A long record of European windstorm losses and its comparison to standard climate indices

IF 4.2 2区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Pub Date : 2023-08-24 DOI:10.5194/nhess-23-2841-2023
S. Cusack
{"title":"A long record of European windstorm losses and its comparison to standard climate indices","authors":"S. Cusack","doi":"10.5194/nhess-23-2841-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Traditional insurance has both a great exposure to decadal variations in\nEuropean storm activity and the ability to adjust its business strategy\nover these timescales. Hence, the recent development of skilful predictions\nof multiannual mean European winter climate seems a very welcome addition to\nthe long list of ways that researchers have improved management of windstorm\nrisk. Yet companies do not use these forecasts of mean winter climate to\nadjust their view of risk. The main reason is the lack of a long, reliable\nrecord of losses to understand how forecasted time-mean circulation\nanomalies relate to the damage from a few, intense storms. This study fills\nthat gap with a European windstorm loss record from 1950 to 2022, based on\nERA5 peak near-surface winds per event which were converted to losses using\nan established damage function. The resulting dataset successfully\nidentifies major storms over the past 70 years and simulates the\nmultidecadal variations from low values in the 1960s up to high levels in\nthe 1980s and 1990s then down to the 2010s. However, it underestimated the\nsteepness of the observed loss decline from the stormy end of the 20th\ncentury to the lull over the past 20 years. This was caused by a quite flat\ntrend in ERA5 extreme winds over the period, in contrast to the significant\ndecline in observed peak gusts. Imposing these gust trends on ERA5 peak\nwinds reconciled modelled losses with industry experience over the past few\ndecades. Indices of European winter climate used in long-range forecasting were\ncompared to the new modelled loss dataset. They had correlations of around\n0.4 at interannual timescales, rising to about 0.7 for decadal and longer\nvariations. Notably, the climate indices have a similar multidecadal trend\nas ERA5 extreme winds in modern times, including a less steep decline than\nfound in observed gusts and losses. Further investigation of the modern-day\ndivergence between climate indices and losses may help connect decadal\nforecasting to insurance.\n","PeriodicalId":18922,"journal":{"name":"Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2841-2023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract. Traditional insurance has both a great exposure to decadal variations in European storm activity and the ability to adjust its business strategy over these timescales. Hence, the recent development of skilful predictions of multiannual mean European winter climate seems a very welcome addition to the long list of ways that researchers have improved management of windstorm risk. Yet companies do not use these forecasts of mean winter climate to adjust their view of risk. The main reason is the lack of a long, reliable record of losses to understand how forecasted time-mean circulation anomalies relate to the damage from a few, intense storms. This study fills that gap with a European windstorm loss record from 1950 to 2022, based on ERA5 peak near-surface winds per event which were converted to losses using an established damage function. The resulting dataset successfully identifies major storms over the past 70 years and simulates the multidecadal variations from low values in the 1960s up to high levels in the 1980s and 1990s then down to the 2010s. However, it underestimated the steepness of the observed loss decline from the stormy end of the 20th century to the lull over the past 20 years. This was caused by a quite flat trend in ERA5 extreme winds over the period, in contrast to the significant decline in observed peak gusts. Imposing these gust trends on ERA5 peak winds reconciled modelled losses with industry experience over the past few decades. Indices of European winter climate used in long-range forecasting were compared to the new modelled loss dataset. They had correlations of around 0.4 at interannual timescales, rising to about 0.7 for decadal and longer variations. Notably, the climate indices have a similar multidecadal trend as ERA5 extreme winds in modern times, including a less steep decline than found in observed gusts and losses. Further investigation of the modern-day divergence between climate indices and losses may help connect decadal forecasting to insurance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲风暴损失的长期记录及其与标准气候指数的比较
摘要传统保险既能很好地应对欧洲风暴活动的十年变化,也有能力在这些时间范围内调整其业务战略。因此,最近对欧洲冬季多年平均气候的熟练预测似乎是研究人员改进风暴风险管理的一长串方法中的一个非常受欢迎的补充。然而,公司并没有利用这些对冬季平均气候的预测来反映他们的风险观。主要原因是缺乏长期、可靠的损失记录,无法了解预测的时间平均环流强度与几场强烈风暴造成的损失之间的关系。这项研究填补了1950年至2022年欧洲风暴损失记录的空白,该记录基于每个事件的ERA5峰值近地表风,这些风使用既定的损失函数转换为损失。由此产生的数据集成功地识别了过去70年中的主要风暴,并模拟了从20世纪60年代的低值到80年代和90年代的高水平再到2010年代的几十年变化。然而,它低估了从20世纪末的暴风雨到过去20年的平静,观察到的损失下降的深度。这是由这一时期ERA5极端风的平稳趋势造成的,与观测到的峰值阵风的显著下降形成对比。将这些阵风趋势强加给ERA5峰值风,使模型损失与过去几十年的行业经验相一致。将用于长期预测的欧洲冬季气候指数与新的模拟损失数据集进行了比较。它们在年际尺度上的相关性约为0.4,在十年和长期变化中上升到约0.7。值得注意的是,气候指数与现代ERA5极端风有着相似的数十年趋势,包括下降幅度没有观测到的阵风和损失那么大。进一步调查气候指数和损失之间的现代差异可能有助于将十年预测与保险联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
192
审稿时长
3.8 months
期刊介绍: Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS) is an interdisciplinary and international journal dedicated to the public discussion and open-access publication of high-quality studies and original research on natural hazards and their consequences. Embracing a holistic Earth system science approach, NHESS serves a wide and diverse community of research scientists, practitioners, and decision makers concerned with detection of natural hazards, monitoring and modelling, vulnerability and risk assessment, and the design and implementation of mitigation and adaptation strategies, including economical, societal, and educational aspects.
期刊最新文献
Slope Unit Maker (SUMak): an efficient and parameter-free algorithm for delineating slope units to improve landslide modeling Total water levels along the South Atlantic Bight during three along-shelf propagating tropical cyclones: relative contributions of storm surge and wave runup Wind as a natural hazard in Poland The role of response efficacy and self-efficacy in disaster preparedness actions for vulnerable households Climatological occurrences of hail and tornadoes associated with mesoscale convective systems in the United States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1