Articles | Volume 22, issue 5
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2759–2773, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-2759-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2759–2773, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-2759-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
08 May 2018
Research article
| 08 May 2018
Effects of variability in probable maximum precipitation patterns on flood losses
Andreas Paul Zischg et al.
Related authors
Philipp Wanner, Noemi Buri, Kevin Wyss, Andreas Zischg, Rolf Weingartner, Jan Baumgartner, Benjamin Berger, and Christoph Wanner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-512, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-512, 2021
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we quantified the glacial meltwater contribution to mountainous streams using high-resolution stable water isotope analysis. The glacial meltwater made up almost 28 % of the annual mountainous stream discharges. This high contribution demonstrates that the mountainous streamflow regimes will change in the future when the glacial meltwater contribution will disappear due to global warming posing a major challenge for hydropower energy production in mountainous regions.
Daniela Molinari, Anna Rita Scorzini, Chiara Arrighi, Francesca Carisi, Fabio Castelli, Alessio Domeneghetti, Alice Gallazzi, Marta Galliani, Frédéric Grelot, Patric Kellermann, Heidi Kreibich, Guilherme S. Mohor, Markus Mosimann, Stephanie Natho, Claire Richert, Kai Schroeter, Annegret H. Thieken, Andreas Paul Zischg, and Francesco Ballio
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2997–3017, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2997-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2997-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Flood risk management requires a realistic estimation of flood losses. However, the capacity of available flood damage models to depict real damages is questionable. With a joint effort of eight research groups, the objective of this study was to compare the performances of nine models for the estimation of flood damage to buildings. The comparison provided more objective insights on the transferability of the models and on the reliability of their estimations.
Veronika Röthlisberger, Andreas P. Zischg, and Margreth Keiler
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2431–2453, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2431-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2431-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the role of building value estimation schemes within flood exposure analyses on regional to national scales. Our results for Switzerland suggest that models based on individual buildings produce more reliable results than models based on surface area, but only if they consider the buildings' volume. Simple models tend to underestimate the exposure, which results in suboptimal allocation of resources for protection measures in decision making processes based on cost efficiency.
S. Fuchs, M. Keiler, and A. Zischg
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2127–2142, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2127-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2127-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
A spatially explicit object-based temporal assessment of buildings and citizens exposed to natural hazards in Austria is presented, including elements at risk of river flooding, torrential flooding, and snow avalanches. It is shown that the repeatedly stated assumption of increasing losses due to continued population growth and related increase in assets has to be opposed to the local development of building stock, which is spatially and temporally variable.
Maria Pregnolato, Andrew O. Winter, Dakota Mascarenas, Andrew D. Sen, Paul Bates, and Michael R. Motley
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1559–1576, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The interaction of flow, structure and network is complex, and yet to be fully understood. This study aims to establish rigorous practices of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for modelling hydrodynamic forces on inundated bridges, and understanding the consequences of such impacts on the surrounding network. The objectives of this study are to model hydrodynamic forces as the demand on the bridge structure, to advance a structural reliability and network-level analysis.
Nicole Clerx, Horst Machguth, Andrew Tedstone, Nicolas Jullien, Nander Wever, Rolf Weingartner, and Ole Roessler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-71, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-71, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Meltwater runoff is one of the main contributors to mass loss on the Greenland Ice Sheet that influences global sea level rise. However, it remains unclear where meltwater runs off and what processes cause this. We measured the velocity of meltwater flow through snow on the ice sheet, which ranged from 0.17 to 12.8 m hr-1 for vertical percolation and from 1.3 to 15.1 m hr-1 for lateral flow. This is an important step towards understanding where, when and why meltwater runoff occurs on the ice sheet.
Sarah Rose Shannon, Anthony Payne, Jim Freer, Gemma Coxon, Martina Kauzlaric, David Kriegel, and Stephan Harrison
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-51, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-51, 2022
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
We added a snow and glacier melt model to the Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of HydRology (DECIPHeR) model. The motivation was to develop a hydrological model that can be applied to large glaciated and snow-fed catchments, yet is computationally efficient enough to include model uncertainty in streamflow predictions. The model is applied to the highly glacierised Naryn River catchment in Central Asia and found to reproduce past changes in streamflow well.
Daniel Viviroli, Anna E. Sikorska-Senoner, Guillaume Evin, Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Jérémy Chardon, Anne-Catherine Favre, Benoit Hingray, Gilles Nicolet, Damien Raynaud, Jan Seibert, Rolf Weingartner, and Calvin Whealton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-99, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-99, 2022
Preprint under review for NHESS
Short summary
Short summary
It is difficult to estimate the magnitude of rare to very rare floods due to a lack of sufficiently long observations. The challenge is even greater in large river basins, where precipitation patterns and precipitation amounts vary considerably over the course of an event, and floods from different parts of the basin coincide. We show that computer models can provide plausible results in this setting, and can thus inform flood risk and safety assessments for critical infrastructure.
Gang Zhao, Paul Bates, Jeffrey Neal, and Bo Pang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5981–5999, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Design flood estimation is a fundamental task in hydrology. We propose a machine- learning-based approach to estimate design floods anywhere on the global river network. This approach shows considerable improvement over the index-flood-based method, and the average bias in estimation is less than 18 % for 10-, 20-, 50- and 100-year design floods. This approach is a valid method to estimate design floods globally, improving our prediction of flood hazard, especially in ungauged areas.
Philipp Wanner, Noemi Buri, Kevin Wyss, Andreas Zischg, Rolf Weingartner, Jan Baumgartner, Benjamin Berger, and Christoph Wanner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-512, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-512, 2021
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we quantified the glacial meltwater contribution to mountainous streams using high-resolution stable water isotope analysis. The glacial meltwater made up almost 28 % of the annual mountainous stream discharges. This high contribution demonstrates that the mountainous streamflow regimes will change in the future when the glacial meltwater contribution will disappear due to global warming posing a major challenge for hydropower energy production in mountainous regions.
Thomas Lees, Marcus Buechel, Bailey Anderson, Louise Slater, Steven Reece, Gemma Coxon, and Simon J. Dadson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5517–5534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5517-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5517-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We used deep learning (DL) models to simulate the amount of water moving through a river channel (discharge) based on the rainfall, temperature and potential evaporation in the previous days. We tested the DL models on catchments across Great Britain finding that the model can accurately simulate hydrological systems across a variety of catchment conditions. Ultimately, the model struggled most in areas where there is chalky bedrock and where human influence on the catchment is large.
John P. Bloomfield, Mengyi Gong, Benjamin P. Marchant, Gemma Coxon, and Nans Addor
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5355–5379, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5355-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5355-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Groundwater provides flow, known as baseflow, to surface streams and rivers. It is important as it sustains the flow of many rivers at times of water stress. However, it may be affected by water management practices. Statistical models have been used to show that abstraction of groundwater may influence baseflow. Consequently, it is recommended that information on groundwater abstraction is included in future assessments and predictions of baseflow.
Peter Uhe, Daniel Mitchell, Paul D. Bates, Nans Addor, Jeff Neal, and Hylke E. Beck
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4865–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present a cascade of models to compute high-resolution river flooding. This takes meteorological inputs, e.g., rainfall and temperature from observations or climate models, and takes them through a series of modeling steps. This is relevant to evaluating current day and future flood risk and impacts. The model framework uses global data sets, allowing it to be applied anywhere in the world.
Rosanna Lane, Gemma Coxon, Jim Freer, Jan Seibert, and Thorsten Wagener
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-321, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-321, 2021
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
This study modelled the impact of climate change on river high flows across Great Britain (GB). Generally, results indicated an increase in the magnitude and frequency of high flows along the west coast of GB by 2050–2075. In contrast, average flows decreased across GB. All flow projections contained large uncertainties; the climate projections were the largest source of uncertainty overall but hydrological modelling uncertainties were considerable in some regions.
Regula Muelchi, Ole Rössler, Jan Schwanbeck, Rolf Weingartner, and Olivia Martius
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3577–3594, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3577-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3577-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyses changes in magnitude, frequency, and seasonality of moderate low and high flows for 93 catchments in Switzerland. In lower-lying catchments (below 1500 m a.s.l.), moderate low-flow magnitude (frequency) will decrease (increase). In Alpine catchments (above 1500 m a.s.l.), moderate low-flow magnitude (frequency) will increase (decrease). Moderate high flows tend to occur more frequent, and their magnitude increases in most catchments except some Alpine catchments.
James Shaw, Georges Kesserwani, Jeffrey Neal, Paul Bates, and Mohammad Kazem Sharifian
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3577–3602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
LISFLOOD-FP has been extended with new shallow-water solvers – DG2 and FV1 – for modelling all types of slow- or fast-moving waves over any smooth or rough surface. Using GPU parallelisation, FV1 is faster than the simpler ACC solver on grids with millions of elements. The DG2 solver is notably effective on coarse grids where river channels are hard to capture, improving predicted river levels and flood water depths. This marks a new step towards real-world DG2 flood inundation modelling.
Regula Muelchi, Ole Rössler, Jan Schwanbeck, Rolf Weingartner, and Olivia Martius
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3071–3086, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3071-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3071-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Runoff regimes in Switzerland will change significantly under climate change. Projected changes are strongly elevation dependent with earlier time of emergence and stronger changes in high-elevation catchments where snowmelt and glacier melt play an important role. The magnitude of change and the climate model agreement on the sign increase with increasing global mean temperatures and stronger emission scenarios. This amplification highlights the importance of climate change mitigation.
Oliver E. J. Wing, Andrew M. Smith, Michael L. Marston, Jeremy R. Porter, Mike F. Amodeo, Christopher C. Sampson, and Paul D. Bates
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 559–575, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Global flood models are difficult to validate. They generally output theoretical flood events of a given probability rather than an observed event that they can be tested against. Here, we adapt a US-wide flood model to enable the rapid simulation of historical flood events in order to more robustly understand model biases. For 35 flood events, we highlight the challenges of model validation amidst observational data errors yet evidence the increasing skill of large-scale models.
Keith J. Beven, Mike J. Kirkby, Jim E. Freer, and Rob Lamb
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 527–549, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-527-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-527-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The theory that forms the basis of TOPMODEL was first outlined by Mike Kirkby some 45 years ago. This paper recalls some of the early developments: the rejection of the first journal paper, the early days of digital terrain analysis, model calibration and validation, the various criticisms of the simplifying assumptions, and the relaxation of those assumptions in the dynamic forms of TOPMODEL, and it considers what we might do now with the benefit of hindsight.
Daniela Molinari, Anna Rita Scorzini, Chiara Arrighi, Francesca Carisi, Fabio Castelli, Alessio Domeneghetti, Alice Gallazzi, Marta Galliani, Frédéric Grelot, Patric Kellermann, Heidi Kreibich, Guilherme S. Mohor, Markus Mosimann, Stephanie Natho, Claire Richert, Kai Schroeter, Annegret H. Thieken, Andreas Paul Zischg, and Francesco Ballio
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2997–3017, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2997-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2997-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Flood risk management requires a realistic estimation of flood losses. However, the capacity of available flood damage models to depict real damages is questionable. With a joint effort of eight research groups, the objective of this study was to compare the performances of nine models for the estimation of flood damage to buildings. The comparison provided more objective insights on the transferability of the models and on the reliability of their estimations.
Gemma Coxon, Nans Addor, John P. Bloomfield, Jim Freer, Matt Fry, Jamie Hannaford, Nicholas J. K. Howden, Rosanna Lane, Melinda Lewis, Emma L. Robinson, Thorsten Wagener, and Ross Woods
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2459–2483, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2459-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2459-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present the first large-sample catchment hydrology dataset for Great Britain. The dataset collates river flows, catchment attributes, and catchment boundaries for 671 catchments across Great Britain. We characterise the topography, climate, streamflow, land cover, soils, hydrogeology, human influence, and discharge uncertainty of each catchment. The dataset is publicly available for the community to use in a wide range of environmental and modelling analyses.
Thomas O'Shea, Paul Bates, and Jeffrey Neal
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2281–2305, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2281-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2281-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Outlined here is a multi-disciplinary framework for analysing and evaluating the nature of vulnerability to, and capacity for, flood hazard within a complex urban society. It provides scope beyond the current, reified, descriptors of
flood riskand models the role of affected individuals within flooded areas. Using agent-based modelling coupled with the LISFLOOD-FP hydrodynamic model, potentially influential behaviours that give rise to the flood hazard system are identified and discussed.
Wouter J. M. Knoben, Jim E. Freer, and Ross A. Woods
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4323–4331, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The accuracy of model simulations can be quantified with so-called efficiency metrics. The Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) has been often used in hydrology, but recently the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) is gaining in popularity. We show that lessons learned about which NSE scores are
acceptabledo not necessarily translate well into understanding of the KGE metric.
Rosanna A. Lane, Gemma Coxon, Jim E. Freer, Thorsten Wagener, Penny J. Johnes, John P. Bloomfield, Sheila Greene, Christopher J. A. Macleod, and Sim M. Reaney
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4011–4032, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4011-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4011-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluated four hydrological model structures and their parameters on over 1100 catchments across Great Britain, considering modelling uncertainties. Models performed well for most catchments but failed in parts of Scotland and south-eastern England. Failures were often linked to inconsistencies in the water balance. This research shows what conceptual lumped models can achieve, gives insights into where and why these models may fail, and provides a benchmark of national modelling capability.
Wouter J. M. Knoben, Jim E. Freer, Keirnan J. A. Fowler, Murray C. Peel, and Ross A. Woods
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2463–2480, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Computer models are used to predict river flows. A good model should represent the river basin to which it is applied so that flow predictions are as realistic as possible. However, many different computer models exist, and selecting the most appropriate model for a given river basin is not always easy. This study combines computer code for 46 different hydrological models into a single coding framework so that models can be compared in an objective way and we can learn about model differences.
Gemma Coxon, Jim Freer, Rosanna Lane, Toby Dunne, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Nicholas J. K. Howden, Niall Quinn, Thorsten Wagener, and Ross Woods
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2285–2306, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
DECIPHeR (Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of Hydrology) is a new modelling framework that can be applied from small catchment to continental scales for complex river basins. This paper describes the modelling framework and its key components and demonstrates the model’s ability to be applied across a large model domain. This work highlights the potential for catchment- to continental-scale predictions of streamflow to support robust environmental management and policy decisions.
Anne F. Van Loon, Sally Rangecroft, Gemma Coxon, José Agustín Breña Naranjo, Floris Van Ogtrop, and Henny A. J. Van Lanen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 1725–1739, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-1725-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-1725-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We explore the use of the classic
paired-catchmentapproach to quantify human influence on hydrological droughts. In this approach two similar catchments are compared and differences are attributed to the human activity present in one. In two case studies in UK and Australia, we found that groundwater abstraction aggravated streamflow drought by > 200 % and water transfer alleviated droughts with 25–80 %. Understanding the human influence on droughts can support water management decisions.
Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Heidi Kreibich, Sergiy Vorogushyn, Jeroen Aerts, Karsten Arnbjerg-Nielsen, Marlies Barendrecht, Paul Bates, Marco Borga, Wouter Botzen, Philip Bubeck, Bruna De Marchi, Carmen Llasat, Maurizio Mazzoleni, Daniela Molinari, Elena Mondino, Johanna Mård, Olga Petrucci, Anna Scolobig, Alberto Viglione, and Philip J. Ward
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5629–5637, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5629-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5629-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural flood protection measures, such as levees. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach and shown that increasing levels of flood protection can generate a false sense of security and attract more people to the risky areas. We briefly review the literature on this topic and then propose a research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection.
Keith J. Beven, Susana Almeida, Willy P. Aspinall, Paul D. Bates, Sarka Blazkova, Edoardo Borgomeo, Jim Freer, Katsuichiro Goda, Jim W. Hall, Jeremy C. Phillips, Michael Simpson, Paul J. Smith, David B. Stephenson, Thorsten Wagener, Matt Watson, and Kate L. Wilkins
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2741–2768, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2741-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2741-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper discusses how uncertainties resulting from lack of knowledge are considered in a number of different natural hazard areas including floods, landslides and debris flows, dam safety, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic ash clouds and pyroclastic flows, and wind storms. As every analysis is necessarily conditional on the assumptions made about the nature of sources of such uncertainties it is also important to follow the guidelines for good practice suggested in Part 2.
Keith J. Beven, Willy P. Aspinall, Paul D. Bates, Edoardo Borgomeo, Katsuichiro Goda, Jim W. Hall, Trevor Page, Jeremy C. Phillips, Michael Simpson, Paul J. Smith, Thorsten Wagener, and Matt Watson
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2769–2783, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2769-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2769-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Part 1 of this paper discussed the uncertainties arising from gaps in knowledge or limited understanding of the processes involved in different natural hazard areas. These are the epistemic uncertainties that can be difficult to constrain, especially in terms of event or scenario probabilities. A conceptual framework for good practice in dealing with epistemic uncertainties is outlined and implications of applying the principles to natural hazard science are discussed.
Veronika Röthlisberger, Andreas P. Zischg, and Margreth Keiler
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2431–2453, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2431-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2431-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the role of building value estimation schemes within flood exposure analyses on regional to national scales. Our results for Switzerland suggest that models based on individual buildings produce more reliable results than models based on surface area, but only if they consider the buildings' volume. Simple models tend to underestimate the exposure, which results in suboptimal allocation of resources for protection measures in decision making processes based on cost efficiency.
Simon Brenner, Gemma Coxon, Nicholas J. K. Howden, Jim Freer, and Andreas Hartmann
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 445–461, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-445-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-445-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we simulate groundwater levels with a semi-distributed karst model. Using a percentile approach we can assess the number of days exceeding or falling below selected groundwater level percentiles. We show that our approach is able to predict groundwater levels across all considered timescales up to the 75th percentile. We then use our approach to assess future changes in groundwater dynamics and show that projected climate changes may lead to generally lower groundwater levels.
Simon Schick, Ole Rössler, and Rolf Weingartner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 929–942, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-929-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-929-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting at the seasonal timescale aims to answer questions such as the following: how much water do we have next summer? Is next winter going to be extremely cold? Constrained by computer power, earth system models (ESMs) do not resolve all environmental variables of interest. Our study tests a method to refine the output of such an ESM for streamflow forecasting in the Rhine basin. The results show that the method is able to translate skill at different spatial scales.
Benoit P. Guillod, Richard G. Jones, Simon J. Dadson, Gemma Coxon, Gianbattista Bussi, James Freer, Alison L. Kay, Neil R. Massey, Sarah N. Sparrow, David C. H. Wallom, Myles R. Allen, and Jim W. Hall
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 611–634, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-611-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-611-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing the potential impacts of extreme events such as drought and flood requires large datasets of such events, especially when looking at the most severe and rare events. Using a state-of-the-art climate modelling infrastructure that is simulating large numbers of weather time series on volunteers' computers, we generate such a large dataset for the United Kingdom. The dataset covers the recent past (1900–2006) as well as two future time periods (2030s and 2080s).
Mary C. Ockenden, Wlodek Tych, Keith J. Beven, Adrian L. Collins, Robert Evans, Peter D. Falloon, Kirsty J. Forber, Kevin M. Hiscock, Michael J. Hollaway, Ron Kahana, Christopher J. A. Macleod, Martha L. Villamizar, Catherine Wearing, Paul J. A. Withers, Jian G. Zhou, Clare McW. H. Benskin, Sean Burke, Richard J. Cooper, Jim E. Freer, and Philip M. Haygarth
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 6425–6444, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6425-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6425-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes simple models of phosphorus load which are identified for three catchments in the UK. The models use new hourly observations of phosphorus load, which capture the dynamics of phosphorus transfer in small catchments that are often missed by models with a longer time step. Unlike more complex, process-based models, very few parameters are required, leading to low parameter uncertainty. Interpretation of the dominant phosphorus transfer modes is made based solely on the data.
Jannis M. Hoch, Jeffrey C. Neal, Fedor Baart, Rens van Beek, Hessel C. Winsemius, Paul D. Bates, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3913–3929, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3913-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3913-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
To improve flood hazard assessments, it is vital to model all relevant processes. We here present GLOFRIM, a framework for coupling hydrologic and hydrodynamic models to increase the number of physical processes represented in hazard computations. GLOFRIM is openly available, versatile, and extensible with more models. Results also underpin its added value for model benchmarking, showing that not only model forcing but also grid properties and the numerical scheme influence output accuracy.
Katrien Van Eerdenbrugh, Stijn Van Hoey, Gemma Coxon, Jim Freer, and Niko E. C. Verhoest
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5315–5337, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5315-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5315-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Consistency in stage–discharge data is investigated using a methodology called Bidirectional Reach (BReach). Various measurement stations in the UK, New Zealand and Belgium are selected based on their historical ratings information and their characteristics related to data consistency. When applying a BReach analysis on them, the methodology provides results that appear consistent with the available knowledge and thus facilitates a reliable assessment of (in)consistency in stage–discharge data.
Daniel B. Bernet, Volker Prasuhn, and Rolf Weingartner
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1659–1682, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-1659-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-1659-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
To quantify the relevance of surface water floods in Switzerland, we introduce and analyze an exhaustive set of insurance flood damage claims. First, we present a method to classify such claims and then we analyze the classified data with respect to space and time. The results reveal that just as fluvial floods are responsible for vast damage in Switzerland, so too are surface water floods. Accordingly, surface water floods should receive similar attention like fluvial floods.
Laurent Guillaume Courty, Adrián Pedrozo-Acuña, and Paul David Bates
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1835–1847, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1835-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1835-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents Itzï, a new free software for the simulation of floods. It is integrated with a geographic information system (GIS), which reduces the human time necessary for preparing the entry data and analysing the results of the simulation.
Itzï uses a simplified numerical scheme that permits to obtain results faster than with other types of models using more complex equations.
In this article, Itzï is tested with three cases that show its suitability to simulate urban floods.
Melissa Wood, Renaud Hostache, Jeffrey Neal, Thorsten Wagener, Laura Giustarini, Marco Chini, Giovani Corato, Patrick Matgen, and Paul Bates
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 4983–4997, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4983-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4983-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a methodology to calibrate the bankfull channel depth and roughness parameters in a 2-D hydraulic model using an archive of medium-resolution SAR satellite-derived flood extent maps. We used an identifiability methodology to locate the parameters and suggest the SAR images which could be optimally used for model calibration. We found that SAR images acquired around the flood peak provide best calibration potential for the depth parameter, improving when SAR images are combined.
Remko Nijzink, Christopher Hutton, Ilias Pechlivanidis, René Capell, Berit Arheimer, Jim Freer, Dawei Han, Thorsten Wagener, Kevin McGuire, Hubert Savenije, and Markus Hrachowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 4775–4799, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4775-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4775-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The core component of many hydrological systems, the moisture storage capacity available to vegetation, is typically treated as a calibration parameter in hydrological models and often considered to remain constant in time. In this paper we test the potential of a recently introduced method to robustly estimate catchment-scale root-zone storage capacities exclusively based on climate data to reproduce the temporal evolution of root-zone storage under change (deforestation).
Simon Schick, Ole Rössler, and Rolf Weingartner
Proc. IAHS, 374, 159–163, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-374-159-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-374-159-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
In water resources management, planning at the seasonal time scale is confronted with large uncertainties. Key variables are often unknown or hard to forecast, e.g. precipitation of the next three months. In the present study, we try to highlight some aspects concerning the development of a model faced with these uncertainties. Using the example of statistical streamflow forecasts, the results of the study indicate that the forecast accuracy is improved by the combination of several models.
C. E. M. Lloyd, J. E. Freer, P. J. Johnes, and A. L. Collins
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 625–632, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-625-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-625-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This paper examines the current methodologies for quantifying storm behaviour through hysteresis analysis, and explores a new method. Each method is systematically tested and the impact on the results is examined. Recommendations are made regarding the most effective method of calculating a hysteresis index. This new method allows storm hysteresis behaviour to be directly compared between storms, parameters, and catchments, meaning it has wide application potential in water quality research.
K. J. Beven, S. Almeida, W. P. Aspinall, P. D. Bates, S. Blazkova, E. Borgomeo, K. Goda, J. C. Phillips, M. Simpson, P. J. Smith, D. B. Stephenson, T. Wagener, M. Watson, and K. L. Wilkins
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2015-295, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2015-295, 2016
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. This is Part 2 of 2 papers reviewing these epistemic uncertainties and covers different areas of natural hazards including landslides and debris flows, dam safety, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic ash clouds and pyroclastic flows, and wind storms. It is based on the work of the UK CREDIBLE research consortium.
K. J. Beven, W. P. Aspinall, P. D. Bates, E. Borgomeo, K. Goda, J. W. Hall, T. Page, J. C. Phillips, J. T. Rougier, M. Simpson, D. B. Stephenson, P. J. Smith, T. Wagener, and M. Watson
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015, 2015
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. This is Part 1 of 2 papers reviewing these epistemic uncertainties that can be difficult to constrain, especially in terms of event or scenario probabilities. It is based on the work of the CREDIBLE research consortium on Risk and Uncertainty in Natural Hazards.
S. Fuchs, M. Keiler, and A. Zischg
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2127–2142, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2127-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2127-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
A spatially explicit object-based temporal assessment of buildings and citizens exposed to natural hazards in Austria is presented, including elements at risk of river flooding, torrential flooding, and snow avalanches. It is shown that the repeatedly stated assumption of increasing losses due to continued population growth and related increase in assets has to be opposed to the local development of building stock, which is spatially and temporally variable.
P. Froidevaux, J. Schwanbeck, R. Weingartner, C. Chevalier, and O. Martius
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3903–3924, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-3903-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-3903-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate precipitation characteristics prior to 4000 annual floods in Switzerland since 1961. The floods were preceded by heavy precipitation, but in most catchments extreme precipitation occurred only during the last 3 days prior to the flood events. Precipitation sums for earlier time periods (like e.g. 4-14 days prior to floods) were mostly average and do not correlate with the return period of the floods.
S. Ceola, B. Arheimer, E. Baratti, G. Blöschl, R. Capell, A. Castellarin, J. Freer, D. Han, M. Hrachowitz, Y. Hundecha, C. Hutton, G. Lindström, A. Montanari, R. Nijzink, J. Parajka, E. Toth, A. Viglione, and T. Wagener
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2101–2117, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2101-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2101-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We present the outcomes of a collaborative hydrological experiment undertaken by five different international research groups in a virtual laboratory. Moving from the definition of accurate protocols, a rainfall-runoff model was independently applied by the research groups, which then engaged in a comparative discussion. The results revealed that sharing protocols and running the experiment within a controlled environment is fundamental for ensuring experiment repeatability and reproducibility.
R. Hostache, C. Hissler, P. Matgen, C. Guignard, and P. Bates
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3539–3551, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3539-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3539-2014, 2014
F. N. Outram, C. E. M. Lloyd, J. Jonczyk, C. McW. H. Benskin, F. Grant, M. T. Perks, C. Deasy, S. P. Burke, A. L. Collins, J. Freer, P. M. Haygarth, K. M. Hiscock, P. J. Johnes, and A. L. Lovett
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3429–3448, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3429-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3429-2014, 2014
C. C. Sampson, T. J. Fewtrell, F. O'Loughlin, F. Pappenberger, P. B. Bates, J. E. Freer, and H. L. Cloke
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2305–2324, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2305-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2305-2014, 2014
O. Rössler, P. Froidevaux, U. Börst, R. Rickli, O. Martius, and R. Weingartner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2265–2285, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2265-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2265-2014, 2014
R. Weingartner, B. Schädler, and P. Hänggi
Geogr. Helv., 68, 239–248, https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-68-239-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-68-239-2013, 2013
D. Finger, A. Hugentobler, M. Huss, A. Voinesco, H. Wernli, D. Fischer, E. Weber, P.-Y. Jeannin, M. Kauzlaric, A. Wirz, T. Vennemann, F. Hüsler, B. Schädler, and R. Weingartner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3261–3277, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3261-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3261-2013, 2013
M. H. Mueller, R. Weingartner, and C. Alewell
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1661–1679, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013, 2013
N. Köplin, B. Schädler, D. Viviroli, and R. Weingartner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 619–635, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-619-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-619-2013, 2013
B. Jongman, H. Kreibich, H. Apel, J. I. Barredo, P. D. Bates, L. Feyen, A. Gericke, J. Neal, J. C. J. H. Aerts, and P. J. Ward
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 3733–3752, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-3733-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-3733-2012, 2012
Related subject area
Subject: Engineering Hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Extreme floods in Europe: going beyond observations using reforecast ensemble pooling
Hydroinformatics education – the Water Informatics in Science and Engineering (WISE) Centre for Doctoral Training
Wetropolis extreme rainfall and flood demonstrator: from mathematical design to outreach
Technical note: The beneficial role of a natural permeable layer in slope stabilization by drainage trenches
Assessing the impacts of reservoirs on downstream flood frequency by coupling the effect of scheduling-related multivariate rainfall with an indicator of reservoir effects
Observation operators for assimilation of satellite observations in fluvial inundation forecasting
Contribution of potential evaporation forecasts to 10-day streamflow forecast skill for the Rhine River
Inundation mapping based on reach-scale effective geometry
The challenge of forecasting impacts of flash floods: test of a simplified hydraulic approach and validation based on insurance claim data
A comparison of the discrete cosine and wavelet transforms for hydrologic model input data reduction
Hydrological modeling of the Peruvian–Ecuadorian Amazon Basin using GPM-IMERG satellite-based precipitation dataset
Technical note: Design flood under hydrological uncertainty
Topography- and nightlight-based national flood risk assessment in Canada
Regime shifts in annual maximum rainfall across Australia – implications for intensity–frequency–duration (IFD) relationships
Performance evaluation of groundwater model hydrostratigraphy from airborne electromagnetic data and lithological borehole logs
A continuous rainfall model based on vine copulas
Estimates of global dew collection potential on artificial surfaces
Climate changes of hydrometeorological and hydrological extremes in the Paute basin, Ecuadorean Andes
An assessment of the ability of Bartlett–Lewis type of rainfall models to reproduce drought statistics
Modeling root reinforcement using a root-failure Weibull survival function
Socio-hydrology: conceptualising human-flood interactions
Application of a model-based rainfall-runoff database as efficient tool for flood risk management
Estimating actual, potential, reference crop and pan evaporation using standard meteorological data: a pragmatic synthesis
HydroViz: design and evaluation of a Web-based tool for improving hydrology education
Web 2.0 collaboration tool to support student research in hydrology – an opinion
SCS-CN parameter determination using rainfall-runoff data in heterogeneous watersheds – the two-CN system approach
Discharge estimation combining flow routing and occasional measurements of velocity
Experimental investigation of the predictive capabilities of data driven modeling techniques in hydrology - Part 2: Application
Comment on "A praxis-oriented perspective of streamflow inference from stage observations – the method of Dottori et al. (2009) and the alternative of the Jones Formula, with the kinematic wave celerity computed on the looped rating curve" by Koussis (2009)
An evaluation of the Canadian global meteorological ensemble prediction system for short-term hydrological forecasting
Manuela I. Brunner and Louise J. Slater
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 469–482, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-469-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-469-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing the rarity and magnitude of very extreme flood events occurring less than twice a century is challenging due to the lack of observations of such rare events. Here we develop a new approach, pooling reforecast ensemble members from the European Flood Awareness System to increase the sample size available to estimate the frequency of extreme flood events. We demonstrate that such ensemble pooling produces more robust estimates than observation-based estimates.
Thorsten Wagener, Dragan Savic, David Butler, Reza Ahmadian, Tom Arnot, Jonathan Dawes, Slobodan Djordjevic, Roger Falconer, Raziyeh Farmani, Debbie Ford, Jan Hofman, Zoran Kapelan, Shunqi Pan, and Ross Woods
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2721–2738, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2721-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2721-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
How can we effectively train PhD candidates both (i) across different knowledge domains in water science and engineering and (ii) in computer science? To address this issue, the Water Informatics in Science and Engineering Centre for Doctoral Training (WISE CDT) offers a postgraduate programme that fosters enhanced levels of innovation and collaboration by training a cohort of engineers and scientists at the boundary of water informatics, science and engineering.
Onno Bokhove, Tiffany Hicks, Wout Zweers, and Thomas Kent
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2483–2503, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2483-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2483-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Wetropolis is a
table-topdemonstration model with extreme rainfall and flooding, including random rainfall, river flow, flood plains, an upland reservoir, a porous moor, and a city which can flood. It lets the viewer experience extreme rainfall and flood events in a physical model on reduced spatial and temporal scales with an event return period of 6.06 min rather than, say, 200 years. We disseminate its mathematical design and how it has been shown most prominently to over 500 flood victims.
Gianfranco Urciuoli, Luca Comegna, Marianna Pirone, and Luciano Picarelli
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1669–1676, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1669-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1669-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The aim of this paper is to demonstrate, through a numerical approach, that the presence of soil layers of higher permeability, a not unlikely condition in some deep landslides in clay, may be exploited to improve the efficiency of systems of drainage trenches for slope stabilization. The problem has been examined for the case that a unique pervious layer, parallel to the ground surface, is present at an elevation higher than the bottom of the trenches.
Bin Xiong, Lihua Xiong, Jun Xia, Chong-Yu Xu, Cong Jiang, and Tao Du
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4453–4470, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4453-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4453-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We develop a new indicator of reservoir effects, called the rainfall–reservoir composite index (RRCI). RRCI, coupled with the effects of static reservoir capacity and scheduling-related multivariate rainfall, has a better performance than the previous indicator in terms of explaining the variation in the downstream floods affected by reservoir operation. A covariate-based flood frequency analysis using RRCI can provide more reliable downstream flood risk estimation.
Elizabeth S. Cooper, Sarah L. Dance, Javier García-Pintado, Nancy K. Nichols, and Polly J. Smith
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2541–2559, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2541-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2541-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Flooding from rivers is a huge and costly problem worldwide. Computer simulations can help to warn people if and when they are likely to be affected by river floodwater, but such predictions are not always accurate or reliable. Information about flood extent from satellites can help to keep these forecasts on track. Here we investigate different ways of using information from satellite images and look at the effect on computer predictions. This will help to develop flood warning systems.
Bart van Osnabrugge, Remko Uijlenhoet, and Albrecht Weerts
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 1453–1467, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-1453-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-1453-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
A correct estimate of the amount of future precipitation is the most important factor in making a good streamflow forecast, but evaporation is also an important component that determines the discharge of a river. However, in this study for the Rhine River we found that evaporation forecasts only give an almost negligible improvement compared to methods that use statistical information on climatology for a 10-day streamflow forecast. This is important to guide research on low flow forecasts.
Cédric Rebolho, Vazken Andréassian, and Nicolas Le Moine
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5967–5985, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5967-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5967-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Inundation models are useful for hazard management and prevention. They are traditionally based on hydraulic partial differential equations (with satisfying results but large data and computational requirements). This study presents a simplified approach combining reach-scale geometric properties with steady uniform flow equations. The model shows promising results overall, although difficulties persist in the most complex urbanised reaches.
Guillaume Le Bihan, Olivier Payrastre, Eric Gaume, David Moncoulon, and Frédéric Pons
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5911–5928, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5911-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5911-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper illustrates how an integrated flash flood monitoring (or forecasting) system may be designed to directly provide information on possibly flooded areas and associated impacts on a very detailed river network and over large territories. The approach is extensively tested in the regions of Alès and Draguignan, located in south-eastern France. Validation results are presented in terms of accuracy of the estimated flood extents and related impacts (based on insurance claim data).
Ashley Wright, Jeffrey P. Walker, David E. Robertson, and Valentijn R. N. Pauwels
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3827–3838, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3827-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3827-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The accurate reduction of hydrologic model input data is an impediment towards understanding input uncertainty and model structural errors. This paper compares the ability of two transforms to reduce rainfall input data. The resultant transforms are compressed to varying extents and reconstructed before being evaluated with standard simulation performance summary metrics and descriptive statistics. It is concluded the discrete wavelet transform is most capable of preserving rainfall time series.
Ricardo Zubieta, Augusto Getirana, Jhan Carlo Espinoza, Waldo Lavado-Casimiro, and Luis Aragon
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3543–3555, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3543-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3543-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper indicates that precipitation data derived from GPM-IMERG correspond more closely to TMPA V7 than TMPA RT datasets, but both GPM-IMERG and TMPA V7 precipitation data tend to overestimate, in comparison to observed rainfall (by 11.1 % and 15.7 %, respectively). Statistical analysis indicates that GPM-IMERG is as useful as TMPA V7 or TMPA RT datasets for estimating observed streamflows in Andean–Amazonian regions (Ucayali Basin, southern regions of the Amazon Basin of Peru and Ecuador).
Anna Botto, Daniele Ganora, Pierluigi Claps, and Francesco Laio
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3353–3358, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3353-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3353-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The paper provides an easy-to-use implementation of the UNCODE framework, which allows one to estimate the design flood value by directly accounting for sample uncertainty. Other than a design tool, this methodology is also a practical way to quantify the value of data in the design process.
Amin Elshorbagy, Raja Bharath, Anchit Lakhanpal, Serena Ceola, Alberto Montanari, and Karl-Erich Lindenschmidt
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2219–2232, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2219-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2219-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Flood mapping is one of Canada's major national interests. This work presents a simple and effective method for large-scale flood hazard and risk mapping, applied in this study to Canada. Readily available data, such as remote sensing night-light data, topography, and stream network were used to create the maps.
D. C. Verdon-Kidd and A. S. Kiem
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 4735–4746, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-4735-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-4735-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Rainfall intensity-frequency-duration (IFD) relationships are required for the design and planning of water supply and management systems around the world. Currently IFD information is based on the "stationary climate assumption". However, this paper provides evidence of regime shifts in annual maxima rainfall time series using 96 daily rainfall stations and 66 sub-daily rainfall stations across Australia. Importantly, current IFD relationships may under- or overestimate the design rainfall.
P. A. Marker, N. Foged, X. He, A. V. Christiansen, J. C. Refsgaard, E. Auken, and P. Bauer-Gottwein
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3875–3890, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-3875-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-3875-2015, 2015
H. Vernieuwe, S. Vandenberghe, B. De Baets, and N. E. C. Verhoest
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2685–2699, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2685-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2685-2015, 2015
H. Vuollekoski, M. Vogt, V. A. Sinclair, J. Duplissy, H. Järvinen, E.-M. Kyrö, R. Makkonen, T. Petäjä, N. L. Prisle, P. Räisänen, M. Sipilä, J. Ylhäisi, and M. Kulmala
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 601–613, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-601-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-601-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The global potential for collecting usable water from dew on an
artificial collector sheet was investigated by utilising 34 years of
meteorological reanalysis data as input to a dew formation model. Continental dew formation was found to be frequent and common, but daily yields were
mostly below 0.1mm.
D. E. Mora, L. Campozano, F. Cisneros, G. Wyseure, and P. Willems
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 631–648, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-631-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-631-2014, 2014
M. T. Pham, W. J. Vanhaute, S. Vandenberghe, B. De Baets, and N. E. C. Verhoest
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 5167–5183, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-5167-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-5167-2013, 2013
M. Schwarz, F. Giadrossich, and D. Cohen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 4367–4377, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-4367-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-4367-2013, 2013
G. Di Baldassarre, A. Viglione, G. Carr, L. Kuil, J. L. Salinas, and G. Blöschl
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3295–3303, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3295-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3295-2013, 2013
L. Brocca, S. Liersch, F. Melone, T. Moramarco, and M. Volk
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3159–3169, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3159-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3159-2013, 2013
T. A. McMahon, M. C. Peel, L. Lowe, R. Srikanthan, and T. R. McVicar
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1331–1363, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1331-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1331-2013, 2013
E. Habib, Y. Ma, D. Williams, H. O. Sharif, and F. Hossain
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3767–3781, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3767-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3767-2012, 2012
A. Pathirana, B. Gersonius, and M. Radhakrishnan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 2499–2509, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-2499-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-2499-2012, 2012
K. X. Soulis and J. D. Valiantzas
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1001–1015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-1001-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-1001-2012, 2012
G. Corato, T. Moramarco, and T. Tucciarelli
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2979–2994, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-2979-2011, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-2979-2011, 2011
A. Elshorbagy, G. Corzo, S. Srinivasulu, and D. P. Solomatine
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 1943–1961, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-1943-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-1943-2010, 2010
A. D. Koussis
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 1093–1097, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-1093-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-1093-2010, 2010
J. A. Velázquez, T. Petit, A. Lavoie, M.-A. Boucher, R. Turcotte, V. Fortin, and F. Anctil
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 2221–2231, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-2221-2009, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-2221-2009, 2009
Cited articles
Adams, R., Western, A. W., and Seed, A. W.: An analysis of the impact of
spatial variability in rainfall on runoff and sediment predictions from a
distributed model, Hydrol. Process., 26, 3263–3280, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8435,
2012.
Altarejos-García, L., Martínez-Chenoll, M. L., Escuder-Bueno, I.,
and Serrano-Lombillo, A.: Assessing the impact of uncertainty on flood risk
estimates with reliability analysis using 1-D and 2-D hydraulic
models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1895–1914, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-1895-2012, 2012.
Apel, H., Merz, B., and Thieken, A. H.: Quantification of uncertainties in
flood risk assessments, Int. J. River Basin Manage., 6,
149–162, https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2008.9635344, 2008.
Arnell, N. W. and Gosling, S. N.: The impacts of climate change on river
flood risk at the global scale, Clim. Change, 134, 387–401,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1084-5, 2016.
Asadieh, B. and Krakauer, N. Y.: Global trends in extreme precipitation:
climate models versus observations, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 877–891, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-877-2015, 2015.
Bates, P.: LISFLOOD-FP. Model description and download, available at: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/geography/research/hydrology/models/lisflood/, last access: 4 May 2018.
Bates, P. D. and de Roo, A. P. J.: A simple raster-based model for flood
inundation simulation, J. Hydrol., 236, 54–77,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00278-X, 2000.
Bates, P. D., Horritt, M. S., and Fewtrell, T. J.: A simple inertial
formulation of the shallow water equations for efficient two-dimensional
flood inundation modelling, J. Hydrol., 387, 33–45,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.03.027, 2010.
Beauchamp, J., Leconte, R., Trudel, M., and Brissette, F.: Estimation of the
summer-fall PMP and PMF of a northern watershed under a changed climate,
Water Resour. Res., 49, 3852–3862, https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20336, 2013.
Beniston, M., Stephenson, D. B., Christensen, O. B., Ferro, C. A. T., Frei,
C., Goyette, S., Halsnaes, K., Holt, T., Jylhä, K., Koffi, B.,
Palutikof, J., Schöll, R., Semmler, T., and Woth, K.: Future extreme
events in European climate: An exploration of regional climate model
projections, Clim. Change, 81, 71–95, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9226-z,
2007.
Bermúdez, M. and Zischg, A. P.: Sensitivity of flood loss estimates to
building representation and flow depth attribution methods in micro-scale
flood modelling, Nat. Hazards, 14, 253, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3270-7, 2018.
Bouwer, L. M.: Projections of future extreme weather losses under changes in
climate and exposure, Risk analysis an official publication of the Society
for Risk Analysis, 33, 915–930, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01880.x, 2013.
Bruni, G., Reinoso, R., van de Giesen, N. C., Clemens, F. H. L. R., and ten Veldhuis, J. A. E.:
On the sensitivity of urban hydrodynamic modelling to rainfall spatial and
temporal resolution, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 691–709, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-691-2015, 2015.
Büchele, B., Kreibich, H., Kron, A., Thieken, A., Ihringer, J., Oberle, P.,
Merz, B., and Nestmann, F.: Flood-risk mapping: contributions towards an enhanced
assessment of extreme events and associated risks, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 6, 485–503, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-6-485-2006, 2006.
Burke, N., Rau-Chaplin, A., and Varghese, B.: Computing probable maximum
loss in catastrophe reinsurance portfolios on multi-core and many-core
architectures, Concurrency Computat.: Pract. Exper., 28, 836–847,
https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3695, 2016.
Chatterjee, C., Förster, S., and Bronstert, A.: Comparison of
hydrodynamic models of different complexities to model floods with emergency
storage areas, Hydrol. Process., 22, 4695–4709, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7079, 2008.
Coxon, G., Freer, J., Westerberg, I. K., Wagener, T., Woods, R., and Smith,
P. J.: A novel framework for discharge uncertainty quantification applied to
500 UK gauging stations, Water Resour. Res., 51, 5531–5546,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016532, 2015.
Cristiano, E., ten Veldhuis, M.-C., and van de Giesen, N.: Spatial and
temporal variability of rainfall and their effects on hydrological response
in urban areas – a review, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3859–3878, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3859-2017, 2017.
de Moel, H. and Aerts, J. C. J. H.: Effect of uncertainty in land use,
damage models and inundation depth on flood damage estimates, Nat.
Hazards, 58, 407–425, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-010-9675-6, 2011.
de Moel, H., Jongman, B., Kreibich, H., Merz, B., Penning-Rowsell, E., and
Ward, P. J.: Flood risk assessments at different spatial scales, Mitig.
Adapt.
Strateg. Glob. Change, 20, 865–890, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-015-9654-z, 2015.
Di Baldassarre, G., Schumann, G., Bates, P. D., Freer, J. E., and Beven, K.
J.: Flood-plain mapping: A critical discussion of deterministic and
probabilistic approaches, Hydrol. Sci. J., 55, 364–376,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626661003683389, 2010.
Di Baldassarre, G., Kooy, M., Kemerink, J. S., and Brandimarte, L.: Towards
understanding the dynamic behaviour of floodplains as human-water
systems, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3235–3244, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3235-2013, 2013.
Di Baldassarre, G., Kemerink, J. S., Kooy, M., and Brandimarte, L.: Floods
and societies: the spatial distribution of water-related disaster risk and
its dynamics, WIREs Water, 1, 133–139, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1015, 2014.
Dodov, B. and Foufoula-Georgiou, E.: Incorporating the spatio-temporal
distribution of rainfall and basin geomorphology into nonlinear analyses of
streamflow dynamics, Adv. Water Resour., 28, 711–728,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.12.013, 2005.
Dutta, D., Herath, S., and Musiake, K.: A mathematical model for flood loss
estimation, J. Hydrol., 277, 24–49,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00084-2, 2003.
Emmanuel, I., Andrieu, H., Leblois, E., Janey, N., and Payrastre, O.:
Influence of rainfall spatial variability on rainfall–runoff modelling:
Benefit of a simulation approach?, J. Hydrol., 531, 337–348,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.04.058, 2015.
Emmanuel, I., Payrastre, O., Andrieu, H., Zuber, F., Lang, M., Klijn, F.,
and Samuels, P.: Influence of the spatial variability of rainfall on
hydrograph modelling at catchment outlet: A case study in the Cevennes
region, France, E3S Web Conf., 7, 18004, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160718004,
2016.
Faulkner, D. and Benn, J.: Reservoir Flood Estimation: Time for a Re-think,
in: Dams – Benefits and Disbenefits; Assets or Liabilities?, edited by: Pepper, A., ICE Publishing, London, 2016.
Felder, G. and Weingartner, R.: An approach for the determination of
precipitation input for worst-case flood modelling, Hydrol. Sci.
J., 61, 2600–2609, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1151980, 2016.
Felder, G. and Weingartner, R.: Assessment of deterministic PMF modelling
approaches, Hydrol. Sci. J., 62, 1591–1602,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2017.1319065, 2017.
Felder, G., Zischg, A., and Weingartner, R.: The effect of coupling
hydrologic and hydrodynamic models on probable maximum flood estimation,
J. Hydrol., 550, 157–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.04.052,
2017.
Fewtrell, T. J., Bates, P. D., Horritt, M., and Hunter, N. M.: Evaluating
the effect of scale in flood inundation modelling in urban environments,
Hydrol. Process., 22, 5107–5118, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7148, 2008.
Fischer, E. M. and Knutti, R.: Observed heavy precipitation increase
confirms theory and early models, Nat. Clim. Change, 6, 986–991,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3110, 2016.
Foufoula-Georgiou, E.: A probabilistic storm transposition approach for
estimating exceedance probabilities of extreme precipitation depths, Water
Resour. Res., 25, 799–815, https://doi.org/10.1029/WR025i005p00799, 1989.
Franchini, M., Helmlinger, K. R., Foufoula-Georgiou, E., and Todini, E.:
Stochastic storm transposition coupled with rainfall–runoff modeling for
estimation of exceedance probabilities of design floods, J.
Hydrol., 175, 511–532, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)80022-9, 1996.
Fuchs, S., Keiler, M., and Zischg, A.: A spatiotemporal multi-hazard exposure
assessment based on property data, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2127–2142, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2127-2015, 2015.
Gai, L., Baartman, J. E. M., Mendoza-Carranza, M., Wang, F., Ritsema, C. J.,
and Geissen, V.: A framework approach for unravelling the impact of multiple
factors influencing flooding, J. Flood Risk Manage, published online first, https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12310,
2017.
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition
of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for
improving hydrological modelling, Hydrology Conference 2010, 377, 80–91,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003, 2009.
Hasan, S. and Foliente, G.: Modeling infrastructure system interdependencies
and socioeconomic impacts of failure in extreme events: emerging R&D
challenges, Nat. Hazards, 78, 2143–2168, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1814-7,
2015.
Horritt, M. S. and Bates, P. D.: Effects of spatial resolution on a raster
based model of flood flow, J. Hydrol., 253, 239–249,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00490-5, 2001.
Horritt, M. S. and Bates, P. D.: Evaluation of 1D and 2D numerical models
for predicting river flood inundation, J. Hydrol., 268, 87–99,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00121-X, 2002.
Hydrotec: Hochwasser-Aktionsplan Angerbach, Teil I: Berichte und Anlagen,
Studie im Auftrag des Stua Dusseldorf, Aachen, Germany, 2001.
IPCC: Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate
change adaptation: Special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Cambridge University Press, New York, x, 582, 2012.
Jongman, B., Kreibich, H., Apel, H., Barredo, J. I., Bates, P. D., Feyen, L.,
Gericke, A., Neal, J., Aerts, J. C. J. H., and Ward, P. J.: Comparative
flood damage model assessment: towards a European approach, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 3733–3752, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-3733-2012, 2012.
Jonkman, S. N., Bočkarjova, M., Kok, M., and Bernardini, P.: Integrated
hydrodynamic and economic modelling of flood damage in the Netherlands,
Special Section: Integrated Hydro-Economic Modelling for Effective and
Sustainable Water Management, 66, 77–90,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.12.022, 2008.
Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube
basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, Hydrology Conference
2010, 424–425, 264–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011, 2012.
Kvočka, D., Falconer, R. A., and Bray, M.: Appropriate model use for
predicting elevations and inundation extent for extreme flood events, Nat.
Hazards, 79, 1791–1808, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1926-0, 2015.
Lagos-Zuniga, M. A. and Vargas, M. X.: PMP and PMF estimations in
sparsely-gauged Andean basins and climate change projections, Hydrol.
Sci. J., 59, 2027–2042, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.877588, 2014.
McMillan, H., Krueger, T., and Freer, J.: Benchmarking observational
uncertainties for hydrology: Rainfall, river discharge and water quality,
Hydrol. Process., 26, 4078–4111, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9384, 2012.
Mechler, R., Hochrainer, S., Aaheim, A., Salen, H., and Wreford, A.:
Modelling economic impacts and adaptation to extreme events: Insights from
European case studies, Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change, 15, 737–762,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-010-9249-7, 2010.
Merz, B. and Thieken, A. H.: Flood risk curves and uncertainty bounds, Nat.
Hazards, 51, 437–458, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9452-6, 2009.
Michaelides, S.: Vulnerability of transportation to extreme weather and
climate change, Nat. Hazards, 72, 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0975-5, 2014.
Micovic, Z., Schaefer, M. G., and Taylor, G. H.: Uncertainty analysis for
Probable Maximum Precipitation estimates, J. Hydrol., 521,
360–373, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.12.033, 2015.
Millán, M. M.: Extreme hydrometeorological events and climate change
predictions in Europe, J. Hydrol., 518, 206–224,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.12.041, 2014.
Morrill, E. P. and Becker, J. F.: Defining and Analyzing the Frequency and
Severity of Flood Events to Improve Risk Management from a Reinsurance
Standpoint, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2017-167, in review, 2017.
Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.: River flow forecasting through conceptual
models part I – A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10,
282–290, 1970.
Neal, J., Schumann, G., Fewtrell, T., Budimir, M., Bates, P., and Mason, D.:
Evaluating a new LISFLOOD-FP formulation with data from the summer 2007
floods in Tewkesbury, UK, J. Flood Risk Manage, 4, 88–95,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-318X.2011.01093.x, 2011.
Neal, J., Schumann, G., and Bates, P. D.: A subgrid channel model for
simulating river hydraulics and floodplain inundation over large and data
sparse areas, Water Resour. Res., 48, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR012514,
2012a.
Neal, J., Villanueva, I., Wright, N., Willis, T., Fewtrell, T., and Bates,
P. D.: How much physical complexity is needed to model flood inundation?,
Hydrol. Process., 26, 2264–2282, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8339, 2012b.
Neal, J., Keef, C., Bates, P., Beven, K., and Leedal, D.: Probabilistic
flood risk mapping including spatial dependence, Hydrol. Process., 27,
1349–1363, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9572, 2013.
Neal, J. C., Bates, P. D., Fewtrell, T. J., Hunter, N. M., Wilson, M. D.,
and Horritt, M. S.: Distributed whole city water level measurements from the
Carlisle 2005 urban flood event and comparison with hydraulic model
simulations, J. Hydrol., 368, 42–55,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.01.026, 2009.
Nicótina, L., Alessi Celegon, E., Rinaldo, A., and Marani, M.: On the
impact of rainfall patterns on the hydrologic response, Water Resour. Res.,
44, 311, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006654, 2008.
Nikolopoulos, E. I., Borga, M., Zoccatelli, D., and Anagnostou, E. N.:
Catchment-scale storm velocity: Quantification, scale dependence and effect
on flood response, Hydrol. Sci. J., 59, 1363–1376,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2014.923889, 2014.
Ochoa-Rodriguez, S., Wang, L.-P., Gires, A., Pina, R. D., Reinoso-Rondinel,
R., Bruni, G., Ichiba, A., Gaitan, S., Cristiano, E., van Assel, J., Kroll,
S., Murlà-Tuyls, D., Tisserand, B., Schertzer, D., Tchiguirinskaia, I.,
Onof, C., Willems, P., and ten Veldhuis, M.-C.: Impact of spatial and
temporal resolution of rainfall inputs on urban hydrodynamic modelling
outputs: A multi-catchment investigation, J. Hydrol., 531,
389–407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.05.035, 2015.
Papathoma-Köhle, M., Zischg, A., Fuchs, S., Glade, T., and Keiler, M.:
Loss estimation for landslides in mountain areas – An integrated toolbox
for vulnerability assessment and damage documentation, Environ.
Modell. Softw., 63, 156–169, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.10.003,
2015.
Paschalis, A., Fatichi, S., Molnar, P., Rimkus, S., and Burlando, P.: On the
effects of small scale space?: Time variability of rainfall on basin flood
response, J. Hydrology, 514, 313–327,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.014, 2014.
Pattison, I., Lane, S. N., Hardy, R. J., and Reaney, S. M.: The role of
tributary relative timing and sequencing in controlling large floods, Water
Resour. Res., 5444–5458, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014067, 2014.
Pfahl, S., O'Gorman, P. A., and Fischer, E. M.: Understanding the regional
pattern of projected future changes in extreme precipitation, Nat. Clim.
Change, 7, 423–427, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3287, 2017.
Pianosi, F., Beven, K., Freer, J., Hall, J. W., Rougier, J., Stephenson, D.
B., and Wagener, T.: Sensitivity analysis of environmental models: A
systematic review with practical workflow, Environ. Modell.
Softw., 79, 214–232, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.008, 2016.
Rafieeinasab, A., Norouzi, A., Kim, S., Habibi, H., Nazari, B., Seo, D.-J.,
Lee, H., Cosgrove, B., and Cui, Z.: Toward high-resolution flash flood
prediction in large urban areas – Analysis of sensitivity to spatiotemporal
resolution of rainfall input and hydrologic modeling, J. Hydrol.,
531, 370–388, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.045, 2015.
Rajczak, J., Pall, P., and Schär, C.: Projections of extreme
precipitation events in regional climate simulations for Europe and the
Alpine Region, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 3610–3626,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50297, 2013.
Rodríguez-Rincón, J. P., Pedrozo-Acuña, A., and Breña-Naranjo, J. A.:
Propagation of hydro-meteorological uncertainty in a model cascade
framework to inundation prediction, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2981–2998, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2981-2015, 2015.
Röthlisberger, V., Zischg, A. P., and Keiler, M.: Identifying spatial
clusters of flood exposure to support decision making in risk management,
Sci. Total Environ., 598, 593–603,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.216, 2017.
Rouhani, H. and Leconte, R.: A novel method to estimate the maximization
ratio of the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) using regional climate
model output, Water Resour. Res., 52, 7347–7365, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR018603,
2016.
Rousseau, A. N., Klein, I. M., Freudiger, D., Gagnon, P., Frigon, A., and
Ratté-Fortin, C.: Development of a methodology to evaluate probable maximum
precipitation (PMP) under changing climate conditions: Application to
southern Quebec, Canada, J. Hydrol., 519, 3094–3109,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.10.053, 2014.
Saksena, S. and Merwade, V.: Incorporating the effect of DEM resolution and
accuracy for improved flood inundation mapping, J. Hydrol., 530,
180–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.069, 2015.
Salas, J. D., Gavilán, G., Salas, F. R., Julien, P. Y., and Abdullah,
J.: Uncertainty of the PMP and PMF, in: Handbook of Engineering Hydrology,
vol. 2: Modeling, Climate Change and Variability, 575–603, 2014.
Salas, J. D., Tarawneh, Z., and Biondi, F.: A hydrological record extension
model for reconstructing streamflows from tree-ring chronologies, Hydrol.
Process., 29, 544–556, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10160, 2015.
Sampson, C. C., Fewtrell, T. J., O'Loughlin, F., Pappenberger, F., Bates, P. B.,
Freer, J. E., and Cloke, H. L.: The impact of uncertain precipitation data on
insurance loss estimates using a flood catastrophe model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2305–2324, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2305-2014, 2014.
Sanyal, J.: Uncertainty in levee heights and its effect on the spatial
pattern of flood hazard in a floodplain, Hydrol. Sci. J., 62, 1483–1498,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2017.1334887, 2017.
Savage, J. T. S., Bates, P., Freer, J., Neal, J., and Aronica, G.: When does
spatial resolution become spurious in probabilistic flood inundation
predictions?, Hydrol. Process., 30, 2014–2032, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10749, 2015.
Scherrer, S. C., Fischer, E. M., Posselt, R., Liniger, M. A., Croci-Maspoli,
M., and Knutti, R.: Emerging trends in heavy precipitation and hot
temperature extremes in Switzerland, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121,
2626–2637, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024634, 2016.
Singh, V. P.: Effect of spatial and temporal variability in rainfall and
watershed characteristics on stream flow hydrograph, Hydrol. Process., 11,
1649–1669, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(19971015)11:12<1649::AID-HYP495>3.0.CO;2-1, 1997.
Smolka, A.: Natural disasters and the challenge of extreme events: Risk
management from an insurance perspective, Philos. T. R. Soc.
A, 364, 2147–2165,
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2006.1818, 2006.
Stratz, S. A. and Hossain, F.: Probable Maximum Precipitation in a Changing
Climate: Implications for Dam Design, J. Hydrol. Eng., 19, 6014006,
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001021, 2014.
Totschnig, R., Sedlacek, W., and Fuchs, S.: A quantitative vulnerability
function for fluvial sediment transport, Nat. Hazards, 58, 681–703,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-010-9623-5, 2011.
UNISDR: Making development sustainable: The future of disaster risk
management, Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction, 4.2015,
United Nations, Geneva, 311 p., 2015.
Vetsch, D., Siviglia, A., Ehrbar, D., Facchini, M., Gerber, M., Kammerer,
S., Peter, S., Vonwiler, L., Volz, C., Farshi, D., Mueller, R., Rousselot,
P., Veprek, R., and Faeh, R.: BASEMENT – Basic Simulation Environment for
Computation of Environmental Flow and Natural Hazard Simulation, Zurich,
2017.
Visser, H., Folkert, R. J. M., Hoekstra, J., and de Wolff, J. J.:
Identifying Key Sources of Uncertainty in Climate Change Projections,
Clim. Change, 45, 421–457, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005516020996, 2000.
Viviroli, D., Mittelbach, H., Gurtz, J., and Weingartner, R.: Continuous
simulation for flood estimation in ungauged mesoscale catchments of
Switzerland – Part II: Parameter regionalisation and flood estimation
results, J. Hydrology, 377, 208–225,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.022, 2009a.
Viviroli, D., Zappa, M., Gurtz, J., and Weingartner, R.: An introduction to
the hydrological modelling system PREVAH and its pre- and
post-processing-tools, Environ. Modell. Softw., 24,
1209–1222, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.04.001, 2009b.
Ward, P. J., Jongman, B., Weiland, F. S., Bouwman, A., van Beek, R.,
Bierkens, M. F. P., Ligtvoet, W., and Winsemius, H. C.: Assessing flood
risk at the global scale: Model setup, results, and sensitivity, Environ.
Res. Lett., 8, 44019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044019, 2013.
World Meteorological Organization: Manual on estimation of probable
maximum precipitation (PMP), 3rd ed., WMO, no. 1045, World Meteorological
Organization, Geneva, xxxii, 259, 2009.
Yuan, X.-C., Wei, Y.-M., Wang, B., and Mi, Z.: Risk management of extreme
events under climate change, J. Clean. Prod., 166, 1169–1174,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.209, 2017.
Zhang, J. and Han, D.: Assessment of rainfall spatial variability and its
influence on runoff modelling: A case study in the Brue catchment, UK,
Hydrol. Process., 31, 2972–2981, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11250, 2017.
Zoccatelli, D., Borga, M., Viglione, A., Chirico, G. B., and Blöschl, G.:
Spatial moments of catchment rainfall: rainfall spatial organisation, basin
morphology, and flood response, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 3767–3783, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-3767-2011, 2011.
Short summary
We developed a model experiment and distributed different rainfall patterns over a mountain river basin. For each rainfall scenario, we computed the flood losses with a model chain. The experiment shows that flood losses vary considerably within the river basin and depend on the timing of the flood peaks from the basin's sub-catchments. Basin-specific characteristics such as the location of the main settlements within the floodplains play an additional important role in determining flood losses.
We developed a model experiment and distributed different rainfall patterns over a mountain...
