• Energy Research

Tornadoes pose a significant threat to residential communities, causing enormous physical damage and losses to their social fabric. The dominant type of single-family residential buildings in the USA is light-frame wood construction, which is especially susceptible to tornado effects. Previous studies considering resilience of light-frame wood buildings have focused primarily on assessing damage, developing damage functions, and exploring different repair methods. Studies related to sustainability have focused mainly on environmental impacts or carbon usage. Practically all of these studies have been geared to assessment of individual buildings. In this study, we couple resilience and sustainability to evaluate their tradeoffs or alignments at the community level from a life-cycle stance. The life-cycle cost and carbon footprint are reflected in the construction and repair of damages due to the tornado hazard, as well as regular repair and maintenance that occurs during the life of the residence. Uncertainties in the randomness in tornado occurrence, size of the tornado footprint, and variation in wind speed intensities within the tornado footprint, and capacities of the building structure and envelope play a significant role in building performance and are considered. We explore a number of repair strategies that might be adopted at the community level in decision-making and policy formulation for homeowners, home builders and community planners. These strategies provide a framework for integrating minimum cost and carbon footprint objectives in risk-informed decision-making, a topic that appears to be lacking in the literature.

Tornadoes pose a significant threat to residential communities, causing enormous physical damage and losses to their social fabric. The dominant type of single-family residential buildings in the USA is light-frame wood construction, which is especially susceptible to tornado effects. Previous studies considering resilience of light-frame wood buildings have focused primarily on assessing damage, developing damage functions, and exploring different repair methods. Studies related to sustainability have focused mainly on environmental impacts or carbon usage. Practically all of these studies have been geared to assessment of individual buildings. In this study, we couple resilience and sustainability to evaluate their tradeoffs or alignments at the community level from a life-cycle stance. The life-cycle cost and carbon footprint are reflected in the construction and repair of damages due to the tornado hazard, as well as regular repair and maintenance that occurs during the life of the residence. Uncertainties in the randomness in tornado occurrence, size of the tornado footprint, and variation in wind speed intensities within the tornado footprint, and capacities of the building structure and envelope play a significant role in building performance and are considered. We explore a number of repair strategies that might be adopted at the community level in decision-making and policy formulation for homeowners, home builders and community planners. These strategies provide a framework for integrating minimum cost and carbon footprint objectives in risk-informed decision-making, a topic that appears to be lacking in the literature.

AbstractFlood risk to urban communities is increasing significantly as a result of the integrated effects of climate change and socioeconomic development. The latter effect is one of the main drivers of rising flood risk has received less attention in comparison to climate change. Economic development and population growth are major causes of urban expansion in flood‐prone areas, and a comprehensive understanding of the impact of urban growth on flood risk is an essential ingredient of effective flood risk management. At the same time, planning for community resilience has become a national and worldwide imperative in recent years. Enhancements to community resilience require well‐integrated and enormous long‐term public and private investments. Accordingly, comprehensive urban growth plans should take rising flood risk into account to ensure future resilient communities through careful collaboration between engineers, geologists, socialists, economists, and urban planners within the framework of life‐cycle analysis. This paper highlights the importance of including urban growth in accurate future flood risk assessment and how planning for future urbanization should include measurement science‐based strategies in developing policies to achieve more resilient communities.

AbstractFlood risk to urban communities is increasing significantly as a result of the integrated effects of climate change and socioeconomic development. The latter effect is one of the main drivers of rising flood risk has received less attention in comparison to climate change. Economic development and population growth are major causes of urban expansion in flood‐prone areas, and a comprehensive understanding of the impact of urban growth on flood risk is an essential ingredient of effective flood risk management. At the same time, planning for community resilience has become a national and worldwide imperative in recent years. Enhancements to community resilience require well‐integrated and enormous long‐term public and private investments. Accordingly, comprehensive urban growth plans should take rising flood risk into account to ensure future resilient communities through careful collaboration between engineers, geologists, socialists, economists, and urban planners within the framework of life‐cycle analysis. This paper highlights the importance of including urban growth in accurate future flood risk assessment and how planning for future urbanization should include measurement science‐based strategies in developing policies to achieve more resilient communities.

Abstract Light-frame wood building construction dominates the single-family residential home market in the United States. Such buildings are susceptible to damage from extreme winds due to hurricanes in coastal areas and tornados in the Midwest. The consequences of extreme winds on the built environment and on social and economic institutions within the community can be severe and are likely to increase in the coming decades as a result of increases in urbanization and economic development and the potential impacts of changing climate in hazard prone areas. Current building practices provide minimum standards for occupant safety and health, including structural integrity, water and sanitation, lighting, ventilation, means of egress and fire protection. However, they generally do not consider building resilience, which includes robustness and an ability to recover following extreme natural hazard events. Nor do they address sustainability, the notion that building design, construction and rehabilitation should not adversely impact the environment. In this paper, we establish a generalized cost and carbon footprint life-cycle analysis methodology for examining the benefits of different building practices for residential light-frame wood construction subjected to tornado hazards. A multi-objective approach is used to reveal tradeoffs between resilient and sustainable practices for typical residential construction. We show that when the life cycle of a typical residence is considered, a balance between resilience, sustainability and cost might be achieved in design and rehabilitation of residential building construction for tornado hazards.

Abstract Light-frame wood building construction dominates the single-family residential home market in the United States. Such buildings are susceptible to damage from extreme winds due to hurricanes in coastal areas and tornados in the Midwest. The consequences of extreme winds on the built environment and on social and economic institutions within the community can be severe and are likely to increase in the coming decades as a result of increases in urbanization and economic development and the potential impacts of changing climate in hazard prone areas. Current building practices provide minimum standards for occupant safety and health, including structural integrity, water and sanitation, lighting, ventilation, means of egress and fire protection. However, they generally do not consider building resilience, which includes robustness and an ability to recover following extreme natural hazard events. Nor do they address sustainability, the notion that building design, construction and rehabilitation should not adversely impact the environment. In this paper, we establish a generalized cost and carbon footprint life-cycle analysis methodology for examining the benefits of different building practices for residential light-frame wood construction subjected to tornado hazards. A multi-objective approach is used to reveal tradeoffs between resilient and sustainable practices for typical residential construction. We show that when the life cycle of a typical residence is considered, a balance between resilience, sustainability and cost might be achieved in design and rehabilitation of residential building construction for tornado hazards.

Abstract Fire is an integral component of ecosystems globally and a tool that humans have harnessed for millennia. Altered fire regimes are a fundamental cause and consequence of global change, impacting people and the biophysical systems on which they depend. As part of the newly emerging Anthropocene, marked by human-caused climate change and radical changes to ecosystems, fire danger is increasing, and fires are having increasingly devastating impacts on human health, infrastructure, and ecosystem services. Increasing fire danger is a vexing problem that requires deep transdisciplinary, trans-sector, and inclusive partnerships to address. Here, we outline barriers and opportunities in the next generation of fire science and provide guidance for investment in future research. We synthesize insights needed to better address the long-standing challenges of innovation across disciplines to (i) promote coordinated research efforts; (ii) embrace different ways of knowing and knowledge generation; (iii) promote exploration of fundamental science; (iv) capitalize on the “firehose” of data for societal benefit; and (v) integrate human and natural systems into models across multiple scales. Fire science is thus at a critical transitional moment. We need to shift from observation and modeled representations of varying components of climate, people, vegetation, and fire to more integrative and predictive approaches that support pathways toward mitigating and adapting to our increasingly flammable world, including the utilization of fire for human safety and benefit. Only through overcoming institutional silos and accessing knowledge across diverse communities can we effectively undertake research that improves outcomes in our more fiery future.

Abstract Fire is an integral component of ecosystems globally and a tool that humans have harnessed for millennia. Altered fire regimes are a fundamental cause and consequence of global change, impacting people and the biophysical systems on which they depend. As part of the newly emerging Anthropocene, marked by human-caused climate change and radical changes to ecosystems, fire danger is increasing, and fires are having increasingly devastating impacts on human health, infrastructure, and ecosystem services. Increasing fire danger is a vexing problem that requires deep transdisciplinary, trans-sector, and inclusive partnerships to address. Here, we outline barriers and opportunities in the next generation of fire science and provide guidance for investment in future research. We synthesize insights needed to better address the long-standing challenges of innovation across disciplines to (i) promote coordinated research efforts; (ii) embrace different ways of knowing and knowledge generation; (iii) promote exploration of fundamental science; (iv) capitalize on the “firehose” of data for societal benefit; and (v) integrate human and natural systems into models across multiple scales. Fire science is thus at a critical transitional moment. We need to shift from observation and modeled representations of varying components of climate, people, vegetation, and fire to more integrative and predictive approaches that support pathways toward mitigating and adapting to our increasingly flammable world, including the utilization of fire for human safety and benefit. Only through overcoming institutional silos and accessing knowledge across diverse communities can we effectively undertake research that improves outcomes in our more fiery future.