No abstract

This study investigates some of the uncertainties sources associated with the pseudo global warming (PGW) approach which was employed to project future patterns of tropical cyclones (TCs) over the Arabian Sea (AS). First, the climate variables controlling the patterns of tropical cyclones were extracted from reanalysis datasets of ERA5, ERAI, CFSR, and NCEP/NCAR. Then, each dataset was evaluated against long‐term measurements to identify the best‐performing reanalysis dataset. ERA5 showed the best performance for most of the variables. Outputs of 20 CMIP5 global climate models (GCMs) were then evaluated against the ERA5 data resulting in an ensemble of the best performing GCMs. A PGW framework was then used to project the changes in patterns of three significant historical cyclones: Gonu, Phet, and Ashobaa. In doing so, the signals of future climate variables were extracted from the GCMs ensemble to modify the initial and boundary conditions of the WRF model which was previously tuned for reproducing the historical TCs. Different tests were conducted to address the sources of uncertainty in the PGW approach, including the selection of the climate variables contributing to the computation of the signals, the selection of GCMs, and the spatial variation of signals. A considerable sensitivity of the projected track and intensity of TCs to the choice of GCMs was observed, acknowledging the importance of GCMs evaluation before calculating the signals. Moreover, it was found that among all variables, signals of sea surface temperature and air temperature have major effects on the cyclone's track and intensity. Apart from that, when the signals were applied to the domain of the WRF model uniformly, compared to applying spatially varying signals, different tracks and intensities for future TCs were also observed. Overall, the findings of this paper challenge the reliability of the projected changes in TCs patterns obtained from PGW.

Due to climate change impacts on atmospheric circulation, global and regional wave climate in many coastal regions around the world might change. Any changes in wave parameters could result in significant changes in wave energy flux, the patterns of coastal sediment transport, and coastal evolution. Although some studies have tried to address the potential impacts of climate change on longshore sediment transport (LST) patterns, they did not sufficiently consider the uncertainties arising from different sources in the projections. In this study, the uncertainty associated with the choice of model used for the estimation of LST is examined. The models were applied to a short stretch of coastline located in Northern Gold Coast, Australia, where a huge volume of sediment is transported along the coast annually. The ensemble of results shows that the future mean annual and monthly LST rate might decrease by about 11 percent, compared to the baseline period. The results also show that uncertainty associated with LST estimation is significant. Hence, it is proposed that this uncertainty, in addition to that from other sources, should be considered to quantify the contribution of each source in total uncertainty. In this way, a probabilistic-based framework can be developed to provide more meaningful output applicable to long-term coastal planningRecorded Presentation from the vICCE (YouTube Link): https://youtu.be/3CGU9RcGYjE

This study quantifies the uncertainties in the projected changes in potential longshore sediment transport (LST) rates along a non-straight coastline. Four main sources of uncertainty, including the choice of emission scenarios, Global Circulation Model-driven offshore wave datasets (GCM-Ws), LST models, and their non-linear interactions were addressed through two ensemble modelling frameworks. The first ensemble consisted of the offshore wave forcing conditions without any bias correction (i.e., wave parameters extracted from eight datasets of GCM-Ws for baseline period 1979–2005, and future period 2081–2100 under two emission scenarios), a hybrid wave transformation method, and eight LST models (i.e., four bulk formulae, four process-based models). The differentiating factor of the second ensemble was the application of bias correction to the GCM-Ws, using a hindcast dataset as the reference. All ensemble members were weighted according to their performance to reproduce the reference LST patterns for the baseline period. Additionally, the total uncertainty of the LST projections was decomposed into the main sources and their interactions using the ANOVA method. Finally, the robustness of the LST projections was checked. Comparison of the projected changes in LST rates obtained from two ensembles indicated that the bias correction could relatively reduce the ranges of the uncertainty in the LST projections. On the annual scale, the contribution of emission scenarios, GCM-Ws, LST models and non-linear interactions to the total uncertainty was about 10–20, 35–50, 5–15, and 30–35%, respectively. Overall, the weighted means of the ensembles reported a decrease in net annual mean LST rates (less than 10% under RCP 4.5, a 10–20% under RCP 8.5). However, no robust projected changes in LST rates on annual and seasonal scales were found, questioning any ultimate decision being made using the means of the projected changes.