Comparison of estimated flood exposure and consequences generated by different event-based inland flood inundation maps

Abstract

Abstract. The flooding brought about by compound coastal flooding events can be devastating. Before, during, and immediately following these events, flood inundation maps (FIMs) can provide essential information to emergency management. However, there are a number of frameworks capable of estimating FIMs during flood events. In this article, we evaluate FIMs derived from three such frameworks in the context of Hurricane Harvey. Our analysis reveals that each of the three FIM frameworks provides different FIMs that differ in their level of accuracy. Each of the three FIMs also produces different exposure and consequence estimates because of their spatial differences. This investigation highlights the need for a centralized means of vetting and adjudicating multiple FIMs during compound flood events empowered by the ability to distribute FIMs as geographic information system (GIS) services and coalesce FIMs into a common operating picture. Furthermore, we provide evidence that the ability to produce multi-model estimates of FIMs to create probabilistic FIMs may provide a better product than the use of a lone FIM.

Accounting for surge dynamics is key to modeling tropical cyclone-induced coastal flooding

“…In previous studies, the HWMs have been used for the validation of a rapid storm surge forecasting framework 77 , and for the validation and comparison of event-based flood inundation mapping services 78 . In general, field measurements such as the HWMs used here are commonly taken as a complement to conventional water-level records in assessing model performance 79 .…”