The Impact of Natural Hazards in Iceland

1
The Impact of Natural Hazards in Iceland

• How Impact Assessment could be Instrumental in a
  New Type of a Regional Plan
• Birgir Jónsson, University of Iceland
• Hallgrímur Már Hallgrímsson, Snertill Consulting
• Trausti Valsson, University of Iceland
• 5th Nordic Environmental Assessment Conference

2
Our Motivation

• Too small difference between Municipal
  Planning and Regional Planning
• Municipalities not as interested in Regional
  Planning as Municipal Planning
• Regional Planning Areas should be based more on
  physical/natural factors
• Regional Planning Areas too small
• Natural Hazards not shown enough respect in
  Regional Planning

3
Aim

• To formulate a new or different
• planning methodology,
• better suited
• (than present planning methods)
• to make use of Natural Hazards Data
• during Regional Planning

4
Research Project (Hallgrimssons MS project)

• 1. part - Natural Hazards and Planning
• Study on Regional Planning Methods and main
  Natural Hazards in Iceland
• 2. part - Construct Methology
• Methodology introduced in two steps i.e. new
  division of planning areas and working process
  for introduction of natural hazard data
• 3. part - Application of Methology
• Methology applied on a certain area, the Thjórsá
  River Basin

5
Importance of Natural Hazards in Regional
Planning (1)

• Chapter 4.18.2 in the Planning Regulation No
  400/1998 reads (roughly translated)
• In Regional- and Municipal Planning, Natural
  Hazard Areas should be clearly indicated as well
  as proposed land use and rules about human
  activity in these areas.

6
Importance of Natural Hazards in Regional
Planning (2)

• Regional Planning in Iceland during the last few
  decades has not dealt sufficiently with Natural
  Hazards, with the exception of very localized
  hazards like snow avalanches in some cases
• The Regional Plan for the Central Highlands of
  Iceland (1999) hardly mentions Natural Hazards,
  although many Natural Hazards Areas are located
  within the region

7
Analysis and Proposals (1)
Boundaries of regional plans are administrative
boundaries
8
Analysis and Proposals (2)
Most Regional Plan Areas have been too small, not
much difference between Municipal and Regional
Plans
9
Analysis and Proposals (3)
Regional Planning in Iceland has not dealt
adequately with Natural Hazards
10
Methodology

• Two step methodology is proposed, based on
  previous reasoning
• Propose a new division for Regional Plan Areas
  based on natural/physical reasons
• Propose a new working process on how to make use
  of Natural Hazard Data in Regional Planning

11
Basis for Area Division

• Threefold reasons
• Landscape and Nature
• Not divide landscape and nature units, such as
  river basins and protected areas
• Natural Hazards
• Each Natural Hazard contained, as possible,
  wholly within one Regional Planning Area
• Sociological Units
• Try not to divide economic and social units, such
  as employment areas

12
New Regional Planning Areas ?
Proposal for a new Division of Planning Areas
13
Regional Planning Areas

• Nine Planning Areas
• Each Regional Plan should conform with Regional
  Plans for adjacent Areas

• Boundaries of Regional Planning Areas are
  approximate and overlapping as needed
• Planning Authorities in adjacent areas should
  cooperate when planning the boundary areas

14
Working Process
Collect Data
Nature, cause and frequency
Impact Areas
Hazard
Impact and damage
15
Preventive Planning

• 1) If Possible - Avoid Probable Impact
  Area!
• 2) In Practice - Depends on Frequency and
  Possible Damage (NB Evacuation Plan)
• Frequency and Examples
• gt1000 years Eruptions - Catastrophic Floods
• gt100 years Huge Floods - Eruptions/Earthquakes
• gt10 years Floods (River and Coastal)
• lt10 years High Force Weather - Coastal Floods

16
Defensive Actions

• Snow Avalanche Defences
• Prepare for Earthquakes, esp. inside houses
• Sea Walls/Dykes
• River Levees/Dykes
• Etc.

17
Natural Hazards in Iceland

• This research project dealt with 10 main Natural
  Hazards in Iceland

• Nature, cause and frequency
• Impact Areas
• Impact and damage
• Preventive planning
• Defensive actions
• Administration
• References

18
Proposed Planning Areas in South Iceland

• Convenient to divide South Iceland into four sub
  areas to make planning work easier

19
South Iceland Earthquakes
Earthquake in 1784, estimated size ca. 7.5 on
Richter Scale, ca. 30x stronger than each of the
two earthquakes in June 2000 which were 6.6 on
Richter Scale
20
Ash and Pumice fall from an eruption in 1480 at
Veidivötn Lakes

• In the eruption at Veidivötn Lakes around year
  1480 the ash and pumice production was 3.5 km3

21
Lava fromVeidivötn Lakes

• Impact maps have been made by Dr. Páll Imsland of
  possible lava flows from future eruptions in the
  Veidivötn Lakes

• The five different maps present different
  locations of the eruptive fissures
• The maps are based on the average amount of lava
  previously erupted in each eruption in the area,
  i.e. 1 km3. This is 5x the amount of lava
  erupted in the Heimaey eruption in 1973

22
Possible paths of Glacial Floods

• Average flow of Thjorsa River is 360 m3/sec near
  mouth
• Peak flow of Glacial Flood from the Grímsvötn
  eruption in 1996 reached 52.000 m3/sec

23
Conclusions

• Regional Planning in Iceland has in many cases
  not shown Natural Hazards enough respect
• By increasing the size of Regional Planning
  Areas, widespread impacts, such as natural
  hazards, can be introduced in the planning
• A new working process helps to deal with Natural
  Hazard Data during Regional Planning, in a more
  precise way than before