Using Storage Ponds in Natural Flood Management Schemes in Practice: The Need for Fine-Tuning and Upscaling

IF 3 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Leo Peskett, Sarah Collins, Andrew Black, Matthew Arran, Alan MacDonald, Andy Young
{"title":"Using Storage Ponds in Natural Flood Management Schemes in Practice: The Need for Fine-Tuning and Upscaling","authors":"Leo Peskett,&nbsp;Sarah Collins,&nbsp;Andrew Black,&nbsp;Matthew Arran,&nbsp;Alan MacDonald,&nbsp;Andy Young","doi":"10.1111/jfr3.70059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is increasing interest in installing water storage ponds as part of natural flood management (NFM) approaches being implemented globally. Despite decades of experience with constructing flood storage ponds within civil engineering disciplines, there remains little empirical evidence of their effectiveness in NFM. In NFM, ‘natural’ ponds use green infrastructure, are often smaller but more numerous, and are built and maintained by land managers rather than engineers. Here we investigate six flood storage ponds in the 69 km<sup>2</sup> Eddleston NFM pilot catchment in Scotland, UK, analysing impact on peak stream flows at different scales and pond designs. The ponds generally reduce peak stream flows where they have large available capacity, catchments are small (&lt; 1 km<sup>2</sup>), and events are low magnitude (&gt; 20% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP)). No discernible flow reduction was observed at the largest pond and catchment (64 km<sup>2</sup>) for the largest (~21% AEP) event. There was significant variability between ponds, and gains can be made in engineering pond inlet/outlet structures, maintenance, and more widespread installation. The findings suggest that natural storage ponds have most potential to contribute to flood control in small catchments (&lt; 10 km<sup>2</sup>) and small flood events (&gt; 25% AEP), when they are carefully designed and maintained, and sufficient in number.</p>","PeriodicalId":49294,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Flood Risk Management","volume":"18 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jfr3.70059","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Flood Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jfr3.70059","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is increasing interest in installing water storage ponds as part of natural flood management (NFM) approaches being implemented globally. Despite decades of experience with constructing flood storage ponds within civil engineering disciplines, there remains little empirical evidence of their effectiveness in NFM. In NFM, ‘natural’ ponds use green infrastructure, are often smaller but more numerous, and are built and maintained by land managers rather than engineers. Here we investigate six flood storage ponds in the 69 km2 Eddleston NFM pilot catchment in Scotland, UK, analysing impact on peak stream flows at different scales and pond designs. The ponds generally reduce peak stream flows where they have large available capacity, catchments are small (< 1 km2), and events are low magnitude (> 20% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP)). No discernible flow reduction was observed at the largest pond and catchment (64 km2) for the largest (~21% AEP) event. There was significant variability between ponds, and gains can be made in engineering pond inlet/outlet structures, maintenance, and more widespread installation. The findings suggest that natural storage ponds have most potential to contribute to flood control in small catchments (< 10 km2) and small flood events (> 25% AEP), when they are carefully designed and maintained, and sufficient in number.

Abstract Image

在自然洪水管理方案中使用蓄水池:需要微调和升级
作为全球范围内正在实施的自然洪水管理(NFM)方法的一部分,人们对安装储水池越来越感兴趣。尽管在土木工程学科中建造蓄水池已有数十年的经验,但很少有经验证据表明它们在NFM中的有效性。在NFM中,“天然”池塘使用绿色基础设施,通常更小但数量更多,由土地管理者而不是工程师建造和维护。在这里,我们调查了英国苏格兰Eddleston NFM试点集水区69平方公里的6个蓄水池,分析了不同规模和池塘设计对峰值流量的影响。在可用容量大、集水区小(1平方公里)和事件强度低(年超过概率为20%)的地方,池塘通常会减少峰值流量。在最大的(~21% AEP)事件中,最大的池塘和集水区(64 km2)没有观测到明显的流量减少。池塘之间存在显著的差异,可以在工程池塘进出口结构、维护和更广泛的安装中获得收益。研究结果表明,在精心设计和维护且数量充足的情况下,天然蓄水池在小流域(10平方公里)和小洪水事件(25% AEP)中最有可能起到防洪作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Flood Risk Management
Journal of Flood Risk Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-WATER RESOURCES
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
7.30%
发文量
93
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Flood Risk Management provides an international platform for knowledge sharing in all areas related to flood risk. Its explicit aim is to disseminate ideas across the range of disciplines where flood related research is carried out and it provides content ranging from leading edge academic papers to applied content with the practitioner in mind. Readers and authors come from a wide background and include hydrologists, meteorologists, geographers, geomorphologists, conservationists, civil engineers, social scientists, policy makers, insurers and practitioners. They share an interest in managing the complex interactions between the many skills and disciplines that underpin the management of flood risk across the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信