Nutzung des Copernicus EMS zur Erfassung von
Hochwasserrisiken im Drin-Einzugsgebiet
Gerrit Bodenbender, Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)
Dr.-Ing. Peter Heiland, INFRASTRUKTUR & UMWELT Professor Böhm und Partner, Darmstadt / Potsdam / Tirana
Copernicus Forum, Berlin, 28. November 2018
1
Worldwide partner for consulting, development and project management
2
Our working fields
3
(Inter)national projects – in different fields
4
Beitrag zum Workshop
1. “Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment” (PFRA)für das Drin River Basin
2. EMS-Aktivierung: Was haben wir von der EMS-Aktivierung erwartet?
3. Bedenken lokaler Partner
4. Erfahrungen, Lessons learnt
Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment
for the Drin/Drim-Buna/Bojana River Basin
- Scope, workflow, results -
6
7
8
FRM-cylce / EU-directive
Until
2011
2013
2015
PFRA
Hazard + RiskMaps
Flood RiskManagement Plans
until
2018
2019
2021
Review andupdate PFRA
Review and update Hazard + Risk Maps
Review / update FloodRisk Management Plans
until
2024
2025
2027
Review aupdate P
Review andHazard + Ris
Review / updaRisk Managem
9
Products of the 3 phases in the FRM-cylce / EU-directive
Flood Hazard & Risk maps
FHRM(for identified risk areas)
Preliminary FloodRisk Assessment
PFRA
APSFR =Areas of potentiallysignificant flood risk
Flood RiskManagement Plan
FRMP(for identified risk areas)
RiskAssessment
Risk reductionmeasures
FloodHazardmap
Riskmap
1212
Criteria / methodology (example)- Catchment > 50 km² / > 20 km²- Stream length above > 10 km / > 5 km- Values at risk per community >0,5 Mio.€- Special assets at risk: industry, infrastructure etc.
13
PFRA steps – determination of significance
Step 1: Basic River Network
Processing River Network data(starting point for the risk
assessment)
Step 2: cut off all not relevant
sections of the river network(small catchments, low run‐off
coefficients)
Step 3: Determination of sections
with potential significant riskAccording signifcance criteria
Existing, validated data ofthe river network
Filter criteria(negativ/positiv criteria: catchment size, land use)
Significance criteria, significant tresholds
INFR
ASTRUKTU
R & UMWELT 2016
14
Risk receptors and risk indicators
15
Planned DRIN PFRA project work flow
Risk assessment („bottom‐up“)
• Assessment of past events
• Assessment of known risk areas, objectsand infrastructure at risk
• Working maps and working documents
• Technical working groupVerification of results
• Review & clarify results
• Validation Workshop (extended techn. WG)
• Adjustment of maps andassessment
PFRA report and map
• Draft PFRA report
• Adjustment with partners
• Finalisaion, presentation
• Data transfer to partners
EMS PFRA MAP
RISK information
map
EMS – Copernicus Risk Map
• Risk + Beam Map processingby the Copernicus programme
Preparation & data collection
• Assess relevant existing data / sources
• Assess relevant flood events, riskassessment activities
• Fact‐finding missions Jan/Feb 18
EMS – Copernicus Risk MapActivation
Jan - Sep 18
Jan – Apr 18 May - Jul 18
Aug/Sep 18
Nov 18
16
Actual DRIN PFRA project work flow
Risk assessment („bottom‐up“)
• Assessment of past events
• Assessment of known risk areas, objectsand infrastructure at risk
• Working maps and working documents
• Technical working groupVerification of results
• Review & clarify results
• Validation Workshop (2nd meeting of techn. WG)
• Adjustment of maps andassessment
PFRA report and map
• Draft PFRA report
• Adjustment with partners
• Finalisaion, presentation
• Data transfer to partners
PFRA MAP
RISK information
map
Preparation & data collection
• Assess relevant existing data / sources
• Assess relevant flood events, riskassessment activities
• Fact‐finding missions Jan/Feb 18
EMS – Copernicus Risk MapActivation
??? EMS – Service work ongoing
Jan - Sep 18
Jan – May 18 Aug - ?? 18
Sep / Oct 18
Nov 18
17
18
19
EMS – activation Drin River Basin
• Activation preparation Jan - June 2018 (completed 1. Aug. 2018)
• Service provider contracted: 1 Aug 2018 (by European Joint Research Center)
• Schedule: 40 days …
• Input-data from countries:- DEM- „further hydrological data“ – not specified yet- status in ME?
20
EMS activation products
Product 1: Flood hazard map for the Drin river basin (the AOI)
Product 2:An economic assets map covering the AOI displaying monetary values per area unit (€/m²), derived from national and European socio-economic statistics for different land use types (CLC 2012 and Urban Atlas 2012)
Product 3: Economic risk assessment within the maximum expected flood extension area - as defined by the flood hazard map (Product 1), based on the assets assessment (Product 2).
Product 4: Analysis of historical flood events (based on archived satellite image data and a list of documented flood events)
21
Plan B: 2-way-evaluation of PFRA: 43 APSFR
A. Existing knowledge:• Past Events• Flood documentations• Expert knowledge• Local knowledge
B. GIS-based analyses:• available DEMs + World DEM• Max. flood level estimation• Max flood area outline• Critical land use at risk
Risk area fact sheetsRisk area maps
(potential flood risk areas)
Areas of potential significantflood risk (APSFR)
22
World DEM light
• Based on TanDEM X data
• Edited by Airbus (removal of voids, buildings, vegetation)
• Water: water level as during scan
• Further corrections by geomer, using OSM river network
23
Scenario 2
Scenario 1
Potentially flooded area
• Difference between the two extents points to different hydraulic behavior
24
km²WS‐Diff,
Szenario 1
WS‐Diff,
Szenario 2
20 0.8 1.0
50 1.4 1.8
100 1.9 2.4
200 2.4 3.0
500 3.0 3.8
1000 3.5 4.4
2000 4.0 5.0
5000 4.6 5.8
10000 5.1 6.4
20000 5.6 7.0
50000 6.2 7.8
100000 6.7 8.4
Flood depth regionalisation
• Derived from sample points by statistical correlation
• Does not consider form of river cross section
• Lakes and reservoirs not included in regionalization as here the water level is defined by water management measures
25
Map Production without EMS
• With potentially flooded areas
26
27
List of APSFR
28
Statistic analyses: land use in the potential risk areas
Nur Flächengrößen; keine ökonomischen Analysen (kein BEAM)
29
Benefit of EMS results if NOT in time for the PFRA?
• Validation of results in a later stage
• National data set for economic values for land use classes:
for all kind of risk assessments
for evaluation of cost-benefit relations for flood risk managementmeasures (in FRM-plans)
prioritisaton of measures (in FRM-plans)
• Flood hazard shape to validate FHRM in later stages.
30
3. Bedenken lokaler Partner
• Wir haben viele Kartenprojekte … wie bringen wir die zusammen?
welchen Mehrwert bringen „Karten aus dem Weltall“?
wie verlässlich sind diese Ergebnisse?(Fazit: „Ablehnung“, „… lass man machen, dann schaun mer mal …“)
Welche DATEN bekommen wir zur Weiternutzung? (shapes, DEM, BEAM)?
• Wie sollen wir diese Karten verwenden? Klarheit bei Möglichkeiten UND vor allem Grenzen
Unterstützung bei der Kommunikation und weiteren Nutzung?
• Umgang mit Unterschieden zwischen verschiedenen Produkten? Umgang mit Unsicherheiten (Transparenz)
„naja, das passt halt nie ganz zusammen …“ – das gibt es vor Ort eben nicht!
31
4. Erfahrungen, lessons learnt (subjektiv, in diesem Fall …)
• Nur wording (?): „Zielgruppen“ oder „Anspruchsgruppen“?
• Kommunikation im Vorfeld: Definitionsprozess … braucht bereits Experten/-
innen (Sprache / Verständnis)
Spezifikation: direkte Kommunikation fehlte hier zwischen JRC + SP + Endnutzer
• Kommunikation während der Aktivierung / Bearbeitung Kann es sein, dass der User/Partner die technische
Spezifizierung nicht erhält?
Bearbeiter / Service Provider können nicht eine
• Genauigkeit Einsatzbereiche Kommunikation über Genauigkeiten …
Gegenseitiges Verständnis erhöhen: Was brauchen wir/die? Was können wir/die?
INFRASTRUKTUR & UMWELTProfessor Böhm und Partner
HauptsitzJulius-Reiber-Straße 17D-64293 DarmstadtPhone +49 (0) 61 51/81 30-0Fax +49 (0) 61 51/81 30-20
Niederlassung PotsdamGregor-Mendel-Straße 9D-14469 PotsdamPhone +49 (0) 3 31/5 05 81-0Fax +49 (0) 3 31/5 05 81-20