-term forecasts. In Hurricanes; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1997; pp. 147–184. [Google Scholar]
  20. Pompe, J.; Haluska, J. Estimating the Vulnerability of US Coastal Areas to Hurricane Damage. In Recent Hurricane Research-Climate, Dynamics and Societal Impacts; Lupo, A., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2011; pp. 407–418. [Google Scholar]
  21. Smith, K. Environmental Hazards: Assessing Risk and Reducing Disaster, 6th ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  22. Cutter, S.L. American Hazardscapes: The Regionalization of Hazards and Disasters; Joseph Henry Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  23. Forbes, C.; Rhome, J.; Mattocks, C.; Taylor, A. Predicting the storm surge threat of Hurricane Sandy with the National Weather Service SLOSH model. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2014, 2, 437–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Dietrich, J.; Dawson, C.; Proft, J.; Howard, M.; Wells, G.; Fleming, J.; Luettich, R.; Westerink, J.; Cobell, Z.; Vitse, M. Real-time forecasting and visualization of hurricane waves and storm surge using SWAN+ ADCIRC and FigureGen. In Computational Challenges in the Geosciences; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 49–70. [Google Scholar]
  25. Dietrich, J.; Zijlema, M.; Westerink, J.; Holthuijsen, L.; Dawson, C.; Luettich, R., Jr.; Jensen, R.; Smith, J.; Stelling, G.; Stone, G. Modeling hurricane waves and storm surge using integrally-coupled, scalable computations. Coast. Eng. 2011, 58, 45–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Powell, M.D.; Murillo, S.; Dodge, P.; Uhlhorn, E.; Gamache, J.; Cardone, V.; Cox, A.; Otero, S.; Carrasco, N.; Annane, B. Reconstruction of Hurricane Katrina’s wind fields for storm surge and wave hindcasting. Ocean Eng. 2010, 37, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Anderson, G.; Schumacher, A.; Guikema, S.; Quiring, S.; Ferreri, J.; Staid, A.; Guo, M.; Ming, L.; Zhu, L. Stormwindmodel: Model Tropical Cyclone Wind Speeds.(R Package Version 0.1.4) 2020. Available online: http://cran.nexr.com/web/packages/stormwindmodel/index.html (accessed on 1 October 2021).
  28. Anderson, G.B.; Ferreri, J.; Al-Hamdan, M.; Crosson, W.; Schumacher, A.; Guikema, S.; Quiring, S.; Eddelbuettel, D.; Yan, M.; Peng, R.D. Assessing United States county-level exposure for research on tropical cyclones and human health. Environ. Health Perspect. 2020, 128, 107009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Logan, J.R.; Xu, Z. Vulnerability to hurricane damage on the US Gulf Coast since 1950. Geogr. Rev. 2015, 105, 133–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Füssel, H.-M. Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2007, 17, 155–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cutter, S.L. The vulnerability of science and the science of vulnerability. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2003, 93, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cutter, S.L. Social science perspectives on hazards and vulnerability science. In Geophysical Hazards: Minimizing Risk, Maximizing Awareness; Beer, T., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 17–30. [Google Scholar]
  33. Chi, H.; Pitter, S.; Li, N.; Tian, H. Big data solutions to interpreting complex systems in the environment. In Guide to Big Data Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 107–124. [Google Scholar]
  34. Abarca-Alvarez, F.J.; Reinoso-Bellido, R.; Campos-Sánchez, F.S. Decision model for predicting social vulnerability using artificial intelligence. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2019, 8, 575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Martín, Y.; Li, Z.; Cutter, S.L. Leveraging Twitter to gauge evacuation compliance: Spatiotemporal analysis of Hurricane Matthew. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0181701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Yang, C.; Clarke, K.; Shekhar, S.; Tao, C.V. Big Spatiotemporal Data Analytics: A research and innovation frontier. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2020, 1075–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Yu, M.; Yang, C.; Li, Y. Big data in natural disaster management: A review. Geosciences 2018, 8, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Hashem, I.A.T.; Yaqoob, I.; Anuar, N.B.; Mokhtar, S.; Gani, A.; Khan, S.U. The rise of “big data” on cloud computing: Review and open research issues. Inf. Syst. 2015, 47, 98–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Miller, H.J.; Goodchild, M.F. Data-driven geography. GeoJournal 2015, 80, 449–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Reynard, D. Five classes of geospatial data and the barriers to using them. Geogr. Compass 2018, 12, e12364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Jarvinen, B.R.; Neumann, C.J.; Davis, M.A. A Tropical Cyclone Data Tape for the North Atlantic Basin, 1886–1983: Contents, Limitations, and Uses; National Hurricane Center: Miami, FL, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  42. Landsea, C.W.; Franklin, J.L. Atlantic hurricane database uncertainty and presentation of a new database format. Mon. Weather Rev. 2013, 141, 3576–3592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Landsea, C.W.; Franklin, J.L.; Beven, J.L. The revised Atlantic hurricane database (HURDAT2); National Hurricane Center: Miami, FL, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  44. Allen, T.R.; Sanchagrin, S.; McLeod, G. Geovisualization for storm surge risk communication. In Proceedings of the Special Joint Symposium of ISPRS Technical Commission IV & AutoCaro in Conjunction with ASPRS/CaGIS 2010 Fall Specialty Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 15–19 November 2010; pp. 15–19. [Google Scholar]
  45. Zachry, B.C.; Booth, W.J.; Rhome, J.R.; Sharon, T.M. A national view of storm surge risk and inundation. Weather Clim. Soc. 2015, 7, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Jelesnianski, C.P.; Chen, J.; Shaffer, W.A. SLOSH: Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes; NOAA Technical Report NWS 48; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  47. Luther, M.E.; Merz, C.R.; Scudder, J.; Baig, S.R.; Pralgo, J.L.; Thompson, D.; Gill, S.; Hovis, G. Water level observations for storm surge. Mar. Technol. Soc. J. 2007, 41, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Yang, K.; Paramygin, V.A.; Sheng, Y.P. A rapid forecasting and mapping system of storm surge and coastal flooding. Weather Forecast. 2020, 35, 1663–1681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Conver, A.; Sepanik, J.; Louangsaysongkham, B.; Miller, S. Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) Basin Development Handbook v2.0; NOAA/NWS/Meteorological Development Laboratory: Silver Springs, MD, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  50. Allen, T.R.; Sanchagrin, S.; McLeod, G. Visualization for hurricane storm surge risk awareness and emergency communication. In Approaches to Disaster Management—Examining the Implications of Hazards, Emergencies and Disasters; Tiefenbacher, J.P., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  51. Mayo, T.; Lin, N.J.A. The effect of the surface wind field representation in the operational storm surge model of the National Hurricane Center. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Mercado, A. On the use of NOAA‘’s storm surge model, SLOSH, in managing coastal hazards—The experience in Puerto Rico. Nat. Hazards 1994, 10, 235–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Frazier, T.G.; Wood, N.; Yarnal, B.; Bauer, D.H. Influence of potential sea level rise on societal vulnerability to hurricane storm-surge hazards, Sarasota County, Florida. Appl. Geogr. 2010, 30, 490–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Houston, S.H.; Shaffer, W.A.; Powell, M.D.; Chen, J. Comparisons of HRD and SLOSH surface wind fields in hurricanes: Implications for storm surge modeling. Weather Forecast. 1999, 14, 671–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Maloney, M.C.; Preston, B.L. A geospatial dataset for US hurricane storm surge and sea-level rise vulnerability: Development and case study applications. Clim. Risk Manag. 2014, 2, 26–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Boose, E.R.; Chamberlin, K.E.; Foster, D.R. Landscape and regional impacts of hurricanes in New England. Ecol. Monogr. 2001, 71, 27–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Boose, E.R.; Serrano, M.I.; Foster, D.R. Landscape and regional impacts of hurricanes in Puerto Rico. Ecol. Monogr. 2004, 74, 335–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Busby, P.E.; Canham, C.D.; Motzkin, G.; Foster, D.R. Forest response to chronic hurricane disturbance in coastal New England. J. Veg. Sci. 2009, 20, 487–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Batke, S.P.; Jocque, M.; Kelly, D.L. Modelling hurricane exposure and wind speed on a mesoclimate scale: A case study from Cusuco NP, Honduras. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e91306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Boose, E.R.; Foster, D.R.; Fluet, M. Hurricane impacts to tropical and temperate forest landscapes. Ecol. Monogr. 1994, 64, 369–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Fujita, T.T. Proposed Characterization of Tornadoes and Hurricanes by Area and Intensity; University of Chicago: Chicago, IL, USA, 1971. [Google Scholar]
  62. Womble, J.A.; Smith, D.A.; Mehta, K.C.; McDonald, J.R. The enhanced Fujita Scale: For use beyond tornadoes? In Proceedings of the Fifth Forensic Engineering: Pathology of the Built Environment, Washington, DC, USA, 11–14 November 2009; pp. 699–708. [Google Scholar]
  63. Potter, S. Fine-Tuning Fujita: After 35 years, a new scale for rating tornadoes takes effect. Weatherwise 2007, 60, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Doswell III, C.A.; Brooks, H.E.; Dotzek, N. On the implementation of the enhanced Fujita scale in the USA. Atmos. Res. 2009, 93, 554–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Boon, J.D. Evidence of sea level acceleration at US and Canadian tide stations, Atlantic Coast, North America. J. Coast. Res. 2012, 28, 1437–1445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Sallenger, A.H.; Doran, K.S.; Howd, P.A. Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 884–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Smith, R.K.; Montgomery, M.T. Understanding hurricanes. Weather 2016, 71, 219–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Coch, N.K. Hurricane hazards along the northeastern Atlantic coast of the United States. J. Coast. Res. 1994, 12, 115–147. [Google Scholar]
  69. Ache, B.W.; Crossett, K.M.; Pacheco, P.A.; Adkins, J.E.; Wiley, P.C. “The coast” is complicated: A model to consistently describe the nation’s coastal population. Estuaries Coasts 2015, 38, 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Marsooli, R.; Lin, N.; Emanuel, K.; Feng, K. Climate change exacerbates hurricane flood hazards along US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts in spatially varying patterns. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 3785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Strobl, E. The economic growth impact of hurricanes: Evidence from US coastal counties. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2011, 93, 575–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Maantay, J.A.; Maroko, A.R.; Herrmann, C. Mapping population distribution in the urban environment: The cadastral-based expert dasymetric system (CEDS). Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2007, 34, 77–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Messager, M.L.; Ettinger, A.K.; Murphy-Williams, M.; Levin, P.S. Fine-scale assessment of inequities in inland flood vulnerability. Appl. Geogr. 2021, 133, 102492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hallisey, E.; Tai, E.; Berens, A.; Wilt, G.; Peipins, L.; Lewis, B.; Graham, S.; Flanagan, B.; Lunsford, N.B. Transforming geographic scale: A comparison of combined population and areal weighting to other interpolation methods. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2017, 16, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Crowell, M.; Coulton, K.; Johnson, C.; Westcott, J.; Bellomo, D.; Edelman, S.; Hirsch, E. An estimate of the US population living in 100-year coastal flood hazard areas. J. Coast. Res. 2010, 26, 201–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Cohen, D.T. 60 Million Live in the Path of Hurricanes. Available online: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/08/coastal-county-population-rises.html (accessed on 16 September 2021).
  77. Andersen, T.K.; Shepherd, J.M. A global spatiotemporal analysis of inland tropical cyclone maintenance or intensification. Int. J. Climatol. 2014, 34, 391–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yoo, J.; Santanello, J.A.; Shepherd, M.; Kumar, S.; Lawston, P.; Thomas, A.M. Quantification of the Land Surface and Brown Ocean Influence on Tropical Cyclone Intensification over Land. J. Hydrometeorol. 2020, 21, 1171–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Galarneau, T.J.; Davis, C.A.; Shapiro, M.A. Intensification of Hurricane Sandy (2012) through extratropical warm core seclusion. Mon. Weather Rev. 2013, 141, 4296–4321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Cutter, S.L. Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Prog. Hum. Heography 1996, 20, 529–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Historical hurricane and tropical storm tracks along the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from 1950 to 2018.
Figure 1. Historical hurricane and tropical storm tracks along the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from 1950 to 2018.
Ijgi 10 00781 g001
Figure 2. Synoptic data points of historical hurricanes (1851–2018) of the United States.
Figure 2. Synoptic data points of historical hurricanes (1851–2018) of the United States.
Ijgi 10 00781 g002
Figure 3. Flowchart for comprehensive hurricane-related damage modeling.
Figure 3. Flowchart for comprehensive hurricane-related damage modeling.
Ijgi 10 00781 g003
Figure 4. The spatial extent of operational basins (or grids) in the SLOSH model.
Figure 4. The spatial extent of operational basins (or grids) in the SLOSH model.
Ijgi 10 00781 g004
Figure 5. Hurricane Harvey (2018) storm surge heights simulated by the SLOSH model in the Matagorda Bay (ps2) basin.
Figure 5. Hurricane Harvey (2018) storm surge heights simulated by the SLOSH model in the Matagorda Bay (ps2) basin.
Ijgi 10 00781 g005
Figure 6. Interpolated storm surge inundation (before conducting additional geoprocessing operations) from Hurricane Harvey (2017).
Figure 6. Interpolated storm surge inundation (before conducting additional geoprocessing operations) from Hurricane Harvey (2017).
Ijgi 10 00781 g006
Figure 7. Simulated wind damage by Hurricane Harvey (2017) using the HURRECON model.
Figure 7. Simulated wind damage by Hurricane Harvey (2017) using the HURRECON model.
Ijgi 10 00781 g007
Figure 8. Modeled frequency of storm surge inundation of one foot or higher based on hurricanes: (A) The Northeast region; (B) The Southeast region; and (C) The Gulf Coast region.
Figure 8. Modeled frequency of storm surge inundation of one foot or higher based on hurricanes: (A) The Northeast region; (B) The Southeast region; and (C) The Gulf Coast region.
Ijgi 10 00781 g008
Figure 9. Modeled wind damage frequency and intensity from 1950 to 2018: (A) the spatial extent of F0 wind damage (minor damage to buildings/trees); (B) F1 wind damage (houses damaged, and single or isolated groups of trees blown down); (C) F2 wind damage (houses unroofed or destroyed and extensive tree blowdowns) and F3 wind damage (houses blown down or destroyed, most trees down, and heavy automobiles lifted or overturned); (D) cumulative hurricane wind damage.
Figure 9. Modeled wind damage frequency and intensity from 1950 to 2018: (A) the spatial extent of F0 wind damage (minor damage to buildings/trees); (B) F1 wind damage (houses damaged, and single or isolated groups of trees blown down); (C) F2 wind damage (houses unroofed or destroyed and extensive tree blowdowns) and F3 wind damage (houses blown down or destroyed, most trees down, and heavy automobiles lifted or overturned); (D) cumulative hurricane wind damage.
Ijgi 10 00781 g009
Figure 10. (A) The coastal counties affected by wind damage according to the Fujita scale (F0, F1, F2, and F3); (B) the coastal counties affected by storm surges; (C) the 775 hurricane-prone coastal counties defined in this study.
Figure 10. (A) The coastal counties affected by wind damage according to the Fujita scale (F0, F1, F2, and F3); (B) the coastal counties affected by storm surges; (C) the 775 hurricane-prone coastal counties defined in this study.
Ijgi 10 00781 g010
Figure 11. The population trend of the coastal counties and growth rate (1970–2018).
Figure 11. The population trend of the coastal counties and growth rate (1970–2018).
Ijgi 10 00781 g011
Figure 12. The percentage of the total U.S. population living in residential areas in the hurricane-prone coastal counties (1970–2018).
Figure 12. The percentage of the total U.S. population living in residential areas in the hurricane-prone coastal counties (1970–2018).
Ijgi 10 00781 g012
Figure 13. Total population exposed to hurricane-related damage in residential areas in the hurricane-prone coastal counties by different hurricane damage categories (1950–2018).
Figure 13. Total population exposed to hurricane-related damage in residential areas in the hurricane-prone coastal counties by different hurricane damage categories (1950–2018).
Ijgi 10 00781 g013
Table 1. Geospatial data and software used in this study for hurricane modeling.
Table 1. Geospatial data and software used in this study for hurricane modeling.
DataDescriptionData Source
Atlantic Hurricane Database
(HURDAT2)
1851-2018
This dataset contains six-hourly information on the location, maximum winds, central pressure, and (starting in 2004) size of all known tropical cyclones and subtropical cyclones.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Hurricane Center (NHC) https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
SLOSH Basins
(*.shp files)
The SLOSH basins are hyperbolic, elliptical, or polar mesh grids that are required to model storm surge heights. The spatial coverage of this study is the entirety of the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts.SLOSH Display Program
SLOSH Display
Program (SDP)
This program was used to download SLOSH basins and to visualize the results of the SLOSH model. Please note that the SLOSH model and the SLOSH Display Program (SDP) are two different tools. The SDP Tide information was also used to retrieve the astronomical tide data.NOAA Slosh Display Package Webpage, https://slosh.nws.noaa.gov/sdp/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
SLOSH ModelThis is a computer model used by the National Hurricane Center to forecast and simulate storm surge vulnerability caused by historical, hypothetical, or predicted hurricanes.Available to interested users upon request to NOAA
Tide level stationThe SLOSH model requires the observed coastal sea levels within a basin.NOAA Tides and Currents, https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
VDatumThis software is a conversion tool for converting initial water heights between vertical datums—tidal, orthometric, and ellipsoidal datums.NOAA Vertical Datums Transformation,
https://vdatum.noaa.gov/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
Corpscon 6.0This software was used to transform the vertical datums of SLOSH modeling outputs (NGVD 29) to the reference vertical datum (NAVD 88).US Army Corps of Engineers Geospatial Center, https://www.agc.army.mil/What-we-do/Corpscon/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
National Elevation Dataset (NED) The 1/3 arc-second DEM dataset with full coverage of coastal counties was used to create the inundation extent and depth. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Map Viewer, https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
Land use/land cover (LULC)The National Land Cover Database (NLCD) was used to calculate the developed areas within the hurricane-affected areas in estimating at-risk populations in Section 3.2. Non-developed areas were masked out from the NLCD datasets for the hurricane-affected areas. Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, https://www.mrlc.gov/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)
HURRECONThis software estimates wind speed, wind direction, and wind damage on the Fujita scale for a single or multiple hurricanes in a given region. The input parameters (hurricane track and intensity information) can be acquired from the HURDAT2 database. HURRECON is available in both R and Python. Environmental Data Initiative Data Portal, https://doi.org/10.6073/pasta/0878074e6c87ec8b43cb56601ff00472 (accessed on 1 October 2021)
or
GitHub https://github.com/hurrecon-model/HurreconR (accessed on 1 October 2021)
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Park, G. A Comprehensive Analysis of Hurricane Damage across the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts Using Geospatial Big Data. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 781. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110781

AMA Style

Park G. A Comprehensive Analysis of Hurricane Damage across the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts Using Geospatial Big Data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2021; 10(11):781. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110781

Chicago/Turabian Style

Park, Gainbi. 2021. "A Comprehensive Analysis of Hurricane Damage across the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts Using Geospatial Big Data" ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 10, no. 11: 781. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110781

APA Style

Park, G. (2021). A Comprehensive Analysis of Hurricane Damage across the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coasts Using Geospatial Big Data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(11), 781. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110781

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop