Search

Many drinking water utilities face immense challenges in supplying sustainable, drought-resilient services to households. Here we propose a quantified framework to perform drought risk analysis on ~5600 potable water supply utilities and evaluate the benefit of adaptation actions. We identify global hotspots of present-day and mid-century drought risk under future scenarios of climate change and demand growth (namely, SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0, SSP5-8.5). We estimate the mean rate of unsustainable or disrupted utility supply at 15% (interquartile range, 0–26%) and project a global increase in risk of between 30–45% under future scenarios. Implementing the most cost-effective adaptation action identified per utility would mitigate additional future risk by 75–80%. However, implementing the subset of cost-effective options that generate sufficient tariff revenue to provide a benefit-cost ratio that is greater than 1 would only achieve 5–20% of this benefit. The results underline the challenge of attracting the financing required to close the climate adaptation gap for water supply utilities.

Ports are located in low-lying coastal and riverine areas making them prone to the physical impacts of natural disasters. The consequential disruptions can potentially propagate through supply chains, resulting in widespread economic losses. Previous studies to quantify the risks of port disruptions have adopted various modelling assumptions about the resilience of individual ports and marine network logistics. However, limited empirical evidence is available to validate these modelling assumptions or to provide deeper understanding of the ways in which operations are adapted during and after disruptions. Here, we use vessel tracking data to analyse past port disruptions due to natural disasters, evaluating 141 incidences of disruptions across 74 ports and 27 disasters. Results show a median disruption duration of six days with a 95th percentile of 22.2 days. All analysed events show multiple ports being affected simultaneously, challenging some of the studies that only focus on single port disruptions. Moreover, we find that the duration of the disruption scales with the severity of the event, with an increment of 1.0 m storm surge or 10 m/s wind speed associated with a two day increase in disruption duration. In contrast to commonplace assumptions in model studies, substitution between ports is rarely observed during short-term disruptions. On the other hand, production recapture happens in practice in many cases of port disruptions. In short, empirical vessel tracking data provides valuable insights for future modelling studies in order to better approximate the extent of the disruption and the potential resilience of the port and maritime network.

River floods are considered one of the most important natural disasters and causes huge damages every year, both in economic consequences and fatalities. Out of historical perspectives, human settlements are located in fertile and economic attractive delta regions. Deltas tend to be constantly changing nodes of economic and urban growth leading to increasing exposure to flooding. Climate change may lead to a higher intensity and magnitude of flood events in the future. This development puts huge pressures on government and other decision-making authorities to cope with these threat by developing adequate flood mitigation plans. It is recognized that prevention is not possible and a shift towards integrating flood management into urban planning making it both robust and adaptive to future uncertainties is required to reduce the risk. Finding the set of measures appropriate for the risk situation of a city is difficult, because for a lot of non-structural measures the benefit is not yet defined in a quantitative way. Flood risk assessments are useful tools for indications of economic damage and identifying the most vulnerable cities worldwide. However, only considering economic damage as flood indicator will lead to an one-sided quantification of flood risk. Therefore, other risk indicators need to be considered to give a more comprehensive indication of flood risk. In this research, a framework is suggested to get a quick overview of the flood risk management of a city containing preventive, spatial, emergency, recovery and adaptive status. The economic risk is extended with the risk indicators; individual risk, household risk and a damage distribution. Based on this, an evaluation of the flood risk situation of a city can be derived, resulting in a preliminary advice for the appropriate measures and measures where the highest cost benefit ratio can be achieved. Focusing on the most beneficial measures could save a lot of time and resources. Next to that, this framew, Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Hydraulic Engineering

Contains fulltext : 97862.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND/AIM: In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a single center intervention study. Primary endpoints were the risk parameters cell proliferation and glutathione S-transferase (GST) detoxification capacity in the pouch mucosa; secondary endpoints were the short chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents, pH, and cytotoxicity of fecal water. METHODS: Before the start and at the end of each 4-week intervention period, six biopsies of the pouch were taken and feces was collected during 24 h. Cell proliferation and GST enzyme activity was assessed in the biopsies and pH, SCFA contents, and cytotoxicity were assessed in the fecal water fraction. The three interventions (sulindac, inulin/VSL#3, sulindac/inulin/VSL#3) were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Cell proliferation was lower after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment with sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 showed the opposite. GST enzyme activity was increased after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment showed the opposite effect. However, no significance was reached in all these measures. Cytotoxicity, pH, and SCFA content of fecal water showed no differences at all among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed non-significant decreased cell proliferation and increased detoxification capacity after treatment with sulindac or VSL#3/inulin; however, combining both regimens did not show an additional effect.