4.6 Article

Modelling a storm surge under future climate scenarios: case study of extratropical cyclone Gudrun (2005)

期刊

NATURAL HAZARDS
卷 89, 期 3, 页码 1119-1144

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-017-3011-3

关键词

Pseudo-climate modelling; FVCOM; Sea level; ETC; Storm surge; Global warming; Baltic Sea

资金

  1. Estonian Research Council [PUT1439]
  2. Strategic Research Foundation Grant-aided Project for Private Universities from Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology [S1311028]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Weather Research and Forecasting atmosphere model and Finite Volume Community Ocean Model were for the first time used under the pseudo-climate simulation approach, to study the parameters of an extreme storm in the Baltic Sea area. We reconstructed the met-ocean conditions during the historical storm Gudrun (which caused a record-high +275 cm surge in Parnu Bay on 9 January 2005) and simulated the future equivalent of Gudrun by modifying the background conditions using monthly mean value differences in sea surface temperature (SST), atmospheric air temperature and relative humidity from MIROC5 in accordance with the IPCC scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 for 2050 and 2100. The simulated storm route and storm surge parameters were in good accordance with the observed ones. Despite expecting the continuation of recently observed intensification of cyclonic activity in winter months, our numerical simulations showed that intensity of the strongest storms and storm surges in the Baltic Sea might not increase by the end of twenty-first century. Unlike tropical cyclones, which derive their energy from the increasing SST, the extratropical cyclones (ETCs) harvest their primary energy from the thermal differences on the sides of the polar front, which may decrease if the Arctic warms up. For climatological generalizations on future ETCs, however, it is necessary to re-calculate a larger number of storms, including those with different tracks and in different thermal conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据