Geohazard Risk Prioritization

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Geohazard Risk Prioritization COLUMBIA SHUSWAP REGIONAL DISTRICT Geohazard Risk Prioritization FINAL April 16, 2020 Project No.: 1899001 Prepared by BGC Engineering Inc. for: Columbia Shuswap Regional District BGC ENGINEERING INC. 500-980 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC Canada V6Z 0C8 Tel: 604.684.5900 Fax: 604.684.5909 BGC ENGINEERING INC. AN APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES COMPANY Suite 500 - 980 Howe Street Vancouver, BC Canada V6Z 0C8 Telephone (604) 684-5900 Fax (604) 684-5909 April 16, 2020 Project No.: 1899001 Jan Thingsted, Planner Columbia Shuswap Regional District 555 Harbourfront Drive NE PO Box 978 Salmon Arm, BC V1E 4P1 Dear Mr. Thingsted, Re: Geohazard Risk Prioritization – FINAL BGC is pleased to provide you with the following geohazard risk prioritization for the Columbia- Shuswap Regional District. The web application accompanying this report can be accessed at www.cambiocommunities.ca. Those without a username and password should click “Register for Access”. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. We appreciate the opportunity to collaborate with you on this challenging and interesting study. Yours sincerely, BGC ENGINEERING INC. per: Sarah Kimball, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., P.Geo. Senior Geological Engineer Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 TABLE OF REVISIONS ISSUE DATE REV REMARKS DRAFT March 10, 2020 Original issue FINAL April 16, 2020 Original issue CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS BGC would like to express gratitude to the Columbia Shuswap Regional District for providing background information, guidance and support throughout this project. Key CSRD staff providing leadership and support included: • Jan Thingsted, Planner • David Major, IT/GIS Coordinator • Tom Hansen, Emergency Program Coordinator • Derek Sutherland, Manager of Protective Services • Gerald Christie, Manager Development Services • Corey Paiement, Team Leader, Planning Services. The following BGC personnel were part of the study team: • Kris Holm (Project Director) • Sarah Kimball (Project Manager) • Richard Carter • Matthew Buchanan • Matthieu Sturzenegger • Elisa Scordo • Patrick Grover • Philip LeSueur • Midori Telles-Langdon • Alistair Beck. BGC ENGINEERING INC. Page i Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 LIMITATIONS BGC Engineering Inc. (BGC) prepared this document for the account of Columbia Shuswap Regional District. The material in it reflects the judgment of BGC staff in light of the information available to BGC at the time of document preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this document or any reliance on decisions to be based on it is the responsibility of such third parties. BGC accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this document. As a mutual protection to our client, the public, and ourselves, all documents and drawings are submitted for the confidential information of our client for a specific project. Authorization for any use and/or publication of this document or any data, statements, conclusions or abstracts from or regarding our documents and drawings, through any form of print or electronic media, including without limitation, posting or reproduction of same on any website, is reserved pending BGC’s written approval. A record copy of this document is on file at BGC. That copy takes precedence over any other copy or reproduction of this document. BGC ENGINEERING INC. Page ii Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Columbia Shuswap Regional District (CSRD, the Regional District) retained BGC Engineering Inc. (BGC) to carry out a geohazard risk prioritization study (the regional study) for the Regional District. The primary objective of this study is to characterize and prioritize flood and steep creek (debris-flood and debris-flow) geohazards in the CSRD that might impact developed properties. Collectively these are referred to as “geohazards” in this document. While the study encompasses both electoral areas and municipalities, BGC was retained to complete prioritization from the perspective of CSRD (not individual municipalities). The goal is to support decisions that prevent or reduce injury or loss of life, environmental damage, and economic loss due to geohazard events. Completion of this risk prioritization study is a step towards this goal. The regional study provides the following outcomes across the CSRD: • Identification and prioritization of geohazard areas, from the perspective of CSRD, based on the principles of risk assessment (i.e., consideration of both hazards and consequences) • Geospatial information management for both geohazard areas and elements at risk • Web communication tool to view prioritized geohazard areas and supporting information • Discussion of the relative sensitivity of geohazard areas to climate change • Information gap identification and recommendations for further study. These outcomes support CSRD to: • Continue operating under existing flood-related policies and bylaws, but based on improved geohazard information and information management tools • Review and potentially develop Official Community Plans (OCPs) and related policies, bylaws, and land use and emergency management plans • Undertake flood resiliency planning, which speaks to the ability of an area “to prepare and plan for, [resist], recover from, and more successfully adapt to adverse events” (NRC, 2012) • Develop a framework for geohazard risk management, including detailed hazard mapping, risk assessment, and mitigation planning • Prepare funding applications to undertake additional work related to geohazard risk management within the CSRD. This study provides results in several ways: • This report summarizes methods and results, with additional details in appendices. • Access to Cambio web application displaying prioritized geohazard areas and supporting information. This application represents the easiest way to interact with study results. Appendix B provides a guide to navigate Cambio Communities. • Geodatabase with prioritized geohazard areas. • Excel spreadsheet with attributes of prioritized geohazard areas. BGC ENGINEERING INC. Page iii Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 In total, BGC identified and prioritized 1446 geohazard areas encompassing over 1946 km2 of the CSRD (Table E-1, Figure E-1). Table E-1. Number of prioritized areas in the CSRD, by geohazard type. Priority Level Grand Geohazard Type Very Very High Moderate Low Total High Low Clear-Water Floods 0 58 92 846 0 996 (water courses and water bodies) Steep Creeks (Fans) 11 120 104 166 49 450 Grand Total (Count) 11 178 196 1012 49 1446 Grand Total (%) 1% 12% 14% 70% 3% 100% Table E-3 highlights clear-water flood and steep creek geohazard areas considered high priority for further assessment. The full list of prioritized areas should be reviewed for decision making. BGC emphasizes that the baseline priority ratings are not equivalent to an absolute level of risk, and CSRD will need to consider additional factors in decisions about next steps at any site (i.e., evaluation of costs and benefits to advance the steps of risk management). Table E-2 lists the results worksheets, which are provided in Appendix H. These worksheets can be filtered and sorted to view ranked hazard areas by any field in the worksheets. When reviewing results, local authorities may wish to consider other factors outside the scope of this assessment but that also affect risk management decision making. For example, additional factors include the level of risk reduction already achieved by existing structural mitigation (dikes), the level of flood resiliency in different areas, and comparison of the risk reduction benefit to the cost of new or upgraded flood risk reduction measures. Appendix F provides the example Risk Assessment Information Template (RAIT) form required by the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP). Table E-2. Results worksheets provided in Appendix H. Appendix H Contents (Excel Worksheet Name) Study Area Metrics Summary statistics of select elements at risk (count of presence in geohazard areas). Study Area Hazard Summary Summary statistics of elements at risk, according to their presence in geohazard areas. Study Area Hazard Type Summary Summary statistics of geohazard areas, according to the presence of elements at risk. Priority by Jurisdiction Summary statistics of prioritization results by jurisdiction. Steep Creek Hazard Attributes Attributes for all steep creek geohazard areas. Clear-water Flood Hazard Attributes Attributes for all clear-water flood geohazard areas. BGC ENGINEERING INC. Page iv Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 Figure E-1. Number of prioritized areas in each jurisdiction within the CSRD BGC ENGINEERING INC. Page v Columbia Shuswap Regional District April 16, 2020 Geohazard Risk Prioritization - FINAL Project No.: 1899001 Table E-3. Geohazard areas highlighted as high priority for more detailed assessment. Hazard Code Hazard Type Geohazard Process Name Geohazard Rating Consequence Rating Priority Rating 9291 / 9301 / 9302 / 9299 Clear-water Flood Shuswap Lake Moderate Very High High 9142 / 9305 / 9285 / 9281 / 9183 Clear-water Flood Eagle River Moderate Very High High
Recommended publications
  • Deformation Monitoring and Geohazards in Nigeria: a Critical Review
    International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI) | Volume VI, Issue XI, November 2019 | ISSN 2321–2705 Deformation Monitoring and Geohazards in Nigeria: A Critical Review K. O. Ishola, P.A. Jegede Department of Surveying and Geoinformatics, Federal Polytechnic, Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria Abstract:- Geohazards are geological and environmental due to plate tectonics. As noted by Chen et al (2017), different conditions that involve long-term or short-term geological types of geological hazards occur through different processes. It occur when artificial structures, such as buildings mechanisms. Even when the same types of hazard occur in and natural structures, such as slopes are deformed in various different internal geological structures, the causes and ways. To achieve the aim of this study which is to is to facilitate characteristics of the environmental external terrain conditions comprehensive technical understanding and knowledge of the processes of monitoring geological hazards and to better of the hazard can differ. MARI (2017) therefore asserted that appraise their impacts on engineering structures and the geohazards include: earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides, environment with a view to providing mitigation strategy, in ground motion, tsunamis, floods, droughts, meteorite impacts order to achieve the stated objective, secondary data sourced and health hazards of geologic materials. Spatial scales can from dailies, reports internet and other relevant research works range from local events such as a rock slide or coastal erosion were used. Having studied the state of geohazard and to events that pose threats to humankind such as a great deformation monitoring control Nigeria as well as mitigation volcano or meteorite impact.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Oregon Seismic Hazard Database: Purpose and Methods
    State of Oregon Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Brad Avy, State Geologist DIGITAL DATA SERIES 2021 OREGON SEISMIC HAZARD DATABASE: PURPOSE AND METHODS By Ian P. Madin1, Jon J. Francyzk1, John M. Bauer2, and Carlie J.M. Azzopardi1 2021 1Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite 965, Portland, OR 97232 2Principal, Bauer GIS Solutions, Portland, OR 97229 2021 Oregon Seismic Hazard Database: Purpose and Methods DISCLAIMER This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. This publication cannot substitute for site-specific investigations by qualified practitioners. Site-specific data may give results that differ from the results shown in the publication. WHAT’S IN THIS PUBLICATION? The Oregon Seismic Hazard Database, release 1 (OSHD-1.0), is the first comprehensive collection of seismic hazard data for Oregon. This publication consists of a geodatabase containing coseismic geohazard maps and quantitative ground shaking and ground deformation maps; a report describing the methods used to prepare the geodatabase, and map plates showing 1) the highest level of shaking (peak ground velocity) expected to occur with a 2% chance in the next 50 years, equivalent to the most severe shaking likely to occur once in 2,475 years; 2) median shaking levels expected from a suite of 30 magnitude 9 Cascadia subduction zone earthquake simulations; and 3) the probability of experiencing shaking of Modified Mercalli Intensity VII, which is the nominal threshold for structural damage to buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Geohazards Name
    Geohazards Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Period: ____________________ Date: _______________ Essential Question: Where are the common locations of geohazards and how do they occur? Geohazards can be defined as events related to the geological state and processes that may cause loss of lives as well as material and environmental damages. These geohazards arise from global geological processes inside the Earth, driving deformation and displacement of its crust. Underneath the thin crust the Earth consists of a sticky fluid of melted rock we call the mantle that undergoes convection that turns and twists like boiling water, causing the crust to move. The earth’s crust is divided in different plates called tectonic plates. When these plates interact the resulting crustal movement can cause earthquakes, allow volcanoes to erupt and set off landslides. All of these three; earthquakes, volcanic eruption and landslides can trigger tsunamis if they happen in or close to the ocean. Earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, tsunami, and sinkhole are all classified as geohazards. Earthquakes: Earthquakes occur in plate boundaries or fractures on Earth’s crust that can either be convergent, divergent, or transform. Earthquakes are caused by the sudden release of accumulated strain along these faults, releasing energy in the form seismic waves. A major earthquake is usually followed by aftershocks. Earthquakes may cause liquefaction, landslides, and tsunamis. Most earthquakes happen along the “Pacific Ring of Fire”, convergent boundaries around the Pacific Ocean. Volcanoes: A volcano is an opening in the Earth's crust from which lava, ash, and hot gases flow or are ejected during an eruption. Volcanic hazards vary from one volcano to another and from one eruption to the next.
    [Show full text]
  • Landslide Hazard Evaluation and Temporary Slope Stabilization Plan
    Landslide Hazard Evaluation and Temporary Slope Stabilization Plan Revolution Pipeline Butler, Beaver, Allegheny, and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania for ETC Northeast Pipeline, LLC February 23, 2019 Landslide Hazard Evaluation and Temporary Slope Stabilization Plan Revolution Pipeline Butler, Beaver, Allegheny, and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania for ETC Northeast Pipeline, LLC February 23, 2019 3050 South Delaware Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65804 417.831.9700 Landslide Hazard Evaluation and Temporary Slope Stabilization Plan Revolution Pipeline Butler, Beaver, Allegheny, and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania File No. 18782-026-01 February 23, 2019 Prepared for: ETC Northeast Pipeline, LLC 1300 Main Street, Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77002 Attention: Laura A. Sutton, Senior Counsel Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 3050 South Delaware Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65804 417.831.9700 Trevor N. Hoyles, PE Principal Jonathan L. Robison, PE Principal TNH:JLR:kjb Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright (C) Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
    B.C. Reg. 38/2016 O.C. 112/2016 Deposited February 29, 2016 effective February 29, 2016 Water Sustainability Act WATER DISTRICTS REGULATION Note: Check the Cumulative Regulation Bulletin 2015 and 2016 for any non-consolidated amendments to this regulation that may be in effect. Water districts 1 British Columbia is divided into the water districts named and described in the Schedule. Schedule Water Districts Alberni Water District That part of Vancouver Island together with adjacent islands lying southwest of a line commencing at the northwest corner of Fractional Township 42, Rupert Land District, being a point on the natural boundary of Fisherman Bay; thence in a general southeasterly direction along the southwesterly boundaries of the watersheds of Dakota Creek, Laura Creek, Stranby River, Nahwitti River, Quatse River, Keogh River, Cluxewe River and Nimpkish River to the southeasterly boundary of the watershed of Nimpkish River; thence in a general northeasterly direction along the southeasterly boundary of the watershed of Nimpkish River to the southerly boundary of the watershed of Salmon River; thence in a general easterly direction along the southerly boundary of the watershed of Salmon River to the southwesterly boundary thereof; thence in a general southeasterly direction along the southwesterly boundaries of the watersheds of Salmon River and Campbell River to the southerly boundary of the watershed of Campbell River; thence in a general easterly direction along the southerly boundaries of the watersheds of Campbell River and
    [Show full text]
  • Guidebook for Assessing Risk Exposure to Natural Hazards in Central America - El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua
    The Guidebook for Assessing Risk Exposure to Natural Hazards in Central America - El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua - was produced under the aegis of the Project of Technical Cooperation Mitigation of Georisks in Central America between the Servicio Nacional de Estudios Territoriales (SNET), El Salvador Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH), Guatemala Comisión Permanente de Contingencias (COPECO), Honduras Instituto Nicaragüense de Estudios Territoriales (INETER), Nicaragua and Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe (BGR), Germany Key word list for indexing CARA-GIS, Central America, Disaster Risk Management, El Salvador, Georisk, Guatemala, Guidebook, Hazard Map, Honduras, Inundation, Landslide, Potential Loss Assessment, Nicaragua, Technical Cooperation, Risk Exposure Map, Seismic Hazard, Socio-Economic Vulnerability, Spatial Planning, Susceptibility, Volcanic Hazard Recommended citation of this document BALZER, D.; JÄGER, S. & D. KUHN (2010): Guidebook for Assessing Risk Exposure to Natural Hazards in Central America - El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. – Project of Technical Cooperation ‘Mitigation of Georisks in Central America’: 121 pages; 26 figures; 44 tables; 35 maps; San Salvador, Guatemala-City, Tegucigalpa, Managua, Hannover. This book is also available in Spanish (ISBN 978-3-9813373-8-9). Project of Technical Cooperation - Mitigation of Georisks in Central America Foreword Central America with its project relevant countries of El Salvador (SV), Guatemala (GT), Honduras (HN), and Nicaragua (NI) covers an area of about 371.500 km² with approximately 34 Mio inhabitants. This central part of the Central America isthmus is situated between longitude 92° 14’ W and 83° 9’ W and latitude 17° 50’ N and 10° 40’ S. It is located at the interaction between the sea floor tectonic plates, namely Cocos and Nazca to the west and the Caribbean plate to the east.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Geo-Hazards Caused by Climate Changes
    Landslides and Engineered Slopes – Chen et al. (eds) © 2008 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-41196-7 Analysis of geo-hazards caused by climate changes L.M. Zhang Department of Civil Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, China ABSTRACT: This paper analyzes the effect of climate on the generation of possible geohazards. The rainfall and evaporation changes in Hong Kong in the past four decades are first reviewed based on records from the Hong Kong Observatory. Then the effect of climates on the generation of emerging geohazrzds is analyzed through a series of transient infiltration analyses taking the climate conditions as initial conditions. Three climate conditions; namely, extreme drought condition, extreme wet condition, and steady-state condition, are studied. Extreme yearly weather variations are shown to be the key to the generation of interchanging extreme hazards such as landslides and floods. The analysis results demonstrate that, in a prior extreme drought condition, an intermediate rainfall process can result in large surface runoff and thus surprising floods. In addition, dissipation of suction only occurs in the shallow soils. Hence, storm water infiltration into a dry ground is likely to cause shallow-seated landslides or debris flows under the combined effect of shallow perched ground water and surface erosion from increased runoff. On the other hand, in extremely wet conditions, the ground water table can rise substantially and failure of some slopes that have been stable for a long time can be triggered even by a moderate rainfall event. 1 INTRODUCTION value between 1964 and 2002 being 1405 mm (Figure 1a).
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Tsunami-Related Geohazard Assessment for Hersek Peninsula and Gulf of İzmit Coasts Cem Gazioğlu
    ISSN:2148-9173 IJEGEO Vol: 4(2) May 2017 International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics (IJEGEO) is an international, multidisciplinary, peer reviewed, open access journal. Assessment of Tsunami-related Geohazard Assessment for Hersek Peninsula and Gulf of İzmit Coasts Cem Gazioğlu Editors Prof. Dr. Cem Gazioğlu, Prof. Dr. Dursun Zafer Şeker, Prof. Dr. Ayşegül Tanık, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şinasi Kaya Scientific Committee Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hasan Abdullah (BL), Assist. Prof. Dr. Alias Abdulrahman (MAL), Assist. Prof. Dr. Abdullah Aksu, (TR); Prof. Dr. Hasan Atar (TR), Prof. Dr. Lale Balas (TR), Prof. Dr. Levent Bat (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Füsun Balık Şanlı (TR), Prof. Dr. Nuray Balkıs Çağlar (TR), Prof. Dr. Bülent Bayram (TR), Prof. Dr. Şükrü T. Beşiktepe (TR), Dr. Luminita Buga (RO); Prof. Dr. Z. Selmin Burak (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gürcan Büyüksalih (TR), Dr. Jadunandan Dash (UK), Assist. Prof. Dr. Volkan Demir (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hande Demirel (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nazlı Demirel (TR), Dr. Arta Dilo (NL), Prof. Dr. A. Evren Erginal (TR), Dr. Alessandra Giorgetti (IT); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Murat Gündüz (TR), Prof. Dr. Abdulaziz Güneroğlu (TR); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kensuke Kawamura (JAPAN), Dr. Manik H. Kalubarme (INDIA); Prof. Dr. Fatmagül Kılıç (TR), Prof. Dr. Ufuk Kocabaş (TR), Prof. Dr. Hakan Kutoğlu (TR), Prof. Dr. Nebiye Musaoğlu (TR), Prof. Dr. Erhan Mutlu (TR), Assist. Prof. Dr. Hakan Öniz (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hasan Özdemir (TR), Prof. Dr. Haluk Özener (TR); Assoc. Prof. Dr. Barış Salihoğlu (TR), Prof. Dr. Elif Sertel (TR), Prof. Dr. Murat Sezgin (TR), Prof. Dr. Nüket Sivri (TR), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Uğur Şanlı (TR), Assoc.
    [Show full text]
  • Human-Triggered Earthquakes and Their Impacts on Human Security
    COPY: Achieving Environmental Security: Ecosystem Services and Human Welfare. Human-Triggered Earthquakes and Their Impacts on Human Security Christian D. KLOSE a 1 a Columbia University, New York NY, USA Abstract. A comprehensive understanding of earthquake risks in urbanized regions requires an accurate assessment of both urban vulnerabilities and earthquake hazards. Socioeconomic risks associated with human-triggered earthquakes are often misconstrued and receive little scientific, legal, and public attention. However, more than 200 damaging earthquakes, associated with industrialization and urbanization, were documented since the 20th century. This type of geohazard has impacts on human security on a regional and national level. For example, the 1989 Newcastle earthquake caused 13 deaths and US$3.5 billion damage (in 1989). The monetary loss was equivalent to 3.4 percent of Australia’s national income (GDI) or 80 percent of Australia’s GDI per capita growth of the same year. This article provides an overview of global statistics of human- triggered earthquakes. It describes how geomechanical pollution due to large-scale geoengineering activities can advance the clock of earthquakes or trigger new seismic events. Lastly, defense-oriented strategies and tactics are described, including risk mitigation measures such as urban planning adaptations and seismic hazard mapping. Keywords. Human-triggered, earthquakes, hazard, vulnerability, risk, human security, mitigation, strategies, tactics, social science, Clausewitz Introduction Nature Precedings : hdl:10101/npre.2010.4745.1 Posted 9 Aug 2010 Every earthquake that ruptures somewhere on Earth is triggered by some stress perturbation in the Earth’s crust. Earthquakes occur under natural conditions when tectonic stress states change (e.g., at plate boundaries, rift systems, or volcanoes).
    [Show full text]
  • Geohazard Assessment for Onshore Pipelines in Areas with Moderate Or High Seismicity
    Geohazard assessment for onshore pipelines in areas with moderate or high seismicity P. N. Psarropoulos Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Hellenic Air-Force Academy, Athens, Greece P. D. Karvelis Korros Engineering (www.korros-e.com) A. A. Antoniou School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece SUMMARY: Geohazard assessment is one of the most important issues of the engineering design of onshore pipelines. Nevertheless, the geohazard assessment in areas characterized by moderate or high seismicity is more demanding, since many issues are related to the potential earthquakes. The current paper aims to illustrate the main topics of geotechnical earthquake engineering that have to be coped with. After a extensive review of the impact of local site conditions on seismic wave propagation, and consequently on ground surface motion, the paper deals with the quantitative estimation of permanent ground deformations that are regarded as more severe types of pipeline loading than seismic wave propagation. The main seismic norm provisions that are related to onshore pipelines are briefly described, while characteristic case studies in seismic-prone areas are presented to demonstrate the importance of the aforementioned issues. Keywords: earthquake, geohazard, seismic design, pipeline 1. INTRODUCTION Undoubtedly the geohazard assessment comprises one of the most important issues of the engineering design of onshore pipelines, including the interrelated structures, such as compressor stations, tanks, operation and maintenance buildings, etc. Geologists and engineers use the term “geohazard” to describe the hazards to the pipeline that may derive from any potential gravity-related geological / geotechnical problem or failure, such as slope instabilities, landslides, ground settlements, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges with Use of Risk Matrices for Geohazard Risk Management for Resource Development Projects
    Mining Geomechanical Risk 2019 – J Wesseloo (ed.) © 2019 Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, ISBN 978-0-9876389-1-5 doi:10.36487/ACG_rep/1905_01_Porter Challenges with use of risk matrices for geohazard risk management for resource development projects M Porter BGC Engineering Inc., Canada M Lato BGC Engineering Inc., Canada P Quinn BGC Engineering Inc., Belgium J Whittall BGC Engineering Inc., Canada Abstract Geohazards comprise a subgroup of natural hazards associated with geotechnical, hydrotechnical, tectonic, snow and ice, and geochemical processes that can pose a threat to worker and public safety, asset integrity, and asset management lifecycle cost. Like for most types of threats, the risks from geohazards can be assessed qualitatively or quantitatively and used to inform a geohazard management program. Most mining companies use risk matrices to aid in the assessment, prioritisation, communication and management of corporate risks. These matrices use standardised descriptions of likelihood and consequence to help users assess risks of negative outcomes to health, safety, the environment, assets, and reputation, and are tailored to each organisation’s types of risk exposure and level of risk tolerance. Geohazards and related geotechnical failures can represent low‐probability, high‐consequence events that plot in the highest risk zones of most corporate risk matrices. Variability in spatial and temporal probabilities for people and infrastructure exposed to geohazards can have a large influence on risk exposure, and this can be challenging to assess and communicate effectively with some risk matrices. Risk is scale‐dependent: the business risk due to rockfall from a single slope along a mine access road is vastly different than the total risk due to rockfalls from all slopes along that road, yet guidance is often missing on how the risks from these scenarios should be plotted on a risk matrix.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 4, No. 4 Lillooet, B. C, Fridat, November 20, 1914
    THE PROSPECTOR VOL. 4, NO. 4 LILLOOET, B. C, FRIDAT, NOVEMBER 20, 1914. $2 PER YEAR General News of Lillooet War Gleanings LILLOOET German Paper Suspended District For Speaking Frankly Thou little Town on Fraser Strand London— An official statement Bathing in sunlight's sea, Mrs. Eagan, left this week for issued by the press bureau says: Rough beauty lies on every hand Leaders in Very Nasty Situation a tour of the coast cities. "The third division was sub­ A stranger e'r will see. jected on the 17th to heavy artil­ Thou know the past of younger days Dr. Nevvcornbe of the P.G.E. lery and infantry attack, the When B.C. was achild, Amsterdam—The pan-German- was in town yesterday. brunt falling on two battalions. When roughshod men did have their ist Post has been suspended for Both were shelled from their ways a violent article attacking the Mr. Casper Phair, local gov­ trenches, which were recyvered When temper did run wild. Austrians for incapacity in the ernment agent, is on a visit to by a counter-attack. The enemy When Bigby weild his rod supreme field. It is owing to them, it Ashcroft these days, His foe was reaching far, was driven back 500 yards. The Then Lillooet did have the cream asserted, that the entire plan of Do not forget the Court of Re­ attack on the second division was Of manhood above par. campaign would have to be chang­ vision. For full particulars see asls repulsed." The pioneers of by bygone past ed, that Cracow must be aban­ page four.
    [Show full text]