1 / 24

Applicability of various Erosion Risk Assessment Methods for Engineering Purposes

1 University “Sv. Kiril i Metodij” –Skopje - Faculty of Forestry Dept. of Land and Water, Skopje, Macedonia 2 University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry, Belgrade, Serbia, Dept. of Ecological Engineering in Soil and Water Protection ”. Applicability of various

schrupp
Download Presentation

Applicability of various Erosion Risk Assessment Methods for Engineering Purposes

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. 1University “Sv. Kiril i Metodij” –Skopje - Faculty of Forestry Dept. of Land and Water, Skopje, Macedonia 2University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry, Belgrade, Serbia,Dept. of Ecological Engineering in Soil and Water Protection” Applicability of various Erosion Risk Assessment Methods for Engineering Purposes D-r Ivan Blinkov1, Full Professor D-r Stanimir Kostadinov2, Full Professor BALWOIS - Ohrid, Macedonia 25-29.5.2010

  2. "The threat of nuclear weapons and man's ability to destroy the environment are really alarming. And yet there are other almost imperceptible changes - I am thinking of the exhaustion of our natural resources, and especially of soil erosion - and these are perhaps more dangerous still, because once we begin to feel their repercussions it will be too late." • (p144 of The Dalai Lama's Little Book of Inner Peace: 2002, Element Books, London)

  3. Hazard:A situation which poses a level of threat to life, health, property or the environment. • Risk: The probability of an unfavourable effect in a system by exposure to a threat. • Risk assessment: A process to calculate or estimate the risk to a system, following exposure to a particular threat. • Vulnerability: Liability to injury or damage.

  4. WATER EROSION MAP - EUROPE • Soil erosion is considered as one of the major threats to European soils, particularly in the Mediterranean areas (Communication on Soil Protection – “Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection”, CEC, 2002).

  5. Introduction • Various methods for erosion risk assessment are used by various countries in Europe. • Generally, three types of approaches exist to identify areas at risk (Eckelmann et al., 2006): qualitative approach, quantitative approach, and model approach, • All these methods vary in their characteristics and applicability. • All already developed methods and approaches are improved in the recent period through use of geospatial databases developed using GIS technology.

  6. IDEA? • Grimm. M., R.J.A.Jones, Montanarella L., 2002 Soil erosion risk assessment in Europe, EC, ESB, JRC, 2002 (revised) • Graedts, L., Rectala-Boix. L., Ano-Vidal. C., Ritsema J. 2006, Risk Assessment methods of Soil Erosin by water, RAMSOIL FP6 project, EC, report, 2006 • Conference conversation – diversity of people • Bilateral scientific project – MKD (Blinkov..) – BG (Velizarova...)

  7. Theoretical background • Erosion damages are interest of various sectors. Erosion damages could be classified into two groups: on-site effects and off-site effects. • On-site damages (soil loss, nutrients loss, landscape degradation, disturbance of the hydrological regime..) • Off-site damages (sedimentation, siltation of the reservoirs, flash flooding, mechanical pollution of water

  8. Aims and objectives • The aim of this study is to evaluate applicability of various Erosion Risk Assessment Methods for various engineering purposes especially for water erosion control measures.. The objective of this study are as follow: • To select and analyze various methods • To collect and analyze various comments about the methods • To classify these methods • To evaluate their applicability for engineering purposes

  9. Erosion Risk Assessment Methods - the RIVM (1992); • CORINE approach (EEA-1985); • “the Hot Spots” approach (EEA - 2000, based on previous maps by Favis-Mortlock and Boardman, 1999; de Ploey, 1989, and other data); • USLE method (Universal Soil Loss Equation - Wischmeier & Smith, 1978). The INRA, • PESERA approach (Gobin et al. -1999), • the European Soil Erosion Model – EUROSEM - (Morgan et al., 1998), • Limburg Soil Erosion Model – LISEM - (De Roo et al., 1996a and 1996b; Takken et al., 1999), • WEPP (Water Erosion Prediction Project), • KINEROS • Erosion Potential Model (EPM) established by Gavrilovic (1972), • CREAMS (Knisel,1980; Foster et al., 1981), etc. • After preliminary assessment, further analyses were aimed only to 6 methods: USLE, PESERA, KINEROS, EUROSEM, WEPP and EPM. Some of the methods are developed in a very small scale and are interest only for general view of the state and general planning (CORINE, GLASOD, INRA..) and couldn’t be used for solving engineering problems

  10. Methodology The Erosion risk assessment methods are evaluated depend on: • fulfilling various erosion related tasks; • working scale; • determination of various erosion types and • finally per sector. Qualitative research method was used. • For this purpose were analyzed a lot of text as follow: descriptions of the methods from their official web-sites, description of the methods in literature, comments for various methods in other scientific papers. • Evaluation was separated for purpose sector: agro-engineering, forestry-engineering water management and watershed management. • The first output of these methods is map that is useful for preparation erosion control strategies.

  11. Main interest of various sectors • Forestry engineering (FE) - previously interest for on-site erosion damages on bare forest land, on burned forest land, on forest land after logging and forest road network. • Agricultural engineering - soil losses including losses of organic matter and nutrient.

  12. Water managementis previously the planned development, distribution and use of water resources. • Water management pay more attention on on-site damages as a result of fluvial erosion (especially on the stream banks), abrasive erosion and off -site damages (annual intensity of sediment load into the stream net, intensity of siltation of the reservoirs, quantity of sediments that deposed in the downstream parts.

  13. Watershed management is the planned use of drainage basins in accordance with predetermined objectives. Watershed management consist of: analysis, protection, development, operation or maintenance of the land, vegetation, & water resources of a drainage basin for the conservation of all its resources for the benefit of its residents. • This is the most comprehensive sector that interest for all erosion types.

  14. Results and discussion Evaluation of various ERAM depend on: • fulfilling various tasks(assessment of average pattern of erosion risk; identification of high risk areas; identification of hot spots; location of depositional and major concentrated flow areas; detailed erosion and deposition pattern and effects of conservation measure; detail impact of erosion on roads) • the scale(on field – parcel; small watershed; large watershed) • solving various erosion types(sheet erosion; rill erosion; gully erosion; fluvial erosion; landslides & landfalls; deposition) • the sector(agricultural engineering; forest engineering; water management; watershed management)

  15. Table 1 Evaluation of various ERAM depend on fulfilling various tasks For fulfilling various tasks, the most comprehensive methods are; EPM, EUROSEM and WEPP

  16. Table 2 Evaluation of various ERAM depend on the scale No one of the methods is applicable for all scales. More of the methods are useful for on-field analysis or small watersheds. Otherwise EPM method is applicable only for watersheds.

  17. Table 3 Evaluation of various ERAM depend on solving various erosion types

  18. Table 4. Evaluation of various ERAM depend on the sector

  19. Comments on other methods • More of the other mentioned above methods are in fact approaches used for development of erosion map of Europe (CORINE, GLASOD, INRA, HOT-SPOT). • These maps are prepared using GIS technology and mathematical method with square GRID. The size of grid was 1km x 1km. Value in the pixel could be estimated using one of various models, to be defined through direct measuring on plots or to be define using exert-judgment. Next step is interpolation of the results using GIS software tools and categorization of the results. The final result is a map in a large scale. This map is useful for general view of erosion as a problem. • For engineering purposes, this type of approach is not useful.

  20. Conclusion • For solving erosion related problems in agriculture, where on-field soil loss and soil erodibility are the dominant interest, the following methods are recommended: USLE, WEPP, EUROSEM . But limiting factor is abscence of data and calibration of some parameters. • Regarding the forestry engineering purposes, depend on the activity various methods are more or less relevant. For silviculture engineering (planting, thinning etc), dominant interest are on-site damages on small area, so the most appropriate methods are the same as for agricultural engineering. For harvesting especially forest road construction the most appropriate are methods that result in on-site damages but various erosion types. For this purpose, EUROSEM fulfill all needs.

  21. Water management interest mainly for off-site damages as deposition by flash flooding and on-site damages (fluvial erosion). For on-site damages KINEROS and EUROSEM are the most appropriate, but for off-site damages solving the EPM. • Watershed management is the most comprehensive area that perhaps unify all above mentioned, This sector interest for all erosion types, all tasks related to erosion problems are relevant. Scale of work is from small to large watershed. Because of that for this type of work the EPM is the most relevant because give answer on all tasks. • Fact that should be appointed is that empirically-based methods need calibration and validation for any region. Beside it some methods (USLE, MUSLE, RUSLE) need a lot of data related to the rainfall intensity i.e. to be defined parameter R and soil characteristics to be defined parameter K. It is limited factor for use of these methods somewhere.

  22. For the Balkan territory, the EPM method is the most appropriate for hilly-mountain and mountain region, but use of USLE for agricultural area (hilly and valley) is limited because of absence of data (Macedonia, Serbia, Bosnia, Montenegro..). This method EPM) although analytical, very easy could be used in GIS environment.

  23. EPM – method in GIS environment Actual and potential erosion risk - what-if scenario Case study Vodno mountatin

  24. Blagodaram na vnimanieto Thank you for your attention

More Related