Assessing the Co-Benefits of green-blue-grey infrastructure for sustainable urban flood risk management

被引:219
作者
Alves, Alida [1 ]
Gersonius, Berry [2 ]
Kapelan, Zoran [3 ,4 ]
Vojinovic, Zoran [1 ]
Sanchez, Arlex [1 ]
机构
[1] IHE Delft, Dept Environm Engn & Water Technol, Delft, Netherlands
[2] IHE Delft, Dept Water Engn, Delft, Netherlands
[3] Univ Exeter, Coll Engn, Ctr Water Syst, Exeter, Devon, England
[4] Delft Univ Technol, Fac Civil Engn & Geosci, Dept Water Management, Delft, Netherlands
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Sustainable urban drainage; Green-blue-grey infrastructure; Flood risk management; Co-benefits valuation; Decision making; Cost-benefits analysis; STORMWATER MANAGEMENT; HEAT-ISLAND; LIFE; MITIGATION; IMPACT; ENERGY; PAVEMENTS; ROOFS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.036
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Green-blue infrastructures in urban spaces offer several co-benefits besides flood risk reduction, such as water savings, energy savings due to less cooling usage, air quality improvement and carbon sequestration. Traditionally, these co-benefits were not included in decision making processes for flood risk management. In this work we present a method to include the monetary analysis of these co-benefits into a cost-benefits analysis of flood risk mitigation measures. This approach was applied to a case study, comparing costs and benefits with and without co-benefits. Different intervention strategies were considered, using green, blue and grey measures and combinations of them. The results obtained illustrate the importance of assessing co-benefits when identifying best adaptation strategies to improve urban flood risk management. Otherwise green infrastructure is likely to appear less efficient than more conventional grey infrastructure. Moreover, a mix of green, blue and grey infrastructures is likely to result in the best adaptation strategy as these three alternatives tend to complement each other. Grey infrastructure has good performance at reducing the risk of flooding, whilst green infrastructure brings in multiple additional benefits that grey infrastructure cannot offer.
引用
收藏
页码:244 / 254
页数:11
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]   Cool surfaces and shade trees to reduce energy use and improve air quality in urban areas [J].
Akbari, H ;
Pomerantz, M ;
Taha, H .
SOLAR ENERGY, 2001, 70 (03) :295-310
[2]   Long-Term Hydraulic Performance of Porous Asphalt Pavements in Northern Sweden [J].
Al-Rubaei, Ahmed Mohammed ;
Stenglein, Anna Lena ;
Viklander, Maria ;
Blecken, Godecke-Tobias .
JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING, 2013, 139 (06) :499-505
[3]   Multi-criteria Approach for Selection of Green and Grey Infrastructure to Reduce Flood Risk and Increase CO-benefits [J].
Alves, Alida ;
Gersonius, Berry ;
Sanchez, Arlex ;
Vojinovic, Zoran ;
Kapelan, Zoran .
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, 2018, 32 (07) :2505-2522
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2012, FLOOD RISK RED INN T
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2010, VAL GREEN INFR GUID
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2015, FLOOR RISK HOLISTIC
[7]  
[Anonymous], RED URB HEAT ISL COM
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2014, WORLD URB PROSP
[9]   Probabilistic social cost-benefit analysis for green roofs: A lifecycle approach [J].
Bianchini, Fabricio ;
Hewage, Kasun .
BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2012, 58 :152-162
[10]   Life-cycle cost-benefit analysis of extensive vegetated roof systems [J].
Carter, Timothy ;
Keeler, Andrew .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2008, 87 (03) :350-363