Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
106
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • The project is guided by a Programme Executive Board, with a Program Leader from the Swedish Road Administration and an Executive chair from Austria. The dialogue with the Executive Board is important and we will try to use a specific Engineering Analysis Approach, to help to identify the crucial and central questions that will be in focus for the risk management method. This is the objective of the seminar in end of March - and also the focus of todays meeting.

Transcript

  • 1. RIMAROCC: Risk Management for Roads in a Changing Climate © EGIS - ERIC BENARD Bo Lind SGI Transportforum Linköping 14 januari 2010 RIMAROCC
  • 2.
    • To develop a common ERA-NET Road method for risk analysis and risk management for roads with regard to climate change in Europe.
    • The Rimarocc method is a matter of Organizing (e.g. who is responsible for what) – Analysing (e.g. risks and vulnerability) – and Prioritizing (e.g. options for non-acceptable risks).
    • - Partners :
      • SGI: (Coordinator) Swedish Geotechnical Institute (Sweden)
      • Egis: Engineering, Project Development, and motorway Infrastructure Operations (France)
      • Deltares: Research and Engineering in Water, Soil and Infrastructure (Netherlands)
      • NGI: Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (Norway)
    The Purpose of RIMAROCC
  • 3. Håkan Nordlander [email_address] Reference group of stakeholders
  • 4.
    • Åsa Lindgren, SRA, SE, (contact person)
    • Geoff Richards, Highways Agency, UK
    • Alberto Compte, CEDEX, ES
    Steering Group
  • 5. The RIMAROCC wp:s WP2: Research Think Tank and necessary co - ordinations WP 3:Climate scenarios and consequences on risk approach WP 4: Risk analysis based decision methods for road authorities WP 5: Risk Management options; mitigation and/or emergency plans WP1: Listening process to identify priority needs of clients/users Focusing on the overall approach – identification , scoring , consequences , possible options Focusing on comparison between options - Structural level - Section level - Network level - Regional level WP 6: Dissimination – case studies WP2: Research Think Tank and necessary co - ordinations WP 3:Climate scenarios and consequences on risk approach WP 4: Risk analysis based decision methods for road authorities WP 5: Risk Management options; mitigation and/or emergency plans WP1: Listening process to identify priority needs of clients/users Focusing on the overall approach – identification , scoring , consequences , possible options Focusing on comparison between options - Structural level - Section level - Network level - Regional level WP 6: Dissimination – case studies
  • 6.
      • Function : expression of what the method needs to do (provide), e.g. make it possible assess the risks
      • Design objectives : appreciation criteria or qualities, e.g. compatible with existing methods
    Systematic Value Engineering process Designing the method Existing methods Design objectives Functions Designing the method Existing methods Design objectives Functions
  • 7. FUNCTIONS Assess the risks F11. Define climate related hazards F12. Identify risk factors F13. Define level of acceptable risk . . F17. Manage the risks F21. Define structural solutions for roads F22. Framework for to calculate costs F23. Framework to prioritize mitigation measures . . F39. DESIGN OBJECTIVES D1. Compatible with existing methods D2. Able to cope with climate change uncertainty D3. Consider specificities of European countries D4. Both new road design and maintenance . . D14. Functions and Design objectives
  • 8.
    • An overview of existing methods or tools for risk analysis and risk management for roads:
      • A survey including Germany, Ireland, France, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom
    • Particularly interesting
      • UK adaptation strategy
      • French GeRiCi-project
      • Dutch Deltares approach
    A Bibliographical Review
  • 9.
    • HAASM: The Highways Agency Adaptation Strategy Model (2008)
    A Bibliographical Review – UK Experience
  • 10.
    • Egis’ GERICI project: Risk Management Related to Climate Change for Infrastructures (2006)
    A Bibliographical Review – French Experience
  • 11.
    • Deltares’ GeoQ riskmanagement method: six risk management steps
    A Bibliographical Review – Dutch Experience
      • Determine goal and collect relevant data
      • Identify risks
      • Qualify and quantify risks
      • Take proper measures
      • Evaluate resulting riskprofile
      • Transfer to next phase
  • 12. Definitions
    • In this handbook definitions of important terms are taken from; ISSMGE TC32 (ISSMGE), FLOODsite 2005 (FLOODsite), PIARC C18 (PIARC) and ISO/FDIS 31000, e.g:
  • 13.
    • Some methodological principles:
      • The proposed method is designed to be compatible, and to operate in parallel with existing methods
      • Designed for road risk management at all operational levels (structure, section, network, territory).
      • It consists of seven steps.
    The Rimarocc Method Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication
  • 14. The Risk Analysis/Management Approach Communication and gathering of information 7.1 Regular monitoring and review 7.2 Re-plan in case of new data or delay in implementation 7.3 Capitalization of return of experience on both climatic events and progress of implementation 7. Monitor, re-plan and capitalize 6.1 Develop action plan at each level of responsibility 6.2 implement adaptation action plans 6. Implementation of action plans 5.1 Identify options 5.2 Appraise options 5.3 Negotiate with funding agencies 5.4 Elaborate action plan 5. Risk mitigation 4.1 Evaluate quantitative aspects with appropriate analysis (CBA or others) 4.2 Compare climate risk to other kinds of risks 4.3 Determine which risks are acceptable 4. Risk evaluation 3.1 Risk analysis : qualitative aspects 3.2 Establish risk scenarios 3.3 Determine risk impact 3.4 Evaluate occurrences 3. Risk analysis 2.1 Identify risk factors 2.2 Identify vulnerabilities 2.3 Identify possible consequences 2. Risk identification 1.1 Establish general context 1.2 Establish appropriate context for particular application 1.3 Establish risk criteria and indicators adapted for each particular application (structure, section, network, territory) 1. Context analysis Sub-steps Key steps
  • 15. 1. Context analysis 1.3 Establish risk criteria and indicators adapted for each particular level 1.2 Establish appropriate context for particular level ” Time and Resources” ” Agency Board” ” Risk Manager” 1.1 Establish general context 1. Context analysis Specific. Particip. Coordin. Authorities in charge Sub steps Key steps Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication
  • 16. 1.3 Establish risk criteria and indicators adapted for each particular level number of month per year H2 Possible period of occurrence x times per year H1 Frequency of key climate conditions / past extreme events Indicator unit Criteria to assess the hazard ???? C6 Impact on the environment ???? C5 Loss of confidence / image / prestige / political consequences Euro’s C4 Indirect costs % of normal capacity % more traveling time number of days C3 Unavailability of the road Euro’s C2 Direct costs; costs for reconstruction Number of death/injured/rescued C1 Loss of safety of the road Criteria to assess the consequences age of design standard (year) last big maintenance (year) S4 Used design standards and type of maintenance ???? S3 Amount of knowledge of a hazard with related consequences ???? S2 Amount and type of information to road users hours / days S1 Speed of occurrence / forecast time Criteria to assess the vulnerability
  • 17. The Rimarocc Method Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication 2.1 Identify risk factors 2.2 Identify vulnerabilities 2.3 Identify possible consequences 2. Risk identification
  • 18. 2.1 Identify risk factors (hazards)
    • The road structure approach (what can affect road system, e.g. tree
      • near the road)
    • Climate scenario approach (what are the effect of a changing climate, e.g.
      • on a tree near the road)
      • seasonal and annual average temperature
      • maximum temperature and number of consecutive hot days (heat waves)
      • seasonal and annual average rainfall
      • extreme rainfall events (heavy showers and long rain periods)
      • drought (consecutive dry days)
      • extreme heat
      • snowfall
      • fog days
      • frost (number of icy days)
      • thaw (number of days with temperature zero-crossings)
      • extreme wind speed (worst gales)
      • sea level rise
  • 19.
    • The climate events are weighted according to their importance for the road sector and the amount of change is marked by a relative scale from significant increase, ++, to significant decrease --.
    (2.1) Climate Scenarios and Climate Change Impacts Regional models + local expertise No statistical evidence of trends, but , but likely to be happening today 50 km (difficult tu use smaller grids) Resolution of 25 km – 12 km will soon be available Likely Qualitative
    • Intensity: likely (+)
    • Frequency:
    • North likely
    • South ?
    • Max. intensity in [mm/h] and [mm/24h]
    Extreme rainfall events (heavy showers and long rain periods) 4 Available data / models Time Horizon (when will it happen ?) Geographical resolution (grid size / resolution for which it can be used) Certainty of predictions: likely, very likely, (virtually) certain Availability of predictions: qualitative, quantitative or impossible Amount of change compared to 1961-1990 period (++, +, +/-, -, --) Critical climate parameter Unwanted climate event Weight
  • 20.   [h1] New Column: point zero. Dimensioning events that has uccurred. Yves has presented material before??   [h2] Point Zero in table below Global IPCC models Already observed (figures available) Main signal perceptible for 250 km grid, but can be refined locally, except specific case of cities (higher T°C) and coastal areas (lower T°C) V. Certain in Europe V. Certain Very likely Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative ++ XXI Cent.: Taver. Global: 1,8 to 4,0 °C (best estim. /scen.). South + Continent. > Nor. ++ Even more for estremes ++ 5 to 30 days
    • Average max. [T°C on 24h]
    • Maximum [T°C]
    • Heat wave duration [number of consecutive days], [hw/year]
    Maximum temperature and number of consecutive hot days (heat waves) 3 IPCC scenarios ( post-IPCC scenarios) Already observed (ice cap melting not within a century) Global but not uniform (may vary according to sea basins) > 0.2m is virtually certain in 2100 Quantitative Qualitative if considering ice cap melting ++ XXI Cent.: (0,2 to 0,6m) No ice cap melting (IPCC assumption)
    • Rise [m]
    Sea level rise (+ waves and storm surges) 4 L VL South - --* South VL L North ++ +/- North Global IPCC models Already observed. Main signal perceptible for 250 km grid, but can be refined locally Wint. Sum. Quantitative Wint. Sum.
    • Average amount [mm/ 3 months]
    Annual, seasonal and periods ( ”wet spells”) average rainfall 4 Available data [h1]   [h2]   / models Time Horizon (when will it happen ?) Geographical resolution (grid size / resolution for which it can be used) Certainty of predictions: likely, very likely, (virtually) certain Availability of predictions: qualitative, quantitative or impossible Amount of change compared to 1961-1990 period (++, +, +/-, -, --) Critical climate parameter Unwanted climate event Weight
  • 21. Has begun + North. and Cont. Eur. - South. Certain in North. Eur. Qualitative + or – depending on the regions
    • Thaw days [number of days with 0°C crossings]
    Thaw and frost (number of days with temperature zero-crossings) 2 Has begun Ditto Ditto Whole Eur. Whole Eur. Whole Eur. Likely Certain Certain Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative + ++ --
    • Minimum [T°C]
    • Average [min. T°C on 24h]
    • Frost duration [number of days/year]
    • Frost index [frost penetration into the soil]
    Frost (number of icy days, Tmax< 0°C and frost days, T drops below 0°C ) 2 Has begun Extr. North Eur Whole Eur Likely Certain Qualitative Quantitative Int: + Freq: - Duration: --
    • Max. snowfall in 24h [m/day]
    • Snow duration at the ground [nb of days]
    Snowfall 2 Has begun South. Eur and Med. More uncertain in N Eur. Very Likely Quantitative ++ over South. Eur.
    • Drought duration [number of consecutive days], [d/year]
    Drought (consecutive dry days) 2 Available data / models Time Horizon (when will it happen ?) Geographical resolution (grid size / resolution for which it can be used) Certainty of predictions: likely, very likely, (virtually) certain Availability of predictions: qualitative, quantitative or impossible Amount of change compared to 1961-1990 period (++, +, +/-, -, --) Critical climate parameter Unwanted climate event Weight
  • 22. Climate Scenarios and Climate Change Impacts Available data / models Time Horizon (when will it happen ?) Geographical resolution (grid size / resolution for which it can be used) Certainty of predictions: likely, very likely, (virtually) certain Availability of predictions: qualitative, quantitative or impossible Amount of change compared to 1961-1990 period (++, +, +/-, -, --) Critical climate parameter Unwanted climate event Weight Observed locally (less pollution)   Unknown Not yet possible (local effects – vertical resolution) ?
    • Fog days [number of days with fog]
    Fog days 1 Global IPCC models Not yet recorded (Vince storm not representative) 500-1000 km grid (North shift of the storm tracks) Likely in North Poor (unknown) in South. Qualitative + in North-O Europe ? elsewhere
    • Max. speed [km/h]
    Extreme wind speed (worst gales) : extra tropical or convective systems induced 2
  • 23. Climate parameters impacting roads
    • Susceptibility to wildfires that threaten transportation infrastructure directly
    • Susceptibility to mudslides in areas deforested by wildfires
    • Consolidation of substructure with (unequal) settlements as a consequence
    • More generation of smog
    Drought (consecutive dry days)
    • Concerns regarding pavement integrity, e.g. softening, traffic related rutting, embrittlement (cracking), migration of liquid asphalt.
    • Thermal expansion on bridge expansion joints and paved surfaces
    • Impacts on landscaping
    Maximum temperature and number of consecutive hot days (heat waves)
    • Inundation of roads in coastal areas
    • Erosion of road base and bridge supports
    • Bridge scour
    • Reduced clearance under bridges
    • Extra demands on infrastructure when used as emergency/evacuation roads
    Sea level rise
    • Impacts on soil moisture levels, affecting structural integrity of roads, bridges, and tunnels
    • Adverse impacts of standing water on the road base
    • Risk of floods from runoff, landslides, slope failures, and damage to roads if changes in precipitation pattern (e.g.: changes from snow to rain in winter and spring thaws)
    Seasonal and annual average rainfall
    • Flooding of roadways
    • Road erosion, landslides and mudslides that damage roads
    • Overloading of drainage systems, causing erosion and flooding
    • Traffic hindrance and safety
    Extreme rainfall events (heavy showers and long rain periods) Major risks to road infrastructure Critical climate variables
  • 24. Climate parameters impacting roads
    • Traffic hindrance and safety
    • More generation of smog
    Fog days
    • Threat to stability of bridge decks
    • Damage to signs, lighting fixtures and supports
    Extreme wind speed (worst gales)
    • Thawing of permafrost, causing subsidence of roads and bridge supports (cave-in)
    • Decreased utility of unimproved roads that rely on frozen ground for passage
    Thaw (number of days with temperature zero-crossings)
    • Traffic hindrance and safety
    • Ice removal costs
    Frost (number of icy days)
    • Traffic hindrance and safety
    • Snow removal costs
    • Snow avalanches closing roads or striking vehicles
    Snowfall Major risks to road infrastructure Critical climate variables
  • 25. 3. Risk analysis 3.1 Risk analysis : qualitative aspects 3.2 Establish risk scenarios 3.3 Determine risk impact 3.4 Evaluate occurrences Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication 3 1,5 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Risk C 2,4 1,7 1 1 2 2 2 2 1,4 2 1 Risk B 5 2,5 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 Risk A tot C6 C5 C4 C3 C2 C1 tot H2 H1 Risk consequence probability Risk description Risk C Risk B Risk A tot S4 S3 S2 S1 Vulnerability (Sensitivity) risk Risk description
  • 26. 4.1 Evaluate quantitative aspects with appropriate analysis (CBA or others) 4.2 Compare climate risk to other kinds of risks 4.3 Determine which risks are acceptable Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication
  • 27. (4.1 – 4.3) Level of acceptable risk
    • Some thoughts:
    • A risk, which everyone impacted is prepared to accept
    • Use of F-N curves: express probability versus consequences e.g. probability of causing number of death/cost/cars involved/etc versus the number of death/etc.
    • F-N curves and risk matrices are related
    • interim risk criterion recommendation for natural hillsides in Hong Kong
  • 28.
    • Level strongly depends on:
      • voluntary – involuntary
      • familiarity – unfamiliarity
      • personal involvement
      • etc.
    • Three approaches:
      • after analysis: determination with output cba
      • before analysis: determination of objectives
      • combination determination of “musts” and “whishes” before analysis every alternative should satisfy the “musts” use “whishes” to determine best option
    (4.1 – 4.3) Level of acceptable risk
  • 29.
    • Cost benefit analysis (cba)
    • Determine expected costs for occurence of unwanted events
    • Determine expected costs for different measures
    • Determine the optimal strategy (most efficient)
    • Cost effectiveness analysis (cea)
    • Determine requirements to meet
    • Determine (if necessary) measures that satisfy requirements
    • Choose measure that is most cost effective
    • Multi criteria analysis (mca)
    • Determine (if necessary) measures that satisfy requirements
    • Determine (weighed) criteria to assess different measures one criterium can deal with costs
    • Score measures on criteria
    • Choose optimal strategy
    (4.1 – 4.3) Level of acceptable risk
  • 30. Feedback loop 3. Risk analysis 4. Risk evaluation 5. Risk mitigation 6. Implemen-tation of action plans 2. Risk identification 7. Monitoring, review, capitali-zation 1. Context analysis Communication Threshold capacity: (also prevention capacity) Coping capacity: (also damage reduction capacity) Recovery capacity: (e.g. reconstruction, emergency funds) Adaptive capacity: (e.g. flexibility to change construction ower time). Identify possible adaptation measures for the non acceptable risks.
  • 31.
    • In short:
      • The proposed method is a cyclic process to continuously improve the performance and capitalise on the experiences
      • It starts with an analysis of the general context , where risk criteria are established, and ends up with a reflective step where the experiences and results are documented and made available for the road organisation
      • In practice the steps are not always totally separated . There can be work going on in several steps at the same time – but it is very important that the logic structure is kept
      • There are feedback loops from each step to the previous ones and also a marked loop from the last step as a reflection and as part of the cyclic process
      • The permanent communication with stakeholders , external experts and others is very important (marked as green arrows throughout the whole process)
    The Risk Analysis/Management Approach
  • 32.
    • Refine the risk analysis/management approach
    • Implement it on four different geographical and operational scales (structure, section, network, territory), with feedbacks to refine the methodological approach
    • Dissemination (reporting + workshop)
    RIMAROCC Next Steps
    • Dead line: September 2010 …