Transcript Forest Fires

Pan-European assessment of
weather driven natural risks
Carlo Lavalle, José I. Barredo, Ad De Roo, Luc Feyen, Stefan Niemeyer,
Andrea Camia, Roland Hiederer, Paulo Barbosa
European Commission DG Joint Research Centre
Institute for Environment and Sustainability
Land Management & Natural Hazards Unit
e-mail: [email protected]
web : http://natural-hazards.jrc.it , http://moland.jrc.it , http://effis.jrc.it
Outline
• The Institutional Context
• Hazards, Vulnerability and Risk analysis for
the EU
– Floods, droughts, forest-fires and heatwaves
• Approaches for forecasting and mitigation of
natural hazards : integrated scenario modelling
• Brief outlook of next steps
Natural Hazards: the institutional context
• Within the European Commission, the JRC provides
scientific and technical advice/support for policies
related to:
– “Flood risk management, flood prevention, protection and
mitigation” [COM(2004) 472]
– “Winning the Battle Against Global Climate Change”
[COM(2005) 35 final]
– Monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the
Community (Forest Focus), regulation No 2152/2003
– 6th Environmental Action Plan
– The definition process of the Strategic Guidelines for the
Programming period 2007-2013
Risk assessment for Natural Hazards
The Approach
Risk = hazard x exposure x vulnerability
Exposure
The present assets:
Population
Infrastructure
Settlements
Ecological values
….
Vulnerability
Hazard
The resistance to damaging forces:
GDP/ capita
Planning regulations
Protection measures
Warning systems
Insurance mechanisms
…
The threatening event:
Floods
Droughts
Forest Fires
Heatwaves
Combination
Methods
Risk
Note : exposure and vulnerability are hazard-specific.
The Quantification of Hazards
• Floods
– Maps (intensity and frequency) produced by hydrological modelling
(LISFLOOD) and validated with actual data (when/where available)
– LISFLOOD ingests data from meteo forecast and/or climate scenarios
and is the basis of the European Flood Alert System (efas.jrc.it)
• Droughts
– Maps produced by hydrological modelling (LISFLOOD) and based on
a quasi-climatogical data analysis
• Forest Fires
– Data from Member States (the EU Forest Fire Data Base, built upon
the Common Core Database) + Model (European Forest Fire
Information System (effis.jrc.it)) + Observed fires (remote sensing)
• Heatwaves
– Meteorological and climatological data
The making of flood risk map
hazard
exposure
vulnerability
+
+
=>
=
Risk (grid)
Risk (NUTS-3)
Ref.: Barredo, et al. (2005). European flood risk mapping. S.P.I.05.151.EN, European Commission
Potential Drought Hazard Maps
Soil Water Stress Maps
LISFLOOD model run
on 44 years (1957/2002)
of ECMWF ERA40
meteorological data
A ‘quasi-climatological’
analysis
Daily maps of the forecasted soil moisture development in Europe (seven
days trend) available on line
Forest Fire Hazard Maps
YEARS of Data
Portugal:
10
Spain:
10
France:
10
Italy:
10
Greece:
10
Germany:
6
Cyprus:
5
Latvia:
1
Czech R.
1
Slovakia:
1
Poland:
10
Lithuania:
1
Hungary:
3
Sweden:
9
Romania:
1
Fire density
Burned Wildland Fraction
Burned Forest:
From EU Fire database
Wildland:
From CORINE 2000
Ref.: Meeting of the Group of Experts on Forest Fires – Brussels 24 Mar 2006
Risk Indicator:
Vulnerable Population Exposed to Heatwave
Heatwave Extent
+
Population Exposed
+
Population Number
Vulnerable
Population Group
Vulnerable Population Exposure
No. of people over 65 years exposed to
HUMIDEX exceeding 35 during June, July and
August 2003
Integrated scenario modelling
Climate Change
GCM/RCM
Impact
Analysis
Cost / Benefit
Appraisal
Land use
MOLAND
Land Use
Socio-eco Stats
Current Climate
Meteo Data
Soil, Vegetation
Natural Hazards
LISFLOOD
EFFIS
Pilot area in the Upper Danube – Preliminary results
Increase of flood impacts for Climate Change Scenarios
Change in annual avg max 5-day precipitation
Change in flood water depth
Tentative estimate upper Danube:
Current Climate: 45 Billion Euro damage (theoretical maximum for a 100-yr flood)
A2 Scenario
40 % increase in total damage, 11 % increase in exposed population
B2 Scenario
19 % increase in total damage , 6 % increase in exposed population
Limitations: a) Uncertainties due to emission scenarios and downscaling procedures
b) Cost estimation made per land use classes with approx. depth-damage curves
Next steps: include land use simulations and adaptation measures
Outlooks
•
Refinement of EU 25+ maps of risk:
– More detailed quantification of impacts (pre- and post-event)
– Improved resolution
– Definition and analysis of macro-regions
•
Proper inclusion of adaptation activities in the scenario modeling;
– Products of EU Flood GIS Project (EP funded)
•
Further development of downscaling methods for Climate Change Models (from
GCM to ‘dedicated’ RCM);
– quantitative assessment of changes in hydrological extremes
– quantitative assessment of changes in forest species distribution and forest fire risk
– Improve understanding and prediction of extreme weather events
•
Further development of climate change/territorial development
– Feed back interactions in Moland
– Completion of scenarios on pilot areas (for flood/fire/drought based on a multi-scale
approach)
•
Subjects for collaboration with Regions and Local Authorities (e.g. via
INTERREG)
• Data exchange, Transfer of methods and tools, Exchange of good practices
• Exchange of visiting staff
• Pilot experiments