Abstract:The Netherlands is a low-lying coastal area and therefore threatened by both extreme river discharges from the Meuse and Rhine rivers and storm surges along the North Sea coastline. To date, in most flood risk analyses these two hazardous phenomena are considered independent. However, if there were a dependence between high sea water levels and extreme discharges this might result in higher design water levels, which might consequently have implications for flood protection policy in the Netherlands. In this s… Show more
“…We recommend considering storm-tide and riverine flooding drivers jointly when assessing coastal flood risk in estuaries. This is particularly important for Australian estuaries with large catchment areas (> 10 000 km 2 ) which are known to have a quick response time to extreme rainfall but may be different in considerably larger estuarine systems, as the time lag between peak storm-tide levels and extreme discharge increases (Klerk et al, 2015). Classification schemes (e.g.…”
Abstract. Many previous modelling studies have considered storm-tide and riverine flooding independently, even though joint-probability analysis highlighted significant dependence between extreme rainfall and extreme storm surges in estuarine environments. This study investigates compound flooding by quantifying horizontal and vertical differences in coastal flood risk estimates resulting from a separation of storm-tide and riverine flooding processes. We used an open-source version of the Delft3D model to simulate flood extent and inundation depth due to a storm event that occurred in June 2016 in the Shoalhaven Estuary, south-eastern Australia. Time series of observed water levels and discharge measurements are used to force model boundaries, whereas observational data such as satellite imagery, aerial photographs, tidal gauges and water level logger measurements are used to validate modelling results. The comparison of simulation results including and excluding riverine discharge demonstrated large differences in modelled flood extents and inundation depths. A flood risk assessment accounting only for storm-tide flooding would have underestimated the flood extent of the June 2016 storm event by 30 % (20.5 km 2 ). Furthermore, inundation depths would have been underestimated on average by 0.34 m and by up to 1.5 m locally. We recommend considering storm-tide and riverine flooding processes jointly in estuaries with large catchment areas, which are known to have a quick response time to extreme rainfall. In addition, comparison of different boundary set-ups at the intermittent entrance in Shoalhaven Heads indicated that a permanent opening, in order to reduce exposure to riverine flooding, would increase tidal range and exposure to both storm-tide flooding and wave action.
“…We recommend considering storm-tide and riverine flooding drivers jointly when assessing coastal flood risk in estuaries. This is particularly important for Australian estuaries with large catchment areas (> 10 000 km 2 ) which are known to have a quick response time to extreme rainfall but may be different in considerably larger estuarine systems, as the time lag between peak storm-tide levels and extreme discharge increases (Klerk et al, 2015). Classification schemes (e.g.…”
Abstract. Many previous modelling studies have considered storm-tide and riverine flooding independently, even though joint-probability analysis highlighted significant dependence between extreme rainfall and extreme storm surges in estuarine environments. This study investigates compound flooding by quantifying horizontal and vertical differences in coastal flood risk estimates resulting from a separation of storm-tide and riverine flooding processes. We used an open-source version of the Delft3D model to simulate flood extent and inundation depth due to a storm event that occurred in June 2016 in the Shoalhaven Estuary, south-eastern Australia. Time series of observed water levels and discharge measurements are used to force model boundaries, whereas observational data such as satellite imagery, aerial photographs, tidal gauges and water level logger measurements are used to validate modelling results. The comparison of simulation results including and excluding riverine discharge demonstrated large differences in modelled flood extents and inundation depths. A flood risk assessment accounting only for storm-tide flooding would have underestimated the flood extent of the June 2016 storm event by 30 % (20.5 km 2 ). Furthermore, inundation depths would have been underestimated on average by 0.34 m and by up to 1.5 m locally. We recommend considering storm-tide and riverine flooding processes jointly in estuaries with large catchment areas, which are known to have a quick response time to extreme rainfall. In addition, comparison of different boundary set-ups at the intermittent entrance in Shoalhaven Heads indicated that a permanent opening, in order to reduce exposure to riverine flooding, would increase tidal range and exposure to both storm-tide flooding and wave action.
“…with a water level event at HvH occurring three days before the discharge 15 peak at Lobith. This is a shorter time lag than applied by Klerk et al (2015), who presented the dependence in the tail for a lag of six days. Despite this shorter time lag we find a similar relation between the two variables as Klerk et al (2015) (Fig.…”
Section: Dependence In the Tail Of The Distributionsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Proxies for storm surge and river runoff were used, namely north-westerly winds and multi-day precipitation sums. In an attempt to use more realistic data to assess the statistical relationship between surge and river discharge, Klerk et al (2015) subsequently used variables diagnosed from hydrological, hydraulic and storm surge models. In their coarseresolution dataset covering the relatively short historical period from 1981-2010 they found a clear correlation between the two variables, but only when a substantial time lag of six days was taken into account.…”
Abstract. Many winter deep low-pressure systems passing over Western Europe have the potential to induce significant storm surge levels along the coast of the North Sea. The accompanying frontal systems lead to large rainfall amounts, which can result in river discharges exceeding critical thresholds. The risk of disruptive societal impact increases strongly if river runoff and storm-surge peak occur near-simultaneously. For the Rhine catchment and the Dutch coastal area, existing studies suggest that no such relation is present at time lags shorter than six days. Here we re-investigate the possibility of finding near-15 simultaneous storm surge and extreme river discharge using an extended data set derived from a storm surge model (WAQUA/DCSMv5) and two hydrological river-discharge models (SPHY and HBV96) forced with conditions from a highresolution (0.11°/12 km) regional climate model (RACMO2) in ensemble mode (16x50 years). We find that the probability for finding a co-occurrence of extreme river discharge at Lobith and storm surge conditions at Hoek van Holland are up to four times higher (than random chance) for a broad range of time lags (-2 to 10 days, depending on exact threshold). This 20 highlights that the hazard of a co-occurrence of high river discharge and coastal water levels cannot be neglected in a robust risk assessment.
“…The former has been assessed for Jakarta in Ward et al (2011b), and Muis et al (2015) have assessed both river and coastal flood risk at the scale of Indonesia using globally available data sets and models. Nevertheless, the impacts of river and coastal flooding can interact with each other -for example when high tides occur at the same time as extreme discharges -and this interaction should be a priority for future flood risk research, not just in Jakarta, but elsewhere (see, e.g., Keef et al, 2009;Klerk et al, 2015;Svensson and Jones, 2004). To enable an assessment of these interactions, one would need to develop time series of both high river discharge and high sea levels, in order to examine the temporal interactions and joint probabilities between these two variables.…”
Section: Limitations and Future Research Developmentsmentioning
Abstract. Given the increasing impacts of flooding in Jakarta, methods for assessing current and future flood risk are required. In this paper, we use the DamagescannerJakarta risk model to project changes in future river flood risk under scenarios of climate change, land subsidence, and land use change. Damagescanner-Jakarta is a simple flood risk model that estimates flood risk in terms of annual expected damage, based on input maps of flood hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. We estimate baseline flood risk at USD 186 million p.a. Combining all future scenarios, we simulate a median increase in risk of +180 % by 2030. The single driver with the largest contribution to that increase is land subsidence (+126 %). We simulated the impacts of climate change by combining two scenarios of sea level rise with simulations of changes in 1-day extreme precipitation totals from five global climate models (GCMs) forced by the four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). The results are highly uncertain; the median change in risk due to climate change alone by 2030 is a decrease by −46 %, but we simulate an increase in risk under 12 of the 40 GCM-RCPsea level rise combinations. Hence, we developed probabilistic risk scenarios to account for this uncertainty. If land use change by 2030 takes places according to the official Jakarta Spatial Plan 2030, risk could be reduced by 12 %. However, if land use change in the future continues at the same rate as the last 30 years, large increases in flood risk will take place. Finally, we discuss the relevance of the results for flood risk management in Jakarta.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.