EuroGeoSurvey Workshop. Living with Geological Risks

Transcription

1 EuroGeoSurvey Workshop October 22, 2014 Bern, Switzerland Living with Geological Risks Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft Confédération suisse Confederazione Svizzera Confederaziun svizra Federal Office of Topography swisstopo Swiss Geological Survey

2 Table of Content I Editorial II EGS Workshop Living with Geological Risks Programme Abstracts 1.1 Towards a post-2105 framework for disaster risk reduction, Margareta Wahlström PLANALP Platform Natural Hazards of the Alpine Convention, Maria Patek Earth observation and geohazards, Gerardo Herrera Tsunamis in fjords of Norway, Jan Host Seismic risk assessment and management: tools and activities, Olivier Bouc Landslides in Albania, Viktor Doda, Hasan Kuliçi, Arben Pambuku & Olgert Jaupaj Volcanic ash and civil aviation: a new perspective, Costanza Bonadonna, Peter Webley, Matthew Hort, Arnau Folch, Susan Loughlin & Herbert Puempel Natural risk management in Switzerland, Joseph Hess Public insurance companies for natural risks, Martin Kamber Induced earthquakes: case studies of Basel and St. Gallen, Stefan Wiemer Radioactive waste and sectoral plan for deep geological repositories, Michael Aebersold SCEER-SoE Swiss Competence Center for Energy Research Supply of Energy, Domenico Giardini The case study Brienz 2005, Jörg Häberle Geological surveys capacity to address economic and social challenges, Mart van Bracht & Luca Demicheli Field Trips Introduction Field Trip Brienz, The Flood Event of 2005 at Glyssibach in Brienz, Oliver Hitz & Nils Hählen Field Trip St-Ursanne Mont Terri Rock Laboratory, Research for a deep geological repository Enclosure Partners PLANAT National Platform for Natural Hazards, Andreas Goetz CHGEOL Swiss Association of Geologists, Donat Fulda Editor Swisstopo Print run 300 copies Available from swisstopo, Seftigenstrasse 264, CH-3084 Wabern Copyright swisstopo, CH-3084 Wabern,

3 I Editorial II EGS Workshop Living with Geological Risks Programme The mountainous landscape of Switzerland has been created mainly by the collision of the African plate continental plate with the European plate. The pressure that began around 60 million years ago at the edges of the two plates has continued over the subsequent millions of years to form the strongly folded, thick thrust sheets comprising the Alpine region. At the border areas of these plates, stresses accumulate in the interior of the Earth. These stresses are released in irregulary recurring sudden movements we experience as earthquakes. Due the ongoing plate movements between Africa and Europe, coupled with the fault system of the Rhine Graben in Basel area, major earthquakes can still occur in Switzerland. The regions of Valais, Basel, central Switzerland, St. Gallen Rhine Valley and the Engadine are particulary vulnerable to earthquakes. For these regions, a detailed knowledge of the local geological situation is a crucial contribution to protecting our living space against this natural hazard. As a result of large difference in elevation over short distances, mountainous areas are especially prone to threats of landslides, like rock falls, rock debris and earth slides, as well as ice breakoff from glacier snouts. In combination with relatively high precipitation in the region of the watershed separing the Northern from the Southern Alps, these natural conditions increase the flood risk in low-lying areas. Using geological maps and other geological data, experts can recognize theses risks and take time action to mitigate the hazards. For instance schists related to the flysch, a very common rock type in Switzerland, is prone to landslides due to its water-bearing shale layers. Experts use the Geological Atlas of Switzerland at the scale 1:25 000, combined with slope angle data from the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of swisstopo, to identify key factors for the hazard mapping of potential landslides areas. The long-term safe storage of radioactive waste is the focus of research at the Mont Terri rock laboratory in St-Ursanne. In Switzerland, the most likely candidates for such a repository are the Opalinus Clay formation (175 million years). The Swiss Geological Survey leads an international project with 15 partners institutions to study the hydrogeological, geochemical and geotechnical features of this clay. For complex applications, such as generation of geothermal energy and deep geological repositories, the Swiss Geological Survey develops also three-dimensional geological models. The basic data, 3D models and products of the Swiss Geological Survey help to assess these natural and man-made geological risks and to ensure sustainable regional development. Geological information help to identify, localize and, through land-use planning as well as organizational and structural building measures, minimize potential threats to human life and property. Olivier Lateltin, Head of the Swiss Geological Survey, swisstopo Conference opening Natural hazards: the UN Hyogo Action Plan Natural hazards and the Alpine Convention Earth observation and geohazards Tsunamis in fjord of Norway Seismic risk assessment and management Landslides in Albania Volcanic ash and civil aviation Natural risk management in Switzerland Public insurance companies for risks Induced earthquakes in Switzerland Sectorial plan for geological repositories SCCER-SoE: program for energy research The case study of Brienz 2005 Conclusive remarks of the workshop Andreas Goetz, PLANAT Margareta Wahlström, UNISDR Maria Patek, PLANALP Gerardo Herrera, EGS EOEG Jan Host, NGU Olivier Bouc, BRGM Viktor Doda, AGS Costanza Bonadonna, Uni Geneva Joseph Hess, FOEN Martin Kamber, IRV Stefan Wiemer, ETH Zurich Michael Aebersold, FOE Domenico Giardini, ETH Zurich Jörg Häberle, Bern Mart van Bracht, EGS 4 5

4 1 Abstracts 1.1 Towards a post-2105 framework for disaster risk reduction Margareta Wahlström Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction Almost a decade ago, the international community came together in the aftermath of the devastating Indian Ocean earthquake/ tsunami and committed to building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters, through the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) endorsed by the UN General Assembly. The HFA was the result of over 35 years of work and progress, and learning achieved under the aegis and guidance of the Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator (UNDRO) 1971, the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) 1989, the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World 1994 and finally the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) The HFA has been decisive in strengthening and guiding international and regional cooperation efforts, in generating the political momentum necessary to ensure that disaster risk reduction is used as a foundation for sound national and international development agendas, as well as giving a common language and a framework of critical action to which governments have clearly responded. It has created an international platform for exchanging information/knowledge and building on national and regional experience. Today, these are effective instruments for partnership and learning. National reports have informed about significant progress on policies, institution and legal frameworks, risk identification and early warning systems, public awareness and education to build a culture of safety and resilience, as well as the development of disaster preparedness plans in many countries. Ten years on significant progress has been made. Statistics show a reduction of loss of lives due to weather-related disasters. On the other hand, disaster risk and economic, social, environmental, and cultural losses are increasing. Economic losses now regularly exceed $100 billion annually and are projected to double by That amounts to a lot of critical infrastructure such as public utilities, roads, schools, hospitals, manufacturing facilities that has been left exposed on vulnerable coastlines, unstable hill slopes, river basins, seismic zones and flood plains. We live in a rapidly urbanizing world where disasters are becoming ever more complex as natural hazards interact increasingly with the built environment and technology to create new permutations of risk which do not respect national borders. The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moom recently stated the world s vulnerability to disaster risks is growing faster than our ability to increase resilience. We must accelerate our efforts. Let us broaden the coalition for more action. Disaster risk reduction is everyone s business. So, more joint and decisive actions are needed. Science and technology plays a vital role in developing new tools for disaster risk management, particular to identify, assess and monitor disaster risk, enhance people-centred early warning systems and disaster preparedness plans, to which the Geological Services can contribute substantively. Looking to the future, in December 2013, the United Nations General Assembly requested to hold the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan, from 14 to 18 March 2015 at the highest political level with the following objectives: to complement the assessment and review the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action to consider the experience gained through the regional and national strategies/institutions and plans for disaster risk reduction to adopt a concise, focused, forward-looking and action-oriented post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction to identify modalities of cooperation based on commitments to implement a post-2015 framework to determine modalities for periodic review of the implementation. Based on previous frameworks, consultations, the midterm review of the HFA, General Assembly resolutions, UNIS- DR documentation and statements received at the first session of the Preparatory Committee, held in Geneva in July 2014, the co-chairs of the Preparatory Committee released a Pre-zero draft of the post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. Further consultations with all partners are taking place. Three strategic and mutually-reinforcing goals are being considered for the post-2015 framework: the prevention of disaster risk creation; the reduction of existing disaster risk; and the strengthening of persons, communities and countries disaster resilience. The year 2015 also offers a generational opportunity. The post-2015 framework on disaster risk reduction, together with the sustainable development goals and a renewed agreement on climate change can provide the world, for the first time, with a comprehensive and risk-sensitive development agenda, one that lays the foundations for a more resilient planet in the 21st century. We look forward to the engagement of the European Geological Surveys and other scientific communities, including technical, social and economic sciences and practitioners working on disaster risk reduction to take into consideration the post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction and to express commitment in support of its implementation. 6 7

5 1.2 PLANALP Platform Natural Hazards of the Alpine Convention Maria Patek President PLANALP Head of unit for Torrent and Avalanche Control of the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Marxergasse 2, 1010 Wien, Austria In the year 1999 the Alpine Space was affected by devastating avalanches and floods, consequently the Alpine Convention established a working group to develop common strategies and activities among the Alpine Arch. This working group developed recommendations which were the basis for the platform natural hazards (PLANALP), which was appointed by the ministers at the 8th Alpine Conference in 2004 in France. The members of PLANALP are high-level experts which are delegated by the contracting parties. This ensures effective networking and coordination of various activities in the Alpine Space and therein exerts influence on the national strategies. The mandate of the PLANALP covers the formulation of strategic concepts on integrated risk management as well as the coordinated implementation of subsequent measures and activities. Further the PLANALP collaborates closely with relevant professional national and international institutions in the field of natural hazard risk management. The PLANALP consists of no more than two experts per contracting party subsequently of members. Therein two observers are put forward by the Alpine Convention. There is at least one PLANALP meeting a year which is hosted by the president country and normally there is a second meeting in one of the other Alpine States. The platform on Natural Hazards of the Alpine Convention is assisted by the permanent secretariat of the Alpine Convention. Based on this, the following main objectives of the PLAN- ALP can be identified: Discuss concepts for an integrated reduction of natural hazards Identify best practices Implement the subsequent measures Intensify the cross-border exchange of experiences The current mandates of the PLANALP specify these main objectives in concrete actvities that are carried out within the respective period which normally lasts for two years. An example given would be the mandate of the period with the following activtities and products defined: Assessment of concepts for an integrated natural hazard risk managament Transfer of knowledge and good practice of examples form the Alpine Arch Conceptualisation and implementation of recommendations regarding the following areas: Risk Governance (taking into account gender aspects) and climate change Life-cycle management of protection measures for natural hazards Flood risk management plans To give an idea about the work of PLANALP the following paragraphs illustrate selected examples of activities and products of the last years. In 2012 the PLANALP tackled the topical issue of climate change adaptation. Under the presidency of Switzerland a brochure with the titel Alpine strategy for adaptation to climate change in the field of natural hazards was compiled. Therein the background of climate change especially in the Alpine region an the expected impacts are outlined and subsequent recommendations developed. This brochure is completed by examples of the contributing states referring to the different recommendations provided. The current topic of the implementation of the flood risk managament plans related to the Flood Directive (2007/60/EC) was given particular attention in respect to the special characteristics of Alpine catchments. Therefore the PLANALP organised an international conference where this topic was discussed thouroughly. More than 100 participants from 11 countries participated and after a keynote presentation one representative from each contracting party presented the national approach and challenges regarding the implementation phase. The fruitful discussions showed how important this cross-border exchange is and the associated conference proceedings provide the possibility for further reading. Another activity tackles the complex issue of life-cycle management for protection measure for natural hazards. Therein, based on a questionnaire, all PLANALP members presented the way they deal with life-cycle management in this context. Grounded on this information a special task force including external experts was established in ordert to compile all the information of the different countries in a brochure including recommendations for national strategies. Concluding the platform Natural Hazards is very active platform contributing to a wide range of topics within the integrated natural hazard risk management. maria.patek@bmlfuw.gv.at Fig. 1: Member states of the Alpine Convention (Source: Permanent Secretariat of the Alpine Convention) 8 9

6 1.3 Earth observation and geohazards Gerardo Herrera Earth Observation and Geohazards Expert Group (EOEG), EuroGeoSurveys, the Geological Surveys of Europe, 36 38, Rue Joseph II, 1000 Brussels, Belgium. Geohazards InSAR Laboratory and Modeling group (InSARlab), Geoscience research department, Geological Survey of Spain (IGME), Alenza 1, E Madrid, Spain Geohazards cause harmful impacts on society, its composite infrastructure, and the environment. The collective ability to forecast and mitigate natural and human-made hazards and their consequences has advanced significantly over the last decades. Scientific knowledge and technology is available to support organizations and individuals to deal effectively with ground disturbances and their consequences to built-up areas, infrastructures,the environment and economic potentials. In Europe, considerable public/private resources have been invested in developing and deploying satellite sensors and advanced ground based multi-sensor networks for natural and human-made hazard monitoring and risk mitigation. The Copernicus programe coordinated and managed by the European Commission for monitoring the Earth is part of this collective effort. The EC has financed many projects, which have advanced and improved our understanding of hazardous processes, capacities for environmental monitoring and modelling using satellite, aerial and ground-based data and technologies, and the ability to forecast, prepare, respond and recover from geohazards. Despite these advancements, the operational capacity of governments, institutions, public and private organizations, businesses and individuals to anticipate, prepare, react and respond to geohazards remains limited, with adverse societal and economic consequences. Particularly lacking and challenging is the awareness on the impact of changes in climate on hazards and their effects on critical structures and complex infrastructures as result of transient or permanent disturbances of the ground surface. Despite of a large quantity of Earth Observation (EO) imagery currently existing and planned to arrive, the scientific community is encumbered by the chronic lack of systematic high level products including geohazards mapping at different scales and worldwide. As regards ground based sensor systems there is a definitive need for long term in situ monitoring experiments linked to Earth Observation by satelites. Only if different scales of data are compared and once long term data is available, reliable conclusions on underlying geohazard processes can be derived and their possible future changes due to climate change impacts can be estimated. The aim of the Earth Observation and Geohazards Expert Group from the Geological Surveys of Europe (EOEG) is to bridge the gap between Earth Observation technological and scientific capabilities and the delivery of harmonized pan-european geo-information on geohazards improving the operational capacity and economic capabilities of governments, institutions, organizations, businesses and individuals. The European Geological Surveys leading role in numerous recent national and European Earth Observation projects (e.g. Terrafirma, Pangeo, Safeland, Evoss, Eo-Miners, Inqua, SubCoast, Doris, Lampre, EGDI-Scope, etc.) increase the quality, efficiency and cost-effectiveness of geohazards science delivery to european society. Moreover EGS is the only pan-european organisation that could provide the necessary technical and scientific background to coordiante long term coupled Earth Observation and In Situ longterm monitoring experiments. In this framework, thorugh out this presentation several results and achievements from different projects will be shown in order to highlight the state-of-the-art of remote sensing and ground based monitoring capabilities targeting geohazards in order to: process data for terrain motion monitoring detect, map, monitor and forecast geohazards investigate underlying processes of geohazard triggers deliver harmonized pan-european geo-information on geohazards embracing all the disaster cycle phases including prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. g.herrera@igme.es

7 1.4 Tsunamis in fjords of Norway Jan Host National delegate, Geological Survey of Norway Geological survey of Norway NGU, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway It is Easter 1934, three o clock in the night. The inhabitants in Tafjord are wakened by terrible noise. Minutes after, a tsunami smashes houses and boats. Terrified people are desperately seeking higher grounds in the dark. Two more tsunamis hit the shore after yet a few minutes. At dawn 40 people are missing, and the seafloor under the Landhammeren mountain has received 3 million cubic metres of rocks. Norway s terrain is prone to landslides, with a steep coastline and narrow fjords and valleys. During the first 36 years of the last century, 175 people lost their lives to tsunamis (displacement waves) in three large rock avalanche events into Norway s lakes and fjords. Studies of historic records indicate that we should expect 2 4 similar events every 100 years. Despite this, little had been done to map where to expect the next disaster, until NGU took the initiative to change this by the turn of the century. NGUs mapping programme for unstable rock slopes has a risk based approach, giving priority to areas where historic and prehistoric large avalanche events are known. The program s vision is: to characterize all unstable rock slopes which can cause devastating effects in a distance larger than the shadow angle of rock falls no loss of life due to large rock slope failures in the next centuries Credits Reginald L. Hermanns, Landslide mapping Team Leader, NGU Lars Harald Blikra, Åknes/Tafjord Beredskap/NVE. References Hermanns, R.L., Oppikofer, T., Yugsi Molina, F.X., Dehls & J.F., Böhme, M. (2014): Approach for systematic rockslide mapping of unstable rock slopes in Norway. In: Sassa, K., Canuti, P. & Yin, Y. (eds.): Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment 3 (p ). Springer. The mapping methodolgy is based on a gradually narrowing hunt for objects from the regional to the local scale, starting with satellite insar analyses of larger regions and ending with a detailed description and risk assessment of each individual medium to high-risk objects. Each step in the mapping process is carefully documented in a national open-access database. The final aim of the mapping program is to identify the unstable rock slopes most likely to cause the highest threat to life. Followeing the Norwegian building code, these objects need to be put under extensive 24/7 monitoring and safety systems, evacuation plans etc. needs to be developed. A uniform risk classification system has been developed in a consensus-based international cooperation in order to identify these objects of highes risk. So far, 5 high-risk objects are under continous monitoring. Early warning systems and evacuation plans have been established by the local authorities in cooperation with relevant regional and national bodies. Fig. 1: The stepwise approach to NGU s mapping and risk classification of unstable rock slopes (after Hermanns et al. 2014). Jan.host@ngu.no

8 1.5 Seismic risk assessment and management: tools and activities Olivier Bouc Head of Seismic and Volcanic Risk Unit, Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières, BRGM BRGM, Direction Risques et Prévention, 3 avenue Claude-Guillemin, BP 36009, Orléans Cedex 2, France Whereas approaches to geological risks used to be restricted to an assessment of hazard, it is now considered common practice to integrate exposure and vulnerability to really deliver a risk estimate. Therefore, seismic risk assessment requires a transdisciplinary approach involving a variety of knowledge, from the geology of seismogenic structures up to the mapping of the vulnerability of structures and networks. Seismic risk prevention implies both: advances in the theoretical knowledge of the phenomena: seismic source behaviour, wave propagation, ground motion, structural response or also resilience of urban systems; applied characterization of the risk on the territory of interest: knowledge of the seismic sources and of past eathquakes, regional hazard determination, local soil conditions, building repartition and typology These activities require a variety of tools that match different spatial resolutions. An appropriate management of seismic risk also necessitates different tools to respond to the various phases of a seismic event. In the preventive phase, the main objective is to minimize the risk through measures regarding land use, structures building or retrofitting, as well as raising awareness of the populations and preparing appropriate crisis management plans. The supporting information for risk mitigation measures is taken from the knowledge supplied by studies such as deterministic or probabilistic hazard assessment at regional level, microzonation studies and vulnerability assessment at local level. Simulations of seismic risk scenarios through dedicated software (e.g. Sedan et al. 2013) inform the decision makers about priority areas for the implementation of mitigation measures as well as for crisis management plans, and may be used for increasing public preparation. During a seismic event, automatic measures (e.g. plant or railway shutdown) taken upon detection may help minimize damages or service unavailability durations. Such early warning systems are necessarily based on seismic monitoring networks. In the minutes and hours following an earthquake, civil protection services need support to maximize the efficiency of their response. Rapid information on expected or observed damages help them designing and targeting their intervention. The experience of past events or exercises shows the benefit for crisis managers of a spatial information, provided it is simple. Demonstration tools have been developed in the Pyrenees area (Bertil et al. 2012) to automatically deliver a mapping of effects within minutes after the earthquake. Growing interest is also shown for the exploitation of social networks to retrieve information about the effects of the earthquake. In the days after the earthquake the civil protection needs evolve towards a more refined assessment of particular structures and a diagnosis of the usability of buildings. The multidisciplinary string composed by these various components of seismic risk management is anchored in the geological and seismological knowledge of the phenomena. The ability of applied research institutes like geological surveys to deliver relevant interpreted scientific information can therefore be beneficial to the authorities at all stages for an efficient management of seismic risk. References Belvaux M., Monfort-Climent D., et al. (2014): Cartographie Départementale du Risque Sismique en Martinique. Rapport BRGM/ RP FR. Bertil D., Roviró J., et al. (2012): ShakeMap implementation for Pyrenees in France-Spain border: regional adaptation and earthquake rapid response process. Proceedings of 15 th World Conference on Earthquake engineering, Portugal. Sedan O., Terrier M., et al. (2013): Armagedom a Tool for seismic risk assessment illustrated with applications. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17:2, o.bouc@brgm.fr Fig. 1: Example of outcomes of seismic risk scenarios simulations in Martinique, showing restitution at two different resolutions (Belvaux et al. 2014)

9 1.6 Landslides in Albania Viktor Doda 1, Hasan Kuliçi 2, Arben Pambuku 3 & Olgert Jaupaj 4 1 General Director of the Albanian Geological Survey 2 Director of Engineering Geology, Geophysics and Geodesy 3 Director of Marine Geology 4 Engineering Geologist, Department of Engineering Geology Albanian Geological Survey, Rruga e Kavajes, Nr. 153 Tirana, Albania In natural systems, landslides are recognized as one of the most significant natural hazards in many areas throughout the world (Crozier & Glade 2005). In Albania, many areas are prone to slope failure due to geological features, diverse terrain topography, high mountains and steep valley slopes, high intensity spring-autumn rainfall, deep weathering associated with the humid climate and man-modified slopes such as road cuts, excavations and constructions. However, numerous recent landslide events in Albania have been mainly triggered by high intensity rainfall and man-made erosion. The cumulative costs to society associated with these small slides may be as great as those of a large catastrophic event. The largest landslides that have occurred in Albania in recent years are: 1977 Moglice (Korce), a huge landslide triggered by heavy rainfall which destroyed more than 50 houses, 2008 Gjirokaster, a destabilization due to man-made construction with a landslide that killed 3 people and destroyed 1 building, The 2009 Synei (Kavaje) landslides which were triggered by heavy rainfall destroyed 8 houses, roads and other infrastructure but fortunately did not result in casualties, The 2013 Ngracie landslides had the same cause and damaged 13 houses, roads and other infrastructure. The classification of landslides by the Albanian Geological Survey is based on Cruden & Varnes (1996). The main classification criteria are: type of movement and type of material involved in the movement. Rockslides frequently occur in Tirana, Fier and Gjirokasters region. They are of medium to extensive spread and affect large volumes. They are common on high, steep rock slopes and occur particularly in flysch formations containing a high fraction of clay and silt. The occurrence of earth slides spreads almost over all the territory of Albania. They are small to moderate and occur often in Quaternary deposits with the estimated depth of the slip surface between 2 and 10 m. More than 15% of Albania is prone to slope instability. Human activity is responsible for causing about 80% of the historical landslides. The other part of the slides has occurred for natural reasons: geological or physical. In order to reduce the enormous destructive potential of landslides and to minimize the consequential losses, AGS has developed the National Landslide Database which is the most comprehensive source of information on landslides in Albania. Information is gathered from field surveys, aerial orthophotos, reports, online news and social media. The National Landslide Database currently holds over 3021 records of landslide events with each landslide registered on a data sheet. Each landslide record can hold information including general information (region, municipality, topographic map and geographical coordinates X, Y), geometry of landslide, geological data, lithology, land-use, erosion, cause of activation, hydrogeology data, type of movement, state activity, humidity. The Albanian Geological Survey also estimates the stability of the slope dam for a big hydropower project in Albania. For this study a method and a database were created according to the procedures used in the EU. The database is also suitable to be included in the programs with public access. The landslide case studies in Albania are also docmented using geophysics, mainly seismic tomography and geodetic methods. The Albanian Geological Survey is working to create a landslide susceptibility map from the National Landslide Databasa which can provide useful information for the government in order to develop policies for landslide risk reduction, buildings codes and land-use planning related to landslides. References Caniani, D., Pascale S., Sdao, F. & Sole, A. (2007): Neural networks and landslide susceptibility: a case study of the urban area of Potenza. Cruden, D. M. & Varnes, D. J. (1996): Landslide types and processes. In: Turner, A. K. and Schuster, R. L. (eds.): Landslides: investigation and Mitigation, Transportation Research Board Special (p. 673). report 247, National Academy Press, Washington D.C. Komach, M. & Ribicic, M. (2006): Landslide susceptibility map of Slovenia at scale 1: V Günther, A., Reichenbach, P., Guzzetti, F., & Richter, A. (2007): Criteria for the identification of landslide risk areas in Europe: the TIER 1 approach. Trigila, A., Iadanza, C., & Spizzichino, D. (2010): Quality assessment of the Italian Landslide Inventory using GIS processing. Landslides 7.4, Guerrieri, L., Trigila, A. & Iadanza, C. (2007): The IFFI project (Italian Landslide Inventory): Methodology and Results. hkulici@yahoo.com

10 1.7 Volcanic ash and civil aviation: a new perspective Costanza Bonadonna 1, Peter Webley 2, Matthew Hort 3, Arnau Folch 4, Susan Loughlin 5 & Herbert Puempel 6 1 Earth and Environmental Sciences Section, University of Geneva, Switzerland; 2 Geophysiscal Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA; 3 Met Office London Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre, UK; 4 Barcelona Supercomputing Centre, Spain; 5 British Geological Survey, UK; 6 World Meteorological Organization, Switzerland Worldwide, there are about 20 volcanoes erupting at any given time, posing a potential hazard to aviation. Since 1973 there have been 120 reported aviation incidents due to volcanic ash, including 26 cases of very severe engine damage and 9 incidents of in-flight engine failure. Several recent eruptions (such as Eyjafjallajokull 2010, Iceland, and Cordon Caulle 2011, Chile) are a stark reminder of the need to plan for, and be able to respond effectively to, future eruptions to minimize disruption to air transport and to protect human safety. As a consequence of the severe disruption to air traffic generated by the April-May 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland (Fig. 1), it became clear that the tephra-dispersal community needed to improve monitoring and forecasting methodologies and to provide a more robust and reliable response to societal needs. In particular, an integrated strategy was urgently needed, based on collaboration between the volcanological and meteorological communities and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in order to ensure that both the scientific knowledge and aviation safety aspects were considered. As a result, a new multidisciplinary international scientific community able to work together on a better description of both the source term and the transport and sedimentation of volcanic particles naturally developed. This diverse community gathered at the Geneva Headquarters of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on October 2010 for the 1st IUGG-WMO workshop to promote stronger interactions between the volcanological and the operational forecasting communities. The resulting outcomes served as a road-map for on-going research. A consensual document was produced together with a document summarizing the results of a model-benchmark exercise carried out before the workshop, a document summarizing critical features of the main Volcanic Ash Dispersal and Transport Models (VATDMs) and a document summarizing the main data-acquisition techniques available at that time ( Workshop.html). A great deal of scientific progress has been made since 2010 to improve characterisation of volcanic eruptions and to understand sensitivities and uncertainties in ash dispersal modelling and forecasting as a result of increased multidisciplinary collaboration. In particular, a large number of projects and consortia were funded worldwide that cover multiple aspects of ash dispersal, ranging from the expansion of ground-based remote sensing networks and capabilities for the characterization of far-field ash clouds to the real-time characterization of the source. However, more recent volcanic ash crises (i.e. Grimsvötn 2011, Iceland; Cordón Caulle 2011, Chile) have demonstrated how specific needs remain (e.g. accurate description of the source term) and posed new challenges (e.g. re-suspension of deposited volcanic ash). A significant challenge in the rapid operationalization of scientific achievements was also evident. Three years after our first gathering, the 2nd IUGG-WMO workshop (18 20 November 2013) aimed at consolidating the multidisciplinary community established in 2010 and at optimizing the scientific and operational advances. The workshop was sponsored by WMO, the University of Geneva, the British Geological Survey, the Met Office (UK), the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics and the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth s Interior. Priorities to maximise national and international cooperation and advancement of scientific research were identified. These include the need for systematic ground and space-borne monitoring, increased integration of observations with forecast models and further opportunities to share knowledge and experience across the community (see Consensual Document and additional material at The work presented and the discussions held at the 2nd IUGG-WMO workshop show that the whole ash-aviation community, from research to operations, is working together to build the most capable system for aviation safety. The resulting outcomes provide the next steps for the community to move forward. Costanza.Bonadonna@unige.ch Fig. 1: Volcanic plume associated with the 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull volcano, Iceland (photograph by J. Elíasson)

11 1.8 Natural risk management in Switzerland Joseph Hess Vice-director Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, CH-3003 Bern The Swiss strategy for integrated risk management is based on a holistic approach seeking the optimal combination of response, recovery and preparedness. This approach has been developed in a strategic report in 2011 into 6 priorities for action. The implementation of these priorities will be illustrated with examples from different flood risk management projects in various basins in Switzerland. Comprehensive knowledge of hazards and risks A society can only deal diligently with natural hazards if it has an in-depth knowledge of the hazards, assesses them objectively, takes preventive measures and reacts quickly and correctly. Therefore, hazard fundamentals are key bases for effective and efficient natural risk management. Hazard assessment is relevant to determine the magnitude and frequency of environmental processes in affected areas. Increased awareness of natural hazards The events of recent years have shown, that the population is often not very familiar with natural hazards. It is important to save up and promote the knowledge that already exists and to document and analyse new hazard events so that lessons can be learned from them. This requires the provision of solid basic training in natural hazards for all those involved in the planning and construction of buildings, facilities and infrastructure as knowledge about the vulnerability of buildings is crucial for the minimisation of damage. Holistic planning of measures The principle of natural risk management is an optimized combination of structural, biological, land-use planning and preparedness measures along with insurance protection. The elaboration of comprehensive hazard fundamentals is crucial for this the approach, which consists of measures to ensure preparedness, response and recovery in a risk management cycle. Protective structures designed to withstand excess loads of impacts A lesson learnt from previous flood events is the possibility of events of much higher magnitude than the design value used for protection work. Protection systems cannot be designed for all possible magnitude or process, but an overload case has to be taken into account in their design. The primary goal is to avoid uncontrolled collapse and the second is to handle the overload impacts with non-structural measures. Emergency preparedness Careful emergency planning helps to reduce the damage caused by extreme natural hazard events. Communes must have an emergency concept and regularly rehearse the necessary measures. Expert support is provided by national and cantonal agencies. Five partner organisations: i.e. police, fire brigades, health system, technical operations and civil protection ensure that intervention, protection, rescue and assistance services are provided. Good cooperation between all stakeholders is crucial here. Timely identification of hazard events Damages can only be limited if timely action can be taken at local level. This requires the perfect functioning of forecasting and warning chains and a good understanding of the available information at the end of this chain through on-site observations in the local context. Planning of flood protection projects can take several years before protection works are built and offer an effective protection. It is however expected from the authority to take actions as soon as the hazard situation is identified. Because forecasting and warning systems can be implemented more quickly than protective works, they are very often used as anticipated measure to reduce risk in a transition phase. References FOEN, Federal Office for the Environment (2011): Living with natural hazards. josef.hess@bafu.admin.ch Fig. 1: Major flood projects in Switzerland

12 1.9 Public insurance companies for natural risks Martin Kamber CEO IRV Interkantonaler Rückversicherungsverband IRV, Bundesgasse 20, Postfach, CH-3001 Bern Exposure to loss situation Given its location in mid-latitudes characterised by the seasons and changes in the weather, as well as by the very varied topography a large number of hazardous natural actions take place in Switzerland in a relatively small area. However, the mountain ranges which work as meteorological divides generally prevent any individual large loss event from affecting the whole country. Most damage to property is caused by flooding, hailstorms and storm-force winds. Looking at a cross-section over a period of many years, they are responsible for a good 95% of losses due to natural hazards. On the basis of the fact that their occurrence is quite strictly limited in terms of time and areas affected, such hazardous incidents as avalanches, snow pressure, rock falls, rockslides and landslips are, on the other hand, relatively insignificant. Direct insurance in the natural hazard sector Switzerland has nationwide natural hazard insurance for content and buildings. Natural hazard insurance is mandatorily linked to fire insurance. A dual insurance system exists in Switzerland: In 19 of the 26 cantons there exists an obligation to insure, i.e. home owners are obliged to take out insurance protection with a Public Insurance Company for Buildings (PIB) (monopoly). 82% of the value of buildings insurance in Switzerland is covered by this PIB system. In three cantons, content must also be insured by the PIB. In the remaining seven cantons 18% of the buildings value in Switzerland the building stock is covered by private insurers, for the most part on a mandatory basis. Moreover, the private insurance industry covers content in 23 cantons. The cover is very similar overall in the case of cantonal buildings insurance companies and private insurance companies. This affects both the loss occurrences insured and the conditions of insurance. Insurance is new for old with both the PIBs and private insurance companies. Public Insurance Companies for Buildings Public Insurance Companies for Buildings are independent organisations subject to public law. They are non-profit companies, in other words they do not work with the aim of making a profit. As no dividends have to be paid out and there are no acquisition / advertising costs, the premiums are significantly lower than in the private insurance industry. Also, the PIBs have lower administration costs. All building owners are obliged to insure with the Public Insurance Company for Buildings operating in their particular canton. The only exceptions are buildings owned by the Swiss Confederation. On the other hand, the PIBs are obliged to provide insurance cover for all buildings in their territory, and irrespective of their exposure to risks and hazards. In this way, adverse selection and risk-selection are prevented effectively: there is no fighting over good risks and mutual solidarity is at a maximum. In addition, this results in the greatest possible risk collective, whereby premiums remain affordable for all policyholders. Natural hazard losses that are caused by storms, hail, flooding, landslips/collapses, snow pressure and avalanches are insured, but not losses caused by earthquakes. The insurance cover of the PIBs is unlimited. The cantonal buildings insurance companies do not regard themselves simply as insurers: they are also heavily committed to preventing and combating loss (loss prevention and mitigation). Thanks to the monopoly they hold, the preventive efforts of the PIBs benefit themselves (and their policyholders). Given that, preventive measures to protect goods are as a rule cheaper than compensation for actual damage, effective preventive measures are in the best interests of the PIBs. They can thus optimise the allocation of resources between prevention and payments for losses to control the risk involved. The range of preventive measures when it comes to natural hazards is extensive: Recommendations as to how building owners should behave, property protection guidelines with regard to recommended construction designs and materials, free text messages and internet bad weather warning systems, subsidies for building protection measures, active involvement in the town planning sector (creation and publication of maps showing natural hazards). Legal foundations support the PIBs in their efforts to implement preventive measures. The PIBs support the fire brigades/rescue forces, in that they provide substantial help in the financing of their training, remuneration, co-ordination and operating resources. In this way, it is ensured that they are able to effectively carry out their duties in terms of search and rescue and minimisation of losses. martin.kamber@irv.ch

13 1.10 Induced earthquakes: case studies of Basel and St. Gallen Stefan Wiemer Swiss Seismological Service, ETH Zürich ETH Zürich, Schweiz. Erdbebendienst (SED), NO H 57, Sonneggstrasse 5, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland The Earth s crust is critically stressed in most places, and it is a well established fact that man-made perturbations to the stress conditions for example through reservoir stimulation, hydraulic fracturing, mining, reservoir impoundment, injection of waste water or CO 2 storage can lead to enhanced seismic activity. Induced seismicity has received increased attention in the past few years, because a number of GeoEnergy projects have been delayed or canceled because of felt earthquakes and the concerns they caused. Managing induced seismicity is thus increasingly one of the most relevant challenges for GeoEnergy applications around the world that alter the stress and pore pressure conditions in the deep underground (Fig. 1). Induced earthquakes have also received a growing attention by the public, the media and regulators. This is partially because have increased in number and in magnitude with increasing human activity: For example, induced earthquakes caused by fracking-wastewater related projects in the eastern US seem to have more than tripled the rate of naturally occurring M 3.0 earthquakes since Induced earthquakes are governed by the same physics and generally indistinguishable from natural events. However, induced earthquakes differ in three important respects from natural earthquakes: the public acceptance and legal implications are fundamentally different mitigation and control are to some extend an option for managing the hazard and risk posed by induced seismicity events are often very shallow, and near urban areas, which enhances risk and risk perception. Currently, management and mitigation of induced seismicity risk is not only a technological and communication challenge, but also a scientific challenge because reliable and validated methodologies to assess and monitor the risks do not exist. This is a consequence of two factors: Our limited understanding of the physical processes taking place, and, perhaps even more importantly, our limited knowledge of the physical conditions (i.e., 3D stress and strength heterogeneity, pre-existing faults, permeability distribution etc.) at the depths where reservoir creation is taking place. In Switzerland, the visionary 2006 Enhanced Geothermal Project in Basel and was stopped after a magnitude Ml = 3.4 Fig. 2: Seismicity observed during and following the 2006 reservoir stimulation beneath the city of Basel. Events above ML 3 are marked. earthquake, causing several millions damages, occurred during the reservoir stimulation (Fig. 2). The fact that induced seismicity poses possibly the largest obstacle for deep geothermal energy exploitation in Switzerland was again highlighted in July 2013, when a magnitude 3.5 earthquake shuck the city of St. Gallen, induced during a well-control operation of a hydrothermal project. While only a few cases on non-structural damage were reported, this earthquake again challenges the hope that deep geothermal energy may contribute substantially as a clean and renewable energy source in Switzerland. The presentation will review the lessons learned from the failure of each of these projects and outline the research and development activities underway in Switzerland. stefan.wiemer@sed.ethz.ch Fig. 1: A selection of underground engineering applications where induced seismicity may occur

14 1.11 Radioactive waste and sectoral plan for deep geological repositories Michael Aebersold Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Mühlestrasse 4, CH-3063 Ittigen In Switzerland the procedure for selecting potential sites for deep geological repositories is defined in the Sectoral Plan for Deep Geological Repositories. The Sectoral Plan consists of a general concept and an implementation part. The general concept defines the federal government objectives and the rules for the selection procedure. In addition to safety and security criteria, it deals with requirements relating to the selection of suitable sites, in particular spatial planning and socio-economic aspects. Site selection comprises three stages and shall result in the identification of one or two sites for deep geological repositories for low and intermediate level (L/ILW) as well as high level radioactive waste (HLW). With public acceptance being crucial, the Sectoral Plan for Deep Geological Repositories sets forward a significant involvement of the cantons and regions concerned as well as of the neighbouring countries. This includes the creation of regional participation bodies in which the municipalities concerned, as well as their inhabitants, political parties and organizations, take part. National borders do not play a role in the determination of involvement therefore the participation bodies also include delegates from southern Germany. Each stage comprises a broad public consultation in both Switzerland and neighbouring countries. This is followed by a formal consultation and approval by the Federal Council. The implementation of the site selection procedure started after the Federal Council s approval of the general concept in 2008: the National Co-operative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Nagra) proposed three possible sites for a geological repository for HLW and six possible sites for a geological repository for L/ILW. All these sites have clay-rich sediments as potential host rocks (see Fig. 1). The Swiss Nuclear Safety Inspectorate (ENSI) reviewed the documentation and approved the proposed geological sites. The public consultation procedure was concluded at the end of The Federal Council approved the potential sites regions on 30 November 2011, thus ending stage 1 of the site selection process. In the now ongoing stage 2, potential areas for the surface facilites within the planning perimeters fixed in stage 1 have been identified by Nagra in coordination with the siting regions and cantons. Socio-economic studies have been drafted. Nagra carries out provisional quantitiative safety analyses and a safety-based comparison before proposing at least two sites each for HLW and L/ILW. These will be carefully examined by the Federal authorities. Stage 2 is expected to last until In stage 3, which should take another ten years to complete, detailed investigations including drilling of the sites still under consideration, will be carried out. Based on the results of the three-stage process, a repository site will be selected for each type of repository (with the option of the two repositories being located at the same site). This will be followed by the general licensing procedure specified in the nuclear energy legislation. The Federal Council will grant the general licence, which will require the approval of Parliament. Approval is also subject to a facultative national referendum, which means that the Swiss electorate may have the final say. According to the current schedule, the L/ILW repository should be operational by 2050 and the HLW repository by Reference Swiss Federal Office of Energy SFOE (2008): Sectoral plan for deep geological repositories conceptual part. michael.aebersold@bfe.admin.ch Fig. 1: Geological siting regions proposed in Switzerland for a repository for high-level waste (green/dark green hatched) and low- and intermediate-level waste (green). Five of the regions lie in the northern midlands and one is in central Switzerland. The yellow dots indicate the proposed locations for the surface facilities

15 1.12 SCEER-SoE Swiss Competence Center for Energy Research Supply of Energy Domenico Giardini ETH Zürich, Institut f. Geophysik, NO H 69.1, Sonneggstrasse 5, CH-8092 Zürich In the post-fukushima era, several European countries, including Switzerland, have decided not to replace their nuclear energy infrastructure and to accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy future based on carbon-free renewable electricity sources. Switzerland launched the new Energy Strategy 2050, requiring profound changes of the whole energy infrastructure and usage, as Switzerland will need to find new sources and strategies to replace 40% of its present electricity, while at the same time coping with constraints including the desire not to increase the use of electricity, a population growth projected to 9 million inhabitants, the need to maintain a vigorous economy as the leading innovation country in the world, a growing use of electricity in transportation, and the commitment to policies mitigating climate change. The Federal government recognized the crucial importance of nationwide coordinated R&D and new national competence centers on energy research (SCCER) have been established to develop and implement new technologies needed to reach the 2050 objectives. The first step to design robust policies and strategies for the future energy mix is the availability of electricity resources. The Swiss Competence Centre for Energy Research on Supply of Electricity (SCCER-SoE) has been given the mandate to further develop HydroPower and to establish GeoEnergy, seeking answers to three fundamental questions: can we extract safely the deep geothermal heat and produce at competitive costs a substantial portion of the national electricity supply, covering up to 5-10% of the national baseload supply? is the geological sequestration of CO 2 a viable measure to enable carbon-free generation of electricity from hydrocarbon resources? can we increase (i.e. by 10%) the present hydropower electricity production under changing demand, climate and operating conditions? can we maintain, improve and operate the hydropower infrastructure in the long-term future? Providing robust answers to these questions is highly significant to understand the potential of these electricity sources in the future energy mix of Switzerland. Today the situation in Switzerland is very different for Deep Geothermal Energy and Hydro-Power: we do not have yet any electricity production from deep geothermal energy and we will require a sustained growth rate of the installed capacity to reach the 2050 target of 4.4 TWh/a; hydropower production is already highly optimized, providing 57% of the electricity supply; according to the Energy Strategy 2050, the mean annual hydropower production has to be increased under present framework conditions by 1.53 TWh/a and by 3.16 TWh/a under optimized conditions. SCCER-SoE includes 13 research partners from the ETH schools and research centres and the main Swiss universities and cooperation partners from key industries and federal offices. It is lead by the ETH Zurich. It coordinates activities with existing large framework and programs funded in Switzerland, European projects and international programs (IPGT, IEA, EERA). A first pillar of SCCER-SoE is a consistent long-term capacity building in R&D across Switzerland. Over one hundred new research positions and seven new professorships are being filled in the domain of supply of electricity, new experimental and modelling facilities are built, and R&D roadmaps in geoenergy and hydropower have been established. Key R&D directions of the hydropower roadmap In view of environmental and socio-economical constraints, the targeted increase of 10% of the actual electricity production is extremely challenging and can be reached only by innovative and sustainable solutions for new hydropower plants and by the extension and optimization of existing schemes. The expected increase in power production from small hydropower plants (SHPP) requires the development of criteria for a careful site selection as well as strategies to optimize power production within a river network while at the same time minimizing the negative impacts on stream ecology. The effect of climate change will not only change the availability of water resources in time but also change the behavior of the catchment areas by an increased sediment yield and more frequent natural hazards, and thus considerably endangering waterpower production in the near future. A number of coordinated EU applications and national projects have been launched, and the plan for a major national Pilot & Demonstration program is under development. Key R&D directions of the geothermal roadmap for electricity production To enable the large-scale exploitation of deep geothermal energy for electricity generation in Switzerland, solutions must be found for two fundamental and coupled problems: (1) How to we create an efficient heat exchanger in the hot underground that can produce energy for decades while (2) at the same time keeping the nuisance and risk posed by induced earthquakes to acceptable levels? There is general agreement that only by enhancing the permeability of the underground in a controlled way, can these goals potentially be met in order to make progress in answering these questions as rapidly as possible without compromising safety, three overarching and complementary initiatives have been initiated: Advance the capability to quantitatively model the stimulation process and reservoir operation Advance process understanding and validation in underground lab experiments, with the establishement of a national deep underground infrastructures (DUG-Lab) in cooperation with similar European efforst Execute a petrothermal P&D project, supported by a major scientific monitoring & analysis initiative Key procedures and technologies for DGE success will be validated in four key areas: Drilling and completion: Test completion technologies for the portion of the well in the injection area required to control how the water is injected at high pressure in the rock in order to maximize the flow and swept area. Reservoir characterization and monitoring: Employ multi-disciplinary methodologies that integrate surface and downhole measurements for the characterization of the reservoir properties before and during stimulation. Reservoir creation and stimulation: Develop monitoring schemes, modeling tools and injection procedures that assist the creation of a heat exchanger without generating damaging seismic events. Risk mitigation: Test monitoring and injection procedures and injection protocols to control and model the evolution of induced micro-seismicity before and during stimulation and to limit the maximum event size expected in a stimulated volume. CO 2 geological storage Industrial-scale CO 2 capture and storage are important components of Cleantech technologies, and there is consensus on the need to strengthen Swiss research and industrial leadership in this area. A RD&D program to demonstrate the feasibility of geological sequestration of CO 2 in saline aquifers is a priority. As the properties of geological formations vary according to locality, the reliability and precision of 3D subsurface reservoir models can only be demonstrated and tested with a local (Swiss) pilot injection project. The realization of a national end-to-end CCS P&D project is underway, covering CO 2 capture from a gas-fired power plant, transportation, underground storage, surface infrastructure, environment and safety, costs, legal framework and public-acceptance processes necessary to ensure its success. domenico.giardini@sed.ethz.ch

16 1.13 The case study Brienz 2005 Jörg Häberle Amt für Wald des Kantons Bern, Abteilung für Naturgefahren, CH-3800 Interlaken The village of Brienz is situated in the center of Switzerland at the Lake of Brienz in the canton of Bern. In 2005, the 22/23 of August, after a period of long lasting rainfall (> 300 mm in 3 days), landslides and debris flows occurred in two torrents and caused massive damage in the village. Two people lost their lives, about 30 houses were distroyed or severely damaged. 300 people had to be evacuated within a very short time and the total damage summed up to about 25 millions euros. The case of Brienz represents one among many disaster-events occurring during August 2005 in the Bernese Oberland and the Swiss Alps. Geologically, the region of Brienz belongs to the Helvetic nappes (Axen- and Wildhorn-Decke). In the field cretaceous sediments, mainly Hauterivian limestones and Valanginian marls can be observed. The marls are strongly folded and weather very quickly. Most historical and active landslides occur where the bedding of these marls or the weathering front forms a dip slope oriented discontinuity, which strongly favours sliding. The geological setting influenced the natural disaster: The landslides entered directly into the streambead and backlogged the torrents. After the breakthrough, the flood of water and debris mobilised huge quantities of bed load in the torrents. In the case of the Glyssibach, up to m 3 of debris reached the alluvial cone, on which the houses of Brienz are built. After the disaster, a flood prevention project was started. In the lower section of the two torrents various constructions have been realised to divert, detain, conduct and deposit the bedload and water during future disaster events. The protection measures, which were inaugurated in August 2013, involved costs of about 30 millions euros. References Hitz, O. & Hählen N. (2011): Das Hochwasserereignis von 2005 am Glyssibach Brienz. Unpublished paper. Müller, R. (2007): The destructive debris slides debris flows of Brienz, August Diploma thesis, geol. Inst. ETH Zürich. joerg.haeberle@vol.be.ch m Fig. 2: The landslide in the catchment of Glyssibach (Müller, 2007). Trachtbach Glyssibach Brienz 574 m Fig. 1: The landscape of Brienz with the two landslides (red) in the catchment areas of the Trachtbach and Glyssibach torrents

17 1.14 Geological surveys capacity to address economic and social challenges Mart van Bracht & Luca Demicheli President and Executive Secretary EuroGeoSurveys, Brussels Every geoscientist knows that geological data, information, knowledge and expertise are key tools to respond to many of the major social and economic challenges facing the European and global communities in the 21st Century. European society, in particular, faces great challenges for which ecologically, economically and socially sound solutions and scientific advice are required. These challenges include geo-energy, raw materials, groundwater and geohazards. The National Geological Surveys of Europe are key players in responding to these major geoscientific challenges. They are the national entities responsible for policy support in all subsurface-related survey and management activities, including mitigation and exploration research, vulnerability and risk assessments, forecasts and statistics. As such, the Geological Surveys of Europe united in EuroGeoSurveys (EGS) jointly represent the critical mass of knowledge, research capacity and capability, data and facilities needed to fulfil that same role on a European level. As a not-for-profit international organisation based in Brussels, EGS has 32 member countries, also representing some regional surveys in Europe, and an overall workforce of several thousand experts. EGS aims to play a role in stimulating economic growth, mitigating the effects of climate change, guaranteeing a sufficient supply of food and water, providing a healthy and clean living environment and in protecting the EU s citizens against natural hazards. Its mission is to provide public Earth science knowledge to support the EU s competitiveness, social well-being, environmental management and international commitments. To achieve this, EGS has drafted a vision document which adheres to three pillars. These include: a joint research programme with significant impact at EU policy level, creating an information system for Europe a focus on building a common European Geological Data Infrastructure (EGDI) EGS vision is also based on sharing knowledge, capacities and infrastructure to address capacity building through training and participation in multinational and multidisciplinary research, multinational exchange of researchers and of best practices, and sharing of laboratories, facilities and infrastructures. These three pillars are essential for establishing a common European Geological Knowledge Base and providing a Geological Service for Europe that ultimately will guarantee a common single access point for EU bodies and other stakeholders. EGS has the capacity to achieve its vision due to its flexible structure and the broad range of scientific fields it covers. The organisation coordinates a number of expert groups and temporary task forces that integrate information, knowledge and expertise deriving from the member countries in fields such as natural hazards, water, soils, energy, mineral resources, marine geology, spatial data, carbon capture and storage, geochemistry, Earth observation and international cooperation. These expert groups have contributed significantly to the definition of some fundamental legislative initiatives and policy provisions within the European Commission. These include the INSPIRE Directive, the Raw Materials Initiative, the Directive on the geological storage of CO 2, the Maritime Policy, the Soil Thematic Strategy, the Water Framework Directive, the Mining Waste Directive, the Resource Efficiency Policy and the Coastal Zone Policy. Moreover the participation of our member geological surveys in a substantial number (over 250 since 1998) of EU-funded Research and Development (R&D) and policy support projects has contributed to solving important societal challenges and promoting sustainable and competitive growth. New geological knowledge has become essential as it can lead to the discovery and safe and sustainable exploitation of new energy, mineral and other resources. At the same time, knowledge and information on the dynamic geosphere are indispensable in helping European citizens cope with anthropogenic pressures, climate change and natural hazards. They are also key elements in protecting the European environment. The subsurface, including soils and groundwater, is increasingly used and therefore under pressure. Many human activities have positive effects, increasing safety, generating renewable energy or creating valuable habitats. Some others affect the Earth negatively. Essential parts of Europe are facing pollution, erosion, soil sealing and loss of fertility as a result of urbanisation, industrialisation and land-use change. These affect the availability and access to food, drinking water, clean air and other benefits from resources and processes that are supplied by ecosystems. Exposure to naturally occurring toxic substances like arsenic, mercury or radioactive materials (e.g. radon) or harmful minerals (e.g. asbestos) may also endanger human health. In short, geological knowledge and information are essential to allow us to make optimal use of the geosphere without compromising it for future generations. Operating according to their legal national mandate the Geological Surveys of Europe are ideally positioned to operate at the EU level through EuroGeo- Surveys for the development of geological knowledge and the provision of official and reliable information. Mart.vanBracht@tno.nl luca.demicheli@eurogeosurveys.org

18 2 Field Trips 2.1 Introduction Sä UAS Bludenz Silvretta UPS UAC Davos UAS LAS LAS LAC UAC St. Moritz LAC LAC Bernina LAC LAC UPS UAC Tonale Q MPS LPF UAS CP SS LPF SC Lechtal St. Gallen SM Sä Buchs GSz Q ShS UhS AP Chur Flims Thusis LPS MPS Suretta Tambo MPC Chiavenna 1: LPC 50km Legend to Figure Q Quaternary fill of main valleys CP Cenozoic pluton Insubric Fault European (Northalpine) Foreland RG Rhine Graben Autochthonous Molasse EM Mesozoic sediments FJ Folded Jura Mountains SM Subalpine Molasse Q GM Db Ax Linthal AP All VGM Ilanz IV Disentis Ta UhS Passo di S. Bernardino Adula UhC Simano Biasca Q Bellinzona Po Basin Nappe systems of the European continental margin Helvetic nappe system UhS UhC ShS Ultrahelvetic cover nappes Ultrahelvetic crystalline nappes (Lucomagno, Verampio) Southhelvetic cover nappes Zurich Zug OPF SM SF Schwyz Db MPS Altdorf Q Aar massif Dammastock Gotthard massif Gotthardpass Airolo Simano Maggia Antigorio MPC LPC SS SC CS Chaînes subalpines Wi Wildhorn nappe Db Drusberg nappe Sä Säntis nappe Ax Axen nappe Luzern NPS UhC Ivrea Zone Infrahelvetic complex Di Diablerets nappe Gh IV Gellihorn nappe Ilanz Verrucano GSz GM VGM Gonzen schuppen zone Glarus & Mürtschen nappe Verrucano of Glarus and Mürtschen nappe Aarau OPF Brienz Db Meiringen Ax AP Finsteraarhorn AP UPS MPC Sesia IZ Mo AP Morcles nappe Autochthonousparautochthonous cover Belledonne massif Do Doldenhorn nappe Chétif massif (Ch) Mont Blanc massif Aiguilles Rouges massif SF All Subalpine Flysch Allochthonous units Gotthard massif Aar massif Tavetsch massif (Ta) EM Solothurn Molasse Basin Thun Interlaken Gh NPF Kandersteg Do Brig AP Siviez-Mischabel MPC Dent Blanche Monte Rosa UPS LAC Penninic nappe system Lower Penninic nappes/valais Trough Middle Penninic nappes/briançon Rise Upper Penninic nappes/piemont Ocean LPF Flysch sediments MPS Mesozoic sediments UPF Flysch sediments LPS Mesozoic sediments ZH Palaeozoic sediments (Zone Houillère) UPS Mesozoic sediments & ophiolites LPC Crystalline basement MPC Crystalline basement Nappe systems of the Adriatic continental margin Southalpine nappe system Austroalpine nappe system RG St-Ursanne Neuchâtel Bern OPF Bulle MPS OPF Lenk Klippen-Decke UhS Wi NPS Di Q SM Mo Sion AP MPS Martigny Bernhard Dent Blanche MPC Mont Blanc massif Wi LAC Ch Courmayeur LPS ZH Aiguilles Rouges massif SS Mesozoic sediments Upper Austroalpine nappes SM Monthey Mo SK Crystalline basement IZ Lower Crust (Ivrea Zone) Adriatic Foreland Cenozoic of Po Basin Fig. 1a: Legend to Fig. 1b. UAM Mesozoic sediments UAC Crystalline basement Lower Austroalpine nappes LAM Mesozoic sediments LAC Crystalline basement Autochthonous Foreland EM Jura Mountains FJ Yverdon Lausanne MPS UPF Geneva UPF FJ SM UhS Cluses MPS Sallanches CS Chaînes subalpines Annecy Megève CS UhS Fj Belledonne Ugine massif Fig. 1b: Simplified Geological-tectonic map of the Central Alps with traces of cross-sections displayed in Figs. 2, 3 and 4 (Pfiffner 2014)

19 NNW SSE Jungfraujoch Lütschine 5 Niederhorn Spitzi Flue Därliggrat 5 Chnubel Marbach Thunersee V 0-5 Permo-Carboniferous trough Northhelvetic Flysch Aar massif Central Aar Granite V 0 Gotthard massif -5 Goms massif [km] [km] Northalpine Foreland Helvetic nappe system Penninic nappe system 20km Cenozoic/ Molasse Upper Marine Molassse Lower Freshwater Molasse Sediments Cenozoic Early Cretaceous Pre-Triassic basement Carboniferous - Permian (V: Verrucano Gr) Quartz-porphyry Allochthonous units Upper Penninic Flysch Ultrahelvetic nappes Lower Penninic cover nappes Southhelvetic Flysch Lower Marine Molasse Palfris Shale Late-/post-Variscan granite Late Jurassic Gneisses and schist Erzegg Formation Middle Jurassic Mols Member Early Jurassic Triassic NNW SSE 5 5 Biel Hermrigen Aarberg Wohlensee Flamatt Schwarzenburg Guggershorn (Boltigen) Zweisimmen Gu Si Br 0 0 Kl Ni NHF Kl UH -5 NHF -5 Autochthonous Foreland [km] [km] 10km Northalpine Foreland Northalpine Foreland and Helvetic nappe system Penninic nappe system Molasse (Cenozoic) Sediments Pre-Triassic basement Upper Penninic nappes/piemont Ocean Upper Freshwater Molasse Cenozoic (Northhelvetic Flysch, NHF) Permo-Carboniferous Gurnigel nappe Gu) Upper Marine Molasse Cretaceous Crystalline rocks, undifferentiated Simme nappe (Si) Lower Freshwater Molasse Lower Marine Molasse Late Jurassic Cretaceous Helvetic Allochthonous units Middle Penninic nappes/briançon Rise Early and Middle Jurassic Late Jurassic Ultrahelvetic nappes (UH) Breccia nappe (Br) Triassic Middle Jurassic Subalpine Flysch Klippen nappe (Kl) Early Jurassic Lower Penninic nappes/valais Trough Triassic Niesen nappe (Ni) Triassic (anhydrite) Triassic Fig. 2: Geological cross-section through the Helvetic nappe system along the transect of Jungfrau (Pfiffner 2014). The trace of cross-section is indicated in Fig. 1. Fig. 3: Geological cross-section through the western Molasse Basin along the seismic lines of the Western Traverse of NFP20 (Pfiffner 2014). The trace of cross-section is indicated in Fig

20 NNW Rhine Graben Jura Mountains Molasse Basin Mont-Terri Seppois-le-Bas Miécourt Glovelier Reconvilier Bienne/Biel Hermrigen Aarberg 0 SSE Field Trip Brienz The flood event of 2005 at Glyssibach in Brienz Oliver Hitz 1 & Nils Hählen 2 1 Hydraulic engineer, Public Works Service, Canton of Berne, Schlossberg 20, CH-3601 Thun 2 Head of the Department of Natural Hazards, Forestry Service, Canton of Berne, Schloss 2, CH-3800 Interlaken -5 [km] 20km Sediments Pre-Triassic basement Cenozoic (Molasse Basin & Rhine Graben) Permo-Carboniferous volcaniclastics Late Jurassic Crystalline rocks, undifferentiated Late Triasssic Middle Jurassic Early Middle Triassic (incl. evaporites) Fig. 4: Geological cross-section through the central Jura Mountains (Pfiffner 2014). The trace of cross-section is indicated in Fig [km] Introduction The village of Brienz is located on the shore of Lake Brienz (564 m altitude) in the eastern part of the Bernese Oberland (Fig. 1). It is built on the alluvial fans of six mountain torrents: Mühlibach, Trachtbach, Glyssibach, Schwanderbach, Lammbach and Eistlenbach. Floods and debris flows are well known and also listed in the ancient chronicles. Earlier, primarily agricultural land and buildings were inundated. With time, however, construction areas in secure locations became scarce and moved closer towards the channel. During the flood of 2005, especially the Trachtbach and the Glyssibach caused extensive damage. Reference Pfiffner, O.A. (2014): Geology of the Alps. Wiley-Blackwell, London. Geology, geomorphology The ridge of the northerly lying Brienzer-Rothorn Range ( m altitude) coincides with the municipal as well as the cantonal border to the Canton of Lucerne. Further east lie the municipalities of Schwanden, Hofstetten and Brienzwiler. The slopes north of Brienz consist mainly of Helvetic limestones and marls of the Wildhorn Nappe (Figs. 2, 3, 4 and 5). In the lower slope areas east of Brienz, however, there are Late Jurassic marly shales and micritic limestones belonging to the Schilt and Quinten Formations of the Axen Nappe, which also appears south of Lake Brienz. The transition to stockwork chalk forms the Cement Stone Formation. Thrust faults tectonically overstressed the marly shales in the lower part of the stockwork chalk to cause preferential weathering and formation of scree deposits. The upper areas of the hillside north of Brienz are dominated by Helvetic siliceous limestone as well as limestones belonging to the Drusberg-, Seewen- and Schrattenkalk Formations, which increase in thickness towards the north. In the Brienzer-Rothorn Range lies the catchment basin of the Brienzer torrents. These torrents refer to the five channels of Trachtbach, Glyssibach, Salazarbach, Lammbach and Eistlenbach, which join together from west to east. Settlement, land use During the Middle Ages, large forest areas were cleared in the catchment basins of the Brienzer torrents to make way for alpine pastures and hay production. Particularly the coniferous belt between altitudes of 1500 and 1800 m was affected. Following devastating floods in the first half of the 19th century and the widespread lack of mountain forests, the first Federal Forest Law to prohibit deforestation was passed. In particular, the large danger potential of the Brienzer torrents and the growing damage potential increasingly created the need for protection measures. After the devastating losses of the Lamb Creek disaster of 1896, the local population would absolutely not have been capable alone to undertake and to finance compre- Fig. 1: Overview of the catchment basins of Trachtbach and Glyssibach. hensive protection measures of hydraulic and silvicultural natures. As a result, the Canton of Berne acquired most of the cleared pastures and initiated the first reforestation projects through the financial support of the federal government. Since then, large dam and reforestation projects have been ongoing for more than a hundred years. From the very beginning, it was recognized that a comprehensive safety concept can only be successful if it consists of a combination of forestry measures in the basin and hydraulic constructions in the lower stretches. Maps from the years 1870, 1920 and 1998 show the colonisation of the torrent fan. Between 1870 and 1920 the railway system along the shore of Lake Brienz was developed. Increasing colonization began mainly in the second half of the last century. During the flood of 2005, especially Trachtbach and Glyssibach caused extensive damage. Both channels flow through a densely populated part of the village. It is remarkable that at both the previous large flood events occurred many decades ago (Trachtbach 1902, Glyssibach 1920/21, Fig. 6). Since the other Brienzer torrents have similar quiet periods, many people before 2005 knew about the danger of these channels at best only through narratives and records rather than through personal experience. Glyssibach is since known for significant torrential events. In the context of establishing a natural hazards map for the town of Brienz, a detailed event register was created in 2003, which now describes about 30 events back to The large, damaging events concerned primarily the municipality of Unterschwanden