1 / 25

Remich, Luxembourg, February 2006 (river Mosel)

Remich, Luxembourg, February 2006 (river Mosel). Cross border flood hazard maps – Experiences from the TIMIS flood project. Thematic Workshop on Flood Mapping, Dublin, September 17-19, 2008.

leppinger
Download Presentation

Remich, Luxembourg, February 2006 (river Mosel)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Remich, Luxembourg, February 2006 (river Mosel)

  2. Cross border flood hazard maps – Experiences from the TIMIS flood project Thematic Workshop on Flood Mapping, Dublin, September 17-19, 2008 Juerg ELSENER METZ, Deputy Project CoordinatorErnst Basler + Partner AG, Zollikon, Switzerland, juerg.elsener@ebp.ch http://www.timisflood.net

  3. Table of content • Project overview • Products available as of 2009 • Generation of hazard maps • Transnational issues: Challenges and strategies • Conclusions and findings

  4. Project overview: Facts and figures flood hazard maps improvement of forecast for the river Mosel warning system for small catchment areas 6.86 million € 50% funded by the INTERREG IIIB NWE programme 7 partners from Luxembourg (lead), France and Germany 2004 to 2008

  5. Project area and project partners Project partners Forecast and Warning Hazard Maps

  6. 1 Project management and communication activities 2 Data collection 4 Hazard maps and GIS 3 Forecast and warning system 5 Transnational information system Actions

  7. Project schedule Management and Communication Data acquisition Data modelling Product generation Dissemination Today Closing Conference: October 20, 2008, Mertert-Wasserbillig, Luxembourg

  8. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Transnational hazard maps

  9. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Transnational forecast and warning system

  10. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Transnational WebGIS application on flooding

  11. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Web service: Print-on-Demand

  12. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Web service: Platform for information exchange, PLATIN MS

  13. Products available 2009: Maps and Web services Web service: RSS feed

  14. Generation of hazard maps • Base Maps • Laserscanning / Digital terrain model (DTM) • Surveying of river cross-sections • Hydraulic modelling • Hazard classification and hazard stages

  15. National maps: 1:5’000, 1:20’000/25’000, 1:50’000, 1:100’000 Transnational maps (Cartosphere): 1:250’000, 1:500’000, 1:1 Mio. colour transformed into gray values projection: «on-the-fly» from original to the desired projection Base Maps

  16. airborne laserscanning in winter (no vegetation) density: 1-2 points per m2 elevation accuracy: ± 0.17 m, football fields as control areas classification terrain-surface: semi-automatic Processing of the digital terrain model (DTM) Laserscanning of elevation points, DTM

  17. field surveying (tachymetry) parameters: elevation, hydrological parameters (roughness, vegetation) every 100 – 200 meters elevation accuracy: 0.01 mpositional accuracy: 0.20 m georeferenced photos of obstacles (bridges, weirs) Surveying of river cross-sections

  18. 1d-modelling (90% of rivers);2d-modelling (10% of rivers) 10 flood events representing 10 different probabilities of occurrence (from MHQ*0.1 to HQextreme) representative run-offs: gauge level statistics, regionalisation, statistical analysis water levels, water depth, flow velocity Hydraulic Modelling

  19. hazard classification by intensity (water depth * flow-velocity) and probability of occurence 4 hazard stages (substantial, moderate, minor, residual) integration of existing hazard maps (France, Interreg IIC projects, Rhineland-Palatinate) Hazard classification and hazard stages

  20. Transnational issues: Challenges and strategies • Data inter-operability • Methods and standards for hazard maps • Organisational aspects

  21. Challenge 1: Data inter-operability • Differences in • acquisition date, updating • scale, representation • acquisition technology, accuracy • cartographic projection • data format, data model • Strategies • managing all the data in geodatabases and in their original projection • collecting meta data for all datasets • using methods which can manage data inhomogeneities

  22. Fliessgeschwindigkeit HQ100 gering mittel hoch Aléa faible Aléa moyen Aléa fort Aléa très fort <50cm 50cm-1m 1m-1.50m 1.50-2m 2m-2.50m 2.50-3m >3m Wassertiefe HQ100 Challenge 2: Methods and standards for hazard maps • Different hazard categories • in Luxembourg and Rhineland-Palatinate (TIMIS flood) • Rhine-Atlas • in France • in Baden-Württemberg • Strategies • Keep and combine the different approaches, set minimal standards • present in maps «common denominator», e.g. water depths HQ100

  23. Hazard maps Risk maps for test areas Forecast and warning (Geo-) data Desktop GIS (information) Internet services Interested public Concerned inhabitants Municipalities Civil protection and intervention services Water authorities Spatial planning authorities (Re-) Insurance companies Researchers and experts Challenge 3: Organisational aspects • Transnational stakeholders have different • requirements and interests • knowledge and competences • cultures and mentalities • Strategies • communication plan, incl. stakeholder analysis • activities such as website, newsletters, multi-lingual glossary, web-based workspace • workshops with relevant stakeholders • present and discuss prototypes with potential users

  24. Conclusions and findings • address all responsible authorities, even if they’re not project partners • consider comparable accuracy and method standards for hazard maps • define minimal data models which can be extended to national requirements • promote hazard maps actively down to the affected citizens • exchange knowledge with other transnational projects dealing with flooding A Set of minimal common standards is required to afford cooperation and to ensure efficiency

  25. http://www.timisflood.net Thank you very much for your attention !

More Related