El Salvador - GFDRR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

82 | El Salvador: Damage, Loss, and Needs Assesment There were no damages to power plants. In the electricity transmission system, landslides and erosion affected the bases of numerous transmission towers, one substation and one of ETESAL’s facilities. These will require work to avoid and mitigate disasters in the future. In the distribution networks, there were damages to the systems of DELSUR and AES; these were repaired quickly, using the equipment and supplies available in their workshops and warehouses. With regard to system operation and electricity distribution, the service was quickly and effectively reestablished in a relatively brief period, although in some isolated zones it took longer. This assumed higher operating costs and, due to the destruction of a relatively high number of houses and small- and medium-scale businesses, there has been a slight decrease in demand and sales of electricity which will only be recovered in the medium term, in line with these users’ reconstruction process. The heavy and unusual precipitation that occurred during the natural event made it possible to store significant volumes of water in the systems’ dams in the Lempa River basin. This allowed around 97.9 gigawatts/hour of hydroelectricity to be generated between November of last year and May 2010, displacing the equivalent in thermal generation, with the consequent savings in generation which will be passed on to users. In summary, estimated damages totaled US$690,000, and the companies were obliged to spend unforeseen funds to rehabilitate supply and to avoid greater damages, in the amount of an extra US$2.13 million, with the consequent negative effect on their expected financial results. Through the introduction of savings in power generation estimated at US$7.89 million, the sector shows a net benefit of US$5.76 million resulting from greater generation in the hydroelectric plants (see Table 29). TABLE 29. ESTIMATED DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE ELECTRICITY SECTOR System Component Effects (in millions of US dollars) Property Damages Losses Total Public Private Generation system – – 7.89 – 7.89 – 7.89 Higher hydropower generation – 7.89 – 7.89 – 7.89 Transmission system – 1.32 1.32 1.32 Mitigation costs: towers, substation and facility 1.32 1.32 1.32 Distribution system 0.69 0.81 1.50 – 1.50 Damages to distribution networks 0.69 0.69 0.69 System rehabilitation costs – – Damage assessment cost – – Higher operating costs 0.06 0.06 0.06 Fewer electricity sales 0.75 0.75 0.75 Total 0.69 – 5.76 – 5.07 – 6.57 1.50 Source: Estimates by assessment mission based on information from SIGET and companies. B.3.3 Transportation Sector The damages and losses caused by the disaster had an especially severe effect on bridges, causing some to collapse and significant damages to other structures. Landslides caused costs and obstructions to pavement. Fortunately, the damages are less than those that occurred on similar occasions: for example, during Hurricanes Mitch in 1998 and Stan in 2005, and the 2001 earthquakes.
II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AREAS | 83 The following is an estimate of the physical damages to road infrastructure caused by the disasters, and losses or increases in vehicular operating costs—incurred by users and subsector companies—as a result of the unavailability of road assets that were totally or partially affected and unusable, during the period in which they will be not be in service. In this regard, the value of damages was estimated according to the cost of replacing the affected roads at their same level of quality and efficiency. a) Background The institutional qualification of El Salvador’s roads distinguishes the following networks: special, primary, secondary and tertiary. The first corresponds to a part of the old main roads that, due to enormous demands, were expanded to highways with two separate routes, two lanes each; the primary network corresponds to roads that connect to provincial capitals and also connect provincial capitals with the national capital, ports and borders; secondary roads connect to municipal capitals and also connect these capitals with the primary network; and the tertiary network consists of local or country roads. All of the above roads are the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Works (MOP). Road conservation is the responsibility of the Road Conservation Fund (Fondo de Conservación Vial), an autonomous agency with resources granted by law that stem from the specific tax on fuel. Most of the background information used in the preparation of this report came from the work conducted by an MOP team. Background information on land was obtained in situ by MOP specialized personnel. The following were also considered: background information from direct observations of various affected areas and individual road points; consultations with experienced professionals or those who have participated in similar analytical processes; and operators of the mass transportation of goods and people. Damages mostly correspond to bridge collapses and to the destabilization of embankments, as well as to erosion, landslides, cave-ins, sinking and settling of pavement, among the main adverse consequences. b) Damage Estimate Costs were estimated by separately analyzing each physical damage and then assessing the respective replacement costs. The results obtained are presented in Table 30. Addressing the damages expressed in the table corresponds to rehabilitation, except for bridges, most of which must be completely reconstructed (in this regard, see Recovery Needs in Chapter VI). It is worth noting that the figure in the table includes emergency expenditures since these cannot be separated from replacement because a large share of the expenditures made immediately after the phenomenon include both items. Of the total cost, US$32 million correspond to the foreign component (imported materials required for reconstruction).
Page 1:
El Salvador Damage, Loss, and Needs
Page 5 and 6:
| iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to e
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgement | v The external su
Page 9 and 10:
| 1 PRESENTATION At the request of
Page 11 and 12:
| 3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Through
Page 13 and 14:
| 5 I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT A.
Page 15 and 16:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 7 The
Page 17 and 18:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 9 IMA
Page 19 and 20:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 11 IM
Page 21 and 22:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 13 Sp
Page 23 and 24:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 15 As
Page 25 and 26:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 17 C.
Page 27 and 28:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 19 po
Page 29 and 30:
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT | 21 GR
Page 31 and 32:
| 23 II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AR
Page 33 and 34:
II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AREAS |
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40: II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AREAS |
Page 89: II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AREAS |
Page 97: II. POPULATION AND AFFECTED AREAS |
Page 100 and 101: 92 | El Salvador: Damage, Loss, and
Page 108 and 109: 100 | El Salvador: Damage, Loss, an
Page 140 and 141:
132 | El Salvador: Damage, Loss, an
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160:
AUSTRALIA BELGIUM BRAZIL CANADA DEN
show all

El Salvador - GFDRR

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?