International Centre for Geohazards - NGI

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 3Contents1 BACKGROUND.........................................................................................................................42 ORGANISATION OF ICG.........................................................................................................43 ACTIVITIES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS.............................................................................84 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES OF ICG IN 2004 ...........................................................................84.1 Core research activities .....................................................................................................84.2 Bam Earthquake of 26 December 2003 ............................................................................94.3 Indian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004..................................................................134.4 Communication and relations with the media.................................................................155 INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND OTHER ICG ACTIVITIES IN 2004.................155.1 ICG Publications.............................................................................................................155.2 International contacts made on geohazards in 2004........................................................165.3 Other international activities...........................................................................................165.4 Web site...........................................................................................................................176 DOCTORAL CANDIDATES AND GUEST RESEARCHERS IN 2004................................177 ACCOUNTING 2004................................................................................................................187.1 Cash funding (kNOK).....................................................................................................187.2 In kind (kNOK, approximate, these numbers are a minimum).......................................187.3 Breakdown of the funds from The Research Council in 2003-2004...............................198 PLANNED ACTIVITIES AND BUDGET FOR 2005.............................................................198.1 Research Projects ............................................................................................................198.2 International networking .................................................................................................198.3 EU proposals and projects with financing from other sources........................................208.4 Organising conferences and workshops in 2005 and 2006 .............................................208.5 ICG budget for 2005 .......................................................................................................20Appendix A – Summary of ICG Activities in 2004Appendix B – List of ICG PublicationsReview and reference documentf:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 41 BACKGROUNDThe "International Centre for Geohazards" (ICG) is one the 13 Centres ofExcellence (Senter for Fremragende Forskning, SFF) established by theResearch Council of Norway in 2003. The motivation for establishing ICG andthe basic research topics are given in the Annual Report for 2003 and are notrepeated here.ICG is a consortium of five partners. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)is the host organisation for ICG. Other partners in the centre are University ofOslo (UiO), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU),NORSAR, and Geological Survey of Norway (NGU). The consortium may beexpanded with "associated partners" subject to agreement by all five main partners.The Centre’s objective is to be an international centre of expertise on basic andapplied research on geo-related natural hazards (geohazards), such as landslidesand earthquakes. The aim is to develop knowledge that can help savelives and reduce damage to infrastructure and the environment. Another aim isto train graduate students and highly-qualified researchers from Norway andabroad.ICG and PRIO are the only Centres of Excellence hosted by a non-university.NGI, NORSAR and partly NGU need to operate on an earning basis (eachman-hour is charged at commercial rates) rather than supported by the statenational budget as for university staff. Therefore, the personnel costs forresearch carried out by engineers and scientists from those three partners inICG are charged to the projects. For a given funding from The ResearchCouncil of Norway, there are considerably more room of assigning researchstaff at the centres hosted by universities than at ICG. This is one reason whymany tasks are carried out by post-docs and guest researchers brought in atICG, as the research hours are much less costly for visiting scientists and engineersthan for regular staff at NGI, NORSAR and NGU.2 ORGANISATION OF ICGICG has its own Board of Directors (Steering Committee). Each of the ICGconsortium partners, NGI, NTNU, UiO, NORSAR and NGU, has a representativeon the Steering Committee. In addition, the Steering Committee has atleast one external representative from Norway and one international representative.The Research Council of Norway may also appoint a member to theSteering Committee. The associated partners in the centre do not have a representativeon the Steering Committee.As the host organisation, NGI appointed the director of ICG, and NGI’s representativeis the chairman of the Steering Committee.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 5Activities of the ICG are grouped into three categories:1. Research projects2. Training and education3. International networking and dissemination of informationThe organisation chart and the project chart of ICG are shown on the followingpages. The ICG projects and other ICG activities are elaborated further later inthe report.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 7Project chart of ICG as of 31 December 2004Dr. Farrokh Nadim, DirectorDr. Anders Solheim, Deputy DirectorTini van der Harst, Administrative AssistantTechnical AdviserProf. Kaare HøegInternational Scientific AdvisorsProf. Gholamreza Mesri (U.of Illinois)Prof. Steven Kramer (U. of Washington)Prof. Kok-Kwang Phoon (Nat. U. of SingaporeICG Project Project Managers Guest ResearchersRisk and vulnerability analysis for geohazards Dr. Suzanne Lacasse (NGI) Prof. Kok-Kwang Phoon, Prof. Sebnem DuzgunEarthquake hazard: Risk and vulnerability Dr. Conrad Lindholm (NORSAR)Rockslides and engineering geology – Stability, failure, slidingDr. Nestor CardozoDr. Lars H. Blikra (NGU)and consequencesLandslides in soil slopes Mr. Kjell Karlsrud (NGI) Dr. Stanley Boyle, Prof. Lewis EdgersOffshore geohazards Dr. Anders Solheim (NGI) Dr. Joonsang Park, Dr. Shaoli YangGIS applications in geohazards Prof. Bernd Etzelmüller (UiO)Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) applications in geohazards Dr. John Dehls (NGU)Slide Dynamics and mechanics of disintegration Prof. Anders Elverhøi (UiO)Tsunami modelling and prediction Dr. Carl Harbitz (NGI)Development of graduate studies in geohazards Prof. Steinar Nordal (NTNU) Dr. Tewodros Tefera, Prof. Michael LongPhD-candidates:Graziella Devoli (UiO) Inger Lise Solberg (NTNU)Sylfest Glimsdal (UiO) Vikas Thakur (NTNU)Harald Iwe (UiO) Krishnia Aryal (NTNU)Finn Løvholt (UiO) Roger Ebeltoft (NTNU)Bård Romsdal (UiO) Maj Gøril Glåmen (NTNU)Arne Moe (NTNU) Guro Grøneng (NTNU)Vidar Kveldsvik (NTNU) Trond Nordvik (NTNU)Professors from Norway active in ICG:Kaare Høeg (UiO) Jan Ketil Rød (NTNU)Anders Elverhøi (UiO) Rolf Sandven (NTNU)Bernd Etzelmüller (UiO) Leiv-Jacob Gelius (UiO)Lars Grande (NTNU) Hans Petter Langtangen (UiOSteinar Nordal (NTNU) Svein Hamran (UiO)Geir Kleivstul Pedersen (UiO) Farrokh Nadim (NTNU & UiO)Bjørn Gjevik (UiO) Kåre Rokoengen (NTNU)Bjørn Nilsen (NTNU)f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.doc FNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 83 ACTIVITIES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORSThe main responsibility of ICG’s Steering Committee is to set the priorities inthe yearly research plans. The Steering Committee also acts as a technicaladvisor to the Director of ICG.The Steering Committee shall also discuss and deal with• annual budget• annual technical report(s)• annual financial reportThe annual technical and financial report (this document) is prepared by theDirector of the Centre and delivered to the Managing Director of NGI, who isresponsible for reporting the activities of ICG to The Research Council ofNorway.The ICG Steering Committee is composed of:Prof. Kaare Høeg (UiO/NGI), ChairmanDr Arne Bjørlykke (NGU)Prof. Anders Elverhøi (UiO)Dr Haavar Gjøystdal (NORSAR) (Mr. Anders Dahle from 1 Jan. 2005)Prof. Steinar Nordal (NTNU)Mr. Steinar Schanche (NVE)Mr. Tor-Inge Tjelta (Statoil)Dr Philippe Jeanjean (BP, USA)The Steering Committee held 3 meetings in 2004:Meeting No. 1/04: 14 January 2004Meeting No. 2/04: 12 May 2004Meeting No. 3/04: 8 December 2004The following meetings in 2005 are planned:Meeting No. 1/05: 16 March 2005 (already held)Meeting No. 2/05: 16 November 20054 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES OF ICG IN 20044.1 Core research activitiesThe paper reproduced in Appendix A presents the ICG research projects in2004 and the work underway for each project. The paper was published in thepeer-reviewed journal "Norwegian Journal of Geology" in January 2005.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 9ICG divided its activities into 10 projects, and significant progress was done oneach:• Risk and vulnerability analysis for geohazards• Earthquake hazard, vulnerability and risk• Stability of rock slopes• Stability of soil slopes• Offshore geohazards• Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and geohazards• Applications of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) to geohazards• Slide dynamics and mechanics of disintegration• Tsunami modelling and prediction• Development of graduate studies in geohazardsThe last project is most important as it establishes graduate research programmesat UiO and NTNU in the areas of environmental geology, civil engineeringand geohazards.In 2004 ICG was active in following up the two worst natural disasters of the21 st century, namely the Bam Earthquake of 26 December 2003 in Iran, and theIndian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004. The ICG activities in connectionwith these 2 events are summarised below.4.2 Bam Earthquake of 26 December 2003On 26 December 2003 at 01:56 GMT (05:26 local time), an earthquake devastatedthe city of Bam. Bam is located in the margin of Kavir-e-Lut desert in thesouth-eastern part of Iran (Fig. 4.1). The city had a population of around150,000 prior to the earthquake.The official death toll for this event is about 30,000. Furthermore, over 50,000people were injured and about 100,000 people became homeless by the earthquake.The earthquake destroyed almost 70 percent of the conjugated cities ofBam and Baravat and the historical castle of Arg-e-Bam (2,000–2,500 yearsold mud-brick citadel – then the largest mud-brick construction in the world).By invitation of the Geological Survey of Iran, GSI (www.gsi.org.ir), ICG senta team of experts on a post-earthquake reconnaissance mission to Bam in January2004. The ICG team consisted of:• Dr Farrokh Nadim, ICG / NGI (Team Leader, geotechnics)• Dr Conrad Lindholm, ICG / NORSAR (seismology)• Prof. Svein Remseth, ICG / NTNU (structures)• Prof. Arild Andresen, ICG / University of Oslo (tectonics and geology)• Dr Masoud Moghtaderi-Zadeh, Consultant to ICG (lifelines and industrialfacilities)• Mr Eirik Tvedt, Statoil (earthquake engineering)f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 10Figure 4.1Geographical setting of Bam (left) and mechanism of recent earthquakes inthe south-eastern part of Iran ("beach balls" on right). The star on the figureat right shows the epicentre of the earthquake on 26 December 2003 (fromwww.usgs.gov).The post-earthquake reconnaissance report of ICG is available on the ICG website. The ICG team concluded that the reason for this tragedy was an unfortunatecombination of geological, social and human circumstances.The seismo-tectonic circumstances that contributed to the disaster were:• The causative fault practically traversed the city of Bam.• The earthquake occurred at a shallow depth (only 10 km below surface).• The fault rupture started south of Bam and propagated northwards. Theshaking was most severe in Bam at the northernmost point of the rupture.• The earthquake occurred on a fault and in a region that was not perceived asbeing particularly seismically active.• It is possible that the normal component of fault displacement added additionaldamaging power to the earthquake.Social issues also contributed to the disaster through the following factors:• The residential buildings were completely inappropriate for a seismicregion, being extremely vulnerable to earthquake shaking.• The requirements of the Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic ResistantDesign of Buildings were ignored or not enforced for residential buildings.• The foreshocks were not regarded as serious warnings.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 11Another factor that contributed to the high death toll was the timing of theevent. The earthquake occurred early in the morning when most people werestill sleeping in their beds.The damage pattern was nearly symmetric about a line 3 km to the west of thesurface expression of the Bam fault, and the damage attenuated rapidly withdistance from this line (very little or no damage at distances greater than 4 kmfrom the reference line!). The observations confirmed that well-designedstructures would have survived with only minor damage the severe earthquakeshaking levels of the Bam earthquake.The industrial facilities around the city of Bam performed well and experiencedvery little damage, but this might have been due to their distance fromthe earthquake epicentre. In contrast, emergency facilities (hospitals, police andfire stations), schools and the university were destroyed and/or heavilydamaged during the earthquake.With the exception of "qanats" (traditional subterranean irrigation channels),the lifelines performed surprisingly well during the earthquake. Only minordamage occurred to the city water system, electric systems, roads, the airport,railway, gas and petroleum stations, and telecommunications. This was mainlydue to the distance of the critical facilities from the earthquake epicentre.However, out of the more than 60 qanat chains that served the twin cities ofBam and Baravat, only 4 survived the earthquake. The agricultural activities inthe Bam area (mainly date tree gardens) are totally dependent on the watertransported by these qanats from the foothills of Jebal-e-Barez mountains, tensof kilometres away. The importance of qanats to the livelihood of the peoplecannot be underestimated. The city of Bam is where it is because the fault thatcaused the earthquake also provided the conditions for the access to water foragricultural activities (daybreak of the qanats occurs on the surface expressionof the Bam fault).A unique set of strong motion acceleration recordings were obtained at theBam accelerograph station, operated by the Building and Housing ResearchCentre (BHRC) of Iran. Although the highest peak ground acceleration (nearly1g) was recorded for the vertical component of the motion, the longitudinalcomponent (fault-parallel motion in N-S direction) clearly had the largestenergy flux, as well as the largest maximum velocity and maximum grounddisplacement. The response spectra of all three components of motion show apeak in the period range of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds. This is either due to the effectsof the local soil response or related to the earthquake source function.The geotechnical effects of the earthquake were not significant. There was littleevidence that site response effects played a major role in the damage pattern inthe city. There were no reports of liquefaction and only minor sliding activityf:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 12took place during the event. The earthquake created some sinkholes in andaround Bam. The most serious geotechnical effect was the collapse of "qanats"in the vicinity of the surface expression of the Bam fault.Figure 4.2Buildings with lateral load bearing capacity that were damaged during theearthquake (mostly soft first-storey type of damage), but did not collapse(the building on top left collapse progressively in the days following themain event, but all the residents survived the main event), and the girl’sboarding school (bottom left) which was levelled by the earthquake shaking.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 13The ICG team made the following recommendations:• The rebuilding of Bam must be done with application of simple but wellproven anti-seismic design of residential buildings.• The complete collapse of new residential buildings in Bam should beregarded as a warning to all other cities and villages in Iran where buildingwith similar construction are prevalent.• Faults similar to the one traversing the city of Bam, and which have notshown activity for hundreds of years, are likely to exist in many locationsin Iran. A programme to map such faults would be an important step forfuture disaster mitigation.• The correlation between access to water and proximity to earthquakegeneratingfaults is a problem that needs to be studied further for othertowns and villages around the margin of the Lut desert.• The unfinished hospital in Bam appears to be a well-designed and constructedstructure which performed well under the seismic loading. Itshould be finished and put into use, but a new design check should takeinto account that this is a structure of high importance class.4.3 Indian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004Tsunamis (large waves formed by rapid mass movements) are a secondaryeffect of geological events like earthquakes, submarine slides and rock falls infjords and lakes.The earthquake-generated tsunami near Sumatra on 26 December 2004, wasthe most devastating tsunami in several hundred years. Other large historicaltsunamis are the 1883 Krakatau tsunami, and the 1896 tsunami in Japan,resulting in more than 36,000 and 27,000 fatalities respectively. In the 1990’s,four tsunamis ravaged the coasts of Nicaragua, Indonesia, Japan and PapuaNew Guinea causing loss of 4,000 lives. In Norway, the three most severeknown tsunami events, leading to the deaths of 174 people altogether, occurredin the twentieth century (Loen 1905 and 1936; Tafjord 1934).Any powerful submarine earthquake brings the risk of a dangerous tsunami.However, not all such earthquakes actually result in a big wave, and not alltsunamis are caused by earthquakes. Some of the worst, such as a 15-metrehightsunami that killed more than 2,000 people in Papua New Guinea in 1998,are the result of submarine landslides (though these can themselves be triggeredby earthquakes, as was the case in Papua New Guinea).In the days following the Indian Ocean tsunami, the media interest wastremendous and a large number of requests from television and radio companies,newspapers, and magazines were duly obliged. This included a featurearticle in Aftenposten, the biggest newspaper in Norway. Moreover, a largenumber of popular/scientific presentations were requested, and complied with,during the first months of 2005.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 14In parallel, it was decided to redirect the focus of our research activity andstudy the Indian Ocean tsunami in detail to better understand the event itself.The ocean bottom bathymetry was established, information on the seabeddeformations was gathered and critically assessed, and preliminary tsunamisimulations were compared to eye witness observations and tide gauge records,before they were put on the ICG homepage together with general tsunamiinformation. All this was done within the end of December 2004! The ICGhomepage was linked from the homepages of Aftenposten, USGS, EUBrussels, and others, and much visited.The tsunami studies have resulted in a closer co-operation among the relevantscientific disciplines and organisations of ICG. These studies are now beingcontinued with two- and three-dimensional parameter sensitivity analyses. Apaper presenting the ICG activities on the Indian Ocean tsunami will be submittedto a refereed journal in the near future.Figure 4.3Vertical displacement of seabed used in modelling of the Indian Oceantsunami (after Chen Ji, Caltech).f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 15Figure 4.4Simulated ocean surface elevation 90 minutes after the earthquake.4.4 Communication and relations with the mediaAs described in the Annual report for 2003, the award of ICG to NGI and itspartners created a lot of interest, both nationally and internationally.Following the Indian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004, there was nearly amedia storm around ICG, with many radio and television interviews of, andnewspaper articles by ICG experts to satisfy the public need for information.The tsunami event clearly demonstrated the benefits of having a centre ofexpertise on geohazards and demonstrated the importance and necessity ofhaving a multi-disciplinary approach, with interaction of all relevant areas ofgeoscience.A communication strategy document was prepared and presented to the Boardof Directors of ICG. The document provides guidelines for presenting ICG’sactivities to the public, mainly through the ICG web site, feature articles innewspapers, and articles in popular media.5 INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND OTHER ICG ACTIVITIESIN 20045.1 ICG PublicationsThe ICG Publication List is given in Appendix B.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 165.2 International contacts made on geohazards in 2004In addition to the contacts listed in the Annual Report for 2003, the followingnew international contacts were made:• International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observations(ITC), Enschede, The Netherlands (Memorandum of Understandingsigned)• Instituto Nicaragüense de estudios Territoriales (INETER), Managua,Nicaragua (Memorandum of Understanding signed)• Universidad Centroamericana "José Simeón Cañas" (UCA), San Salvador,El Salvador (Memorandum of Understanding signed)5.3 Other international activitiesICG is an active member of the international non-profit organisation ICL(International Consortium for Landslides), which was newly established byUNESCO in Japan. Oddvar Kjekstad of NGI is the "Assistant to the President"of ICL. One of ICL initiatives is the publication of the peer-reviewed journal"Landslides". The first number of this journal was published in March 2004.NGI/ICG initiated two regional network programmes, one in Asia and one inCentral America, to increase the local competence in managing risks related todifferent types of slides. The programme in Asia is carried out in cooperationwith ADPC (Asia Disaster Prevention Center) in Bangkok, and involves Nepal,Bhutan, India, Thailand, Sri Lanka and Indonesia. The programme in CentralAmerica is carried out for the regional organization CEPREDENAC andinvolves Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Costa Rica andPanama.On 27 September 2004, NGI and ICG organised and hosted the "WorkshopIdentification of Natural Disaster Hotspots and Risk Reduction in DevelopingCountries". The workshop was organised together with the Norwegian Ministryof Foreign Affairs, The World Bank/ProVention Consortium and the Centrefor Hazards and Risk Research at the Columbia University in New York. TheWorkshop focused on both risk identification and risk reduction and presentedresults from the comprehensive programme known as the "Global HotspotsProject", where floods, earthquakes, landslides and volcano hazards are analysed.The aims of the workshop were to:• Form an arena where specialists, government representatives, UN agencies,NGO representatives, researchers, academia and private industry openlycan exchange experience and ideas about risk management.• Raise awareness on the subject of prevention work relative to emergencyassistance.• Identify major subject in natural disaster risk management that are of keyimportance to bring up in the "UN World Conference on DisasterReduction (WCDR) in Kobe 18-22 January 2005".f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 17The WCDR in Kobe was open only to official national delegates and representativesof registered non-government organisations (NGOs). The WCDRwas attended by Farrokh Nadim as a delegate of ICL and Oddvar Kjekstad as arepresentative of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.5.4 Web siteThe web site of ICG is www.geohazards.no. It is presently being redesignedand the new version should be operative by 1 May 2005.6 DOCTORAL CANDIDATES AND GUEST RESEARCHERS IN 2004ICG’s PhD-candidates in 2004Name Nationality University Financial source Appointmentperiod in 2004PercentengagementKrishna Aryal Nepal NTNU NTNU 01/01 – 31/12 100Graziella Devoli Italy UiO ICG 01/01 – 31/12 100Roger Ebeltoft Norway NTNU NTNU/Vegvesenet 01/09 – 31/12 100Sylfest Glimstad Norway UiO UiO/SIMULA 01/01 – 31/12 100Maj Gøril Glåmen Norway NTNU NTNU 01/09 – 31/12 100Guro Grøneng Norway NTNU ICG 01/08 – 31/12 100Harald Iwe Norway UiO NGI/ICG 01/01 – 31/12 50Vidar Kveldsvik Norway NTNU NGI/ICG 01/03 – 31/12 75Finn Løvholt Norway UiO NGI/ICG 01/01 – 31/12 75Arne Moe Norway NTNU NTNU/ICG 01/01 – 31/12 75Bård Romstad Norway UiO UiO/ICG 01/01 – 31/12 100Inger Lise Solberg Norway NTNU ICG/NTNU/NGU/NVE 01/01 – 31/12 100Vikas Thakur India NTNU NTNU 01/01 – 31/12 100Trond Nordvik Norway NTNU NTNU 01/09 – 31/12 100Post-docs and guest researchers at ICG in 2004Position Name Nationality Academic Appointment Financial sourcedegree period in 2004Post-doc. Dr. Nestor Cardozo Colombia Ph.D. 01/01 – 31/08 NGIPost-doc. Dr. Joonsang Park S. Korea Ph.D. 01/01 – 08/08 NGIPost-doc. Dr. Shaoli Yang China Ph.D. 06/09 – 31/12 ICGPost-doc. Dr. Tewodros Tefera Ethiopia Ph.D. 01/01 – 31/12 NTNU / ICGGuest Dr. Stanley Boyle U.S.A. Ph.D. 28/07 – 15/10 ICGresearcherGuest Prof. Kok-Kwang Singapore Ph.D. 01/05 – 30/09 ICGresearcher PhoonGuest Prof. Michael Long Ireland Ph.D. 01/07 – 27/08 ICGresearcherPost-doc. Prof. Sebnem Duzgun Turkey Ph.D. 01/08 – 31/12 NGIGuestresearcherProf. Lewis Edgers U.S.A. Ph.D. 01/07 – 31/08 ICGf:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 18So far in 2003 and 2004, ICG hosted 15 Ph.D. candidates, 6 post-docresearchers and 11 guest researchers. All post-doc and guest researchers arefrom abroad.7 ACCOUNTING 20047.1 Cash funding (kNOK)The numbers below are minimum estimates. The actual cash funding from ICGpartners and other industrial sources are greater.FundingActivityNGU/NORSAR/ Other/ SUMRes. Council NGIUiO/NTNU IndustrialTechnical Projects 11,454 4,500 1 3,390 2 2,280 3 21,624Non-technical activities 4 1,153 600 - - 1,753Administration & Steering- - 2,0561,556 500Committee meetingsTotal 14,163 5,600 3,390 2,280 25,4331. NGI SIP on Offshore Geohazards (kNOK 3500) and fellowship for post-docs J. Park and S.Duzgun (kNOK 800). Cardozo and time not charged to technical projects (200).2. 50% of man-hours of NGU staff, covered by NGU (kNOK 1390), one full-time researcherfrom UiO (F. De Blasio), 6 months of post-doc by NTNU (T. Tefera), and at least 1.2labour-years from staff of UiO and NTNU (kNOK 2000).3. Free GIS software provided by ESRI and Intergraph to be used in research projects by ICG(kNOK 1500), the EU Integrated project LESSLOSS (kNOK 400), partial funding of PhDcandidateI.-L. Solberg by The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE)(kNOK 130), partial funding of PhD-candidate R. Ebeltoft by The Norwegian Public RoadsAdministration (Vegvesenet) (kNOK 150).4. IT solutions for ICG, preparation of proposals to EU’s 6th Frame Programme, informationmaterial, development of web site, international networking, conference participation,arranging workshops and seminars.7.2 In kind (kNOK, approximate, these numbers are a minimum)Contribution NGI NGU NTNU UiO NORSARPersonnel 500 200 0 * 0 * 200IT 500 500 100 100 500Office spaces 2,000 600 500 500 300Laboratory/Equipment 500 50 100 100 100Project work / proposals/ etc. 1,000 200 500 500 700Stipend to PhD-candidates 900 130 1,900 1,300 -TOTAL 5,400 1,680 3,100 2,500 1,800* Included in “Project work / proposals/ etc.”f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 197.3 Breakdown of the funds from The Research Council in 2003-2004ActivityCost breakdownin 2003-2004Goal in partneragreement, annualaverage over 5 yearsResearch, NGI 27% 25%Research, NGU 11.6% 10%Research, NORSAR 15.3% 15%Research, UiO 3.9% 5%Research, NTNU 4.2% 5%PhDs & Guest researchers 15% * 20%Direct costs, travels, Steering12% 10%Committee meetings, etc.Administration 11% 10%* Most of the guest researchers who worked at ICG in 2003 were supported throughexternal projects or the partner organisations and are included in their cask or inkindcontributions.8 PLANNED ACTIVITIES AND BUDGET FOR 20058.1 Research ProjectsContinue with the projects already underway and start new projects. The followingprojects were approved by the Board of Directors for 2005-2006:• Risk and vulnerability analysis for landslides and earthquakes• Stability of rock slopes• Stability of soil slopes• Offshore geohazards• Slide dynamics and mechanics of disintegration• Tsunami modelling and prediction• Development of graduate programme in geohazards• Prevention and mitigation (with focus on monitoring and early warning)In addition, 3 cross-expertise areas that involve several projects were assigned"theme coordinators":• Geophysics for geohazards• Applications of Geographical Information Technology to geohazards• Debris flows and rock slide dynamics8.2 International networkingTravels to disaster prevention and natural hazard centres in USA, Canada,Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, India, France, Thailand, and Latin America areplanned. Active participation (lecturing) in 10-20 international conferences isf:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 20planned for 2005. In most cases, ICG representatives are asked to give keynoteor state-of-the-art lectures.8.3 EU proposals and projects with financing from other sourcesThis will be a continuous activity throughout the existence of ICG.ICG is already involved in the Integrated Project LESSLOSS (start date: 1September 2004) in European Commission’s 6 th Frame Programme. ICG isalso partner in 3 STREP proposals to EC’s 6FP, which are still under evaluation.ICG is the coordinator for one of the proposed STREPs with acronym ofPLACE (Patterns of Landslide Change in Europe).In December 2004, the proposal for a project called GeoExtremes by ICG partnersNGU and NGI, together with the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research,CICERO and met.no (Norwegian Meteorological Institute), was accepted bythe NORKLIMA programme of The Research Council of Norway. The goal ofthe GeoExtremes project is to predict the spatial and temporal distribution oflandslides and rockslides in Norway in the next 50-100 years based on theexpected changes in the climate.8.4 Organising conferences and workshops in 2005 and 2006ICG is responsible for organising the following two international conferences:• Second Conference on Submarine Slides and Mass Movements (Oslo, Sept.2005)• Geohazards – Technical, Economical and Social Risk Evaluation (Lillehammer,June 2006)ICG is on the Organising Committee for the following large international conferencein Vancouver, Canada in June 2005 and is responsible for 2 of the 8State-of-the-art papers to be presented:• International Conference on Landslide Risk Management8.5 ICG budget for 2005The table below reflects funding from The Research Council of Norway only.Considerable cash and in-kind contributions from the ICG partners and othersources of funding come in addition to the amounts below.f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Page: 21ICG budget in 2005 based on funding from The Research Council of NorwayFunding fromActivityResearch Council(kNOK)CommentsRisk assessment for landslides and 1,950 2 earlier ICG ProjectsearthquakesmergedStability of rock slopes 1,780Stability of soil slopes1,630 Includes earlier projecton rain-induced slidesOffshore geohazards 1,460Slide dynamics 1,110Tsunami modelling and prediction 1,390Graduate programme on geohazards 590Prevention and mitigation1,090 Includes earlier projecton SARTheme: Geophysics for geohazards 260Theme: Applications of GIT190 Replaces earlier projecton GISTheme: Debris flows and dynamics 150of rock slidesTsunamis of 26 Dec. 04 400IT solutions 100EU Proposals 100Web site & Info. 200International networking 250Conference participation 300SC meetings 100Contingency 300Administration 1,200Organisation of conferences in 2005 150& 2006Interaction and net-working200activities - ICG partnersTotal kNOK 14,900The total expenditure charged to the funds provided by The Research Councilof Norway is budgeted to be kNOK 14,900 in 2005. This is kNOK 2,900 morethe annual funding provided to ICG. However, between April 2003 (start of ICGactivities) and December 2004, the ICG consortium used only NOK 21,7 mill.of the NOK 24 mill. funding for 2003 and 2004. The sum of the funds used in2003-2004 and the budgeted expenditure above is NOK 36.6 mill., and is closeto the NOK 36 mill. allocated for the period 2003-2005.SUMTotal for technical projects = kNOK 12,000Total for non-technical activities= kNOK 2,900f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\icg-annual_report2_2004-rev1.docFNa/tha

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Appendix A – Summary of ICG activities in 2004 Page: A1Appendix A - Summary of ICG Activitiesin 2004 (Paper published inpeer reviewed NorwegianJournal of Geology, January2005)f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\appa_cover_page rev1.docFNa

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY International Centre for Geohazards 45International Centre for Geohazards (ICG): Assessment,prevention and mitigation of geohazardsAnders Solheim, Rajinder Bhasin, Fabio V. De Blasio, Lars H. Blikra, Stan Boyle,Alvar Braathen, John Dehls, Anders Elverhøi, Bernd Etzelmüller, Sylfest Glimsdal,Carl B. Harbitz, Håkon Heyerdahl, Øyvind A. Høydal, Harald Iwe, Kjell Karlsrud,Suzanne Lacasse, Isabelle Lecomte, Conrad Lindholm, Oddvar Longva, Finn Løvholt,Farrokh Nadim, Steinar Nordal, Bård Romstad, Jan K. Røed & James M. StroutInternational Centre for Geohazards (ICG), c/o Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, (NGI), P.O.Box 3930 Ullevål Stadion, NO-0806 Oslo, Norway.There is an urgent need to improve the basic understanding of geohazards and our ability to deal with therisks associated with them. The International Centre for Geohazards (ICG) does research on the assessment,prevention and mitigation of geohazards, offshore as well as on land. The main focus is placed on landslidesand their effects, such as tsunamis. Activities include hazard and risk assessment for slides and earthquakes,evaluation of soil and rock slopes, instrument design and monitoring, geophysical methods, field studies,application of SAR technology for monitoring of slopes, further development of GIS as a tool in geohazardassessment, tsunami research, and numerical modelling. Education is given high priority, and graduate programmesin geohazards have been established at both the University of Oslo and at NTNU in Trondheim.Over the next few years, emphasis will also be placed on monitoring, early warning systems, and mitigationmeasures.IntroductionGeohazards can be defined as "events caused by geologicalconditions or processes which represent seriousthreats to human lives, property and the natural andbuilt environment". Geohazards exist both onshore andoffshore. Onshore, the most important are volcaniceruptions, earthquakes, landslides and debris flows, floodsand snow avalanches. Offshore, slope instability andearthquakes are the main threats because of theirpotential for damaging seafloor installations, and forgenerating devastating tsunamis, such as the 1998Papua New Guinea event responsible for more than2000 deaths, and the past Storegga Slide tsunami(Bondevik et al. 1997, in press). Features like shallowgas, gas hydrates and mud diapirism also representgeohazards in the offshore regions.There is an urgent need to improve the basic understandingof geohazards and the ability to deal with therisks they pose. This need is accentuated by theincreasing number of flooding- and sliding events inmany regions, increased concern for geohazards in theproduction and transport of oil and gas, and increasedvulnerability to geohazards caused by urbanisation anduncontrolled land use, particularly in developingcountries. Geo-related disasters constitute the mainobstacles to progress and to the improvement of livingconditions in many developing countries. Offshore,several of the largest oil companies define reduction ofgeohazard-related risks in deep water as one of theirtop research priorities. The consequences of a geohazard-triggeredaccident offshore, in terms of loss of lifeand damage to the environment could be catastrophic.With this background the International Centre forGeohazards (ICG) was established in 2003, as one of13 "Centres of Excellence" awarded by The ResearchCouncil of Norway. ICG is organised as a consortiumof five individual partners: the Norwegian GeotechnicalInstitute (NGI), the Geological Survey of Norway(NGU), the Norwegian University for Science andTechnology (NTNU), the University of Oslo (UiO), andthe Norwegian Seismic Array (NORSAR). In these fivepartner organisations, the necessary expertise in themost relevant research fields, such as geology,

46 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYgeomechanics, geotechnical engineering, geophysics,mathematics, numerical modelling, GIS systems, SARapplications, instrumentation, in-situ measurements, isfound. NGI is the host organisation, and the centre isphysically located at the NGI building in Oslo, where ithas office space for ICG project participants, guestresearchers and students. In addition, much researchactivity is also carried out in the premises of the otherfour partners.Fig. 1. Comparison of casualties from different natural hazards in the20th century (Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED InternationalDisaster database).The main focus of ICG is placed on slides, theirtriggering factors and effects. Many of the casualtiesreported after rain storms, large floods andearthquakes (Fig. 1) are actually caused by the slidesgenerated by these events. Developing countries areparticularly vulnerable. As an example, extremerainfall in Venezuela in 1999 triggered flooding andlandslides, which alone caused over 20 000 deaths (Fig. 2).Slides of various kinds also form the most importantnatural hazard in Norway. The number of deathscaused by all types of sliding in Norway over the past150 years exceeds 2000.ICG carries out research on the assessment, preventionand mitigation of geohazards, including the risk oflandslides due to rainfall, flooding, earthquakes andhuman intervention, as well the geological risks in deepwaters, particularly those related to submarine slides,which can be a threat to seafloor facilities and are alsoimportant tsunami generators. Research is presentlyorganised in nine projects:• Risk and vulnerability analysis for geohazards• Earthquake hazard, vulnerability and risk• Rock slope failures, models and risks• Landslides in saturated and unsaturated soil slopes• Offshore geohazards• Geographical information management and analysesfor geohazard applications• SAR applications in geohazard assessment• Slide dynamics and mechanics of mass disintegration• Tsunami modelling and predictionIn addition, an academic programme, focusing oneducation is a prioritised task, and the two universitypartners of ICG, UiO and NTNU, have establishedinternational graduate programmes in geohazardstudies. PhD programmes are also being developed,and as of November 2004 15 PhD candidates are workingon ICG-related topics. Whereas the programme atUiO addresses geohazards with emphasis on geologyand natural sciences, the programme at NTNU focuseson engineering aspects of geohazards. The researchwork in the MSc and PhD programmes form importantparts of several of the ICG projects.In the near future, increased focus will be placed onearly warning systems, risk assessment and mitigationmeasures. The aim of this paper is to provide a summaryof the main activities and achievements of ICGduring the first 18 months of its existence.abFig. 2. A) Flood-triggered mudslides and debris flows caused over 20 000 fatalities in Venezuela, December 1999 (Photo: Scanpix).B) Earthquake-induced landslide at Las Colinas, El Salvador, January 2001, causing over 600 fatalities.

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards47Fig. 3. Aspects to consider in landslide hazard and risk assessment (S. Duzgun, personal communication, 2004).Risk and vulnerability analysis forgeohazardsSociety and regulative procedures today require thatrisks associated with geohazards and civil engineeringstructures be evaluated. Statistics, reliability analysesand risk assessments are useful tools that assist in theevaluation and the required decision-making. Riskassessment uses probabilistic approaches because theyprovide a rational framework for taking into accountuncertainties. Predicting hazards posed by geologicalprocesses, and evaluating the human, environmentaland economical consequences of geohazards require anintegrated scientific approach involving manydisciplines, including also socio-economical aspects.ICG’s project on risk and vulnerability analysis aims atestablishing state-of-the-art practice for the analysis ofslopes and developing user-friendly tools for applicationsin the other ICG projects. In 2003-2004, the projectconcentrated on (1) a review and critique of methodsfor probabilistic analysis and risk assessment of slopes,(2) the implementation of software for analysis, (3) areview of vulnerability concepts and (4) status on"acceptable/tolerable" probability of failure and risklevel. To do this, it was necessary to review conceptsfrom other fields of engineering and from the non-engineeringliterature. Much work is going on worldwideon the topic of risk and vulnerability, and the project isto continue over a number of years. Many aspects comeinto the assessment of landslide hazard, whetherdeterministic or probabilistic. Some of the aspects andmethods needing to be considered in the study of thevulnerability and risk associated with landslides areshown in Fig. 3.Analysis modelsDeterministic analytical models should be used whenmaterial properties, failure modes (mechanisms andgeometries) and forces are known with reasonableaccuracy. Safety factor changes may be used to evaluatethe significance of parameters or conditions. Probabilisticanalyses should be used when the uncertainty inparameters may govern the results of the analysis. Theprobabilistic analyses quantify the likelihood of failurefrom geological evidence and uncertainties in inputparameters and the analysis model. Realistic models,developed from well designed and executed investigations,should give probabilistic results of real benefit fordecision-making and engineering design.Qualitative estimates of failure likelihood, and anyother potential event, can be ranked and assessed usingsimple matrices (Fig. 4). Upper and lower boundestimates should be included in the ranking to accountfor uncertainty. The art of the engineer is moving thevector (probability of failure, consequence) to the firstquadrant (Fig. 4). Assessing and ranking the risks allowfor informed decisions on prioritisation and on accep-

48 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYFig. 4. Qualitative risk prioritisation matrices.ting risk, or treating and control-ling risks so that theyare minimised. Dealing with uncertainties is anessential part of design. Evaluation of risk does notneed to be quantitative, as a qualitative estimate canalso be extremely useful.Usually it is not feasible to do geotechnical investigationsfor all slopes to a degree where little uncertaintyremains. To identify the most critical slopes, the projectlooked into a 3-level procedure with increasinglyquantifiable results, large-scale mapping, scoring basedon engineering judgement and site-specific limitingequilibrium analysis. Probabilistic methods are beingdeveloped for each of these approaches. The objective,in the end, is to produce an integrated framework thatwill allow the evaluation of the probability of landslides.In addition, the concepts of vulnerability are beingreviewed. A 3-D assessment model for vulnerability,considering magnitude and type of event, scale ofevent, and the element at risk will be developed andimplemented. As these factors are correlated, theframework also needs to formulate the correlationsamong the analysed parameters.Earthquake hazard, vulnerability and riskThrough direct and indirect damage earthquakes arethe most devastating of natural disasters. Earthquakesare also important triggers of landslides. Therefore,improved procedures for earthquake risk estimationare important tools for the planning of mitigationmeasures, and for estimating the risk for earthquakeinduced landslides. The ICG project has developed proceduresand software for earthquake risk and loss estimation.The methods have been tested on earthquakescenarios for the city of Oslo, where the local geology iswell known (Molina & Lindholm, in press).The shaking caused by an earthquake is transmittedthrough the Earth’s crust and along the surface untilthe wave-train arrives at a given site. The site may be anold riverbed or seafloor as for Oslo. The houses may beof varying age and quality, and while some survive theshaking with minor cracks, others might collapse completely.Issues that need to be addressed in the evaluationof seismic hazard and risk include:• The earthquake source: The damage potential dependsheavily on the depth to the earthquake source, butalso on the source mechanism, its size, stress drop,rupture characteristics, directivity effects and parametersspecific to the area.• The path of the wave train: As shaking radiates outfrom the source it attenuates elastically and inelastically.This frequency-dependent attenuation reflectsthe characteristics of the crust.• Soil amplification: Local soil amplification of the shakingis related to specific sub-surface conditions, andoften contributes significantly to the damage. Othersite effects, like topographic amplification may alsoincrease the damage.• Earthquake risk and loss estimation: While somestructures are well designed and maintained, othersmay turn out to be deadly traps. Some infrastructurallifelines and services are very important for a largerpopulation, while others are less important.Most focus in the project is placed on the two last topics, inaddition to the development of methods and procedures.Soil amplificationSediment layers may greatly amplify the shaking fromearthquakes (Fig. 5). This was dramatically demonstratedin Mexico City in 1985, when an earthquake 400 km distantcaused severe damage to the city due to the shakingamplification of the underlying lacustrine sediments.Oslo, which is partly built on thick marine clays, has beeninvestigated for soil amplification using the empiricalmethods of Nakamura (1989), which are based on therelative amplification of noise-surface-waves of the hori-

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards49aFig. 5. Schematic diagram of the amplification of earthquake shakingcaused by unlithified sediments.zontal to vertical spectral amplitudes. Based on data sampledat night from 35 sites in Oslo, sites underlain by thickmarine sediments, showed that a resonance frequency ofaround 1.5Hz could lead to significant amplification,whereas rock sites showed no amplification.bEarthquake risk and loss estimationBoth probabilistic and deterministic earthquake scenarioscan be established in the scheme developed for risk andloss estimation (Fig. 6A). The software used has beendeveloped for the United States by FEMA(http://www.fema.gov/hazus). The strategies andmethodologies developed are adapted by ICG to a GISMatlab code and extended to include a logic treecomputation taking parameter uncertainty intoconsideration. Earthquake damage scenarios for Oslowere based on a detailed parameterisation of thevulnerability of each building type in Oslo. The softsediments were accounted for in terms of amplificationfactors. The damage pattern (Fig. 6B) illustrates thecorrelation between damage, shaking and the presenceof soft sediments. The procedures established for Oslowill be developed further, and can be used in riskassessments in other areas.Continuous development is on-going internationally asregards probabilistic seismic hazard estimation, with themain focus on the development and implementation ofattenuation models, which are decisive in the hazardmodelling. ICG has an active role in these developments.Rock slope failures, models and risksFig. 6. A) Flowchart of the computations procedure for seismichazard assessment (from Molina & Lindholm 2004b). B) Damagescenario for the city of Oslo showing percentage of moderate damageto buildings. The earthquake modelled had its epicenter east of thecity, on one of the main Oslo Graben boundary faults, and hence theeastern part of Oslo exhibits severe damage. The city centre, locatedin an area of thick marine clays, exhibits the maximum damage(from Molina & Lindholm 2004a).Rockfalls and slides are among the most serious naturalhazards in Norway, also because of their tsunamigenicpotential, which has taken more than 170 lives in westernNorway during the last 100 years. With the increasedpublic attention on these problems in parts of Norway aswell as internationally, studies of hazards related to rockslope failures are important ICG activities.

50 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYIntegration of all geological and geotechnical/geomechanicalaspects related to rock-slope failures is important(Blikra et al. in press; Braathen et al. 2004; Bhasin& Kaynia 2004; Bhasin et al. 2004; Dahle 2004; Panthi &Nilsen in press). Hazard and risk zonation need to beperformed on both regional and local levels, and allavailable data from the county of Møre and Romsdal inNorway have been used to evaluate the methods for this(e.g. Blikra et al. in press). The regional hazard zonationwas based on the spatial distribution and temporalpattern of events (Fig. 7A), while a more detailed, localand quantitative zonation was performed in a selectedfjord area, based on the frequency, age and size ofevents (Fig. 7B). In addition, tsunami potential andrun-out distance will be modelled.Several uncertainties exist in the quantification of rockslidehazard, one of which is the probability and magnitudeof future earthquakes. Although earthquakes abovemagnitude 6 are uncommon in Norway, the identificationof postglacial faults in areas of relatively high seismicity(Anda et al. 2002) suggests that large earthquakes shouldnot be ruled out. Lack of adequate models for slide runoutand tsunami run-up are other uncertainties. Theseare the subjects of other ICG research activities.Development of geological and stability models for rock slopesPresent numerical models for rock-slope stabilityevaluations are based on shear-fracture characteristics.On-going field studies on collapsing mountain-sides(e.g., Blikra et al. in press; Braathen et al. 2004; Dahle2004) demonstrate that most rock-slope failure areascontain both shear and tension fractures, as well as abasal shear surface commonly covered with amembrane of crushed rock (fault breccia/gouge) (Fig.8). The following topics have received particular focus:• Use of digital elevation models (DEM) to characterisestructural patterns of importance for instability(e.g. sliding planes and wedges).• Detailed studies of slope failures and the use ofgeophysical methods (2D resistivity, GPR, seismic), aswell as sampling and measurements in drill-holes.• Characterization of weak layers, and particularly thetemporal evolution of such layers during creep.• Utilisation of identified diagnostic structures asgeological input to stability models.ICG research focuses on stability analysis of complexjointed rock slopes using numerical techniques (Bhasin& Kaynia, 2004; Bhasin et al., 2004). The behaviour of arock slope when subjected to the influence of externalloads depends on the characteristics of both the rockmaterial and discontinuities within it.MonitoringUnderstanding the 3D kinematics (movement pattern)is of major importance for the evaluation of hazardsand for testing the reliability of the numerical modelling.Existing monitoring data, e.g. from the Åkerneset sitein Møre & Romsdal, where automatic extensometershave been operating for more than 10 years (NGI1996), will be used. A potential rock slope failure atÅkerneset might involve a volume of 30-45 mill. m3.Several new monitoring systems will be installed at thissite during the next 2 years and will produce a uniqueFig.7. A) Regional hazard zones in Møre and Romsdal County. B) Rock-avalanche deposits in Sunnylvsfjorden in Møre and Romsdal.Estimated volumes shown are in million m 3 .

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards51Fig. 8. Two-layer model for pre-avalanche deformation in a rock-slope failure area. Text boxes describe factors and mechanical properties thathave to be evaluated for stability assessments (from Braathen et al. 2004).data set. Another important method being explored ismicro-seismic monitoring. A small system is already inoperation at the topmost part of the Åkerneset slope,where 6 geophones have been installed. The geologicaland geophysical investigations, drilling, logging, installationof different monitoring systems and modelling atÅkerneset over the next 2-3 years will be an importantelement in the development of a general approach foranalyses of potentially unstable rock slopes.Landslides in saturated and unsaturatedsoil slopesSaturated soils (mainly quick clays)As a consequence of Late Weichselian deglaciation andsubsequent postglacial development, many of the mostheavily populated areas of Norway are located in areaswhere quick clays cause slides, many of which haveFig. 9. Measured versus calculated response for one of 8 piezometers installed in the Romerike area, south-eastern Norway, 15-day averageprecipitation record, and boundary adjusted flux used for groundwater analysis.

52 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYtaken lives. Hazard mapping and research on quickclays are important topics at several of the ICG partnerorganisations, and new initiatives have been undertakenunder ICG. In a recent study in one of the classicalquick clay areas, Romerike in central south-easternNorway, the effects of precipitation on clay slope stabilitywere investigated by re-analysing nine years of datafrom eight piezometers (Fig. 9). Two-dimensional finiteelement analyses were performed to evaluate infiltrationeffects on groundwater flow and piezometerresponse. Development of the boundary flux recordconsidered the effects of temperature, snow depth, landuse practices, and soil hydraulic conductivity. Thestudy showed that the groundwater surface is likely tobe at or near the ground surface relatively frequently,but that elevated groundwater conditions alone are notsufficient to trigger local (i.e. shallow) initial slides orslumps in the Romerike area. The importance of soilstratification was also demonstrated. Silt layers in themarine clay significantly affect head losses, piezometermeasurements, groundwater flow, and slope stability.Installing multiple piezometers along important sectionsand in vertical arrays near the top of slopes isrecommended when attempting to model the groundwaterregime. These are also useful for interpretinggeologic and hydrogeological conditions not readilyinterpretable through subsurface exploration alone.Piezometers are an important part of any early warningsystem in quick clay areas, and would provideimportant data in the planning of mitigation measures.ICG studies are also ongoing in the Trondheim regionand northern Norway, using a combination of geophysical(resistivity, georadar, interferometric sonar) andgeological methods, both on land and in the adjacentfjords. The influence of stratigraphic variability, as wellas other geological constraints on quick clay slides are,in addition to the development of methods andprocedures, important topics of this research, and areexpected to produce improved procedures for slidehazard assessment.Generally, but not exclusively, landslides triggered byheavy rainfall are relatively shallow. The release mechanismfor such shallow slides may be described as a lossin soil strength following saturation of the soil. Undernormal conditions, the soil close to a slope surface issituated above the phreatic surface (groundwater),which means that the near-surface soil is not saturated.The suction in the soil will be a function of the watercontent, varying with soil type. However, duringprolonged rain, infiltration from the surface willeventually fill up the pores in the soil and the negativepore pressure (i.e. capillary suction) may be reversed togive a positive one. Reduced slope stability follows as animmediate effect of the reduced suction. For manyslopes, such loss of suction will lead to landslides.Parametric studies were performed including factorssuch as slope geometry, soil types, long -and short-termrainfall and unsaturated flow above the phreaticsurface. The focus has so far been on the analysis ofpore pressures, as these have a dominant impact onslope stability. One- and two-dimensional flow analyseswere run to study the gradual pore pressure changenear the slope surface.Flow analyses, particularly transient analyses, aretime-consuming, and it has been an important task totest finite element models to achieve reliable results.The upper soil layers must be modelled in detail, as thechanges in pore pressures close to the surface will belarge. One-dimensional analyses indicate that as aresult of precipitation, the saturation zone increasesand progresses downwards until the complete soilprofile has been saturated (pore pressure ≈ 0). Then,Unsaturated soil slopes and the effect of increased rainfallHeavy rainfall triggers a large number of landslideseach year worldwide, many of them causing a highnumber of casualties and a large impact on society. Inmany countries, the triggering rainfall occurs duringtropical storms and hurricanes, which during recentyears, seem to be more frequent. These natural hazardsare of particular importance since climate changescenarios suggest more intense precipitation events willoccur in the future (IPCC 2001).Fig.10. Advance of the saturated zone with time in a 1-dimensionalmodel of a 10 m high soil column during prolonged rainfall.Continuous rainfall is applied on the surface with intensity equal tothe saturated permeability (Ksat) of the soil. The pore pressuredistribution in a vertical section is shown for intervals of 50000seconds, represented by the different curves. Elevation 10 m is at thesoil surface (from Edgers 2003).

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards53Fig. 11. 1D synthetic model generated from geophysical well logs. a) Density, with identification of two weak layers, b) P-velocity, and c) estimatedS-velocity (rock physics modelling). Corresponding Point-Spread Functions (PSF) and Pre-stack Depth Migrated (PSDM) sections for d) 0m offset and e) 1000 m offset. f) Ray tracing for the 1000 m offset showing a large variation of incidence angle with depths (from 30 to 70degrees depending on the layers).the pore pressures suddenly "snap" to create a hydrostaticpore pressure distribution (Fig. 10). If this reflectscorrectly the pore pressure in a slope, rainfall will resultin rapid reduction of the slope’s safety factor. Thenumerical flow calculations show that though thechanges in the position of the ground water level(phreatic surface) may be small, or even negligible,changes in the suction in the upper soil layers may bevery large. Observations of ground water level or porepressure by traditional methods, such as piezometers oropen wells will not give direct information on theactual pore pressures in the unsaturated zone.Offshore geohazardsSeveral ICG projects cover topics relevant for offshoregeohazards. However, as a result of the focus on geohazardsin deep-water areas by the oil industry, wellexemplified through the Ormen Lange Project(Solheim et al. in press), a separate set of activities wasdefined under the title "Offshore geohazards". Prioritisedthemes include site surveys, geophysical tools, and theeffects of pore pressure. Investigations in the StoreggaSlide area offshore mid-Norway for the Ormen Langegas field development, have generated an enormousamount of data related to offshore geohazards. Recentactivities benefit to a large extent from this database,and one of our main goals is to utilise the data toimprove the tools and techniques for offshore geohazardinvestigations. At present, the Ormen Langeinvestigations can to a large extent be regarded as thestate-of-the-art in offshore geohazards.Geophysical studiesThe main focus is placed on processing and techniquesto enhance imaging in the upper few hundred meters ofthe offshore deposits. Submarine slopes often fail along"weak" layers, which can be very thin. The identificationof such layers is therefore important. Extraction ofquantitative information for geotechnical purposesfrom the seismic data is also an aim of the geophysicalresearch at ICG.Seismic wave propagation close to the seafloor and atshallow depths is complex. Understanding wave propagationat shallow depths below the seafloor is a necessitybefore acquiring and processing data. The project looksinto various modelling tools to improve seismic acquisition,processing and imaging for identification ofshallow, thin and weak layers. Attenuation, which ismore important at shallow depths, decreases the amplitudeof the waves and reduces their frequency content,hence degrading the resolution. Most of the standardtechniques in seismic processing assume a rather simpleearth model. Improved velocity models at shallowdepths as well as model-based, amplitude-preserving

54 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYprocessing are needed. Inversion techniques to estimatekey parameters, such as shear strength, can only beapplied if amplitudes have been preserved through theacquisition and processing stages. Only then, are goodAmplitude-Versus-Offset (AVO) and Amplitude-Versus-Angle (AVA) analyses possible. A project hasbeen initiated with the aim of improving the results ofhigh resolution acquisition for shallow depths with amodel-based processing and imaging approach.Seismic resolution is a critical issue for interpreters.Point-Spread Functions (PSF), which is the response ofa point scatterer after depth imaging, can be an aid inseismic imaging (Fig. 11). With an estimate of the PSFat each location of a heterogeneous structure, the seismicresponse of that structure can be estimated assumingthat reflectors can be represented as a set of pointscatterers (exploding reflector concept) (Fig. 11). Basedon work conducted by NORSAR and UiO (Lecomte &Gelius 1998; Gelius & Lecomte 1999; Lecomte 2000;Gelius et al. 2002), the results of seismic imaging can bepredicted without the need to generate and process syntheticdata (Lecomte et al. 2003; Lecomte 2004). A methodto compensate for resolution effects in a sort of deconvolutionprocess has been developed and is now ready forICG applications (Sjøberg et al. 2003; Bulteau 2004).Other activities in geophysics at ICG are designed toextract more information from the seismic data, applicablefor geotechnical engineering and risk assessment.Implementation of NORSAR’s rock physics modellingtools for use in unlithified deposits is ongoing. Studiesof shear-waves (S-waves) are necessary for the extractionfor example of shear strength information fromthe seismic data. Data acquired by the use of NGI’snewly developed S-wave source will be of particularinterest for research related to the use of S-waves.Theuse of electromagnetic seabed logging techniques forgeohazard purposes will also be studied.A "field laboratory" in Finneidfjord, Northern NorwayAn area of Sørfjorden near the community of Finneidhas been a focus for scientific studies following asubmarine slide in 1996. This encroached on to landcausing loss of life and the disruption of railway andhighway traffic. Previous studies focused on the slideevent itself (Janbu 1996), as well as on the underlyinggeological conditions of the location (Longva et al.1999, 2003; Best et al. 2003). Finneidfjord is an idealfield laboratory, as the conditions represent many ofthe contributing factors to coastal and offshore slides:submarine slopes, gas-charged soil layers, possibleexcess pore pressures, high sedimentation rates, etc.The purpose of the ICG project is to extend thedatabase of relevant data for the location via sedimentsampling and analysis, as well as long term monitoringof pore pressures, movements and gas seepage.Fig.12. The "Finneidfjord field laboratory". a) Map of the 1996 slide, areas of gassy sediments, high resolution seismic grid and the two ASSEMlocations. Darker grey area shows shadow relief image of multibeam bathymetric data. b) Part of high resolution seismic section across the submarinepart of the 1996 slide. c) Interferometric sidescan mosaic showing the 1996 slide

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards55The field work was conducted in cooperation with theEU project ASSEM (Array of Sensors for SEabed Monitoringfor geohazards). The primary goal of ASSEM isthe development of monitoring and sensor technology,with verification in pilot experiments. The ASSEMtechnology deployed includes autonomous benthicstations fitted with sensor strings for monitoring porepressure in the seabed, methane gas seepage as well assettling and movements of the seabed. The installationof the ASSEM equipment was carried out in May 2004,in intact material adjacent to the 1996 slide, and at alocation further out in the fjord basin where geophysicalmapping indicated entrapped gas in the sediments (Fig.12a). The ASSEM equipment was partially recovered inSeptember 2004, but piezometer strings werere-deployed with autonomous loggers so as to continuemonitoring until early summer 2005, and therebyobtaining a full year of pore pressure data to allowseasonal variations to be evaluated.Swath bathymetric mapping using an interferometricsonar system, high resolution seismic acquisition, andsediment coring have been performed at the location(Fig. 12b, c). The bathymetric data were of very highquality and therefore important for delineating theslide lobes and for planning the coring campaign. Thefailure layer and also areas of potentially gas-chargedsediments were mapped using the seismic data. Thesediment cores, including samples of the failure layer("weak layer"), are currently being analysed for a widerange of parameters; physical properties, age determination,mineralogy, geochemistry, texture, etc. Techniquesdeveloped in connection with the geophysicalactivities (above) will be tested to extract quantitivegeotechnical information from the seismic data.The data from the "Finneidfjord field laboratory" willgreatly improve the understanding of the mechanismsof submarine sliding. With the extensive and detailedknowledge acquired for this location, it may also forman important test location for other techniques, such asthe use of geophysical tools and sampling devices, as wellas seismic enhancement and imaging techniques.Fig.13. Principles of GIS-applications within ICG.GIS-based physical and empirical modellingICG research in the field of GIS-based physical andempirical modelling of slope processes concentrates onthe calculation of spatially distributed terrain attributesthat are physically linked to landslide processes, and theapplication of these for spatial prediction of landslidehazard. Key tasks are the identification of source areas forlandslides and to delineate hazard zones given one or moresource areas. The work is based on parameterising andanalysing gridded digital elevation models (DEM) withinthe framework of geomorphometry (e.g. Pike 1995).A novel approach is the segmentation of the terraininto regions of homogeneous topography and withuniform surface processes. For each region, new attributescan be extracted based on its shape, internaltopography and context in the terrain. Grid-basedterrain modelling, where the terrain is looked upon as acontinuous surface, is combined with an object-basedparadigm where the terrain is looked upon as a mosaicof distinct units having characteristics that differ significantlyfrom their neighbours (Fig. 14a). Delineationof regional hazard zones within this framework is basedon flow-routing algorithms, typically finding thesteepest down-slope route from a given point. Usingalgorithms that allow multiple flows, probability isdistributed down a slope yielding the highest valuesalong the steepest path (Fig. 14b).Geographical information managementand analyses for geohazard applicationsMost modelling tools in Geographical InformationSystems (GIS) are designed for the so-called cartographicoverlay, meaning boolean, arithmetic, or statistical combinationof data layers, and the modelling of static surfaceor sub-surface flow paths (Tomlin 1990). The rationale forusing GIS models in geohazard assessment is to developphysically-based models that require limited input data andyet are simple enough to be applied to large areas (Fig. 13).GIS-based regional hazard and risk assessmentThe prediction of areas affected by landslides (hazard)and the estimation of damages (risk) over large areas(regionalisation) require a combination of factorsgoverning the hazard processes (e.g. topography, precipitation,etc) that are not physically comparable. This isdone within the framework of cartographic modelling(Tomlin 1990) using regional map layers representingthe spatial distribution of an attribute that expressesthe degree to which the attribute on various locationscontributes to the overall slide susceptibility (index

56 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYFig. 14. a) Example of spatial merging of a DEM for delineation of slope land forms, Sheteligfjellet, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard (Romstad 2001). Fiveterrain attributes (slope, three types of curvature and topographic wetness index) have been clustered into nine classes using a combinedsegmentation-classification algorithm. Purple class corresponds well to source areas, pink class corresponds to areas of accumulation, b) RegionalGIS-based analysis, identifying potential source areas (red), potential down-slope fall paths (yellow) and reach angle (green circles), c)Hazard map for central America.maps). A weighted overlay then results in a ranking ona susceptibility scale.In a recent ICG activity, carried out for the ProVentionConsortium in the international project "Global NaturalDisaster Risk Hotspots", this approach was applied todelineate global hotspots for rapid mass movements,such as landslides and snow avalanches (Nadim et al.2004). The probability of landslide and avalancheoccurrences was estimated by modelling the physicalprocesses and combining the results with statistics frompast experiences. The main input data used were topographyand slope angles, extreme monthly precipitation,seismic activity, soil type, mean temperature inwinter months (for snow avalanches) and hydrologicalconditions. The risk computations were based onhuman losses as recorded in natural disaster impactdatabases. The estimation of expected losses wasachieved by first estimating the physical exposure bycombining the landslide frequency and the populationexposed, and then doing a regression analysis usingdifferent sets of uncorrelated socioeconomicalparameters. Validation of the global landslide hazardassessment was carried out through a limited numberof case studies (Fig. 14c).A challenge for the future development of such modelsis to make them less dependent on subjective judgementof input parameters. Implementing results fromother ICG projects may make the models moreobjective, as triggering and run-out patterns can betranslated to weighting factors using empirical orphysical relationships. This is also necessary to coupleGIS-based landslide hazard modelling with futureclimate change scenarios and to assess the impact ofchanging temperature and precipitation patterns onlandslide occurrences and frequencies.SAR applications in geohazard assessmentSatellite-based radar interferometrySince the early 1990’s, satellite-based radar interferometryhas been used to identify large groundmovements due to earthquakes and volcanic activity.

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards57Differential SAR Interferometry (DInSAR) is atechnique that compares the phases of multiple radarimages of an area to measure surface change. It firstbecame well known after an image of the LandersEarthquake deformation field was published byMassonnett et al. (1993). Data stacking methods thattake advantage of a growing archive of radar images, aswell as increasing computing power, have led to a largeincrease in the precision of the technique. The methodhas the potential to detect millimetre-scale surfacedeformation along the sensor – target line-of-sight.Both linear trends and seasonal fluctuations can beidentified (Colesanti et al. 2003a, b).When a pulse of radar energy is reflected back from theEarth to the satellite, two types of information arerecorded, amplitude (displayed in typical SAR images),and phase of the wave. The phase of the wave uponreturn depends primarily on the distance between thesatellite and the surface. Atmospheric effects are small.Differences in phase between two images are easilyviewed by combining, or interfering, the two phaseimages.In the resulting image, the waves will eitherreinforce or cancel one another, depending upon therelative phases. The resulting image is called an interferogrammeand contains concentric bands of colour, orfringes that are related to topography and/or surfacedeformation. When the effects of topography areremoved, the resulting image contains fringes due tosurface deformation. Each fringe represents one-halfwavelength of surface movement. In the case of the ERSsatellites, this is less than 3 cm.The many small reflective objects contributing to eachpixel must remain unchanged or coherent betweenimages, for radar interferometry to work. Decorrelationmay occur as a function of the acquisition geometry(geometric decorrelation) and/or time (temporaldecorrelation). In addition, atmospheric phase screen,mainly due to the effect of the local water vapourcontent, can be difficult to discriminate from grounddeformation. These problems can be overcome bycombining information from a series of radar images toidentify stable natural reflectors (called permanentscatterers, PS) that are coherent over a long period oftime (Ferretti et al. 2001). This technique (PSInSAR)was developed by the SAR processing group atPolitecnico di Milano and is covered by severalinternational patents.Radar interferometry has been used to investigate faultmovements, landslides and subsidence (Dehls et al. 2002;Dehls & Nordgulen 2003a, b). ICG is currently exploitingthe PSInSAR technique to identify the slow precursormovements that often characterize both large rockslopefailures and soft-sediment failures. This capabilitywill be tested in Trondheim and Drammen, where thereare numerous quick-clay areas and a well-establishedrecord of events within the period 1992-2000. The techniqueis also being tested in western Norway, where largeunstable rock masses are a significant threat. The interferometryactivities are an integrated part of other ICGactivities on both soil and rock slope failures.Ground-based radar interferometryIn addition to the satellite-based systems, the need forreliable, portable, high resolution measurement systemsfor monitoring of slope displacement has been recognized.A Ground based INterferometric Synthetic ApertureRadar system (GINSAR) is being developed at ICG. Theradar shall be capable of measuring radial displacementsdown to 1 mm at a typical range of 3 km, and will utilisethe synthetic aperture principle in order to achieve veryhigh spatial cross-range resolution.The use of the GINSAR system will be for a slope identifiedas a potential area for instability, by monitoringthe slope displacements over time. The end product is amap of the slope front with colour codes showing theamount of radial displacement seen from the radarposition. The activity includes research in fields such asradio wave propagation and radio wave scattering atthe ground surface, radio antenna theory, developmentof processing routines, and hardware design. ICGexpects the GINSAR system to become an importanttool for future activities in monitoring both rock –andsoil slopes and to be part of early warning systems.Slide dynamics and mechanics of massdisintegrationReliable numerical models for slide initiation and runoutare a pre-requisite for choosing and implementingthe right mitigation measures. Despite much research,models for the many different types of slides are stillinadequate. In particular, the huge run-out distanceson small slope gradients observed for many submarineslides are difficult to model. This is of great importancefor the oil industry when designing seafloor facilities atdeep-water fields, which are often located in continentalslope settings. Consequently, modelling the dynamicsof subaqueous slides has been an important activity atICG since its initiation, as it followed naturally the largeOrmen Lange Project, in which both the past StoreggaSlide and potential future slides were major issues(Solheim et al. in press).Run-out distances of several hundred kilometres onslope gradients less than 1° are not unusual for largesubmarine slides (Hampton et al. 1996; Locat & Lee2002; Elverhøi et al. 2002). As a debris flow with equivalentmaterial properties would not flow at such lowgradients in air, one must conclude that ambient water

58 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYplays a major role in the subaqueous environment. Themobilising effect of water on the debris flow must bedramatically greater than the resisting effects of increaseddrag force and reduced gravitational acceleration.As a function of glacial – interglacial depositional variability,unstable sediment configurations have beenbuilt up, and slope failures have occurred periodicallyalong the Norwegian continental margin, to produceglacial debris flows as well as submarine slides withvolumes sometimes exceeding 1000 km 3 , such as theHolocene Storegga Slide (3500 km 3 ) (Bryn et al. 2003,in press). Debris flow deposits of the Storegga Slidehave been found at distances as far as 450 km from theescarpment, along sections sloping less than onedegree. The recent investigations and mapping of theStoregga area provide a unique opportunity to combinemodelling results, laboratory experiments and fielddata to improve models for the long run-out exhibitedby subaqueous landslides.Recently Mohrig et al. (1998, 1999) found experimentallythat clay-rich subaqueous debris flows becomenaturally lubricated by a thin water layer, a phenomenontermed hydroplaning. Comparison with similar experimentscarried out under subaerial conditions revealed ashorter run-out for the same type of material.Furthermore, experiments performed by Mohrig et al.(1999) and subsequent modelling by Huang and Garcia(1999) have showed that for subaqueous debris flows,the initial soil properties are not useful as inputparameters for later modelling of the flow behaviour ofthe disintegrated mass. This means that parameterssuch as yield strength or a combination of sensitivityand remoulded yield strength (e.g. Locat & Demers1988) provide too high values for parameter input torealistic submarine flow models.A clear indication that lubrication or hydroplaningoccurs in natural debris flows is the fact that some clayrichdebris flows generate out-runner blocks, whichdetach from the main front and flow farther (Ilstad etal. in press c). Computer simulations of hydroplaning(De Blasio et al. 2004a, in press), showed that thelargest debris flows in Storegga could potentially reachdistances as far as the ones observed. Thus, hydroplaningcould explain the long run-out of the Storeggalandslide, but not the continuity of smaller debris flowdeposits along the slope (De Blasio et al. 2003). Thelaboratory conditions where hydroplaning is observed(only few metres length and a well-remoulded slurrywith constant properties) are probably unrealisticallyfavourable to water intrusion and lubrication. Incontrast to the long run-out Storegga Slide, the smallerdebris flows in the same area (run-out less than 20 km)are well described by a Bingham fluid model. Inparticular, for the small debris flows the Binghammodel explains the empirical observation that therun-out increases as a power law function of the slidevolume (Issler at al. 2003). Extending the pureFig. 15. Maximum surface elevationof the tsunami generated by theMjølnir asteroid, 15-60 minutesafter the impact.

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards59Bingham model to larger debris flows from the samearea, the simulation points fail to model the longrun-out distances. This demonstrates once more that a sofarunexplained mechanism is active in enhancing themobility of very large debris flows. Much remains to beunderstood in the disintegration of clay-rich material, particularlywhen associated with overconsolidated sediments.Not all submarine debris flows consist primarily of clay.In some cases, silt, sand and gravel are sufficientlyabundant to dictate the physical behaviour of thedebris flow. These are commonly regarded as granularmaterials, where Coulomb frictional behaviour anddispersive pressure become much more important thancohesion. Experiments show that sand-rich debrisflows are disintegrated by water shear during the flow,resulting in very complex turbulent flow patterns(Ilstad et al. in press a, b). Understanding the dynamicsof emplacement of sand bodies will probably require acombination of physical experiments, field observations,theory, and numerical modelling.Tsunami modelling and predictionTsunamis have caused thousands of deaths and severedestruction worldwide. The three most severe knownevents in Norway occurred in Loen in 1905 and 1936and in Tafjord in 1934, with a total of 174 deaths.Earthquakes, slides, and rockfalls are the principaltriggers of large tsunamis. Asteroid impacts can alsogenerate destructive tsunamis, but these are rare events.The tsunami research activity at ICG focuses on thedevelopment of numerical models for tsunamigeneration, propagation, and run-up. These numericaltools are applied to improve the understanding ofhistorical tsunamis, and to prevent damage due topotential future tsunamis. The modelling is thereforeimportant for early warning and mitigation planning.The project "Tsunamis generated by asteroid impacts,rockslides and landslides" granted by The ResearchCouncil of Norway programme BeMatA, contributes tothe tsunami activity at ICG. The model developmentfocused on domain decomposition methods for longwave equations (Glimsdal et al. in press), and thenumerical stability of long wave equations applicable totsunami modelling, the latter having a perticularimportance for modelling of tsunamis in fjords. Moreover,the Mjølnir asteroid impact in the Barents Sea 150million years ago is now well described in the near fieldof the impact (Shuvalov et al. 2001). The tsunamigenerated by the Mjølnir impact was probablyenormous (Fig. 15). Simulations indicate a maximumsurface elevation of the wave front of about 300 m 15minutes after the impact, and 40 m after 7.5 hours.Deposits from the tsunami generated by the HoloceneStoregga Slide have been found in coastal areas aroundFigure 16. Snapshot of the wavegenerated by the Storegga submarineslide offshore Mid-Norway.

60 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYthe Norwegian Sea and North Sea, from the east coastof England to beyond the Arctic Circle in northernNorway (Bondevik et al. in press). This prehistorictsunami (Fig. 16) and potential future tsunamis generatedby slides in the Storegga area were analysed with atwo-model approach taking the retrogressive behaviourof the slide (Kvalstad et al. in press) into account. Theslide volume, maximum slide velocity, initial slideacceleration, and characteristics of the retrogressivemotion were shown to be of key importance for thecharacteristics and the propagation of the generatedwaves (Løvholt et al. in press; Haugen et al. in press).Simulations of the tsunami generated by the Storeggaslide corresponded well with the observed tsunamideposits (Bondevik et al. in press). Back-calculations oftsunamis generated by submarine gravity mass flows inthe Trondheim area are also underway.Tsunamis constitute a serious natural hazard for thepopulations in exposed areas. ICG has a special focuson the assessment of potential tsunamis generated byrockslides in Norwegian fjords, lakes and hydropowerreservoirs (ICG 2004). The potential for tsunamis nearÅkerneset in western Norway will be investigated usingnumerical models, including both model developmentand assessment of the impact area of potential waves.One of the future challenges for the tsunami research atICG is the development of more advanced numericaltsunami models, i.e. Navier Stokes type of models,suitable to handle strong non-linearities, and to coupledifferent long-wave models in a two dimensionaldomain decomposition framework.Risk and vulnerability analyses form an integrated partof all practical geohazards work. This is clearlyexemplified through ICG’s involvement in projects indeveloping countries, where improved analyses andmitigation measures could save numerous lives andhuge costs. In the near future, ICG will also focus onresearch related to early warning systems and mitigationmeasures.As a consortium of five different partners, representativeof private research foundations, state organisationsand universities and located at different sites, ICG faceda number of organisational challenges. Establishing acentral, main office facility was an important successfactor. The wide range of research conducted at ICG,only briefly described above, and the internationalinterest shown in it, witness that research ongeohazards is timely. This is also clearly demonstratedby the large number of inquiries received fromstudents, post-doctoral fellows and guest researchersinterested in doing research at ICG.Increasing public awareness of geohazards and theestablishment of a geohazard-focused programme havebeen important for recruiting students. The graduatestudies in geohazards started at the two universitypartners, UiO and NTNU, are a success. This is animportant aspect of ICG, since recruiting new scientistsis a prerequisite for ensuring increased research activitywith respect to geohazards. With a potentially changingclimate in the future, many of the boundary conditionsfor geohazards, such as the level and frequency ofextreme weather events, may change, makingintensified research even more important.Concluding remarksThe activities at ICG span the entire "value chain" ofgeohazard assessment. Field techniques and proceduresas well as instruments are being designed. Examples arethe land-based portable GINSAR system for highresolution monitoring of deformation, development ofsatellite-based monitoring, routines for pore pressuremeasurements (both sub-sea and on land), andacquisition of higher resolution seismic data. Tools andmethods for processing and analysis of data form animportant part of the development activities. Examplesinclude earthquake risk analysis, geohazards related GISapplications, and various geophysical tools for enhancedseismic resolution and extraction of physical parametersfrom seismic data. Given a large and expanding amountof data from field investigations and laboratory experiments,numerical modelling becomes increasinglyimportant. ICG includes significant activities related tothe development of improved models for actual geohazardproblems. Examples include the modelling of slidedynamics and run-out, and the tsunami modelling.Acknowledgements: ICG receives funding from The Research Council ofNorway. This is gratefully acknowledged. The Global LandslideHotSpots project was carried out during 2003 and 2004 for the"ProVention Consortium" in the project "Global Natural Disaster RiskHotspots", and was financed by the World Bank and ISDR. This ispaper number 68 of the International Centre for Geohazards (ICG).

NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYInternational Centre for Geohazards61ReferencesAnda, E., Blikra, L.H. & Braathen, A. 2002: The Berill fault - firstevidence of neotectonic faulting in southern Norway. NorwegianJournal of Geology 82, 175-182.Best, A.I., Clayton, C.R.I., Longva, O. & Szuman, M. 2003: The role offree gas in the activation of submarine slides in Finneidfjord. In J.Locat & Mienert, J. (eds.), Submarine Mass Movements and theirConsequences. Proceedings, First International Symposium, 491-498,Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Bhasin, R. & Kaynia, A.M. 2004: Static and Dynamic Simulation of a700 m High Rock Slope in Western Norway. International Journal ofEngineering Geology 71, 213-226.Bhasin, R., Kaynia, A., Blikra, L.H., Braathen, A. & Anda, E. 2004:Insights into the deformation mechanisms of a jointed rock slopesubjected to dynamic loading. International Journal of RockMechanics & Mining Sciences 41, 470-471.Blikra, L.H., Longva, O., Braathen, A., Anda, E., Dehls, J. & Stalsberg,K. in press: Rock-slope failures in Norwegian fjord areas: examples,spatial distribution and temporal pattern. In Evans, S.G., ScarawciaMugnozza, G., Strom, A.L. & Hermanns, R.L. (eds.), Massive rockslope failure: new models for hazard assessment. Kluwer AcademicPublishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Bondevik, S., Svendsen, J.I., Johnsen, G., Mangerud, J. & Kaland, P.E.1997: The Storegga tsunami along the Norwegian coast, its age andrun-up. Boreas 26, 29-53.Bondevik, S. Løvholt, F., Harbitz, C.B., Mangerud, J., Dawson, A. &Svendsen, J.I. in press: The Storegga slide tsunami - comparingfield observations with numerical simulations. Marine andPetroleum Geology.Braathen, A., Blikra, L.H., Berg, S.S. & Karlsen, F. 2004: Rock-slopefailures of Norway; type, geometry, deformation mechanisms andstability. Norwegian Journal of Geology 84, 67-88.Bryn, P., Berg, K., Forsberg, C.F., Solheim, A. & Kvalstad, T.J. in press:Explaining the Storegga Slide. Marine and Petroleum Geology.Bryn, P., Solheim, A., Berg, K., Lien, R., Forsberg, C. F., Haflidason, H.,Ottesen, D. & Rise, L. 2003: The Storegga slide complex: repeatedlarge scale sliding in response to climatic cyclicity. In Locat, J. &Mienert, J. (eds.), Submarine Mass Movements and TheirConsequences, 215-222. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Bulteau, M., 2004: Controlling and correcting resolution effects inmarine seismics: application to better assessment of offshoregeohazards. Civ. Eng. Thesis, EOST, Louis Pasteur University,Strasbourg, France, ICG report 2004-6-1.Colesanti, C., Ferretti, A., Novali, F., Prati, C. & Rocca, F. 2003a: SARmonitoring of progressive and seasonal ground deformation usingthe Permanent Scatterers Technique. IEEE Transactions onGeoscience and Remote Sensing 41, 1685-1701.Colesanti, C., Ferretti, A., Prati, C. & Rocca, F. 2003b: Monitoringlandslides and tectonic motions with the Permanent ScatterersTechnique. Engineering Geology 68, 3-14.Dahle, H. 2004: Analyse av skråningsstabilitet for Oppstadhornet.Unpublished Master thesis, NTNU.De Blasio, F. V., Issler, D., Elverhøi, A., Harbitz, C. B., Ilstad, T., Bryn, P.,Lien, R., and Løvholt, F. 2003: Dynamics, velocity and run-out ofthe giant Storegga slide. In Locat, J. & Mienert, J. (eds.): SubmarineMass Movements and Their Consequences. Proceedings, FirstInternational Symposium, 223-230. Kluwer Academic Publishers,Dordrecht, The Netherlands.De Blasio, F.V., Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., Harbitz, C.B., Bryn, P. & Lien, R.in press: Flow models of natural debris flows originated fromoverconsolidated clay materials. Marine Geology.De Blasio, F.V., Engvik, L., Harbitz, C.B. & Elverhøi, A. 2004:Hydroplaning and submarine debris flows. Journal of GeophysicalResearch, 109, C1, Paper C01002, 15pp.Dehls, J.F. & Nordgulen, O. 2003a: Analysis of InSAR data over Romeriksporten.Geological Survey of Norway Report 2003.076, 18pp.Dehls, J.F. & Nordgulen, O. 2003b: Evaluation of the use of PSInSARfor the monitoring of subsidence in Oslo region. Geological Surveyof Norway Report 2003.105, 45ppDehls, J.F., Basilico, M. & Colesanti, C. 2002: Ground deformationmonitoring in the Ranafjord area of Norway by means of thePermanent Scatterers technique. Geoscience and Remote SensingSymposium IGARSS '02. 2002 IEEE International 1, 203-207.Edgers, L. 2003: Unsaturated soils and rain-induced slides. Effects ofinfiltration on pore pressures and stability. NGI-report no.20031087-1.Elverhøi, A., De Blasio, F. V., Butt, F. A., Issler, D., Harbitz, C., Engvik,L., Solheim, A. & Marr, J. 2002: Submarine mass-wasting onglacially influenced continental slopes-processes and dynamics. InDowdeswell, J.A. & Cofaigh, C.Ó (eds.), Glacier-InfluencedSedimentation on High-Latitude Continental Margins. GeologicalSociety of London, Special Publication 203, 73–87.Ferretti, A., Prati, C. & Rocca, F. 2001: Permanent scatterers in SARinterferometry: IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and RemoteSensing 39, 8-20.Gelius, L.-J. & Lecomte, I. 2000: The resolution function in linearizedBorn and Kirchhoff inversion. In Hansen, P.C, Jacobsen, B.H. &Mosegaard, K. (eds.), Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences: Methods andApplications of Inversion. 129-141, Springer Verlag.Gelius, L.-J., Lecomte, I. & Tabti, H. 2002: Analysis of the resolutionfunction in seismic prestack depth imaging. GeophysicalProspecting 50, 505-515.Glimsdal, S., Pedersen, G.K. & Langtangen, H.P. in press: An investigationof overlapping domain decomposition methods forone-dimensional dispersive long wave equations. Advances inWater Resources.Hampton, M. A., Lee, H. J. & Locat, J. 1996: Submarine Slides. Reviewsof Geophysics 34, 33–59.Haugen, K.B., Løvholt, F. & Harbitz, C.B. in press: Fundamentalmechanisms for tsunami generation by submarine mass flows inidealised geometries. Marine Petroleum and Geology.Huang X. & Garcia, M.H. 1998: A Herschel-Bulkley model for mudflow down a slope. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 374, 305-333.Huang, X. & Garcia, M.H. 1999: Modeling of non-hydroplaning mudflows on continental slopes. Marine Geology 154, 132–142.ICG 2004: Slide-generated waves in reservoirs. ICG Report 10-2004-1.Ilstad, T., Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., Marr, J. & Parker, G. in press a:Experimental studies of subaqueous debris flow (I) – Measurementsof pore-fluid pressure and total stress. Marine Geology.Ilstad, T., Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., Marr, J. & Parker, G. in press b:Experimental studies of subaqueous debris flow (II)– particletracking. Marine Geology.Ilstad, T., De Blasio, F.V., Engvik, L., Elverhøi, A., Longva, O. & Marr, J.in press c: Submarine outrunner blocks from debris flows:laboratory experiments and field observations in Finneidfjord,Norway. Marine Geology.Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001. ClimateChange 2001: The Science of Climate Change, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, U.K.Issler, D., De Blasio, F. V., Elverhøi, A., Ilstad, T., Bryn, P. & Lien, R.2003: Issues in the assessment of gravity mass flow hazard in theStoregga area off the western Norwegian coast. In Locat, J. &Mienert, J. (eds.), Submarine Mass Movements and TheirConsequences, 231-238. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Janbu, N. 1996: A comprehensive evaluation of the conditions before,during and after the Finneidfjord slide 20 June 1996. Report 1,revision 1.Kvalstad, T.J. Andresen, L., Forsberg, C.F., Berg, K., Bryn, P., &Wangen, M. in press: The Storegga slide: Evaluation of triggeringsources and slide mechanics. Marine and Petroleum Geology.Lecomte, I. 1999: Local and controlled prestack depth migration in

62 A. Solheim et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGYcomplex areas. Geophysical Prospecting 47, 799-818.Lecomte, I. 2004: Simulating Prestack Depth Migrated Sections.Extended Abstracts, EAGE 66th Conference and Exhibition, Paris,June 2004, P071.Lecomte, I. & Gelius, L.-J. 1998: Have a look at the resolution ofprestack depth migration for any model, survey and wavefields.Extended Abstracts, SEG 68th Annual Meeting, SP 2.3.Lecomte, I., Gjøystdal, H. & Drottning, Å. 2003: Simulated PrestackLocal Imaging: a robust and efficient interpretation tool to controlillumination, resolution, and time-lapse properties of reservoirs.Extended Abstracts, SEG 73nd Annual Meeting, Dallas.Locat, J. & Demers, D. 1988: Viscosity, yield strength, remouldedstrength and liquidity index relationships for sensitive clays.Canadian Geotechnical Journal 25, 799-806.Locat, J. & Lee, H. J. 2002: Submarine Landslides: Advances andChallenges. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 39, 193–212.Longva, O., Blikra, L. H., Mauring, E., Thorsnes, T. & Reither, E. 1999:Testprosjekt Finneidfjord; integrert skredfarekartlegging - metodevurdering.Geological Survey of Norway Report 1999.051.Longva, O., Janbu, N., Blikra, L.H. & Bøe, R. 2003: The 1996Finneidfjord Slide: seafloor failure and slide dynamics. In Locat, J.& Mienert, J. (eds.), Submarine Mass Movements and theirConsequences. Proceedings, First International Symposium, 531-538,Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Løvholt, F., Harbitz, C.B. & Haugen, K.B. in press: A parametric studyof tsunamis generated by sybmarine slides in the OrmenLange/Storegga area off western Norway. Marine Petroleum andGeology.Massonnett, D., Rossi, M., Carmona, C., Adragna, F., Peltzer, G., Feigl,K. & Rabaute, T. 1993: The displacement field of the Landersearthquake mapped by radar interferometry. Nature 364, 138-142.Mohrig, D., Elverhøi, A. & Parker, G. 1999: Experiments on the relativemobility of muddy subaqueous and subaerial debris flows, andtheir capacity to remobilize antecedent deposits. Marine Geology154, 117–129.Mohrig, D., Whipple, K. X., Hondzo, M., Ellis, C. & Parker, G. 1998:Hydroplaning of subaqueous debris flows. Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin 110, 387–394.Molina S. & Lindholm, C. in press: A logic tree extension of thecapacity spectrum method developed to estimate seismic risk inOslo, Norway. Journal of Earthquake Engineering.Molina S. & Lindholm, C. 2004: HAZUS_ICG; Version 1.0. User andTechnical Manual.Nadim, F., Gregoire, A.S., Rodriguez, C.& Peduzzi, P. 2004: Globallandslide and avalanche hotspots: First-order identification ofglobal slide and avalanche hotspots. Norwegian GeotechnicalInstitute (NGI), Report no. 20021613-1.Nakamura Y. 1989: Method for dynamic characteristics estimation ofsubsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. RailwayTechnical Research Institute, 30, No. 1NGI 1996: Åkernes landslide. General description of the Åkernes slidearea and control measures. NGI Report 585910-9.Panthi K. K. & Nilsen B. in press: Numerical Analysis of Stresses andDisplacements for the Tafjord Slide, Norway. Bulletin ofEngineering Geology and the Environment.Pike, R. J. 1995: "Geomorphometry - process practice and prospect."Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Suppl. 101, 221-238Romstad, B. 2001: Improving relief classification with contextualmerging. In: J. T. Bjørke, J.T. & Tveite, H. (eds.): Proceedings of the8th Scandinavian Research Conference on Geographical InformationScience. ScanGIS'2001, 25th-27th June 2001. Ås, Norway, 3-14.Shuvalov, V., Dypvik, H. & Tsikalas, F. 2002: Numerical simulations ofthe Mjølnir marine impact crater. Journal of Geophysical Research107, E7 10.1029, 1,1 TO 1-13.Sjøberg, T., Gelius, L.-J. & Lecomte, I. 2003: 2D deconvolution of seismicimage blur, Extended Abstracts, SEG 73nd Annual Meeting.Solheim, A., Bryn, P., Sejrup, H.P., Mienert, J., & Berg, K., in press:Ormen Lange – an integrated study for the safe development of adeep-water gas field within the Storegga Slide Complex, NE Atlanticcontinental margin; Executive summary. Marine and PetroleumGeology.Tomlin, C.D. 1990: Geographic information systems and cartographicmodelling. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall.

International Centre for Geohazards Report No.: 20031103-2Date: 2005-03-31Rev.: 1Annual Report - 2004 Rev. date: 2005-09-20Appendix B – ICG Publications Page: B1Appendix B - ICG Publications as of 1January 2005f:\p\2003\11\20031103\rap\2004-annual-report\appb_icg-publications rev1.docFNa

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005)1. Anda, E., Blikra, L.H. and Braathen, A. (2002).The Berill fault - first evidence of neotectonic faulting in southern Norway.Norwegian Journal of Geology (NGT) 82, 175-182.2. Lacasse, S. and Nadim, F. (2002).Safety and hazards.Keynote Lecture. International Conference on Innovation and Sustainable Developmentof Civil Engineering in the 21 st Century. Beijing, China. 1-3 August 2002. Proceedings,pp. K11-K16.3. Nadim, F. (2002).Probabilistic methods for geohazard problems: State-of-the-Art.Probabilistics in GeoTechnics: Technical and Economic Risk Estimation, Graz, Austria,September 15 -19.4. Kvalstad, T.J., Nadim, F., Kaynia, A.M. and Bryn, P. (2002).Slope stability at Ormen Lange.International Conference on Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics – ‘Diversity andSustainability’, London, UK, 26 – 28 November.5. Lacasse, S. (2002).Geotechnical Solutions for the Offshore: Synergy of research and practice.Keynote Lecture. Proc, Intern. Conf. Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics“Diversity and Sustainability”, SUT, London, UK, 26 – 28 November, pp. 13-20.6. Lacasse, S. (2002).Reliability Analysis – Reliability and Risk in Geo-EngineeringKeynote Lecture, Proc. Intern. Workshop on Dam Foundation and Tunnelling in WeakRocks. Paper 1. Delhi, India, December 2002.7. Lindholm, C. D. and H. Bungum (2002).Microzonation studies in Central America.12'th Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, Eds. D. Paul, A. Kumar and M. Sharma,Roorkee, India, 16-18 Dec., pp 351-3588. Best, A.I., Clayton, C.R.I., Longva, O. and Szuman, M. (2003).The Role of Free Gas in the activation of Submarine Slides in Finneidfjord.Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences, 1 st International Symposium,Editors: Locat, Meinert and Boisvert, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 491-498.9. De Blasio, F.V., D.D. Issler, A. Elverhøi, C. B. Harbitz, T. Ilstad, P. Bryn, R. Lien, and F.Løvholt (2003).Dynamics, Velocity and Run-out of the Giant Storegga Slide.Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences, 1 st International Symposium,Editors: Locat, Meinert and Boisvert, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 223-230.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 210. Issler, D.D., F.V. De Blasio, A. Elverhøi, T. Ilstad, P. Bryn, and R. Lien (2003).Issues in the Assessment of Gravity Mass Flow Hazard in the Storegga Area off theWestern Norwegian Coast.Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences, 1 st International Symposium,Editors: Locat, Meinert and Boisvert, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 231-238.11. Longva, O., Janbu, N., Blikra, L.H. and Bøe, R. (2003).The 1996 Finneidfjord Slide; Seafloor Failure and Slide Dynamics.Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences, 1 st International Symposium,Editors: Locat, Meinert and Boisvert, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 531-538.12. Nadim, F., Krunic, D., and Jeanjean, P. (2003).Probabilistic slope stability analyses of the Sigsbee EscarpmentProceedings, OTC 15203, Offshore Technology Conference ’03, Houston, Texas, May2003.13. Nowacki, F., Solhjell, E., Nadim F., Liedke E., Andersen, K.H., and Andresen, L. (2003).Deterministic Slope Stability Analyses of the Sigsbee Escarpment.Proceedings, OTC 15160, Offshore Technology Conference ’03, Houston, Texas, May2003.14. Heyerdahl, H., C.B. Harbitz, U. Domaas, F. Sandersen, K. Tronstad, F. Nowacki, A.Engen, O. Kjekstad, G. Dévoli, S. G. Buezo, M. R. Diaz, and W. Hernandez (2003).Rainfall Induced Lahars in Volcanic Debris in Nicaragua and El Salvador: PracticalMitigation.Proc., International Conference on Fast Slope Movements – Prediction and Prevention forrisk Mitigation, IC-FSM2003, Naples, Italy, 11-13 May.15. Grozic, J.L.H., F. Nadim, and T.J. Kvalstad (2002).Constitutive modeling of the undrained shear strength of fine grained soils containinggas.55 th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, 3 rd Joint IAH-CNC/CGS Conference, NiagaraFalls, Ontario, Canada, 20 – 23 October.16. Grozic, J. (2003).Gas hydrates and submarine slope instability.Geohazards 2003, Edmonton, Canada, June 2003, pp 143-150.17. Nadim, F. and S. Lacasse (2003).Review of probabilistic methods for quantification and mapping of geohazardsGeohazards 2003, Edmonton, Canada, June 2003, pp 279-285.18. Lacasse, S., F. Nadim and K. Høeg (2003).Risk Assessment in Soil and Rock EngineeringPanAm Conference, SARA, MIT, Cambridge, Mass., USA, June 200319. Blikra, L.H., O. Longva, A. Braathen and E. Anda (in press).Rock-slope failures in Norwegian fjord areas: Examples, spatial distribution and temporalpattern.NATO Advanced Research Workshop Italy June 2002.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 320. Braathen, A., L.H. Blikra, S.S. Berg and F. Karlsen (2004).Rock-slope failures in Norway; type, geometry, deformation mechanisms and stability.Norwegian Journal of Geology (NGT) 67-88.21. Bhasin, R. and A.M. Kaynia (in press).Static and Dynamic Simulation of a 700 m High Rock Slope in Western Norway.Accepted for publication in International Journal of Engineering Geology22. Biscontin, G., J.M. Pestana, and F. Nadim (in press).Seismic Triggering of Submarine Slides in Soft Cohesive Soil Deposits.Accepted for publication in Marine Geology, special issue on landslide generatedtsunamis.23. Jensen, A., G.K. Pedersen and D.J. Wood (2003).An experimental study of wave run-up at a steep beach.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 486, pp 161-188.24. Harbitz, C. B., G. Parker, A. Elverhøi, J. G. Marr, D. Mohrig, and P. A. Harff (2003).Hydroplaning of subaqueous debris flows and glideblocks: Analytical solutions anddiscussion.J. Geophys. Res., 108(B7), 2349, doi:10.1029/2001JB001454.25. De Blasio, F.V., L. Engvik, C.B. Harbitz and A. Elverhøi (2004).Hydroplaning and submarine debris flows.J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 109, C01002, doi:10.1029/2002JC00714.26. Edgers, L., and F. Nadim (2004).Rainfall-induced slides of unsaturated slopesISRL 2004, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, June 2004.27. Gauer, P., Kvalstad, T.J., Forsberg, C.F., Bryn, P. and Berg, K. (2004).The Last Phase of the Storegga Slide: Simulation of Retrogressive Slide Dynamics andComparison with Slide-Scar MorphologyMarine and Petroleum Geology Special Issue.28. Lindholm, C., M. Roth, H. Bungum and J.I. Faleide (2003).Probabilistic and deterministic seismic hazard results and influence of the sedimentaryMøre Basin, NE Atlantic. Submitted to Marine and Petroleum Geology.29. Bungum, H., C. Lindholm and J.I. Faleide (2003).Postglacial seismicity offshore mid-Norway with emphasis on spatio-temporalmagnitudalvariations. Submitted to Marine and Petroleum Geology.30. Bommer, J.J., N.A. Abrahamson, F.O. Strasser, A. Pecker, P.-Y. Bard, H. Bungum, F.Cotton, D. Fäh, F. Sabetta, F, Scherbaum and J. Studer (2004).The challenge of defining upper bounds on earthquake ground motions. SeismologicalResearch Letters, 75(1).31. Douglas, J., H. Bungum and F. Scherbaum (2004).Composite hybrid ground-motion prediction relations based on host-to-targetconversions: case studies for Europe. Manuscript in preparation (to be finished early in2004). Submitted to J. Earthquake Eng.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 432. Bommer, J.J., F. Sabetta, F. Scherbaum, H. Bungum, F. Cotton and N. Abrahamson(2004b).On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in PSHA. Submitted toBull. Seism. Soc. Am.33. Lindholm, C.D., E. Camacho, A. Climent, W. Strauch, J. Cepeda, D. Caceres, J.P.Ligorria and H. Bungum (2005).Seismic hazard and microzonation.Submitted to book authored by J. Bundschuh and G. Alvarado “Central AmericanGeology”.34. Lindholm, C.D., C.A. Redondo and H. Bungum (2004).Two earthquake databases for Central America.In: Natural hazards of El Salvador. Geological Socity of America, Special Paper 375-26;1:6. Eds. W. Rose, J. Bommer, D. Lopez, M. Carr and J. Major.35. Bungum H. (2004).Numerical modelling of fault activities. In preparation (Computational ‘Geophysics).Ormen Lange Special Issue, Marine and Petroleum Geology (accepted).36. Engen, Ø, O. Eldholm and H. Bungum (2003).The Arctic plate boundary. J. Geophys. Res., 108(B2),2075, doi:10.1029/2002JB001809.37. Bungum, H., C. Lindholm and A. Dahle (2003).Long-period ground-motions for large European earthquakes, 1905-1992, andcomparisons with stochastic predictions. J. Seism., 7:377-396.38. Sabetta, F., A. Lucantoni, H. Bungum and J.J. Bommer (2004).Sensitivity of PSHA results to ground motion prediction relations and logic-tree weights.Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., submitted.39. Scherbaum, F., Bommer, J.J., Bungum, H., Cotton, F. and Abrahamson, N.A. (2004).Composite hybrid ground-motion prediction relations based on host-to-targetconversions. In preparation (for Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.).Ormen Lange Special Issue, Marine and Petroleum Geology (accepted).40. Bommer, J.J., Oates, S., Cepeda, J.M:, Bird, J., Lindholm, C., Velázquez, M., Torres, R.,Rivas, J., Castellón, J., Maravilla, N., Marroquín, G., Hernández, D., Lynch, R.,Hoogenboezem, H., Dejongh, R. and Siddiqi, G. (2005).Development of a methodology for controlling hazard due to induced seismicity.Submitted to Engineering Geology41. Nadim, F. and Lacasse, S. (2004).Mapping of landslide hazard and risk along the pipeline route.Terrain and geohazard challenges facing onshore oil and gas pipelines. London, 200442. Andresen, L. and Jostad, H.P. (2004).Analyses of progressive failure in long natural slopes.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 543. Jostad, H.P. and Andresen, L. (2004).Modelling of shear band propagation in clays using interface elements with finitethickness44. Holden, L., Sannan, S. and Bungun, H. (2003).A stochastic marked point process model for earthquakes.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 3:95–101, European Geosciences Union200345. Kvalstad, T.J., Nadim, F., Kaynia, A.M., Mokkelbost, K.H. and Bryn, P. (in press).Soil conditions and slope stability in the Ormen Lange area.Marine and Petroleum Geology.46. Kvalstad, T.J., Andresen. L., Forsberg, C.F., Berg, K., Bryn, P. and Wangen M. (inpress).The Storegga slide: Evaluation of triggering sources and slide mechanics.Marine and Petroleum Geology.47. Haugen, K.B., Løvholt, F. and Harbitz, C.B. (in press).Fundamental mechanisms for tsunami generation by submarine mass flows in idealisedgeometries.Marine and Petroleum Geology.48. Løvholt, F., Harbitz, C.B. and Haugen, K.B. (in press).A parametric study of tsunamis generated by sybmarine slides in the OrmenLange/Storegga area off western Norway.Marine and Petroleum Geology.49. Bondevik, S., Løvholt, F., Harbitz, C., Mangerud, J., Dawson, A. and Svendsen, J.I. (inpress).The Storegga Slide tsunami - comparing field observations with numerical simulations".Marine and Petroleum Geology.50. Nadim, F., Moghtaderi-Zadeh, M., Lindholm, C., Andresen, A., Remseth, S., Bolourchi,M.J., Mohtari, M. and Tvedt, E. (2004).The Bam Earthquake of 26 December 2003.Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.51. Glimsdal, S., Pedersen, G.K. and Langtangen, H.P. (2005).An investigation of overlapping domain decomposition methods for one-dimensionaldispersive lang wave equations.Advances in Water Resources, Vol. 27, No. 11, pp: 1111-113352. Nadim, F., Kvalstad, T.J. and Guttormsen, T. (in press).Quantification of risks associated with seabed instability at Ormen Lange.Marine and Petroleum Geology.53. Issler, D., De Blasio, F.V., Elverhøi, A., Bryn, P. and Lien, R. (2004).Scaling behaviour of clay-rich submarine debris flows.Marine Petroleum and Geology special issue (Ormen Lange). Submitted to ElsevierScience 25.06.04. Accepted.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 654. Berg, K., Solheim, A. and Bryn, P. (2004).The Pleistocene to recent geological development of the Ormen Lange area.55. Solheim, A., Berg, K., Forsberg, C.F. and Bryn, P. (2004).The Storegga Slide Complex: Repetitive large scale sliding with similar cause anddevelopment.56. Moghtaderi-Zadeh, M., Nadim, F. and Bolourchi, M.J. (2004).Performance of Lifeline Systems in Bam Earthquake of December 26, 2003.JSEE: Spring 2004, Vol. 5, No. 457. Ilstad, T., Marr, J.G., Elverhøi, A. and Harbitz, C.B. (2004).Laboratory Studies of Subaqueous Debris Flows by Measurements of Pore-Fluid Pressureand Total Stress.Preprint submitted to Elsevier Science, 9 August 2004. Marine Geology (in press).58. Ilstad, T., Elverhøi, A., Issler, D. and Marr, J.G. (2004).Subaqueous Debris Flow Behaviour and its Dependence on the Sand/Clay Ratio: ALaboratory Study using Particle Tracing.Preprint submitted to Elsevier Science, 9 August 2004. Marine Geology (in press).59. Ilstad, T., De Blasio, F.V., Elverhøi, A., Harbitz, C.B., Engvik, L., Longva, O. and Marr,J.G. (2004).On the Frontal Dynamics and Morphology of Submarine Debris Flows.Preprint submitted to Elsevier Science, 13 August 2004. Marine Geology (in press).60. Molina, S. and Lindholm, C. (2004).Seismic risk in Oslo: a HAZUS testing and applicationPoster presentation at the ESC meeting Sept. 12-17, GFZ, Potsdam, Germany61. Molina, S. and Lindholm, C. (2004).A logic tree extension of the capacity spectrum method developed to estimate seismicrisk in Oslo, Norway.Paper submitted to Journal of Earthquake Engineering.62. Gauer, P. (2004)Numerical modeling of a sub-flow event.Proceedings of the International Snow Science Workshop 2004, Jackson Hole Wyoming,19-24 September 200463. Phoon, K.K., and F. Nadim (2004)Modeling Non-Gaussian Random Vectors for FORM: State-of-the-Art Review.Workshop on Risk assessment and Geohazards, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore,India, 26 November.64. Bryn, P., Berg, K., Forsberg, C.F., Solheim, A. and Kvalstad, T.J. (in press)Explaining the Storegga Slide.Marine and Petroleum Geology.65. Bryn, P., Berg, K., Stoker, M.S., Haflidason, H. and Solheim, A. (in press).Contourites and their relevance for mass wasting along the Mid-Norwegian margin.Marine and Petroleum Geology.

ICG-papers already published or in the pipeline (1 January 2005) 766. Forsberg, C.F. and Locat, J. (in press).Mineralogical and microstructural development of the sediments on the Mid-Norwegianmargin.Marine and Petroleum Geology.67. Solheim, A., Bryn, P., Sejrup, H.P., Mienert, J. and Berg, K. (in press).Ormen Lange - an integrated study for safe development of a deep-water gas field withinthe Storegga Slide Complex, NE Atlantic continental margin; Executive summary.Marine and Petroleum Geology.68. Solheim, A., et al., (2005)Research on assessment, prevention and mitigation of geohazards at the InternationalCentre for Geohazards (ICG).Norwegian Journal of Geology, 2005.69. De Blasio, F., D. Issler, A. Elverhøi, C.B. Harbitz, P. Bryn, R. Lien (2004).Flow models of small to medium-scale debris flows originating from compacted claymaterials.Ormen Lange Special Issue, Marine and Petroleum Geology (accepted).70. De Blasio, F.V., T. Ilstad, A. Elverhøi, D. Issler, and C.B. Harbitz (submitted).High mobility of subaqueous debris flows and the lubricating-layer model.Proceedings 2004 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 3-6 May 2004.71 De Blasio, F.V., D. Issler, A. Elverhøi, C.B. Harbitz, T. Ilstad, P. Bryn, R. Lien, F.Løvholt (2003).Dynamics, Velocity and Run-out of the Giant Storegga Slide. Submarine MassMovements and Their Consequences, 1st International Symposium, Editors: Locat,Mienert and Boisvert, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 223-230.72 De Blasio, F., Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., Harbitz, C.B., Bryn, P. and Lien, R. (2004).On the dynamics of subaqueous clay rich gravity mass flows — the giant Storegga slide.Ormen Lange Special Issue, Marine and Petroleum Geology (accepted).

Kontroll- og referanseside/Review and reference pageOppdragsgiver/ClientThe Research Council of NorwayKontraktsreferanse/Contract referenceSFF – ICG 146035/420Dokumenttittel/Document titleInternational Centre for Geohazards – Annual report – 2004Prosjektleder/Project ManagerFarrokh NadimUtarbeidet av/Prepared byFarrokh NadimEmneord/KeywordsDokument nr/Document No.20031103-2Rev. 1 2005-09-20Dato/Date2005-03-31Distribusjon/Distribution Fri/Unlimited Begrenset/Limited Ingen/NoneLand, fylke/Country, CountyHavområde/Offshore areaKommune/MunicipalityFeltnavn/Field nameSted/LocationSted/LocationKartblad/MapFelt, blokknr./Field, Block No.UTM-koordinater/UTM-coordinatesKvalitetssikring i henhold til/Quality assurance according toNS-EN ISO9001Kontrollertav/ReviewedbyFNaKontrolltype/Type of reviewHelhetsvurdering/GeneralEvaluation *Språk/StyleTeknisk/Technical- Skjønn/Intelligence- Total/Extensive- Tverrfaglig/InterdisciplinaryDokument/Document Revisjon 1/Revision 1 Revisjon 2/Revision 2Kontrollert/Reviewed Kontrollert/Reviewed Kontrollert/ReviewedDato/Date Sign. Dato/Date Sign. Dato/Date Sign.2005.03.31 2005.09.20THa Utforming/Layout 2005.03.31 2005.09.20SL Slutt/Final 2005.03.31 2005.09.20Kopiering/Copy quality* Gjennomlesning av hele rapporten og skjønnsmessig vurdering av innhold og presentasjonsform/On the basis of an overall evaluation of the report, its technical content and form of presentationDokument godkjent for utsendelse/Document approved for releaseDato/Date31 March 2005Sign.