A framework for assessing the remaining life of storm surge barriers

Vader, Hidde; Bakker, A.; Jonkman, Sebastiaan N.; Boomen, M. van den; Baaren, E. van; Diermanse, Ferdinand

doi:10.1080/15732479.2023.2177874

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spatial extent of different water surface elevations (WSEs) and temporal scenarios are computationally modeled using probabilistic hydrologic and hydraulic (H&H) software (i.e., HydroMT, Hydra-NL) [62][63][64]. These models produce flood depths in gridded-cell form through simulated dike failures by "stress testing" under conditions such as overflow, geotechnical instability (i.e., structure, erosion, slope), and other mechanisms.…”

Section: Current Flood Risk Standards Within the Nl Pr And The Usmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the Flood Vulnerability of Residential Structures: Cases from The Netherlands, Puerto Rico, and the United States

Diaz,

Lee,

Kothuis

et al. 2024

Geosciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floods are consistently ranked as the most financially devastating natural disasters worldwide. Recent flood events in the Netherlands, Caribbean, and US have drawn attention to flood risks resulting from pluvial and fluvial sources. Despite shared experiences with flooding, these regions employ distinct approaches and flood management strategies due to differences in governance and scale—offering a three-site case study comparison. A key, yet often lacking, factor for flood risk and damage assessments at the parcel level is building elevation compared to flood elevation. First-floor elevations (FFEs) are a critical element in the vulnerability of a building flooding. US-based flood insurance policies require FFEs; however, data availability limitations exist. Drone-based FFEs were measured in all locations to assess the flood vulnerabilities of structures. Flood vulnerability profiles revealed 64% of buildings were vulnerable to a form of inundation, with 40% belonging to “moderate” or “major” inundation, and inundation elevation means (IEMs) of −0.55 m, 0.19 m, and 0.71 m within the US, Netherlands, and Puerto Rico sites, respectively. Spatial statistics revealed FFEs were more responsible for flood vulnerabilities in the US site while topography was more responsible in the Netherlands and Puerto Rico sites. Additional findings in the Puerto Rico site reveal FFEs and next highest floor elevations (NHFEs) vulnerable to future sea level rise (SLR) flood elevations. The findings within the Netherlands provide support for developing novel multi-layered flood risk reduction strategies that include building elevation. We discuss future work recommendations and how the different sites could benefit significantly from strengthening FFE requirements.

show abstract

Section: Current Flood Risk Standards Within the Nl Pr And The Usmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the Flood Vulnerability of Residential Structures: Cases from The Netherlands, Puerto Rico, and the United States

Diaz,

Lee,

Kothuis

et al. 2024

Geosciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The risk of a failed closure is often assumed to be independent from the risk of dike failure (see for instance HKV, 2006; Vader et al, 2022). The latter risk mainly depends on the extreme water level maximum, that is, the highest water level during a storm, while closure reliability does not.…”

Section: Optimization Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, precipitation, river discharge or internal wind set‐up can raise water levels of the inner basin even with a successful barrier closure. Yet, at four out of the five regions protected by Dutch storm surge barriers, the risk of a failure to close is the largest (Maeslant barrier [HKV, 2006]; Hollandsche IJssel barrier [Vader et al, 2022]) or the second largest (Eastern Scheldt barrier [Rijkswaterstaat, 2008], Ramspol [Rijkswaterstaat, 2002]). Therefore, we expect that the risk of a failure to close, that is, the lack of closure reliability, is important for storm surge barriers outside the Netherlands as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic optimization of coastal flood defence systems including storm surge barrier closure reliability

Mooyaart

Bakker

Bogaard³

et al. 2023

J Flood Risk Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Storm surge barriers are large movable hydraulic structures which close during a storm surge to prevent coastal floods. In the regions they protect, a failure to close the barrier is often the most likely cause for a catastrophic flood. Nevertheless, flood risk assessments usually only focus on raising flood defences behind the barrier. Despite its importance, there is no general method to assess the costs and benefits of improving the closure reliability. This paper presents a model that optimises investments considering both closure reliability improvements and raising flood defences behind the barrier, using the region protected by the Maeslant barrier as a case. We substantiate that constructing the Maeslant barrier was an optimal economic decision. Moreover, we demonstrate large investments such as a redundant barrier already being economically sound with a few decimetres of sea level rise. Based on our experience with this case study, we expect the model is useful in finding strategies to adapt to rising sea levels and other developments that cause coastal flood risk to rise worldwide.

show abstract