Advancing Tsunami Risk Analysis Methodology

1. Proposed Project –“Toward a Methodology for Tsunami Risk Analysis” • Project Motivation(from NTHMP Strategic Plan 2009-2013) • • NTHMP Performance Metrics:“… support a research effort to develop U.S. tsunami risk assessment methodologies” to “… develop quantitative tsunami hazard analysis techniques including source determination and probability of occurrence” and “determine applicability of economic and loss estimation tools (e.g. HAZUS) by 2010” • • NTHMP Risk Definition:‘‘. . . the product of the probability of the occurrence of a tsunami (i.e., the ‘‘hazard’’) times the loss of property and life due to the tsunami” • Study Context • • Nation needs multiple approaches for tsunami risk analysis • (e.g., life safety, economic impacts, livelihood impacts, natural resources, infrastructure resilience, etc.) • • Project focuses on life safety aspects of risk (e.g., evacuation potential) • • First steps towards one tool in a national toolbox of tsunami risk analysis • • Begins research dialogue on needed tools and approaches in national toolbox

2. Proposed Project –“Toward a Methodology for Tsunami Risk Analysis” • Goal: Improve understanding and metrics of societal risk to tsunamis • Objectives: • • Integrate probabilistic hazard models, socioeconomic asset distributions, evacuation time models, and casualty loss models • • Examine life safety aspects of HAZUS tool (e.g., forces on people and buildings) Study Components: III. Socioeconomic and Evacuation Metrics (Nate Wood, USGS) • Community Engagement • (George Crawford, SRC) II. Tsunami Hazard Modeling (Frank González, UW/ESS) 100-yr Max Height 500-yr Max Height Land Cover Residents Employees + Ocean Shores, WA Seaside, OR

3. Proposed Project –“Toward a Methodology for Tsunami Risk Analysis” Proposed Study Areas and Timeline: • 2010 – Long Beach Peninsula – to leverage “Tsunami Safe Haven” project • 2011 – Ocean Shores, WA

4. Proposed Project –“Toward a Methodology for Tsunami Risk Analysis” • References • I. Community Engagement • - Wood, N., Good, J., and Goodwin, B., 2002, Vulnerability assessment of a port and harbor community to earthquake and tsunami hazards: integrating technical expert and stakeholder input,Natural Hazards Review, 3 (4), 148-157 • II. Tsunami Hazard Modeling • - González, F.I., et al. (2009): Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Assessment: The Seaside, Oregon, Pilot Project, J. Geophys. Res., 114, C11023, doi:10.1029/2008JC005132 • - Lukkunaprasit, P., et al. (2009): Experimental Verification of FEMA P646 Tsunami Loading, Journal of Disaster ResearchVol.4No.6, pp. 1-9. • Socioeconomic Vulnerability and Evacuation Potential • - Sleeter, R., and Wood, N., 2006, Estimating daytime and nighttime population density for coastal communities in Oregon: Proceedings of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association, Annual Conference, Vancouver, BC, September 26-29, 2006, 8 p • - Wood, N., Burton, C., and Cutter, S., 2010, Community variations in social vulnerability to Cascadia-related tsunamis in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, Natural Hazards, 52(2), 369-389 • - Wood, N., and Soulard, C., 2008, Variations in community exposure and sensitivity to tsunami hazards on the open-ocean and Strait of Juan de Fuca coasts of Washington: USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2008-5004, 34 p. • - Yeh, H., in press, Gender and Age Factors in Tsunami Casualties (2010): Natural Hazards Review