Using Asset Management to Adapt to Weather Extremes: Lessons Learned from Transport for London
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Welcome to a Webinar Sponsored by FTA and FHWA . Using Asset Management to Adapt to Weather Extremes: Lessons Learned from Transport for London Thursday, December 15, 2011, 10:30am - 12pm US Eastern time (3:30 - 5pm London time) The webinar will begin shortly. • Please type your name and affiliation in the chat box so that we may know who is participating. • Please also enter questions/comments in the chat box at any time. • Audio will be broadcast through your computer speakers/headphones. If you do not have these, you may use the conference line: 877-873-8018, participant code: 305-3084. Speakers: From FTA: Aaron James. From FHWA: Butch Wlaschin. From TfL: Helen Woolston, Matthew Webb, Steven Tyler, Martin Brown, and Les Hawker. FTA Adaptation Initiative • Report examines climate impacts, strategies, risk management tools • Pilots of transit agency adaptation assessments – selection to be announced soon (at least one to focus on asset management systems) • Workshops and webinars – workshops held 8/3/11 in Los Angeles, 10/5/11 in New Orleans. Next in DC, Mar 2012. Webinars 8/8/11, 12/15/11. Recording on web. • Dear Colleague Letter and Policy Statement – describes impacts on FTA goals and commits FTA to action Above available at www.fta.dot.gov/sustainability Click on “FTA Climate Change Adaptation Initiative” 2 3 Introductory Remarks Aaron James, Director, Office of Engineering, FTA Butch Wlaschin, Director, Office of Asset Management, FHWA 16 October 2006 5 Using Asset Management to Adapt to Weather Extremes: Lessons Learned from Transport for London Helen Woolston, Environment and Climate Change Coordinator Matthew Webb, London Underground Climate Change Strategy Manager Steven Tyler, London Underground Senior Planner, Asset Strategy and Planning Martin Brown, London Rail Director Health Safety and Environment Les Hawker, Roads Directorate Highways Asset Manager 6 Agenda • Overview – UK Climate Projections – Risk Assessment • Current Management of Extreme Weather – Asset Management in London Underground – Highways Adaptation and Plans – Rail • Future Planning – Next Steps – Crossrail design 7 Transport for London London Underground London Buses • 3.5m trips per day • 8,500 busesTraffic travelling management 483m km • 1.1 bn passenger journeys a year Walking Traffic• management70.5m km of services operated to River services• More than • 5m580km journeys of major per roadsday • 5.7m walk trips per day • 580km270 of major stations roads • 2.2bn passengers• 6,000 traffic per year signals Annual revenues = £3.8bn(including (£2.9bn bridges from and fares) tunnels) • Bridges and tunnels Annual operating• 6,000expenditure traffic signals= £5.0bn • Congestion Charging Scheme • CongestionCycling Charging Scheme £4.8m capex 2010/11 Taxis and PHVs • 90% growth sinceDial 2000-a -Ride • 22,000 black cabsFunding •–0.5m till 2015 trips per day • 44,000 licensed hire vehicles DLR and London Overground 16 October 2006 8 Customer Demand is increasing and set to grow further... • Employment is the key driver of demand ... over a billion journeys a year 2010/11 was our busiest year despite recession and weekend closures to system 9 TfL Road Network - TLRN 580 km of London’s most important roads Contracts run from 2007 - 2013 10 Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure, Summer 2007 Floods in SW England Impacts on critical infrastructure: • 350,000 people without clean water for up to 17 days • 42,000 people without power in Gloucester for 24 hours • 10,000 people trapped on M5 Motorway overnight • Many others stranded on the rail network • Hospitals, schools and care homes 11 Pitt Report : Improving Resilience to Natural Hazards 12 Managing Extreme Weather and Climate Change - UK Legal and London’s Political Requirements • The United Kingdom’s Climate Change Act of 2008 requires government agencies (including TfL) to report on how they have evaluated and planned for climate change impacts • The Mayor of London’s new Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 13 TfL’s climate change risk analysis process Communicate the climate projections Assess the impacts on services and assets Quantify and prioritize the risks Review the plans eg LU assets, Highways 14 TfL’s analysis of climate change information • The UK government provided climate change projections for the country in 2009 that include a range of scenarios and confidence levels http://ukclimateprojections.defra.gov.uk/ Assets Flooding Tracks Water Resources Drainage Overheating Bridges Air Quality Embankments Subsidence and heave Signals Wind Storms Stations Global climate events Green estate Surfaces – platforms, footways, pavements Communicated by stories, backed Transport interchanges up by data And ...? Eg By the 2040s, European summers Planned build eg stations, upgrades like 2003 could become normal; by the 2060s they would be cool Services, people and customer information 15 Flood maps : predicted worst case 16 October 2006 16 Using TfL’s risk assessment methodology Measure Probability Cost Time Customer Reputation Risk % likelihood occurrence this financial Decrease in revenue/increase in cost in Delay to achievement of key Reduction in customer service Level or type of media coverage/ impact on relationship with year or numbers of events in terms of financial year milestone stakeholders year(s) Very high ≥75% >£250m ≥52 weeks delay Catastrophic asset loss for several Prolonged and targeted hostile media campaign weeks/months, affecting several lines. lasting at least 1- 5 years – Once or more per year Repair timescales in months with total -aimed at decreasing net advocacy amongst loss of service during that time external stakeholders -challenging organisational competence in key Example: Major inundation of several public safety areas lines from river tidal surge flooding Example: Sustained media campaign against Railtrack following various safety incidents From Subject Received High 50% - 75% £175-250M 36-52 weeks delay Major adverse impact such as: • Continuous hostile media coverage of up •disruption/loss of customer service on to 1 year More than once in 2 years more than one line for several weeks • Significant decrease in net advocacy Size Categories•major event resulting in injuries and amongst external stakeholders fatalities • Major organisational changes resulting Example: Kings Cross Fire from an event. e.g. removal of Boyd Neil Physiotherapy accountable individuals from post Medium 20% – 50% Assessment£100-175M 2414:14-36 weeks delay 10Adverse KB impact such as: • Ongoing critical & aggressive media •Loss of train service on one line for campaign coverage lasting the duration Between once in 2 to once in several weeks of an event 5 years •loss of a single-ended train depot/ train • Decrease in net advocacy amongst staff depot/ station external stakeholders. •no injuries or fatalities • Significant challenge by regulators & •significant & ongoing disruption to core stakeholders into relation to management business services of organization. Example: Chancery Lane Derailment; • Targeted and critical parliamentary Moorgate accident questions being asked • Severe & ongoing disruption actions taken by internal stakeholders (employees, unions, equality groups etc) Low 5% - 20% £50-100M 12-24 weeks Disruption to customer service for • Sporadic media coverage triggered by several days, or series of days related events e.g. in print for several Less than once in 5 years Example: days over a period of time •series of network-wide 1 day strikes • Regulators and stakeholder intrusion is loss of train service on one line for heightened by the event several days • Greater scrutiny by regulators & stakeholders in relation to management of organisation 17 • Internal stakeholders (employees, unions, equality group etc) carrying out limited industrial action e.g. series of 1 day strikes Using TfL’s risk assessment methodology – positive aspects Very Low ≤5% Increase Milestone would be Improvements to customer • Positive ‘word of mouth’ by revenue/decrease costs achieved less than service eg: customers Less than once in 20 by less than £250K in 13 weeks early •improved • Positive public awareness years one financial year ambience/information •minor improvement to journey times •small increases in satisfaction Low 5% - 20% Increase Milestone would be Improvements to customer • Minor/short-term positive revenue/decrease costs achieved more than service as above local media coverage Less than once in 5 by between £250K-1M in 13 weeks but less • Improved relations with years one financial year than 26 weeks regulators & stakeholders early Medium 20% – 50% Increase Milestone would be Improvements to customer Positive media coverage and revenue/decrease costs achieved more than service enhanced relations with regulators & Between once in 5 by between £1-5M in 26 weeks but less stakeholders eg headline television years & once in 2 years one financial year than 39 weeks Permanently improved coverage or front page In Evening early customer satisfaction ratings Standard for one day (between 1-5% improvement on current scores) High 50% - 75% Increase Milestone would be Noticeable & permanent Significant positive media coverage revenue/decrease costs achieved more than improvement in customer and enhanced relations with More than once in 2 by between £5-10M in 39 weeks but less service resulting in regulators & stakeholders for more years one financial year than 52 weeks significantly improved than a week early customer satisfaction ratings (a ≥5% improvement on current scores) V High ≥75% Increase