Final Report - Vulnerability Committee

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Flood Control Dam Water Resources Infrastructure Assessment -Final ReportExecutive SummaryFor this particular study, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and Engineers Canadaagreed to partner and co-fund an engineering vulnerability assessment of the Claireville and G. RossLord flood control dams and reservoirs in the context of both the existing climate and future climatechange, using the PIEVC Protocol (version 9, April 2009). This project will serve as a case study for thePIEVC program, in the water resources infrastructure category, on the vulnerability of flood control dams.The main objective of this assessment and case study is to identify components of the dams andreservoirs which are at increased risk of failure, damage, deterioration, reduced operational effectiveness,and/or reduced life cycle from potential future changes in climate. Additionally, the study containsrecommendations for remedial action to minimize the vulnerability and/or complete further study to furtherquantify the risks.The study includes an assessment of the vulnerabilities of both facilities to current climate (existing and/orhistorical conditions), as well as future climate change at the 2050 time horizon. It should be noted thatthe inclusion of the existing conditions is not typical of the previous assessments. Previous infrastructureassessment studies that used the Protocol assessed only the future risks and vulnerabilities associatedwith climate change. At the request of the TRCA, this study included assessment of the existing risks andvulnerabilities associated with the current climate, assessment of future risks and vulnerabilities, and ananalysis of the change between the two.As specified by TRCA, the study did not include a detailed hydrologic or hydraulic assessment ofchanged dam inflow regimes or the assessment of the change in risk of dam failure as a result ofchanges in the regime of extreme rainfall and flow events such as the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF).Such analyses were considered inappropriate or premature because there is insufficient currentunderstanding of the effects of climate change on extreme events of the magnitude that could significantlyimpact the dam, and because there are provincial government initiatives underway to assess Ontariostandards for the PMF and design floods for dams, which may potentially investigate climate changeimpacts. Further, the TRCA had confirmed through previous study that the dams and their operatingprocedures are resilient to a variety of high inflow conditions below design and PMF magnitudes and haddetermined that climate change projections do not currently suggest a significant change in theseconditions. For the purposes of this study, changes to high inflow regimes will be examined only from ageneral, qualitative basis in the assessment in consideration of indirect or secondary effects.One of the project requirements requested by TRCA was an assessment of the state of knowledge withrespect to climate and climate change impacts on similar dams to the TRCA dams under consideration.The objective of the State of Knowledge Assessment was to review and assess the current understandingof the potential impacts that a changing climate might have on dams and reservoirs similar to those underconsideration in this study, as well as the approach being used in other jurisdictions and by other damowners to assess and address potential climate change impacts.PIEVC Engineering ProtocolThe PIEVC Engineering Protocol for Climate Change Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment (April,2009), hereon referred to as the Protocol, is a step-by-step process to conduct an engineeringvulnerability assessment on infrastructure due to climate change.There are five steps within the Protocol, as follows: Step 1 – Project DefinitionThe boundary conditions for the vulnerability assessment were determined in Step 1. A description of theinfrastructure including its location, age, loads, historical climate, and other relevant factors weredeveloped. Step 2 – Data Gathering and SufficiencyThe specific features of the infrastructure to be considered in the assessment as well as the applicableclimate information were identified and evaluated for sufficiency in Step 2.Step 3 – Risk AssessmentGENIVARES-2
Flood Control Dam Water Resources Infrastructure Assessment -Final ReportExecutive SummaryThe interactions between the infrastructure, the climate, and any other factors that could lead tovulnerability were identified in Step 3. This included identifying specific infrastructure components,specific climate change parameter values, and specific performance goals. Consultation with owner andoperations personnel in addition to the Technical Advisory Committee was conducted during a riskassessment workshop. Step 4 – Engineering AnalysisThe impact on the infrastructure and its capacity resulting from the projected climate change loads wasassessed in Step 4. This included a focused engineering analysis on the relationships determined to havevulnerability in Step 3. Step 5 – RecommendationsThe limitations and recommendations on the observations and findings of the infrastructure vulnerabilityassessment in Steps 1 to 4 were determined in Step 5.Climate Analysis and ProjectionsThe climate analysis and projections portion of this study included the establishment of a set of climateparameters describing climatic and meteorological phenomena relevant to the geographic areas of theClaireville and G. Ross Lord flood control dams. The analysis resulted in the determination of generalprobability scores reflective of the occurrence of each phenomenon, both historically and in the future.The following climate parameters were selected for analysis in this study: High Temperature, LowTemperature, Heat Wave, Cold Wave, Extreme Diurnal Temperature Variability, Freeze Thaw, HeavyRain, Heavy 5-Day Total Rainfall, Winter Rain, Freezing Rain, Ice Storm, Heavy Snow, SnowAccumulation, Blowing Snow/Blizzard, Lightning, Hailstorm, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, High Wind,Tornado, Drought/Dry Period, Heavy Fog.Climate parameters were selected by developing a comprehensive list of climatic and meteorologicalphenomena deemed to be relevant to the geographic region (southwestern Ontario) and the region’sknown seasonal variability. Climate events and change factors identified in the Protocol were referencedas a starting point. Factors dictating the selection of climate parameters, and the indices used to expressthem, were based on data availability of several standard meteorologically-accepted parameters inconsideration of both the existing/historical record as well as future projection model output. Justificationfor parameter selection was also based on the parameter’s potential to present vulnerability to theinfrastructure and its components as a result of either extreme or persistent occurrences. Lastly,consultation conducted between the project team, TRCA and members of the Technical AdvisoryCommittee resulted in the endorsement of the above-noted parameters.Specific definitions for the climate parameters analyzed were established by GENIVAR’s climate team inconjunction with TRCA staff and were based on three factors: a) the usefulness of the climate parameterin determining vulnerability, b) the availability of information, and c) the ability to relate this information toa probability. In addition, two tiers of parameter definitions were established based on the nature of eachspecific climate phenomenon. “Tier one” definitions refer to commonly occurring climate phenomena andwere defined as the probability of exceeding the historical average occurrence, whereas “Tier two”definitions refer to extreme events and were defined as the frequency of occurrence in a given year.The historical climate analysis for the Claireville and G. Ross Lord dams was conducted using data from avariety of sources. Information was retrieved from Environment Canada’s Canadian Climate Normals(Environment Canada, n.d.), Climate Data Online (Environment Canada, 2008), the Ontario Node of theCanadian Atmospheric Hazards Network (Environment Canada, 2009) and the Canadian Daily ClimateData (CDCD V1.02) program (Environment Canada, 2007). For these data sources, Toronto PearsonInternational Airport weather station data were generally used due to the station’s close proximity to thedams and completeness of data over the station’s period of record. However, applicable climate datafrom the above-mentioned sources were not available for certain climate parameters (e.g. ice storm,lightning, hurricane and tornado). In these cases alternative sources of information and/or informationrepresentative of a different geographical area were used.GENIVARES-3
Page 1 and 2: National Engineering Vulnerability
Page 3: Flood Control Dam Water Resources I
Page 7 and 8: Flood Control Dam Water Resources I
Page 55 and 56:
Flood Control Dam Water Resources I
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Appendix AState of Knowledge Assess
Page 121 and 122:
National Engineering Vulnerability
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix CRisk Assessment WorkshopP
Page 137 and 138:
Introduction - TRCANational Enginee
Page 139 and 140:
Summary of PIEVC ProtocolNational E
Page 141 and 142:
Summary of PIEVC ProtocolAt each st
Page 143 and 144:
Summary of PIEVC ProtocolStep 3: Ri
Page 145 and 146:
Summary of PIEVC ProtocolStep 3: Ri
Page 147 and 148:
Summary of PIEVC ProtocolStep 4: En
Page 149 and 150:
Overview of Dams Review Current “
Page 151 and 152:
General location of the damsNG. Ros
Page 153 and 154:
G. Ross Lord damInfrastructure Comp
Page 155 and 156:
G. Ross Lord damInfrastructure Comp
Page 157 and 158:
Claireville damInfrastructure Compo
Page 159 and 160:
Claireville damInfrastructure Compo
Page 161 and 162:
Climate Analysis & Projections - Ov
Page 163 and 164:
Climate Analysis & Projections - De
Page 165 and 166:
Climate Analysis & Projections - De
Page 167 and 168:
Climate Analysis & Projections - Pr
Page 169 and 170:
Appendix EFinalized Risk Assessment
Page 171 and 172:
Appendix GComparison of Existing an
show all

Final Report - Vulnerability Committee

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?