Report No: AUS0000903 JUNE 12, 2018 JUNE 3, 2018 VOLCÁN DE FUEGO, GUATEMALA, ERUPTION. GLOBAL RAPID POST DISASTER DAMAGE ESTIMATION (GRADE) REPORT WORLD BANK GSURR D-RAS TEAM Disclaimer The World Bank, the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), and the Government of Guatemala do not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work and do not accept any responsibility for any consequence derived from the use or interpretation of the information contained. . The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank Group concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. 2018. June 3, 2018 Volcán de Fuego, Guatemala, Eruption. Global Rapid Post Disaster Damage Estimation (GRADE) Report. © World Bank.” All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522- 2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Acknowledgements This report was prepared by a team led by Rashmin Gunasekera (GSURR, World Bank) and Joaquin Toro (GSURR, World Bank) and Xijie Lu (GSURR, World Bank). The team also comprised of James Daniell, Antonios Pomonis and Kerri Cox of the World Bank’s GSURR Disaster Resilience Analytics and Solutions (D-RAS) Knowledge Silo Breaker (KSB). Abbreviations CONRED: Coordinadora Nacional para la Reducción de Desastres COPERNICUS EMS: COPERNICUS Emergency Mapping Service DALA: Damage and Loss Assessment D-RAS KSB: Disaster-Resilience Analytics & Solutions, Knowledge Silo Breaker, GSURR, World Bank Group GRADE: Global RApid post-disaster Damage Estimation GSURR: Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice, World Bank Group GTQ: Guatemala Quetzal INACIF: Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Forenses de Guatemala INE Guatemala: National Statistics Institute of Guatemala INGUAT: Instituto Guatemalteco de Turismo INSIVUMEH: Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología MAGA: (Guatemala) Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food OSM: Open Street Map PDC: Pacific Disasters Center SEGEPLAN: Guatemalan Secretariat for Planning and Programming of the Presidency UNITAR: United Nations Institute for Training and Research USD: United States Dollars 3 Executive Summary Following the Volcán de Fuego eruption on June 3, 2018, a rapid post-disaster damage assessment, following the GRADE methodology1 was undertaken. The objective was to estimate the economic damages caused by the event2 and understand the spatial distribution of damage to support the process of developing a roadmap for reconstruction and recovery. For the purposes of the analysis the 2002 census data were projected to 2018 on the individual village level via appropriate projections informed from government data for population and number of buildings and housing units. Numerous results have been developed as part of this analysis. Key results are: 1) Damage extents via photo analysis and social media have been geocoded and put in an easy- to-use KMZ file format to allow the extent of damage or non-damage to be seen, allowing for a quick overview of the majorly damaged areas, via the aerial photos, and field survey photos of various individuals. 2) The analysis provides an independent view of the actual degree of damage across the affected area. Common misconceptions in the media such as that of El Rodeo being destroyed stemmed from the fact that the village of San Miguel Los Lotes (with around 260 buildings destroyed or severely damaged) is part of El Rodeo. However, the main part of El Rodeo appears unaffected by the pyroclastic flows and lahars and only received some ashfall. 3) The analysis allowed for checking of existing products such as satellite analysis via EMS COPERNICUS; PDC; UNITAR/UNOSAT and from Guatemala government sources. It was crucial to follow consecutive updates as over the period June 3 to June 8, data quality improved versus early maps and analysis. 4) An economic viewpoint gives this analysis a key focus. The main direct damage is only in the near field due to pyroclastic flows and to a lesser extent lahars and ballistic missiles. More than 400 houses with a replacement value around $4.5-5 million in capital stock have been destroyed or severely damaged on the SSE slopes of the volcano. Reports of damage due to other current flows in the western slopes need to be investigated for ground truthing. 1 Global RApid post-disaster Damage Estimation (GRADE) approach developed at the World Bank and conducted by the Global Practice for Social, Urban and Rural Development, and Resilience (GSURR) Disaster-Resilience Analytics & Solutions (D-RAS) Knowledge Silo Breaker (KSB). The methodology aims to address specific damage information needs in the first few weeks after a major disaster See https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/DRAS_web_04172018.pdf for details of the methodology. 2 Using capital replacement costs which is the actual cost to replace an asset at its pre-damage condition. This may not be the "market value" of the asset, and is typically distinguished from the "actual cash value" payment which includes a deduction for depreciation etc. 5 5) The ashfall appeared to have not been great enough to cause major building damage and collapses (generally damage to buildings due to tephra accumulation on roofs becomes dangerous when the accumulations exceed 15cm). The wind direction played a major role in the lack of damage to the east, as the upper wind column was heading to the west. 6) A sectoral focus is examined as part of this economic direct impact analysis where agriculture and subsistence farming are one key sector affected. The resort estimated major losses in the coffee production sector where estimates are in the order of $1.5-2 million from preliminary data, as well as $3 million from other sectors. According to the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Food (MAGA), the most affected productive sectors were coffee (2,800 hectares), basic grains (2,358 hectares) and vegetables (3,187 hectares), with around 20% crop loss expected in the affected locations. Similarly, the Chamber of Agriculture and the Association of Exporters of Guatemala (Agexport) report that the sectors of production of flowers, ornamental plants, rubber, cattle and dairy, as well as swine, have also been affected by volcanic ash. 7) Roads, bridges and other infrastructure have been amalgamated from OSM and SEGEPLAN sources. Important to note is that only 1 bridge is currently seen to have been directly damaged by the event. 8) The health impacts of the 10mm of ash falling in Antigua and in other locations should not be underestimated. 9) The tourism impacts in UNESCO World Heritage city of Antigua are minor given the amount of ash which fell was in mm. 10) Future risk is key to analyse as part of this study, and due to predominant wind direction and eruptive nature, this eruption was minor compared to what could be expected from Volcán de Fuego. Such eruptions have happened in the past. 1.0 Introduction: Event Description Volcán de Fuego is considered to be one of Central America's most active volcanoes. It is situated 18 km SW from Central America's former colonial capital and present main tourist destination of Antigua Guatemala (a UNESCO world heritage site) and 40 km SW of Guatemala City. It is the most active of Guatemala’s 34 volcanoes (Figure 1). 6 Figure 1: Volcanoes of Guatemala, with Fuego situated on the border between the Escuintla, Chimaltenango and Sacatépequez departments in the middle of the map. The summit of Fuego at 3 763 m is just three kilometers south of its twin Acatenango andesitic volcano with its summit at 3 950 m. The population around Fuego volcano is estimated to be 54,000 within the 10 km radius and over 1 million within the 30 km radius (Figure 2). In contrast to the mostly andesitic Acatenango volcano, eruptions at Fuego have become more explosive with time, and most historical activity has produced basaltic rocks. Frequent vigorous historical eruptions of Fuego (around 60 in total) have been recorded since the onset of the Spanish era in 1524 and have produced major ash falls, along with pyroclastic flows and lava flows. The current eruptive phase of Fuego began in 2002 and produced an explosive eruption on September 13, 2012 that forced 33 000 people to evacuate from 17 settlements as it ejected lava and pyroclastic flows that travelled about 600 meters down the slopes of the volcano, while on February 8, 2015 an eruption caused the temporary closure of the La Aurora International Airport in Guatemala City, another eruption occurred on March 26-27, 2016. There was no loss of life in these three eruptions. 7 Figure 2: Google Earth map of Volcán de Fuego’s immediate surrounding areas. On Sunday 3 June 2018, at around 05:30 am a new eruption started. Initially the column of ash was 6 km above mean sea level but by 13:00 it had reached 10 km high. Thus it was apparent that this eruption was the strongest since 1974. In the city of Escuintla (35 km SE of the volcano) traffic jams occurred as many people tried to flee in their vehicles. The eruption prompted the evacuation initially of 3 265 people from nearby areas including Sangre de Cristo, Finca Palo Verde, Panimaché I and II, Zapote, San Felipe and Sabana Grande. Eventually by the fourth day more than 12 089 people had been evacuated, with 3 319 of them housed in temporary shelters and 3 271 receiving medical assistance. 2.0 Damage Distribution Pyroclastic Flow Around 16:00 the ash column began to collapse under its own weight and on the slopes of the volcano and continued a fast downslope flow on the volcano’s eastern slopes and ravines. A major pyroclastic flow travelled along the Rio El Jute up to the point where it meets Rio Guacalate and continued a further 2.5 km southwards, reaching up to northern part of the town of El Rodeo (2002 population of 14 125) situated 11 km SE of the crater. The hot ash cloud (pyroclastic flow) 8 reached temperatures up to 7000C. Such a pyroclastic flow - a mixture of ash, sand, and gas - can travel much faster than lava, down the slopes of a volcano reaching speeds over 100 km per hour. The flow reached quickly to the grounds of the La Reunion Golf Resort & Residences, causing its partial destruction, although guests and personnel had been evacuated earlier in the day (Photos 1 and 2). Photo 1 (left) and 2 (right): La Reunion Golf Resort & Residences, before (left) and after (right) the pyroclastic flow. A few hundred meters to the south of the Resort, the flow bifurcated (Figure 3), with one wing flowing towards the southeast but narrowly missing the Enrico Castillo Monge School and the other wing continuing south towards the village of San Miguel Los Lotes where an estimated 800 people lived. The entire village of San Miguel Los Lotes was engulfed by the pyroclastic flow and buried by a 2- 3 m thick layer of hot volcanic deposits (Photos 1 and 2). 9 Figure 3: Pyroclastic flow footprint map due to the June 3, 2018 eruption of Volcán de Fuego. Photo 3 (left) and 4 (right): Effects of the pyroclastic flow on the village of San Miguel Los Lotes. 10 Between the San Miguel los Lotes and the Enrico Castillo Monge School, there was situated a major pork meat production factory, the Granja Porcina Toledo. Both of these facilities were thankfully spared from the effects of the pyroclastic flow (Photo 5 and 6). Around 40,000 pigs were evacuated from the factory to other safe locations prior to the pyroclastic flow occurrence. Photo 5 (left) and 6 (right): Enrico Castillo Monge School (left) and Granja Porcina Toledo (right) were only narrowly missed by the onslaught of the pyroclastic flow. Rio El Jute and Rio Guacalate will need to be dredged soon as their channels have been filled with pyroclastic materials, while the Las Lajas bridge was completely destroyed as it was buried by the flow. In addition because of danger of the flows travelling further south as a precaution the communities of Cañaveral I and IV, Hunapú, Magnolia and Sarita restaurant located on the Palín- Escuintla highway were evacuated. Tephra Fall In addition to the pyroclastic flow lighter particles of tephra (e.g. ash) from the eruption column started to rain down and pushed by the wind affected a wide area around the volcano and were often mixed with falling rain. Ash fell on the country’s capital (Guatemala City) situated around 40 km northeast of the volcano as well as on many parts of the Sacatepéquez, Chimaltenango and Escuintla departments. 11 Aviation authorities closed the capital's international airport (La Aurora International Airport) because of the danger posed to planes by the ash, while members of the Guatemalan military were deployed to clean the ash off the tarmac; the airport was reopened on Monday 4 June. Streets and houses were covered by up to 5 cm of ash in the colonial town of Antigua Guatemala, the country’s most popular tourist destination, situated 18 km NE of the volcano. Reports said that ash came down for about 2 hours mid-morning and shortly on Sunday afternoon, often mixed with falling rain. Tephra fall has also been reported in La Soledad, San Miguel Dueñas, Alotenango, San Lucas, Sacatépequez, San Pedro Yepocapa and in Chimaltenango among other places. Photo 7 (left) and 8 (right): Tephra fall seen on cars in Antigua Guatemala and San Pedro Yepocapa. Following the eruption, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food (MAGA) registered 9,760 hectares of crops damaged, according to a official document published by the institution on June 12. The greatest damage was registered in Escuintla with 5,910 hectares related to 9,090 farming families. The area contained crops of banana, coffee, beans, corn, maxán leaf and other products. In Chimaltenango, 2,802 hectares with crops of corn, beans, carrots, pepper, avocado, broccoli and tomato, among others, related to 13,504 farming families. The least affected department was Sacatepéquez, with 1,048 hectares of avocado, coffee, sweet potato, French bean, peach, corn and bean plantations, which affected 7,627 farming families. In addition medical attention had been provided to 1,379 farm and pet animals, including exotic birds, poultry, dogs, cats, horses, pigs, cattle, pelibueyes and goats. MAGA’s first post-eruption loss estimate for the agricultural losses in Escuintla stood at 33.4 million Quetzal (4.45 million USD). Among the affected communities were San Miguel Los Lotes, El Rodeo, La Trinidad, La Réunion, Osuna, La Reina and Don Pancho, which with the exception of San Miguel Los Lotes were affected by tephra fall. 12 Lahars  INSIVUMEH warned on June 4, that pyroclastic flows and lahars (volcanic mudflows) were possible and that local residents should be on alert, as the eruption had deposited a significant amount of material on the volcano’s flanks that could be washed down as a lahar during a strong rainfall event, with rivers Pantaleón, Mineral and others being potential lahar channels. Evacuation orders were issued on June 5 (Figure 4) for the communities of El Rodeo, La Reina, Canaveral I & Canaveral IV (in Escuintla city), colonias Hunapu & Magnolias (in Escuintla city). On Wednesday afternoon June 6, descent of lahars took place through the ravines Santa Teresa, Mineral and Taniluyá. On June 10 evacuation order was also issued for Santa Lucia Cotzumalguapa. Figure 4: Communities evacuated on June 5 for fear of lahars. Lahars descended on the western flanks of the volcano, causing severe damage to local roads and isolating several rural communities (Figure 5). Risk to life in these seven communities was thus quite high during the eruption phase and afterwards, as rains helped bring pyroclastic deposits down the slopes of the volcano. 13 Figure 5: Communities isolated due to lahars causing damage to access roads. Human Casualties and Emergency Management As of July 25, 2018, the June 3, Volcán de Fuego eruption, had killed 147 people, seriously injured 58 while 276 people were missing, while the painstaking identification process was expected to last for months, as only 88 bodies had been assigned to a missing person by July 3 (a month after the event). Almost all of the victims died due to burn injuries caused by the pyroclastic flow. At least 58 people have been treated in hospitals, including 12 children, some of whom suffered severe burns, 5 adults are under intensive care, and one in critical condition in General San Juan de Dios and Roosevelt Hospitals. Six patients, all minors, with severe burns were transferred to the United States (to Shriners Hospital for Children, in Galveston, Texas) by a US Air Force plane, equipped and with the presence of medical specialists. Others were transferred for burn specialist treatment to Mexico. In addition around 250 more people were injured mostly by minor burns and did not require hospitalization. Search and rescue operations, involving 1200 personnel, begun soon after the disaster. Despite the dangers from continuing eruptions the search and rescue brigades were ceaselessly working bringing bodies out of the disaster zone. The affected localities have been completely cordoned off by police to facilitate operations and prevent further possible loss of life. On the first day it was reported that 7 people had died, but by Monday morning the death toll had risen to 25 and by Tuesday to 69. Late on Tuesday the forensic agency, INACIF, raised the death toll to at least 75, as the operations were continuing. By Thursday morning (June 7) the 14 dead had reached 99. At that point the Volcán de Fuego eruption became Guatemala's deadliest since the 1902 Santa María eruption. Rescuers described finding bodies so cased in ash they looked like statues. Some rescuers had to return to their bases after their shoe soles had melted. Others managed to dig 10 survivors out, with a notable case being when, six children, and their pregnant mother, had been rescued from their home and taken to a local hospital. Despite the recovery of bodies in the first four days the number of missing people had also risen to 197, but it was not clear if the lists of dead and missing were reconciled, as the number of dead that had been identified was only 28. Ad-hoc morgues were set-up in the nearby town of Alotenango and in Escuintla’s colonia Hunapú where relatives or friends could go to identify the victims, but due to the intense heat and burn injuries, many bodies will have to be identified later on with anthropological methods and DNA, while some bodies may never be recovered. Most of the victims were in Las Lajas, and San Miguel Los Lotes, south of the volcano, in Escuintla department, along the path of Sunday’s pyroclastic flow. Search and rescue operations were suspended on June 7, as conditions were judged to be dangerous for the personnel while chances of finding any survivors after nearly 100 hours from the event would be non-existent. The death toll at the moment of this announcement stood at 109 people. On June 7 it was announced that the Ministry of Public Health inaugurated a new Intensive Care Unit II at the San Juan de Dios General Hospital, in the Guatemalan capital, in an effort to strengthen the response capacity for the care of the patients burned during the powerful eruption of Fuego volcano. It was said that this hospital treated 16 patients with severe burns of which 4 died, 2 minors were flown to the USA and eight would be transferred to the new ICU. Among the early confirmed fatalities were four people, including a CONRED (civil protection agency) official, killed when a house was set on fire, while two youngsters were burned to death as they watched the eruption from a bridge. Another victim was found in the streets near San Miguel Los Lotes by volunteer firefighters, and died in an ambulance. Local survivors’ accounts suggest that they had no warnings or evacuation advice on that fateful Sunday afternoon, and thus when the pyroclastic flow reached their village many did not manage to escape in time. 3.0 Brief review of historic eruptions of Volcán de Fuego 15 In the period 1500-2017, there have been eight major eruptions of Volcán de Fuego (Figure 4). In the 20th century the most important eruptions occurred in 1932 and on August 12, 1966 and October 14, 1974 (Photo 9 and 10). The last major eruption of Fuego took place on October 14-19, 1974 and produced pyroclastic flows that destroyed the winter harvest and tephra fall that covered nearby cities such as San Pedro Yepocapa and Acatenango, but also cities much further away such as Coatepeque, Champerico, Tiquisate and Retalhuleu. Worst affected by the tephra fall was the town of San Pedro Yepocapa nearly 9 km west of the summit (present population of 37 000) which was plunged into darkness for several days with the tephra deposited on the town exceeding 1 m in thickness by the end of this eruption. There was no loss of life during this eruption. Figure 4: Historic eruptions of Volcán de Fuego (1500-1980), with M denoting major events. Eruption clusters and running average number of eruptions per 40 year period are also shown (Martin and Rose, 1981). The current eruptive phase of Fuego began in 2002 and produced an explosive eruption on September 13, 2012 that forced 33 000 people to evacuate from 17 settlements as it ejected lava and pyroclastic flows travelled about 600 meters down the slopes of the volcano. On February 8, 2015 an eruption caused the temporary closure of the La Aurora International Airport in Guatemala City while 700 people had to be evacuated from the flanks of the volcano. Another eruption occurred on March 26-27, 2016. There was no loss of life in these three eruptions. 16 Photo 9 (left) and 10 (right): Eruption columns of the August 12, 1966 and October 14, 1974 Volcán de Fuego major eruptions. More recently in 2017 and early 2018 repeated eruptions took place as follows: • April 21, 2017 (the ash plume reached 1 km above the summit and traveled more than 20 km to the east, northeast, and southeast); • May 5, 2017 (the strongest eruption since Sept. 2012, orange alert was issued, the volcanic ash cloud travelled more than 50 km to the south, southwest and west generating ashfall in San Pedro Yepocapa, Morelia, Santa Sofía, El Porvenir, Palo Verde, Santa Lucia Cotzumalguapa, Siquinala, San Andres Osuna, Chuchu and La Reunión, while pyroclastic flows travelled down the Trinidad, Las Lajas, Ceniza and Santa Teresa ravines, evacuation of the village of Sangre de Cristo (population 300) on the west flank, ballistic materials were projected up to a radius of 5 km); • September 13-15, 2017 (ninth effusive eruption phase in 2017, the ash plume on the first day reached 1.2 km above the summit and traveled 15 km west and southwest, causing ashfall in communities including San Pedro Yepocapa, El Porvenir and Sangre de Cristo, pyroclastic flows descended the Seca (Santa Teresa) ravine on the west flank); • September 17-18, 2017 (the ash plume reached 1 km above the summit and drifted west and southwest, ashfall occurred in Panimaché I and II, Morelia and El Porvenir); 17 • September 28-29, 2017 (this was the tenth eruptive phase in 2017 and started with two lava flows descending down the Seca and Las Lajas ravines up to 600 m, explosions generated a column of ash that reached about 1 km above the summit and traveled more than 30 km west and northwest with ashfall reported in La Soledad, Pastores, San Miguel Duenas and Antigua Guatemala); • October 5, 2017 (the ash plume reached 1.2 km above the summit and traveled more than 20 km to the west, southwest, and south); • November 5-7, 2017 (this was the eleventh eruptive phase in 2017 and ashfall occurred in Panimaché I and II, Santa Sofía, Morelia, and El Porvenir); • December 10-11, 2017 (this was the twelfth and last eruptive phase in 2017, the ash plume reached 1.2 km above the summit and drifted 15 km to the south, southwest, and southeast causing ashfall in La Rochela, San Andrés Osuna, Morelia, Panimaché I and II, three lava flows traveled 1.5 km down the Seca (Santa Teresa), 800 m down the Ceniza, and 300 m down the Taniluyá ravine); • February 1-2, 2018 (an orange alert was issued as an eruption lasting 20 hours generated two pyroclastic flows, while the ash plume reached 2.7 km above the summit and drifted up to 40 km to the west and southwest, the pyroclastic flows reached 700 and 1 500 meters in length, ashfall occurred in La Rochela, Ceylon, Santa Lucia Cotzumalguapa, Siquinalá, San Pedro Yepocapa, Sangre de Cristo, Panimaché I and II, Santa Sofía, Morales, Yucales and Yepocapa, education authorities of Sacatepéquez and Escuintla suspended all educational activities, 47 704 people were affected) A summary of the 1974-2018 Volcán de Fuego eruptions is also shown in Table 1. 18 Table 1. Summary of Volcán de Fuego eruption characteristics (1974-2018). Maximum Height of Main Distance Distance eruption directions of travelled travelled by column dispersion by ash Pyroclastic (km, of the ash cloud Flows or Lava Date a.m.s.l.) cloud (km) Flows (km) Notes Strongest since at least 1932; 1m of ash 10-23 Oct 1974 SW, W 110 n/a in San Pedro Yepocapa 13 Sep 2012 0.6 33000 evacuated from 17 locations 700 evacuated & temporary closure of La 08 Feb 2015 Aurora International Airport 21 Apr 2017 4.75 E, NE, SE 20 Strongest since 13/9/2012; Orange Alert; 05 May 2017 S, SW, W 50 Evacuation of Finca Sangre de Cristo 13-15 Sep 2017 5.00 W, SW 15 17-18 Sep 2017 4.75 W, SW 12 2 lava flows descended up to 600m; 28-29 Sep 2017 4.75 E, NE >30 0.6 ashfall in Antigua & San Miguel Duenas 05 Oct 2017 5.00 W, SW, S >20 05-07 Nov 2017 SW 10-11 Dec 2017 5.00 S, SW, SE 15 1.5 3 lava flows descended 300 to 1500m Orange Alert; lasted for 20 hr; 2 pyroclastic flows descended 700 to 01-02 Feb 2018 6.50 W, SW 40 1.5 1500m; Schools closed in Sacatepéquez & Escuintla departm. Red Alert; lasted for 16.5 hr; 1 pyroclastic 03 Jun 2018 10.00 W, SW, NE >50 11.5 flows descended to 11500m; 147 killed & 276 missing 19 4.0 Methodology, Data and Economic Damage Assessment The GSURR D-RAS KSB team was mobilized on June 4, the day after the disaster. Initially exposure data (e.g. housing by type of wall and type of roof, by number of rooms, schools by number of classrooms, health centers, building footprints, roads, agricultural production and tourism- related data) were pulled together-joined from various sources including the Guatemala Country Disaster Risk Profile developed in 2015 under the CAPRA TA initiative, latest living condition and agricultural surveys etc. Much of the data needed were already available to D-RAS, down to the individual settlement or hotel level, from previous modeling efforts of the team in Guatemala. The key data are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Brief summary of assembled data sets. Census Population and Housing data from INE - projected to 2018 CDRP Building construction cost information Land Cover SEGEPLAN, 2012 Imagery and damage analysis (UNISAR/UNOSAT and Satellite Data DigitalGlobe) OSM data of buildings, roads, infrastructure, places of Infrastructure interest Agriculture Agricultural Census Survey 2013, 2014 and 2015. Topology DEMs, Imagery and Landcover (SRTM, ALOS) Health Health centers and school (SEGEPLAN) Once data assembly was completed, GIS exposure analysis layers were prepared to be used for loss estimation. In addition use was made of population exposure datasets such as World Pop, LandScan and GHSL and digital terrain models (SRTM 30m) were also prepared for the affected region. Initial focus was for all areas within the 40 to 50-km radius from the Fuego summit, later- on analysis zoomed in into the areas more severely impacted, as well as to areas potentially at risk from lahars (e.g. areas prone to landslides, projectiles, pyroclastic flows and lahars on the steep slopes of the volcano as well as channels prone to lahar further away where more population and economic activity were exposed). Information about La Reunion Golf Resort & Residences was also collected in order to estimate losses stemming from this important facility. The D-RAS Team also followed closely announcements of government agencies of Guatemala in the ReliefWeb, Twitter, as well as specific web sites (such as INSIVUMEH, CONRED, MAGA, INACIF etc.) as well as on local on-line press. Gradually after the third day hazard layers appeared, related to the area affected by pyroclastic flows, provided by COPERNICS EMS and UNITAR/UNOSAT. Initially these layers were less accurate, but by the fifth day higher resolution and more reliable layers were available. 20 The analysis provided an independent view of the actual degree of damage across the affected area. Common misconceptions in the media such as that of El Rodeo being destroyed stemmed from the fact that the village of San Miguel Los Lotes (with around 260 buildings destroyed or severely damaged) is part of El Rodeo. However, the main part of El Rodeo appears unaffected by the pyroclastic flows and lahars and only received some ashfall. The analysis allowed for checking of existing products such as satellite analysis via EMS COPERNICUS; PDC; UNITAR/UNOSAT and from Guatemala government sources. It was crucial to follow consecutive updates as over the period June 3 to June 8, data quality improved versus early maps and analysis. By the fourth day (June 7), a KMZ file with geo-tagged photos and video fly-overs was ready for internal information sharing. By the sixth day (June 9) loss estimation results were derived, checked and as far as possible validated with evidence from the field via intensive data- information collection from local sources (as aforementioned). A brief report was prepared, accompanied by multimedia attachments such as shape files, Powerpoint presentation on key findings and KMZ file. A list of GRADE analysis products and key findings, lessons follows below. The key economic impact findings and risk implications are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. 1) Damage extents via photo analysis and social media have been geocoded and put in an easy- to-use KMZ file format to allow the extent of damage or non-damage to be seen, allowing for a quick overview of the majorly damaged areas, via the aerial photos, and field survey photos of various individuals. 2) An economic viewpoint gives this analysis a key focus. The main direct damage is only in the near field due to pyroclastic flows and to a lesser extent lahars and ballistic missiles (projectiles). More than 400 houses with a replacement value around $4.5-5 million in capital stock have been destroyed or severely damaged on the SSE slopes of the volcano. Reports of damage due to other current flows in the western slopes need to be investigated for ground truthing. 5) The ashfall appeared to have not been great enough to cause major building damage and collapses (generally damage to buildings due to tephra accumulation on roofs becomes dangerous when the accumulations exceed 15cm). The wind direction played a major role in the lack of damage to the east, as the upper wind column was heading to the west. 6) A sectoral focus is examined as part of this economic analysis where agriculture and subsistence farming are one key sector affected. We have seen major losses in the coffee production sector where estimates are in the order of $1.5-2 million from preliminary data, as well as $3 million from other crops based on preliminary data (impact with 5 mm of ash); could be much higher as ash fallout depth becomes available 21 According to the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Food (MAGA), the most affected productive sectors were coffee (2,800 hectares), basic grains (2,358 hectares) and vegetables (3,187 hectares), with around 20% crop loss expected in the affected locations. Similarly, the Chamber of Agriculture and the Association of Exporters of Guatemala (Agexport) report that the sectors of production of flowers, ornamental plants, rubber, cattle and dairy, as well as swine, have also been affected by volcanic ash. 7) Roads, bridges and other infrastructure have been amalgamated from OSM and SEGEPLAN sources. Important to note is that only 1 bridge is currently seen to have been directly damaged by the event. 8) The health impacts of the 10mm of ash falling in Antigua and in other locations should not be underestimated. 9) The tourism impacts in Antigua are minor given the amount of ash which fell in Antigua. Long- term effects could occur but infrastructure, apart from Route 14, is in working order according to INGUAT. 11) Future risk is key to analyze as part of this study, and due to predominant wind direction and eruptive nature, this eruption was minor compared to what could be expected from Volcán de Fuego. Such eruptions have happened in the past. Table 3. Brief summary of economic impact assessment by sector Sector Economic Impact 400+ buildings destroyed; US$4.5-5 million loss in capital stock (could rise Buildings to 900); Golf course ~ US$30+ million US$5 million crop loss; could be higher as more ash fallout data becomes Agriculture available Tourism Minor impact, except the loss of the Golf course resort Infrastructure Minor but 173km of roads at potential risk from lahar runoff Health Long-term impacts are not trivial 22 Table 4. Brief summary of key risk implications arising from the eruption Risk Implications Lahars could reach densely populated cities of Escuintla and Rainfall Alotenango Rainfall Lahars to block off roads and bridges Ashfall Potential significant agricultural losses Future Predominant wind direction (for small events) negated most of the eruption impact 5.0 Conclusions The analysis of the D-RAS team following the Fuego Eruption in Guatemala is an independent risk analysis and communication exercise. Sectoral impact has been quantified as part of this analysis. The analysis is based on checking of existing products such as satellite imagery analysis via EMSR COPERNICUS; PDC; UNITAR/UNOSAT and government sources. The Volcán de Fuego eruption on June 3, 2018 was a severe but localized event with high impact due to pyroclastic flows and lahars that caused the destruction to La Reunion golf resort and nearby settlements (San Miguel los Lotes, Las Lajas). Impacts could have been even more severe due to the pyroclastic flow with a major factory and a school narrowly escaping direct impact. Problems from ash fall dispersion were focused on the agricultural sector (particularly coffee and vegetable production). Tourism was disrupted briefly and suffered the loss of one key facility (the golf course resort) but overall effects were limited. Impacts in Antigua are minor given the amount of ash which fell in the city. The wind direction played a major role in the lack of damage to the densely inhabited northeast direction. The risk from lahars remains a concern as the eruption deposited 6 metres of pyroclastic deposits on the slopes of the volcano that will be washed down slope with the approaching rain and hurricane season. Local residents should be on alert. Rivers Pantaleón, Mineral and others are potential lahar channels. The western parts of the city of Escuintla are particularly at risk, as are smaller settlements on the western flanks. 23 References Martin, D.P., and Rose, W.I., Behavior Patterns of Fuego Volcano, Guatemala, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 10:67-81, 1981. 24