TY - JOUR
T1 - Timely prediction potential of landslide early warning systems with multispectral remote sensing
T2 - A conceptual approach tested in the Sattelkar, Austria
AU - Hermle, Doris
AU - Keuschnig, Markus
AU - Hartmeyer, Ingo
AU - Delleske, Robert
AU - Krautblatter, Michael
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s).
PY - 2021/9/8
Y1 - 2021/9/8
N2 - While optical remote sensing has demonstrated its capabilities for landslide detection and monitoring, spatial and temporal demands for landslide early warning systems (LEWSs) had not been met until recently. We introduce a novel conceptual approach to structure and quantitatively assess lead time for LEWSs. We analysed "time to warning"as a sequence: (i) time to collect, (ii) time to process and (iii) time to evaluate relevant optical data. The difference between the time to warning and "forecasting window"(i.e. time from hazard becoming predictable until event) is the lead time for reactive measures. We tested digital image correlation (DIC) of best-suited spatiotemporal techniques, i.e. 3gm resolution PlanetScope daily imagery and 0.16gm resolution unmanned aerial system (UAS)-derived orthophotos to reveal fast ground displacement and acceleration of a deep-seated, complex alpine mass movement leading to massive debris flow events. The time to warning for the UAS/PlanetScope totals 31/21gh and is comprised of time to (i) collect - 12/14gh, (ii) process - 17/5gh and (iii) evaluate - 2/2gh, which is well below the forecasting window for recent benchmarks and facilitates a lead time for reactive measures. We show optical remote sensing data can support LEWSs with a sufficiently fast processing time, demonstrating the feasibility of optical sensors for LEWSs.
AB - While optical remote sensing has demonstrated its capabilities for landslide detection and monitoring, spatial and temporal demands for landslide early warning systems (LEWSs) had not been met until recently. We introduce a novel conceptual approach to structure and quantitatively assess lead time for LEWSs. We analysed "time to warning"as a sequence: (i) time to collect, (ii) time to process and (iii) time to evaluate relevant optical data. The difference between the time to warning and "forecasting window"(i.e. time from hazard becoming predictable until event) is the lead time for reactive measures. We tested digital image correlation (DIC) of best-suited spatiotemporal techniques, i.e. 3gm resolution PlanetScope daily imagery and 0.16gm resolution unmanned aerial system (UAS)-derived orthophotos to reveal fast ground displacement and acceleration of a deep-seated, complex alpine mass movement leading to massive debris flow events. The time to warning for the UAS/PlanetScope totals 31/21gh and is comprised of time to (i) collect - 12/14gh, (ii) process - 17/5gh and (iii) evaluate - 2/2gh, which is well below the forecasting window for recent benchmarks and facilitates a lead time for reactive measures. We show optical remote sensing data can support LEWSs with a sufficiently fast processing time, demonstrating the feasibility of optical sensors for LEWSs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114852416&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5194/nhess-21-2753-2021
DO - 10.5194/nhess-21-2753-2021
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85114852416
SN - 1561-8633
VL - 21
SP - 2753
EP - 2772
JO - Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
JF - Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
IS - 9
ER -