iahr 2015 - nature-based flood defenses: panacea or illusion, weesenbeeck, deltares, 20150629

33
Nature-based flood defenses: panacea or illusion? Dr. Bregje K. van Wesenbeeck [email protected]

Upload: delftsoftwaredays

Post on 17-Aug-2015

12 views

Category:

Science


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Nature-based flood defenses:

panacea or illusion?

Dr. Bregje K. van Wesenbeeck

[email protected]

Asian Tsunami (2004)

Hurricane Katrina (2005)

Japanese tsunami (2011)

Hurricane Sandy (2012)

Typhoon Haiyan (2013)

Disaster aftermath

Role of ecosystems in reduction of impact

and damage

Asian Tsunami (2004)

Hurricane Katrina (2005)

Japanese tsunami (2011)

Hurricane Sandy (2012)

Typhoon Haiyan (2013)

Transition in flood risk management

Use of natural processes and ecosystem services for

flood defence and flood risk mitigation

Type of ecosystems

Why?

• Call for sustainability and quality of life

• Hard infrastructure is expensive

• And does not apply everywhere

Risk reduction cascade

Spalding et al. 2014

Cumulative interventions

Initial

risk

Residual

risk

Wetlands

Levees/

Flood walls

Building codes/

zoning

Early warning/

Evacuation plans

Structural and non-structural combinations

Combinations of structural

More space needed

What about risk?

Space and risk

Van Wesenbeeck et al. In prep

Ready for implementation?

Design

Construction

Maintenance &

management

State of quantitative engineering knowledge:

• Design (effectiveness)

• Hydraulic

• Geotechnic

• Construct (uncertainty)

• Manage (adaptive)

State of knowledge: salt marshes

Model data

Flume data

Field data

Functioning under extreme conditions

Vegetation versus elevation

Elevation

Elevation clay platform with vegetation

Models without vegetation

Smale et al. 2013

Testing on realistic scales

With extreme conditions

With and without vegetation

Moller et al. 2014

Modelling extreme conditions woody vegetation

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

x (m)

Wave H

eig

ht

(m)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

Gro

und level (m

) N

AP

VF000

HS1

HS2

HS3

Van Wesenbeeck et

al. submitted

Modelling extreme conditions grassy vegetation

Dijkstra et al. in prep

Modelling extreme conditions

• Veg factor: density * diameter * height * Cd

(Mendez and Losada 2004)

• Cd as calibration factor

• However, Cd changes with water levels and wave

characteristics

Models: bulk drag

Remmers et al. In prep

Future research and developments

• Improve predictability (validated models and generic rules)

• Sensitivity analyses of model parameters

• More controlled tests on realistic scales

• Full parameterization versus quick assessment models

Take home

• Ecosystems contribute to reduction of flood risk

• Ecosystems are likely to be most effective in combination with

other measures

• Vegetation matters

• Design rules can be derived but need to be improved

• Long term trends, such as sea level rise, will ask for constant

management of soft protection strategies