Guido Felder

Estimations of low-probability flood events are frequently used to plan infrastructure and to determine the dimensions of flood protection measures. Several well-established methods exist for estimating low-probability floods. However, a global assessment of the consistency of these methods is difficult to achieve because the “true value” of an extreme flood is not observable. A detailed comparison performed on a given case study brings useful information about the statistical and hydrological processes involved in different methods. In the present study, the following three methods of estimating low-probability floods are compared: a purely statistical method (ordinary extreme value statistics), a statistical method based on stochastic rainfall-runoff simulation (SCHADEX method), and a deterministic method (physically based estimation of the probable maximum flood, PMF). These methods are tested for two different Swiss catchments; the results show that the 10,000-year return level flood estimations exceed the PMF estimations by 3% and 18%. The analysis shows that the plausibility of an extreme flood estimation does not only depend on the applied method but also on its ability to represent flood-triggering processes, including precipitation input, spatio-temporal precipitation distribution, and runoff.

The assessment of the impacts of extreme floods is important for dealing with residual risk, particularly for critical infrastructure management and for insurance purposes. Thus, modelling of the probable maximum flood (PMF) from probable maximum precipitation (PMP) by coupling hydrological and hydraulic models has gained interest in recent years. Herein, we examine whether variability in precipitation patterns exceeds or is below selected uncertainty factors in flood loss estimation and if the flood losses within a river basin are related to the probable maximum discharge at the basin outlet. We developed a model experiment with an ensemble of probable maximum precipitation scenarios created by Monte Carlo simulations. For each rainfall pattern, we computed the flood losses with a model chain and benchmarked the effects of variability in rainfall distribution with other model uncertainties. The results show that flood losses vary considerably within the river basin and depend on the timing and superimposition of the flood peaks from the basin's sub-catchments. In addition to the flood hazard component, the other components of flood risk, exposure, and vulnerability contribute remarkably to the overall variability. This leads to the conclusion that the estimation of the probable maximum expectable flood losses in a river basin should not be based exclusively on the PMF. Consequently, the basin-specific sensitivities to different precipitation patterns and the spatial organization of the settlements within the river basin need to be considered in the analyses of probable maximum flood losses.

The assessment of the impacts of extreme floods is important for dealing with residual risk, particularly for critical infrastructure management and for insurance purposes. Thus, modelling of the probable maximum flood (PMF) from probable maximum precipitation (PMP) by coupling hydrologic and hydraulic models has gained interest in recent years. Herein, we examine whether variability in precipitation patterns exceeds or is below other uncertainties in flood loss estimation and if the flood losses within a river basin are related to the probable maximum discharge at the basin outlet. We developed a model experiment with an ensemble of probable maximum precipitation scenarios created by Monte-Carlo simulations. For each rainfall pattern, we computed the flood losses with a model chain and benchmarked the effects of variability in rainfall distribution with other model uncertainties. The results show that flood losses vary considerably within the river basin and depend on the timing and superimposition of the flood peaks from the basin's sub-catchments. In addition to the flood hazard component, the other components of flood risk, exposure and vulnerability, contribute remarkably to the overall variability. This leads to the conclusion that the estimation of the probable maximum expectable flood losses in a river basin should not be based exclusively on the PMF. Consequently, the basin-specific sensitivities to different precipitation patterns and the spatial organisation of the settlements within the river basin need to be considered in the analyses of probable maximum flood losses.

Probable maximum flood (PMF) event estimation has challenged the scientific community for many years. Although the concept of the PMF is often applied, there is no consensus on the methods that should be applied to estimate it. In PMF estimation, the spatio-temporal representation of the probable maximum precipitation (PMP) as well as the choice of modelling approach is often not theoretically founded. Moreover, it is not clear how these choices influence PMF estimation itself. In this study, combinations of three different spatio-temporal PMP representations and three different modelling approaches are applied to determine the PMF of a mesoscale basin keeping the antecedent catchment conditions and the total precipitation amount constant. The nine resulting PMF estimations are used to evaluate each combination of methods. The results show that basic methods allow for a rough estimation of the PMF. In cases where a physically plausible and reliable estimation is required, sophisticated PMP and PMF estimation approaches are recommended.

There is a lack of suitable methods for creating precipitation scenarios that can be used to realistically estimate peak discharges with very low probabilities. On the one hand, existing methods are methodically questionable when it comes to physical system boundaries. On the other hand, the spatio-temporal representativeness of precipitation patterns as system input is limited. In response, this paper proposes a method of deriving spatio-temporal precipitation patterns and presents a step towards making methodically correct estimations of infrequent floods by using a worst-case approach. A Monte Carlo approach allows for the generation of a wide range of different spatio-temporal distributions of an extreme precipitation event that can be tested with a rainfall–runoff model that generates a hydrograph for each of these distributions. Out of these numerous hydrographs and their corresponding peak discharges, the physically plausible spatio-temporal distributions that lead to the highest peak discharges are identified and can eventually be used for further investigations.

While many studies have been conducted in mountainous catchments to examine the impact of climate change on hydrology, the interactions between climate changes and land use components have largely unknown impacts on hydrology in alpine regions. They need to be given special attention in order to devise possible strategies concerning general development in these regions. Thus, the main aim was to examine the impact of land use (i.e. bushland expansion) and climate changes (i.e. increase of temperature) on hydrology by model simulations. For this purpose, the physically based WaSiM‐ETH model was applied to the catchment of Ursern Valley in the central Alps (191 km²) over the period of 1983−2005. Modelling results showed that the reduction of the mean monthly discharge during the summer period is due primarily to the retreat of snow discharge in time and secondarily to the reduction in the glacier surface area together with its retreat in time, rather than the increase in the evapotranspiration due to the expansion of the “green alder” on the expense of grassland. The significant decrease in summer discharge during July, August and September shows a change in the regime from b‐glacio‐nival to nivo‐glacial. These changes are confirmed by the modeling results that attest to a temporal shift in snowmelt and glacier discharge towards earlier in the year: March, April and May for snowmelt and May and June for glacier discharge. It is expected that the yearly total discharge due to the land use changes will be reduced by 0.6% in the near future, whereas, it will be reduced by about 5% if climate change is also taken into account. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.