Search

Climate change impact on rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility of a certain region is often implied based on expected changes in rainfall patterns and rarely explicitly quantified. This study aims to address this gap by implementing coupled landslide and climate modelling chains to explicitly assess the effects of changing rainfall patterns on rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility. The effects of climate change are integrated into the landslide modelling chain via Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves for the present and future climate conditions for a landslide-prone study area located in central Norway. The effects of climate change on landslide susceptibility are examined by using a physical-based landslide prediction model with rainfall events of varying duration and intensity that are simulated based on the climate-dependent IDF curves. The novelty of this study is the proposition of a novel probabilistic framework to assess the climate change impact on landslide susceptibility for rainfall events with a given duration. The proposed framework accounts for both the uncertainties of rainfall events through probabilistic interpretation of IDF curves and the uncertainties in the landslide model with the Monte Carlo method. Compared to results based on only intense rainfall events, the proposed framework leads to a lower increase in the probability of landslide initiation and landslide-susceptible extents due to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are few commonly used indicators that describe the state of Earth's global hydrological cycle and here we propose three indicators to capture how an increased greenhouse effect influences the global hydrological cycle and the associated rainfall patterns. They are: i) the 24-hr global total rainfall, ii) the global surface area with daily precipitation, and iii) the global mean precipitation intensity. With a recent progress in both global satellite observations and reanalyses, we can now estimate the global rainfall surface area to provide new insights into how rainfall intensity changes over time. Based on the ERA5 reanalysis, we find that the global area of daily precipitation decreased from 43 to 41% of the global area between 1950 and 2020, whereas the total daily global rainfall increased from 1440 Gt to 1510 Gt per day. However, the estimated 24-hr global precipitation surface area varies when estimated from different reanalyses and the estimates are still uncertain. To further investigate historical variations in the precipitation surface area, we carried out a wavelet analysis of 24-hr precipitation from the ERA5 reanalysis that indicated how the rainfall patterns have changed over time. Our results suggest that individual precipitation systems over the globe have shrunk in terms of their spatial extent while becoming more intense throughout the period 1950--2020. Hence, the wavelet results are in line with an acceleration of the rate of the global hydrological cycle, combined with a diminishing global area of rainfall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The climate of Bangladesh is very likely to be influenced by global climate change. To quantify the influence on the climate of Bangladesh, Global Climate Models were downscaled statistically to produce future climate projections of maximum temperature during the pre-monsoon season (March–May) for the 21st century for Bangladesh. The future climate projections are generated based on three emission scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) provided by the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. The downscaling process is undertaken by relating the large-scale seasonal mean temperature, taken from the ERA5 reanalysis data set, to the leading principal components of the observed maximum temperature at stations under Bangladesh Meteorological Department in Bangladesh, and applying the relationship to the GCM ensemble. The in-situ temperature data has only recently been digitised, and this is the first time they have been used in statistical downscaling of local climate projections for Bangladesh. This analysis also provides an evaluation of the local data, and the local temperatures in Bangladesh show a close match with the ERA5 reanalysis. Compared to the reference period of 1981–2010, the projected maximum pre-monsoon temperature in Bangladesh indicate an increase by 0.7/0.7/0.7 ∘ C in the near future (2021–2050) and 2.2/1.2/0.8 ∘ C in the far future (2071–2100) assuming the RCP8.5/RCP4.5/RCP2.6 scenario, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most impact studies using downscaled climate data as input assume that the selection of few global climate models (GCMs) representing the largest spread covers the likely range of future changes. This study shows that including more GCMs can result in a very different behavior. We tested the influence of selecting various subsets of GCMs on the climate change signal over Poland from simulations based on dynamical and empirical–statistical downscaling methods. When the climate variable is well simulated by the GCM, such as temperature, results showed that both downscaling methods agree on a warming over Poland by up to 2° or 5°C assuming intermediate or high emission scenarios, respectively, by 2071–2100. As a less robust simulated signal through GCMs, precipitation is expected to increase by up to 10% by 2071–2100 assuming the intermediate emission scenario. However, these changes are uncertain when the high emission scenario and the end of the twenty-first century are of interest. Further, an additional bootstrap test revealed an underestimation in the warming rate varying from 0.5° to more than 4°C over Poland that was found to be largely influenced by the selection of few driving GCMs instead of considering the full range of possible climate model outlooks. Furthermore, we found that differences between various combinations of small subsets from the GCM ensemble of opportunities can be as large as the climate change signal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake: The spelling of the Joanna O'Keeffe' name was incorrect. The correct spelling is Joanna O'Keeffe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]