Transcription

1 This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the author s institution, sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit:

2 Available online at Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) Coastal changes at the Sulina mouth of the Danube River as a result of human activities Adrian Stanica a, *, Sebastian Dan a, Viorel Gheorghe Ungureanu b a National Institute of Marine Geology and Geoecology GeoEcoMar, Street Dimitrie Onciul 23-25, Sector 2, 70318, Bucharest, Romania b Faculty of Geology and Geophysics, University of Bucharest, Street Traian Vuia No. 6, Sector 2, 70139, Bucharest, Romania Abstract Sulina, the middle distributary of the Danube Delta, has been significantly changed by human activities over the past 150 yr. These include engineering works in the second half of the 19th century, when the channel was transformed for navigation and the construction of jetties which nowadays extend 8 km seawards. These interventions have strongly affected the natural processes of the Black Sea coast near the Sulina mouth. To the south of the Sulina mouth, the natural mild erosion has been reversed in the area close to the jetties where accretion is occurring, while southwards the greatest erosion rate along the entire Romanian coast, of more than 20 m/yr, has been recorded. Sediment accumulation in the northern part of the mouth is also huge and has brought to the creation and swift elongation of a sediment spit in several decades. Thus, the bay located here suffers from a rapid transformation into a lagoon. Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Black Sea; Danube Delta; Littoral; Human impact; Sediment transport modeling 1. Introduction During recent years, many researchers have attempted to assess the impact of human development on coastal areas worldwide demonstrating the often harmful and irreversible changes that have occurred. Delta beaches have been considered to be amongst the frailest coastal systems worldwide. In the Mediterranean, such studies have been undertaken on the Rhone (Bird, 1988), Ebro (Jimenez et al., 1997), Nile (Fanos, 1995), and Po (Simeoni and Bondesan, 1997) deltaic coasts. Results of these studies indicate the important role of river damming in changing the coastal sedimentary budget (Poulos and Collins, 2002). However human activity has influenced coastal processes in other ways. Harbor protection jetties and coastal engineering works have caused extended * Corresponding author. Fax: address: astanica@geoecomar.ro (A. Stanica). shoreline displacements by altering nearshore sediment transport and/or by modifying littoral sediment budget (e.g. Komar, 1998; Finkl, 1994; Anfuso and Martinez del Pozo, 2005). The Danube Delta is no exception from this rule. Here, the first significant human interventions were completed about 150 yr ago. Jetties were extended almost continously for almost a 100 yr. Furthermore, the damming of the Danube River for hydroelectric purposes has drastically reduced sediment discharge to the coast. The main purpose of this paper is to describe morphological changes in the coastal area of the Sulina mouth of the Danube River. Recent decades have witnessed an abrupt change in the pattern of evolution of this area. Thus, a range of coastal processes are encountered here, ranging from swift coastline accumulation and silting up to erosion. The paper also considers resulting changes in sediment transport capacity of longshore currents using numerical modeling X/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: /j.marpolbul

3 556 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) Study area 2.1. Geographical setting The study area represents the terminal component of the Danube River s course of about 2857 km, which extends from the Schwartzwald Mountains in Germany before discharging into the Black Sea. The Danube Delta, is the final major section of the Danube River, and has three main depositional units. These units are: the delta plain (total area of about 5800 km 2, the marine delta plain having a width of 1800 km 2 ), the delta front (total area of 1300 km 2 ) and the prodelta, with an area of more than 6000 km 2 (Panin, 1998). Currently, the Danube discharges into the Black Sea through three main distributaries. The northern distributary is Chilia, which, near the coast, is further divided into a series of smaller branches forming the Chilia Secondary Delta, which is located mainly in the Ukraine. The Chilia Distributary also represents the border between Ukraine and Romania. The middle branch is the Sulina Distributary, while the southern one is Sfantu Gheorghe (Fig. 1). The study area is the Sulina mouth, which can be divided into two sections: (a) The northern section (Musura Bay) is situated between Sulina and the southernmost arm of the Chilia Distributary, Stary Stambul. It has a length of about 12 km and is crossed by the border between Romania and Ukraine. (b) The southern section is to the south of the Sulina mouth. It consists of a sandy beach with a total length of about 12 km, with a southern limit located in the Canalul cu Sonda area (a former secondary distributary of the Danube Delta which was closed in 1995). This section is divided into three smaller subsections, according to coastline dynamics: (i) Sulina which is accumulating sediment with a length of about 5 km, (ii) South Sulina stable with a length of about 2 km and (iii) Canalul cu Sonda, which is eroding, with a length of about 5 km Genesis and natural evolution of the Danube Delta The Holocene genesis and evolution of the Danube Delta includes the following main phases (Panin, 1976, 1999): (A) the formation of the Jibrieni Letea Caraorman initial spit, consisting of sands transported by the southwards longshore current from the present-day Ukrainian rivers 11, yr BP. (B) the Sf. Gheorghe I Delta ( yr BP) representing the first deltaic pulse on the southernmost arm of the Danube. (C) The Sulina Delta developed between yr BP. (D) the Cosna Sinoie Delta ( yr BP). (E) The Sf. Gheorghe II and Chilia deltas (2000 yr BP present) (Fig. 2). Fig. 1. The Danube Delta and beach sectors in the Sulina mouth area.

4 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) Fig. 2. Genesis and natural evolution of the Danube Delta (from Panin, 1998). The study area is part of the Sulina lobe and its southern section has experienced general shoreline erosion of about km over the past 2000 yr. Therefore, until significant human intervention occurred, the mean erosion rate had been approximately 5 m/yr. The northern area, due to the influxes of sediments from both Sulina but especially Chilia Stary Stambul mouths, had been under cross evolution (initial erosion, with the entire area of the Sulina Secondary Delta, followed by slow advancement, as part of the Chilia Delta) Natural factors controlling the coastal evolution in the Sulina mouth area The tide regime in the study area, as well as in the entire Black Sea is semi-diurnal with average amplitudes of 7 11 cm (Bondar et al., 1973). The relative sea level rise consists of the eustatic sea level rise, estimated for the 20th century at about 1.28 mm/yr (Malciu, 2000), and the natural subsidence, with average values of mm/yr (Panin, 1999). These together account for the mean relative sea level rise for the Sulina area which varies between mm/yr. The long term mean wind regime is active, with winds stronger than 2 m/s recorded 80 90% of the year. Prevailing and stronger winds are from the northern sector (40 50%) (Bondar et al., 1973). The wave regime has the following characteristics: smooth sea (waves below 0.2 m) 49.1%, wind waves 33%, swell 17.9%. Predominant wind waves direction is from NE (Cristescu, Diaconu, 1980 in Panin, 1999). The dominant longshore direction in front of the Danube Delta littoral is from north to south, but this has changed significantly in the study area as a result of the human interventions. The Danube River sediment discharge has also changed, as described in the following section. In the shoreline and backshore areas, superficial sediments are mainly fine and very fine sands, very well sorted, brought by the Danube River and redistributed by waves and currents, while grain size generally decreases offshore Human interventions The first human impacts on the Danube River date back to the late 18th and the beginning of the 19th century and relate mainly to the central and upper part of the Danube. Important changes were induced in the natural course of the Danube Delta from the second half of the 19th century, by the European Danube Commission. Thus, the engineer Sir Charles Hartley designed the cut-offs of the Sulina distributary natural meanders, to reduce the distance between the Black Sea and the Danube harbors. Water now flows along the resulting canal, with an almost straight West East orientation. The cut-offs along the Sulina Canal increased water and sediment discharge along the Sulina distributary (Giosan et al., 1997; Panin, 1998; Ungureanu and Stãnicã, 2000; Bhattacharya and Giosan, 2003). Other subsequent human interventions along the lower course of the Danube include: (i) embankments of the banks of the Danube River and its tributaries and (ii) the damming of most of the tributaries of the Danube for hydroelectric purposes. This has led, among others, to a decrease in Danube sediment discharge (mainly bed load)

5 558 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) into the Black Sea (Panin, 1976; Giosan et al., 1997; Panin, 1998; Ungureanu and Stãnicã, 2000). The human intervention which has had the greatest effect on the entire Danube Delta littoral was the successive damming of the Danube River for hydroelectric purposes in 1970 and 1983 at Portile de Fier I (940 km from the Black Sea) and Portile de Fier II (864 km). These dams intercepted sandy sediments transported by the Danube and, consequently, the present annual sedimentary discharge of the Danube has been reduced by half compared to the natural situation, before the building of the Portile de Fier I dam (from ton in 1858 to ton in 1988, Panin, 1996; Giosan et al., 1997; Ungureanu and Stãnicã, 2000). The estimated sandy bed load, which is the main source of coastal sediment, represents 10% of the total amount of sediment discharge which is ton/yr (Panin, 1996). Other human interventions have also occurred in the study area, with significant impacts on the evolution of the coastline. The most significant intervention has been the building of two parallel jetties aiming to protect navigation along the Sulina Canal. These jetties were built in successive stages, from the late 19th century until the mid 20th century and are currently 8 km in length (Giosan et al., 1997; Panin, 1998; Ungureanu and Stãnicã, 2000). The mouth of the Sulina Canal, as well as the navigation way between the two jetties, has been constantly dredged to maintain the navigation depth, whilst the dredged sediments (mainly sand) have been discharged into the Black Sea at depths of more than 20 m, with the result that these sediments have been removed from the local littoral circulation. Between 1959 and 1984 the mean annual dredging material from the Sulina mouth bar amounted to about 830,600 m 3, with a maximum value of 1,375,000 m 3 in 1981 and a minimal of 377,000 m 3 in 1972 (Bondar et al., 2000). During the last decade of the 20th century, a general trend of decreasing dredging volumes can be observed (Fig. 3). Fig. 3. Volumes of dredged sediments from the Sulina mouth bar m 3 / year. 3. Methodology 3.1. Longshore sediment transport capacity An important parameter for computing longshore sediment transport is the wave climate. Two types of data were used to determine wave climate using the SWAN model: a bathymetric map and wind records. The bathymetric survey was carried out in 1995 by GeoEcoMar Bucharest and covered an area from the Sulina jetties in the north to the southern part of the Sf. Gheorghe mouth. It covers a range of water depths from the shoreline (West) to m offshore (East). Wind records were collected by the National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology of Romania at Sulina. Observations were made four times per day, and included wind speed (m/s) and direction (nautical convention, 16 directions) from 1991 to SWAN (Simulating WAves Nearshore) is a third-generation wave model that computes random, short crested wind-generated waves in coastal regions and inland waters. Triad wave wave interactions and depth-induced wave breaking are added (Booij et al., 1999). The model takes account of a series of processes including refraction, diffraction, wave wave interactions and dissipation. SWAN is based on equation (1) which describe the wave spectrum using the spectral action balance equation, which, for Cartesian coordinates, is: o ot N þ o ox cxn þ o or crn þ o oh chn ¼ S r The first term on the left-hand side of (1) represents the local rate of change of action density in time, the second and third term represent the propagation of action in geographical space (with propagation velocities c x and c y in x and y space, respectively). The fourth term represents the shifting of the relative frequency due to variations in depths and currents (with propagation velocity c r in r space). The fifth term represents depth-induced and current-induced refraction (with propagation velocity c h in h space) (Booij et al., 1999). On the basis of the size of the storm system in the NW Black Sea (Ginsburg et al., 2002) the fetch was specified as 100 km from Sahalin Island (south of the Sf. Gheorghe mouth and of the study area) towards north, west and south. The next step was to simulate for each wind direction and speed class, wave formation and propagation. As the surface was rather large, the first computation was coarse (2 km each cell). The second computation was a nested grid containing only the littoral area with a finer resolution of computation (200 m each cell). The results produced 66 wave conditions with each having a weight in proportion to occurrence. The results were representative of 1 yr and were in fact, an average of the 10 yr of wind records. Furthermore, the wave conditions were used to estimate longshore sediment transport. ð1þ

6 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) The net alongshore sediment transport was first calculated in three dimensions points at depths of 3 m and 7 m (Fig. 4). Two formulae were used: Kamphuis (Kamphuis, 2000) and CERC (Shore Protection Manual, 1984). Both formulae use parameters at the wave breaker zone. The depths of 3 and 7 m were selected to compute the longshore transport capacity at the lower and upper limit of the range of depth where the majority of the waves are breaking. The CERC formula (2) is based on the wave incidence angle and the significant wave height: Q c ¼ 2: H 5=2 sb sin 2a b ðm 3 =yrþ ð2þ where Q c is the longshore sediment transport (m 3 /yr), H sb is significant breaking wave height and a b is angle of wave incidence at breaking. Because the CERC formula does not take in account important parameters such as the grain size and the wave period we decided in addition to use the Kamphuis formula. The Kamphuis formula (3) includes three new variables: the grain size, the slope of the submerged beach and the wave period. The average grain size used was D 50 = 0.16 mm and the slope m = 0.2, as obtained from GeoEco- Mar field measurements and grain size analysis. Q k ¼ 6: H 2 sb T 1:5 op m0:75 b D 0:25 50 sin 0:6 2a b ðm 3 =yrþ ð3þ where Q k is the longshore sediment transport (m 3 /yr), H sb is significant breaking wave height, T op is wave period corresponding to the peak of the spectrum, m b is the beach slope in the breaking zone, D 50 is the median grain size and a b is angle of wave incidence at breaking Morphological changes Several methods were used to measure and estimate shoreline changes, including field measurements and analysis of the existing maps. Field activities can also be divided into a series of measurements on the backshore and shoreline, which involved classical topographic survey (using a TEO A 020 theodolites and topographic gauges, starting from points with known co-ordinates from the National Geodesy System, also calibrated by the use of GPS) and on-board measurements, with GARMIN echo sounders and connected GPS systems (NR109 type SERCELL). Unfortunately, for political reasons, it was not possible to make any field survey in the Ukrainian part of Musura Bay (northern area) in the past 17 yr. Map analysis was performed after scanning and georefferencing a series of existing Romanian maps (navigation, made by the Romanian Marine Hydrographic Directorate, maps made by the Lower Danube Fluvial Administration in 1943 and 1984, bathymetric maps made by GeoEcoMar in 1995, 1998, 2002 and 2003), when the shoreline contour was extracted and superimposed. Georefferencing was performed with the use of Global Mapper 8.0 ( using 12 control points. Volumes of sediments accumulating in the northern area were Fig. 4. Longshore sediment transport south of the Sulina mouth. Dots represent points were computations were made, whilst the arrows indicate the transport direction. The bathymetric map was made by GeoEcoMar in 2002.

7 560 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) computed on the difference of bathymetry on various editions of maps (1943, 1984 and 1998). 4. Results 4.1. Transport of sediments by longshore currents as a result of modeling Table 1 Longshore sediment transport in the study area, resulted from modeling Point 3 m Depth 7 m Depth Kamphuis (m 3 /yr) CERC (m 3 /yr) Kamphuis (m 3 /yr) CERC (m 3 /yr) 1 100,877 65, , , ,735 2,991 40,769 13, , , , ,122 The negative values represent northwards transport directions, while positive values show normal, southwards transport directions. As it can be noticed in Table 1, the values of the computed longshore transport capacity are different. Despite the CERC formula giving always bigger results than Kamphuis formula, both indicate the same direction of the transport and the same gradient. The difference between 3 m and 7 m depth results of computation was expected because the wave heights and periods increase with the breaker depth, consequently the sediment transport is also bigger. However, the computation made for the 7 m water depth seems to be closer to the observations regarding the quantities of transported sediment. In points 1 and 2 (Fig. 4), the net sediment transport by longshore current is from south to north, against the general direction of the longshore current in front of the Danube Delta. This is because of the long Sulina jetties, which extend to a distance of 8 km offshore and generate an eddylike current. The very small quantity of sediment transported in point 2 (Table 1) is interpreted to reflect its proximity to the so-called divergence point, the point where circulation is divided in two branches: one to the south (the general circulation), the other to north (the anticyclone circulation). Point 2 is located about 8 km south of the Sulina jetties. At point 3, the longshore current returns to its normal north to south orientation. The result of this change is that the direction of sediment transport is again to the south Morphological changes in the northern part of Sulina mouth (Musura Bay) The Sulina jetties represent a trap for sediments from the Danube (Chilia Secondary Delta) and transported by the longshore current from the north and active sedimentation occurs in the Musura Bay. In the northern part of the jetties, the computed yearly mean rate of sedimentation between 1943 and 1984 has been 1,900,000 m 3 (Bondar et al., 2000). Nevertheless, due to the damming of the Danube and consequent decrease of Danube born sediment discharges, decreasing sedimentation rates have been observed in the past 20 yr. As result of the sedimentation of sandy sediments derived from the Stary Stambul secondary mouth and transported by the longshore current from the north, a submerged littoral bar was formed in Ukrainian waters, near the Romanian Ukrainian border. During the late 1970s through to the beginning of the 1980s, this became a lateral spit, with a length of about 3.5 km in 1985 (Fig. 5). At the beginning of the 1990s, the new island length was already sufficiently long to cross the border between the Ukraine and Romania. The island has been in a continuous and very active process of elongation towards the south (Sulina Fig. 5. Evolution of the spit island closing Musura Bay between 1985 and 2002 (adapted from Bondar et al. (2000), new island position in 2002 added).

8 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) jetties), whilst, because of the wave directions and overwash phenomena, a movement towards the West was also recorded (Fig. 5). In the past two decades, the island advanced to the south for about 3 km, with an average yearly movement of about 180 m/yr over the period This movement accelerated between 1985 and 2002, with rates increasing from ca. 120 m/yr for to 200 m/yr for and a maximum of ca. 225 m/yr for Visual observations show that, during the past 3 yr, the southern tip of the island has ceased its rapid advancement, and a new inlet for the water discharges from Stary Stambul Distributary is being formed. The westwards movement of the spit has also been very active over the past two decades (a bit more than 1.5 km). Thus, the mean westwards movement rate has been of about 100 m/yr, slower for the period (ca. 70 m/yr) and faster between 1991 and 1998 (115 m/yr). In its present position, the new spit, already at about 0.5 km north of the Sulina jetties, has transformed the previous Musura Bay into a lagoon, with two inlets (north and south of the former bay) Morphological changes in the southern part of Sulina mouth In this area, recent shoreline evolution has been completely altered from the previous (natural) situation by the Sulina jetties, which have blocked sediments transported by the longshore currents from the Chilia Secondary Delta Fig. 6. Coastline changes south of the Sulina jetties during the past century (based on Panin, 1999; coastline position in 2002 added).

9 562 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) as well as by the changes in littoral currents directions, and as a result of the general decrease in sediment supply from the Danube. The Sulina subsection, (which has its northern limit at the jetties and is about 5 km in length), has been subject during the past century to a strong accretion process. The annual measurements performed by GeoEcoMar during the past 3 decades show for this area a mean annual shoreline advancement rate of about 10 m, greater in the north and decreasing to the south. The shoreline of the south Sulina subsection, with a length of about 2 km, has been generally stable (Fig. 6). The southern subsection (including Imputita and with a southern limit at Canalul cu Sonda) of this area has experienced extensive erosion. Although erosion has naturally occurred here (as well as for the entire area south of the jetties), erosion rates have increased dramatically. Thus, from an annual average erosion rate of about 3 5 m during the past two millennia (Panin, 1976, 1999), for the past 3 decades the mean erosion rates rose to about 6 8 m/yr. Values are higher (8 11 m/yr) for the southern limit of the study area. When comparing coastline dynamics with longshore sediment transport 4.1, the values are consistent, as points 1 and 2 (Fig. 4) are located in Sulina (Point 1) and at the end of Sulina south(point 2) subsections north of the divergence point between the north- and southwards currents. The values obtained from modeling prove that the strong erosion effects of the Sulina jetties are felt in the Imputita Canalul cu Sonda area (between points 2 and 3, as well as southwards). 5. Discussions and conclusions Human interventions along the coasts and in the coastal sediments source areas have changed the natural equilibrium worldwide, both in what regards the sediments quantity and their coastal transport pattern. The Danube mouths are no exception from this rule. Human interventions in the Sulina mouth area, as well as along the Danube River (principally the damming of the river) during the past 150 yr strongly altered the natural evolution. The building of the Sulina jetties divided the area into two sections. The northern one (Musura Bay), where sediments transported from the north are blocked by the jetties, has been subject to rapid sedimentation. A spit lateral island has been formed several decades ago. This spit island has evolved very quickly to the SW (elongating with about 3 km southwards and moving westwards with about 1.5 km during the past 20 y). This spit has closed the bay, which has now been transformed into a lagoon with two inlets. The evolution rates of the Sulina spit are in the same order of magnitude with other studies made on similar geomorphological features (e.g. Balouin et al., 2005). South of the Sulina jetties the longshore current has been strongly altered. Thus, it was divided into an anticyclonal south north oriented current (covering the first 8 km of the coast) and the north south longshore returning near the coast. The littoral strips from the first 7 km, which are affected by the eddy-like current, are now either in strong advance (first 5 km) or stable. The southernmost coastline from the study area is subject to strong erosion (about 8 m/yr). Acknowledgement First of all, authors would like to thank the organizers of the 41st ECSA Conference, especially to Dr. Roberto Zonta from CNR Institute of Marine Researches in Venice, Italy, for their invitation and efforts. Data presented in this paper are outcomes of a series of national Romanian research projects, funded during the past decades by the Romanian Authority for Research and Development. The analysis of the Musura Bay evolution was made in a project within the Romanian Relansin R&D Programme. Authors would also like to thank to Marcel Stive and Andre van der Westhuysen from Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology for their help for computation of the wave climate and longshore sediment transport. The computation was made during the doctoral fellowship in the frame of European Centre of Excellence for Environmental and Geo-ecological Studies on River Delta Sea Systems in Europe: case study River Danube, its Delta, Black Sea System, Project number EVK , European Commission FP5. Also many thanks to the three reviewers for their suggestions, which greatly improved the quality of the paper. Last but not least, the authors express their gratitude to Dr. Chris Bradley from the University of Birmingham, UK, for his suggestions and support to improve the overall quality of the text. References Anfuso, G., Martinez del Pozo, J.A., Towards management of coastal erosion problems and human structure impacts using GIS tools: case study in Ragusa Province, Southern Sicily, Italy. Environmental Geology 48, Balouin, Y., Howa, H., Pedreros, R., Michel, D., Longshore sediment movements from tracers and models, Praia de Faro, South Portugal. Journal of Coastal Research 21 (1), Bhattacharya, J.P., Giosan, L., Wave-influenced deltas: geomorphological implications for facies reconstruction. Sedimentology 50, Bird, E.C., Coastline Changes: A Global Review. Wiley, Chichester, U.K. Bondar, C., Roventa, V., State, I., La Mer Noire dans la zone du littoral roumain. Monographie hydrologique. Editura Tehnica, Bucharest, Romania (p. 516, in French). Bondar, C., Popa Adriana, Stanica, A., Hydrologic, sedimentologic and morphologic processes in the Sulina mouth area. In: Proceedings of the IUG/Commission of the Coastal Zones Conference the Delta s state of the art, Booij, N., Ris, R.C., Holthuijsen, L.H., A third-generation wave model for coastal regions; 1. Model description and validation. Journal of Geophysical Research 104 (C4),

10 A. Stanica et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 55 (2007) Fanos, A.M., The impact of human activities on the erosion and accretion of the Nile Delta coast. Journal of Coastal Research 11 (3), Finkl, C.W. (Ed.), Coastal hazards: Perception, susceptibility and mitigation. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 12, p Ginsburg, A.I., Kostianoy, G.K., Nezlin, N.P., Soloviev, D.M., Stanichny, S.V., Anticyclonic eddies in northwestern Black Sea. Journal of Marine Systems 32, Giosan, L., Bokuniewicz, H., Panin, N., Postolache, I., Longshore sediment transport pattern along Romanian Danube Delta Coast, GEO-ECO-MARINA 2, Bucharest, Romania, pp Jimenez, J.A., Sanchez-Arcilla, A., Maldolado, A., Long to short term coastal changes and sediment transport in the Ebro delta; a multiscale approach. In: Briand, F., Maldolado, A. (Eds.), Transformations and Evolution of the Mediterranean coastline. Bulletin de l Institut oceanographique, No special 18, CIESM Science Series 3, pp Kamphuis, J.W., Introduction to coastal engineering and management. Advanced Series on Ocean Engineering 16. Komar, P.D., Beach Processes and Sedimentation. Prentice Hall, London, p Malciu, V., Implications of accelerated sea-level rise (ASLR) for Romania. In: Proceeding of SURVAS Expert Workshop on European Vulnerability and Adaptation to impacts of Accelerated Sea-Level Rise (ASLR), Hamburg, Germany, pp Panin, N., Some aspects of fluvial and marine processes in the Danube Delta. Anuarul Institutului De Geologie si Geofizica 50, Bucharest, Romania, pp Panin, N., Impact of global changes on geo-environmental and coastal zone state of the Black Sea, GEO ECO MARINA 1, Bucharest, Romania, pp Panin, N., Danube Delta: Geology, Sedimentology, Evolution, Association des Sedimentologistes Francais, Paris, p. 64. Panin, N., Global changes, sea level rise and the Danube Delta: risks and responses, GEO-ECO-MARINA 4, Bucharest, Romania, pp Poulos, S.E., Collins, M.B., A quantitative evaluation of riverine water/sediment fluxes to the Mediterranean basin: natural flows, coastal zone evolution and the role the dam construction. In: Jones, S.J., Frostick, L.E. (Eds.), Sediment Flux to Basins: Causes, Controls and Consequences. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 191, pp Simeoni, U., Bondesan, M., The role and responsibility of man in the evolution of the italian Adriatic coast. In: Briand, F., Maldolado, A. (Eds.), Transformations and Evolution of the Mediterranean coastline. Bulletin de l Institut Oceanographique, no special 18, CIESM Science Series 3, pp Ungureanu, Gh., Stãnicã, A., Impact of human activities on the evolution of the Romanian Black Sea beaches. Lakes & Reservoirs: Research and Management 5, U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Shore Protection Manual. US Govt. Printing Office,Washington, DC, USA, vols. 1 and 2.