Next Article in Journal
Effects of Streambed Conductance on Stream Depletion
Previous Article in Journal
Acknowledgement to Reviewers of Water in 2014
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2015, 7(1), 255-270; doi:10.3390/w7010255

Comparing Methods of Calculating Expected Annual Damage in Urban Pluvial Flood Risk Assessments

1
Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
2
Krüger A/S, DK-2860 Søborg, Denmark
3
School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Waihuan Xi Road, Guangzhou 510006, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Athanasios Loukas
Received: 3 October 2014 / Accepted: 29 December 2014 / Published: 12 January 2015
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [3844 KB, uploaded 9 June 2015]   |  

Abstract

Estimating the expected annual damage (EAD) due to flooding in an urban area is of great interest for urban water managers and other stakeholders. It is a strong indicator for a given area showing how vulnerable it is to flood risk and how much can be gained by implementing e.g., climate change adaptation measures. This study identifies and compares three different methods for estimating the EAD based on unit costs of flooding of urban assets. One of these methods was used in previous studies and calculates the EAD based on a few extreme events by assuming a log-linear relationship between cost of an event and the corresponding return period. This method is compared to methods that are either more complicated or require more calculations. The choice of method by which the EAD is calculated appears to be of minor importance. At all three case study areas it seems more important that there is a shift in the damage costs as a function of the return period. The shift occurs approximately at the 10 year return period and can perhaps be related to the design criteria for sewer systems. Further, it was tested if the EAD estimation could be simplified by assuming a single unit cost per flooded area. The results indicate that within each catchment this may be a feasible approach. However the unit costs varies substantially between different case study areas. Hence it is not feasible to develop unit costs that can be used to calculate EAD, most likely because the urban landscape is too heterogeneous. View Full-Text
Keywords: climate change adaptation; damage cost estimation; expected annual damage; integrated risk analysis; urban flood risk climate change adaptation; damage cost estimation; expected annual damage; integrated risk analysis; urban flood risk
Figures

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Olsen, A.S.; Zhou, Q.; Linde, J.J.; Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K. Comparing Methods of Calculating Expected Annual Damage in Urban Pluvial Flood Risk Assessments. Water 2015, 7, 255-270.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top