Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports (2019) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 12-28
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 12... ...
12 While evaluating climate resilience may be a new challenge, it can be incorporated as part of the overall risk management processes that most airports already have. Appendix A describes a generic management structure for assembling a team to analyze the potential impacts and responses to climate change and discusses specific risk management activities that such a team might undertake.
|
From page 13... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 13 These are discussed in the following, before getting into the details of how to actually conduct climate-related risk analyses. It is also important to note that while the present focus is on using the frameworks of FFA and BCA, there are of course other contexts in which climate risks could be assessed and evaluated; some of these are discussed in Appendix B
|
From page 14... ...
14 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports ACRP Report 147 makes a case for climate change adaptation and suggests establishing a stakeholder advisory committee to assist with setting resilience goals and identifying and prioritizing risks. It provides a primer on climate change and uncertainty for airports, provides national climate change projections, and suggests developing adaptations based on the vulnerability of critical assets and refining risk assessments as new, higher-resolution data become available on a 3- to 5-year review cycle.
|
From page 15... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 15 to risk and uncertainty in forecasting airport activity levels (Kincaid et al.
|
From page 16... ...
16 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports The first step uses the ACROS tool as a screening device to rule out climate stressors unlikely to affect an airport, at least through 2060 (Dewberry et al. 2015; the ACROS tool can be downloaded at http://www.trb.org/publications/blurbs/173554.aspx)
|
From page 17... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 17 be required to access the latest climate data (as described in Chapter 3) , a reasonable first step would be to use the ACROS software tool.
|
From page 18... ...
18 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports If, in the worst case, the climate stressor would not place a large burden on the airport or its users, then the airport could reasonably conclude that no further analysis needed to be undertaken. For example, ACROS shows that for PNS, up to 19.8 very hot days could occur in 2060.
|
From page 19... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 19 • Identify analysis period: It is assumed that the runway construction could be completed in a single year (2019) and then would be available for use starting in 2020.
|
From page 20... ...
20 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports Note: PAX = passengers. A B C D E F G H I J K L PNS MAX Very Hot Days Interpolated MAX Very Hot Days Daily Flts Affected per VHot Day Daily Pax Affected per VHot Day Annual Passenger Delay Costs Annual Aircraft Crew plus Depreciation Costs Base Case: Total VHot Day Delay Costs Scenario: Total VHot Day Delay Costs Benefits (Reduction in Delay Costs)
|
From page 21... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 21 5. Construction and annual operation and maintenance (O&M)
|
From page 22... ...
22 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports (AIP) grant that paid for 90% of the runway extension, then in the FFA, the airport would count only 10% of the investment costs.
|
From page 23... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 23 BCA or FFA is that the approach does not directly consider the uncertainty of climate change and the risk it imposes on the airport. A more thorough and robust analysis is available through the use of Monte Carlo simulation.
|
From page 24... ...
24 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports of data points to handle a long projection period could be very large. But as shown there, it is relatively straightforward to summarize the data into temperature bins and count the number of days each year temperatures are forecast to be in each bin.
|
From page 25... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 25 of scenario case costs (bottom of Column L) would remain constant because they do not depend on the climate forecasts.
|
From page 26... ...
26 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports NPV is greater (lesser) than 0.
|
From page 27... ...
Evaluation Methods Under Risk and Uncertainty 27 to undertake the proposed project. The alternative is to undertake the project, in which case the airport would face the construction and maintenance costs plus the reduced delay costs; this is represented by the "scenario" line in the chart.
|
From page 28... ...
28 Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports Overall, the VaR analysis provides a different perspective than that from simply focusing on the positive average NPV from Exhibit 2-9. Decision makers at the airport can use the results to help decide between the risky but higher potential payoff of doing nothing and the certain cost of investing in the mitigation project, which reduces but does not completely eliminate the airport's exposure.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.