Transcript 72x36 Poster Template

Assessment of the technological installations vulnerability to natural hazards
Gabriela BOCA, Alexandru OZUNU, Serban Nicolae VLAD
The Environmental Science Faculty, Babeş Bolyai University Cluj Napoca, ROMANIA
Abstract
The increasing frequency of some natural events having a
particularly high severity raised a growing concern for industrial asset
integrity and for the consequences of accident scenarios that may be
triggered by intense natural events. The vulnerability assessment is
a key factor in determining and minimizing risk, as highlighted on the
2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction, held in Kobe,
Japan.
This work proposes a methodology for the assessment of
technological installations vulnerability to natural hazards in the area
of the Transylvanian Plateau.
Vulnerability was measured by a range of indicators, using also
some weight values. The basic criteria for choosing vulnerability
indicators was that they should cover both damage potential and
coping capacity, as well as the range of all three vulnerability
dimensions (economic, social and environmental). In this context a
crucial task was to find the right balance between the accuracy of
data and the limited data available.
Goals
One of the most important goals of developing tools for
measuring vulnerability is to help bridge the gaps between theoretical
concepts of vulnerability and day-to-day decision making. The primary
interest in defining and measuring vulnerability lies in the goal of
reduction it (Green 2004:324).
Define study area

In the Târnavelor Plateau, flood contributes to the highest
percentage (70 per cent) of natural disasters as events number, and
has affected the largest population, with the highest economic loss;
Over the past 38 years floods affected an estimated land area of 8090 square kilometers on the Tarnavelor Plateau. During this period,
the area suffered about 26 significant damaging floods, causing some
12 fatalities, the displacement of about 43 people and at least 25
billion euro in economic losses. The impact of floods on the economy
varies from site to site, but is very heavy, especially because of the
many priorities which have to be addressed in a relatively short time.

Geological foundation of Tarnavelor Plateau is covered by a
crystalline sedimentary blanket. Fragmentation of relief, the
composition of rocks least resistant to erosion, mainly agricultural land
use and unprotected slopes extending the growing season increased
facilitate a dynamic geomorphologic processes modelling: pluvial denudation and erosion of the surface (affecting all slopes
deforestation), also exists landslides due to the clay - gritty, however
be reflected in an increased mobility of relief. Landslides increased
substantially during the second half of the 20th century, mostly
because of urbanization and agricultural land abandonment

As a result of geographical and geological conditions no real
danger of a destructive event shares of earthquake, landslides and /
or their complementary disasters;
Vulnerability indicators selection, standardization,
weighting and aggregation
Natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, landslide, do not
only affect people and the environment but also infrastructures and
industrial companies.
Technological installations vulnerability at natural hazards [V]
was measured by a range of indicators covering both damage
potential and coping capacity, as well as the range of all three
vulnerability dimensions (economic, social and environmental).
 Criteria for assessing exposure to damages cover:

susceptibility to natural hazard
 structural vulnerability
 potential consequences of the hazmat release
 production losses
 Criteria
for
assessing
coping
Set up the specific indicators for each vulnerability index
Gather data for all indicators identified for each technological site
Weight and aggregate the indicators to calculate each vulnerability
indexes for each technological site
Standardisation of the values of the indexes calculated
Calculation of the total vulnerability value of each technological
site to natural hazards
Normalize the technological sites total vulnerability values with
respect to the maximum value within the study area
Mapping the technological installation total vulnerability at natural
hazards, within the study area
 Overly the map of the natural hazardous areas with the
technological installation vulnerability at natural hazards
Technological installations vulnerability map
capacities
quantify
measures which are taken prior to the event, which can reduce the
vulnerability, as well as measures which can be implemented to try to
contain the event once it has manifested itself within a specific
geographical area in addition to measures to respond.
Indicators were weighted in 4 vulnerability indexes
Conceptual framework
The BBC conceptual framework for measuring vulnerability
proposed by Bogardi / Birkmann (2004) and Cardona (1999/2001)
implies that the assessment of vulnerability should address on the
one hand the susceptibility and exposure of elements, on the other it
should also identify and assess coping capacities and potential
intervention tools.
The BBC conceptual framework promotes a problem–solving
perspective by analysing probable losses and deficiencies of the
various elements at risk and their coping capacities as well as the
potential intervention measures, all within the three key thematic
spheres (economic, social and environmental). In this way it shows
the importance of being proactive in order to reduce vulnerability
before an event strikes the society, economy and environment.
The BBC conceptual framework implies that the development of
vulnerability indicators and the assessment of vulnerability should
address on the one hand the susceptibility and exposure of different
elements at risk in the economic, social and environmental sphere, on
the other it should also identify and assess coping capacities and
potential intervention tools.
Tools and methods
The estimation was performed by analyzing a series of parameters that
pertain to physical, systemic, and functional aspects through the
Analytical Hierarchy Process methodology (Saaty, 2006a, 2006b).
Tools:
Overview of statistical data
Synthesis and analyze of the public information;
Indicators selection, data collection, indicators standardization,
indicators weighting and aggregation
Observations and investigations on technological sites, the Security
Reports, the External Urgency Plans
TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008
www.PosterPresentations.com
Ranking natural hazardous areas using relative priority
matrix
 Calculate the magnitude of each type of natural hazards, at each
NUTS5 of the study area
Magnitude = Frequency + Area exposed
 Standardisation of the values of the magnitudes calculated
 At each NUTS5 of the study area, we aggregated the values of
the magnitudes of different natural hazards into an overall
composite index
 Ranking and mapping that composite index for each NUTS5
Map of the natural hazardous areas
and location of the technological sites
1) SV index assess the structural vulnerability, was performed by
analyzing a series of parameters that pertain to physical, systemic,
and functional aspects through the Analytical Hierarchy Process
methodology (Saaty, 2006a, 2006b). ;
2) SD index assess the secondary direct damages, the potential
consequences of the hazmat release (Cruz and Okada, 2008) - socalled natural hazard-triggered technological disasters (Natechs) with
devastating social as well as environmental consequences (Cruz and
Okada, 2008).
3) PL index, illustrates the production losses (Hiete and Merz, 2008)
– estimate the vulnerability of industrial sectors to different types of
disasters, in a quantitative manner, as a result of the input factors (i)
direct disaster losses, (ii) supply chain disruptions, and (iii) critical
infrastructure disruptions
4) RR index estimate the coping capacity as resilience and
resistance - indicators for assessing coping capacities, resilience and
resistance, quantify measures which are taken prior to the event,
which can reduce the vulnerability, as well as measures which can be
implemented to try to contain the event once it has manifested itself
within a specific geographical area in addition to measures to respond
V = HM * [0,7( SV + SD + PL ) - 0,3 RR]
where HM is a score that indicates the sensitivity of vulnerability to
the type and magnitude of the hazard. The vulnerability of systems is
disaster depended. A disaster specific weighting of the sub-indicators
allows determining differences in vulnerabilities against different
types of disasters.
In our case, HM is equal with the composite index
calculated for the NUTS5 were the technological site is located
Conclusion
The analysis shows the technological installations
vulnerability to natural hazards in the area of the Transylvanian
Plateau is not negligible. Some technological installations are
highly vulnerable mainly due to their structural characteristics,
some are vulnerable mainly due to their NATECH potential, and/or
due to a lack of resilience.
It is emergent to assess the risks due to NATECH events
in a framework starting with the characterization of frequency and
severity of natural disasters and continuing with complex analysis
of industrial processes, to risk assessment and residual
functionality analysis.
Contact information
The Environmental Science Faculty,
Babeş Bolyai University Cluj Napoca, ROMANIA
[email protected]; [email protected] ;
[email protected]