A multi-site approach to risk assessment for the insurance industry - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A multi-site approach to risk assessment for the insurance industry Linda Speight Supervisors: Jim Hall, Chris Kilsby, Paul Kershaw linda.speight@ncl.ac.uk HydroPredict, Prague 2010

Outline • Introduction • Methodology – Modelling extreme events – Flood defences • Calculating Risk • Conclusions

Catastrophe Models Premium = AAL + Risk Load + Expense Load AIR model output

Aims and Objectives To develop a method for multi-site concurrent damages due to weather related extremes Spatial dependencies at multiple scales FLOODsite 2007 Flood (BBC News)

Methodology Process Statistical Statistical based Multiple modelling of Deterministic modelling of modelling of sites nested flood calculation of extreme water level & in national defence damage events floodplain framework failure inundation

Simulate extreme For each event event across network Simulate crest Estimate peak For each site height and defence flows and reliability hydrographs Hydraulic modelling Hydraulic modelling of of water level and water level assuming flow through breach no breaching Sample sequence of Sample defence failure. breach widths Repeat until Hydraulic modelling for P(breach breach sequence Floodplain sequence) Sample inundation → 0 breach modelling Estimate probability of failure state breach sequences Damage per site Calculate conditional on event damage

Modelling extreme events • Aim Y |X, x > u x – Spatial dependency between events Y = set of gauges – Large scale model for UK X = conditional gauge – Good representation of x = daily mean flow extremes u x = threshold • Method Y = a ( x ) + b ( x )Z – Conditional dependence model of Heffernan and a = strength of dependences Tawn (2004) applied by b = changing dependence Keef et al (2009) Z = residuals

Example application 28046 28018 54022 55008 54001 54019 55026 54002 55023 · = observed below threshold o = observed o = simulated

Estimating peak flows at site 40 35 30 Flow(m 3 /s) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Time (h) Daily mean flow Hydrograph Flood Peak Peak flow conversion Ungauged site transfer methods methods • Shape of hydrograph • Analogue sites • Catchment characteristics • Weighted by distance and catchment characteristics

Flood defence system Characterised by • Design standard • Construction High ground type Floodplain Novel aspects • No restriction on d1 d2 d3 length • Consideration of Embankment Defence wall upstream Embankment SOP = 5 years SOP = 100 years SOP = 25 years breaches

Sampling crest heights 7 6,9 6,8 Crest height (m) 6,7 6,6 6,5 6,4 6,3 6,2 6,1 6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Chainage (m) design crest level defence A - old embankment Defence B - sea wall Autocorrelation function for crest height = f (defence type, age, condition, data quality)

Defence reliability • Initiation – Fragility curves – Condition – Type – Sequencing Fragility curve from Hall et al (2003) Photos from FLOODsite

Sampling breaches 7 1 6,9 0,9 6,8 0,8 6,7 0,7 Elevation (m) P(failure) 6,6 0,6 6,5 0,5 6,4 0,4 6,3 0,3 6,2 0,2 6,1 0,1 6 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Chainage (m) P(varying failure) crest height water level breaches Autocorrelation function for strength = f (defence type, age, condition)

Breach widths • Growth Rate • Max width – Materials Observed Assumed Case study Source – Floodplain type values values Elbe 20m to 200m Log normal De Kok and – Amount of water Median 20m width mean of Grossmann 64m 2010 Lower Rhine Width 100 – Apel et al – Sequencing 400m 2004 Lower Rhine Width 50 - Kamrath et al 150m 2006 UK RASP Function of load Hall et all method and defence 2003 length Netherlands Largest 520m Muir-Wood wide and 36m and Bateman deep 2005 River Po Normal Width: Govi and 100m - 300m Turitto 2000 Depth: FLOODsite 0.5m - 4m

Damage • Raster based floodplain inundation model depths • Depth-damage curves damage 3 2,75 2,5 2,25 2 1,75 Depth Metres 1,5 1,25 1 0,75 0,5 0,25 0 -0,25 -0,5 -0,75 -1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Damage £/m 2 BBC News Penning-Roswell et al (2006)

Risk Risk = Probability x Consequence P(I max,i,j |F i,j |OT i,j ,B i,j , BW i,j |L j,i ,C i,j ,R i,j |Q i,j | X i ) F i,j = Flow over or through P(BW i,j ) = f (type, P(OT i,j ) = f (C i,j , L i,j ) defence material, L i,j ) P(B i,j ) = f (C i,j , L i,j , R i,j , OT i,j )

Risk Risk = Probability x Consequence P(I max,i,j |F i,j |OT i,j ,B i,j , BW i,j |L j,i ,C i,j ,R i,j |Q i,j | X i ) C i, R i = f (type, age, condition) Q i,j = Inflow to hydraulic model X i = Large scale spatial event P(L i ) = f (upstream breaches, Q i,j )

Conclusions • Integrated system model • Detail nested in national scale • Consider risk load – If modelling of flood defences is poor how much impact does this have? – Which areas could flood at the same time / where are we over exposed? Informed • Future... decision! – Sensitivity testing – Resilience measurers

Thank you Linda Speight Civil Engineering & Geosciences Newcastle University, UK Linda.speight@ncl.ac.uk

Modelling extreme events (2) 1. Extreme data at conditional gauge Fit Generalised Pareto • Shape (β) • Scale (ε) • threshold 2. Extreme dependence between gauges Fit dependence model Solid lines: parametric Dashed lines: nonparametric (residuals)

A multi-site approach to risk assessment for the insurance industry - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A multi-site approach to risk assessment for the insurance industry Linda Speight Supervisors: Jim Hall, Chris Kilsby, Paul Kershaw linda.speight@ncl.ac.uk HydroPredict, Prague 2010 Outline Introduction Methodology Modelling

AN APPROACH TO AN APPROACH TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF SLOPE MOVEMENTS THE CLASSIFICATION OF SLOPE

AN APPROACH TO AN APPROACH TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF SLOPE THE CLASSIFICATION OF SLOPE MOVEMENTS

Introduction to Risk Assessment Introduction to Risk Assessment Samjwal Ratna Bajracharya

ESTABLISHMENT Unit 6 Risk Assessment And Risk Response Lecture Objectives Todays objectives

DEVELOPING A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO RISK ASSESSMENT IN THE LED OUTDOOR ACTIVITY CONTEXT Clare

REPPIR Approach to Consequence Assessment and Associated Risk Framework Authors: C Boyd

Risk Assessment and its risk-based approach Prof. Dr. Reiner Wittkowski Federal Institute for

The Risk Assessment/Risk Management Process What is risk assessment? The process of evaluating

Overview of Hanford Site Risk Assessment to Support Cleanup Decision Making Mark Triplett

Software Risk Assessment: Fuzzy Logic Approach to Risk Estimation (FLARE) Presented by:

Risk Assessment Reduce the workers and Biosafety is an inexact science, and

1 Risk assessment Risk assessment Lack of assessment of semi-automatic methods has

Application of Biota Assessment Approach to a Site With a Past Uranium Mining and Milling

Human Health-Based Policy: A Risk Assessment Approach Kristina D. Mena, MSPH, PhD UTHealth School

A Holistic Approach to Site Assessment of Former Landfill and Sustainable Remediation Jane

The application of risk assessment in food safety control in Risk Risk Assessment Management

a me PART 8: JULY 2000 SITE VISIT LANDSLIDE RISK ASSESSMENT PEACE REGION (PEACE RIVER

Reliability Engineering in Information Security: A Novel Approach to Risk Assessment Chris

Ross-Adams Mine Site Engineering Evaluation/ Cost Analysis (EE/ CA) Open House April 28, 2015

Assessment and Restoration WATAR Watershed Site Investigation and Assessment Section

Earthquake Damage Workshop/Training on Earthquake Vulnerability and Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment:

Disabled women survivors of domestic abuse, their experiences, and their absence at Multi Agency

Perspectives on Environmental Assessment: A risk based approach to managing environmental

Introduct Intr oduction t on to Element ements a at Ri Risk Intr Introduct oduction t on