search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
The challenges of the Brazilian electric energy regulatory agency on mitigate effects from 2024 Rio Grande do Sul floods


dams receive more attention than those of smaller dams. Ruptures of small dams, built on private property, occur more frequently. This is because, as dams are relatively expensive to build, their owners tend to make them less expensive, generally sacrificing their safety. In terms of historical records, the probability of a small dam breaking is estimated at 2%[29] dams, estimated at 0.5%[30]


, a figure considerably higher than that associated with large . Weaknesses encountered, whether in licensing or safety aspects, are the main


factors driving the practice of establishing small irregular dams on watercourses, disregarding technical and environmental criteria.


9. Conclusions The catastrophic floods that hit Rio Grande do Sul between April and May 2024 highlighted the region’s vulnerability to extreme weather phenomena. The record rainfall affected around 90% of the state and 2.3 million people, with 640,000 of them losing their homes. Studies published by researchers from various countries project that events of this category in the region will become more frequent and intense in the future. The worsening is mainly due to the consequences of climate change and the intensification of phenomena such as El Niño, combined with a lack of investment in a protection system. For the authors, the episode exposes the urgent need to improve flood infrastructure. Dam safety is a critical issue for Brazil, especially given the challenges posed by its dependence on


hydroelectric power. The results of the management of dams carried out in the state by ANEEL and other government agencies demonstrate the evolution of the stability conditions of the structures. Out of a universe of 126 potentially affected hydroelectric plants, only two had their dams partially breached, with the effects being restricted to material damage. However, any dynamic has its resilience limits. Continuous and strategic investments, especially in


emerging technologies, are needed to ensure sustainable growth in the long term. Means of preventing and minimizing engineering risks to prevent extreme events have not yet been


fully exhausted. Future dams can be designed to better balance climate change risks, social and environmental impacts and economic considerations by better evaluating all aspects of the project before construction. New hydroelectricity technology can help to compensate for vulnerabilities to climate change and can make electricity generation more efficient. In-depth exploration with the identification of new criteria and risk factors to improve the Dam Safety Policy is left as a proposal, in order to guarantee managers a wider range of options. The application of a structured risk analysis process, even at the initial maturity level, promotes efficiency gains to the process while reducing information asymmetry levels. Finally, it should be emphasized that the reflections contained in this article are part of a subject of significant importance, not only because of the need to understand regulatory guidelines for the treatment of dam safety by the constituted authorities, but also as proposals to support decisions in the technical field by all the actors involved.


Vol XXXIII Issue 3 | Dam Engineering | 177


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100