Department of Civil Engineering: Hydraulics, Energy and Environment, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid,
ETSI Caminos, Canales y Puertos, c/ Profesor Aranguren, 3, 28040, Madrid, Spain
Dr. Luis Mediero
Department of Civil Engineering: Hydraulics, Energy and Environment, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid,
ETSI Caminos, Canales y Puertos, c/ Profesor Aranguren, 3, 28040, Madrid, Spain
Flooding along the river: Will a warming climate affect river floods? The prevailing sentiment is yes, but a consistent signal in flood magnitudes has not been found. Blöschl et al. analyzed the timing of river floods in Europe over the past 50 years and found clear patterns of changes in flood timing that can be ascribed to climate effects (see the Perspective by Slater and Wilby). These variations include earlier spring snowmelt floods in northeastern Europe, later winter floods around the North Sea and parts of the Mediterranean coast owing to delayed winter storms, and earlier winter floods in western Europe caused by earlier soil moisture maxima. Science , this issue p. 588 see also p. 552
30 July 2014 in Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
There is growing concern that flooding is becoming more frequent and severe in Europe. A better understanding of flood regime changes and their drivers is therefore needed. The paper reviews the current knowledge on flood regime changes in European rivers that has traditionally been obtained through two alternative research approaches. The first approach is the data-based detection of changes in observed flood events. Current methods are reviewed together with their challenges and opportunities. For example, observation biases, the merging of different data sources and accounting for nonlinear drivers and responses. The second approach consists of modelled scenarios of future floods. Challenges and opportunities associated with flood change scenarios are discussed such as fully accounting for uncertainties in the modelling cascade and feedbacks. To make progress in flood change research, we suggest that a synthesis of these two approaches is needed. This can be achieved by focusing on long duration records and flood-rich and flood-poor periods rather than on short duration flood trends only, by formally attributing causes of observed flood changes, by validating scenarios against observed flood regime dynamics, and by developing low-dimensional models of flood changes and feedbacks. The paper finishes with a call for a joint European flood change research network.
22 June 2017 in Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
In 2015 large parts of Europe were affected by drought. In this paper, we analyze the hydrological footprint (dynamic development over space and time) of the drought of 2015 in terms of both severity (magnitude) and spatial extent and compare it to the extreme drought of 2003. Analyses are based on a range of low flow and hydrological drought indices derived for about 800 streamflow records across Europe, collected in a community effort based on a common protocol. We compare the hydrological footprints of both events with the meteorological footprints, in order to learn from similarities and differences of both perspectives and to draw conclusions for drought management. The region affected by hydrological drought in 2015 differed somewhat from the drought of 2003, with its center located more towards eastern Europe. In terms of low flow magnitude, a region surrounding the Czech Republic was the most affected, with summer low flows that exhibited return intervals of 100 years and more. In terms of deficit volumes, the geographical center of the event was in southern Germany, where the drought lasted a particularly long time. A detailed spatial and temporal assessment of the 2015 event showed that the particular behavior in these regions was partly a result of diverging wetness preconditions in the studied catchments. Extreme droughts emerged where preconditions were particularly dry. In regions with wet preconditions, low flow events developed later and tended to be less severe. For both the 2003 and 2015 events, the onset of the hydrological drought was well correlated with the lowest flow recorded during the event (low flow magnitude), pointing towards a potential for early warning of the severity of streamflow drought. Time series of monthly drought indices (both streamflow- and climate-based indices) showed that meteorological and hydrological events developed differently in space and time, both in terms of extent and severity (magnitude). These results emphasize that drought is a hazard which leaves different footprints on the various components of the water cycle at different spatial and temporal scales. The difference in the dynamic development of meteorological and hydrological drought also implies that impacts on various water-use sectors and river ecology cannot be informed by climate indices alone. Thus, an assessment of drought impacts on water resources requires hydrological data in addition to drought indices based solely on climate data. The transboundary scale of the event also suggests that additional efforts need to be undertaken to make timely pan-European hydrological assessments more operational in the future.
Concern over the potential impact of anthropogenic climate change on flooding has led to a proliferation of studies examining past flood trends. Many studies have analysed annual-maximum flow trends but few have quantified changes in major (25–100 year return period) floods, i.e. those that have the greatest societal impacts. Existing major-flood studies used a limited number of very large catchments affected to varying degrees by alterations such as reservoirs and urbanisation. In the current study, trends in major-flood occurrence from 1961 to 2010 and from 1931 to 2010 were assessed using a very large dataset (>1200 gauges) of diverse catchments from North America and Europe; only minimally altered catchments were used, to focus on climate-driven changes rather than changes due to catchment alterations. Trend testing of major floods was based on counting the number of exceedances of a given flood threshold within a group of gauges. Evidence for significant trends varied between groups of gauges that were defined by catchment size, location, climate, flood threshold and period of record, indicating that generalizations about flood trends across large domains or a diversity of catchment types are ungrounded. Overall, the number of significant trends in major-flood occurrence across North America and Europe was approximately the number expected due to chance alone. Changes over time in the occurrence of major floods were dominated by multidecadal variability rather than by long-term trends. There were more than three times as many significant relationships between major-flood occurrence and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation than significant long-term trends