16 Mar 2021
16 Mar 2021
Variable-resolution building exposure modelling for earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment. An application case in Lima, Peru
- 1Seismic Hazard and Risk Dynamics, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, 14473, Germany
- 2Institute for Geosciences, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, 14469, Germany
- 3eScience Centre, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, 14473, Potsdam, Germany
- 4Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, 27570, Germany
- 5Head Aerospace Group, Paris, 92250, France
- 6Institute for Earth Observation, EURAC Research, 39100, Bolzano, Italy
- 7Geodynamic Modelling, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, 14473, Potsdam, Germany
- 1Seismic Hazard and Risk Dynamics, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, 14473, Germany
- 2Institute for Geosciences, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, 14469, Germany
- 3eScience Centre, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, 14473, Potsdam, Germany
- 4Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, 27570, Germany
- 5Head Aerospace Group, Paris, 92250, France
- 6Institute for Earth Observation, EURAC Research, 39100, Bolzano, Italy
- 7Geodynamic Modelling, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, 14473, Potsdam, Germany
Abstract. We propose the use of variable resolution boundaries based on Central Voronoi Tessellations (CVT) to spatially aggregate building exposure models for risk assessment to various natural hazards. Such a framework is especially beneficial when the spatial distribution of the considered hazards present intensity measures with contrasting footprints and spatial correlations such as in coastal environments. This proposal avoids the incorrect assumption that a single intensity value from hazards with low spatial correlation (e.g. tsunami) are considered as representative within large sized geocells for physical vulnerability assessment, without, at the same time, increasing the complexity of the overall model. We present decoupled earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk estimates for the residential building stock of Lima (Peru). We observe that earthquake loss models for far-field subduction sources are practically insensitive to the exposure resolution. Conversely, tsunami loss models and associated uncertainties depend on the spatial correlations of the hazard intensities as well as on the resolution of the exposure models. We observe that for the portfolio located in the coastal area exposed to both perils in Lima, the ground-shaking dominates the losses for lower magnitudes whilst the tsunami does for the larger ones. For the latter, two sets of existing empirical flow-depth fragility models are used, finding large differences in the losses. This study arises awareness about the uncertainties in the selection of fragility models and aggregations entities for exposure modelling and loss mapping.
Juan Camilo Gomez-Zapata et al.
Status: open (until 04 May 2021)
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2021-70', Mario A. Salgado-Gálvez, 02 Apr 2021
reply
Please find in the attachment the general and specific comments for this manuscript.
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2021-70', Anonymous Referee #2, 16 Apr 2021
reply
General comments:
This document addresses the earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment based on the variable-resolution building exposure modelling and the application in Lima, Peru.
From the reviewer’s point of view, both the Central Voronoi Tessellations (CVT) itself and the application are topics of great interest since this is a useful method related to earthquake and tsunami risk assessment for communities affected or potentially affected by these threat.
However, Some process details were not explained clearly. This article uses the scientific research results of several scholars to get the research results. How to verify the research results? What is the innovative idea or technology of this article?
The general comment for the whole paper is that the reviewer has not been able to find enough significant points regarding the principal criteria of the reviewing process.
Considering the above mentioned and after reflection, the final consideration for the review is: major revisions.
Below, there are also some specific comments intended to contribute to the improvement of the article.
Specific comments:
Section 1 (page 4): The authors could highlight the advantages of the CVT, (1) (2) (3)…
Section 3.2: A numerical calculations table is needed to show the spatial resolution, time step, spatial range, and what water depth and elevation data is used.
Section 3.2: What governing equations are used in TsunAWI. Some detail about TsunAWI should be introduced.
Section 3.6: What are the advantages of Suppasri's method and De Risi's method? Which method is the last choice? This issue should be discussed.
Juan Camilo Gomez-Zapata et al.
Juan Camilo Gomez-Zapata et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
228 | 65 | 7 | 300 | 0 | 3 |
- HTML: 228
- PDF: 65
- XML: 7
- Total: 300
- BibTeX: 0
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1