What can we learn from comparing glacio-hydrological models?

Glacio-hydrological models combine both glacier and catchment hydrology modeling and are used to assess the hydrological response of high-mountain glacierized catchments to climate change. To capture the uncertainties from these model combinations, it is essential to compare the outcomes of several model entities forced with the same climate projections. For the first time, we compare the results of two completely independent glacio-hydrological models: (i) HQsim-GEM and (ii) AMUNDSEN. In contrast to prevailing studies, we use distinct glacier models and glacier initialization times. At first glance, the results achieved for future glacier states and hydrological characteristics in the Rofenache catchment in ötztal Alps (Austria) appear to be similar and consistent, but a closer look reveals clear differences. What can be learned from this study is that low-complexity models can achieve higher accuracy in the calibration period. This is advantageous especially when data availability is weak, and priority is given to efficient computation time. Furthermore, the time and method of glacier initialization play an important role due to different data requirements. In essence, it is not possible to make conclusions about the model performance outside of the calibration period or more specifically in the future. Hence, similar to climate modeling, we suggest considering different modeling approaches when assessing future catchment discharge or glacier evolution. Especially when transferring the results to stakeholders, it is vital to transparently communicate the bandwidth of future states that come with all model results. © 2020 by the authors

Sources of uncertainty in a probabilistic flood risk model

Flood risk models capture a variety of processes and are associated with large uncertainties. In this paper, the uncertainties due to alternative model assumptions are analysed for various components of a probabilistic flood risk model in the study area of Vorarlberg (Austria). The effect of different model assumptions for five aspects is compared to a reference simulation. This includes: (I, II) the selection of two model thresholds controlling the generation of large sets of possible flood events; (III) the selection of a distribution function for the flood frequency analysis; (IV) the building representation and water level derivation for the exposure analysis and (V) the selection of an appropriate damage function. The analysis shows that each of the tested aspects has the potential to alter the modelling results considerably. The results range from a factor of 1.2 to 3, from the lowest to highest value, whereby the selection of the damage function has the largest effect on the overall modelling results.(VLID)461981

Retrospective forecasts of the upcoming winter season snow accumulation in the Inn headwaters (European Alps)

This article presents analyses of retrospective seasonal forecasts of snow accumulation. Re-forecasts with 4 months' lead time from two coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models (NCEP CFSv2 and MetOffice GloSea5) drive the Alpine Water balance and Runoff Estimation model (AWARE) in order to predict mid-winter snow accumulation in the Inn headwaters. As snowpack is hydrological storage that evolves during the winter season, it is strongly dependent on precipitation totals of the previous months. Climate model (CM) predictions of precipitation totals integrated from November to February (NDJF) compare reasonably well with observations. Even though predictions for precipitation may not be significantly more skilful than for temperature, the predictive skill achieved for precipitation is retained in subsequent water balance simulations when snow water equivalent (SWE) in February is considered. Given the AWARE simulations driven by observed meteorological fields as a benchmark for SWE analyses, the correlation achieved using GloSea5-AWARE SWE predictions is r D0.57. The tendency of SWE anomalies (i.e. the sign of anomalies) is correctly predicted in 11 of 13 years. For CFSv2-AWARE, the corresponding values are r D0.28 and 7 of 13 years. The results suggest that some seasonal prediction of hydrological model storage tendencies in parts of Europe is possible

Continuous monitoring of snowpack dynamics in alpine terrain by aboveground neutron sensing

The characteristics of an aboveground cosmic‐ray neutron sensor (CRNS) are evaluated for monitoring a mountain snowpack in the Austrian Alps from March 2014 to June 2016. Neutron counts were compared to continuous point‐scale snow depth (SD) and snow‐water‐equivalent (SWE) measurements from an automatic weather station with a maximum SWE of 600 mm (April 2014). Several spatially distributed Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS)‐based SD and SWE maps were additionally used. A strong nonlinear correlation is found for both SD and SWE. The representative footprint of the CRNS is in the range of 230–270 m. In contrast to previous studies suggesting signal saturation at around 100 mm of SWE, no complete signal saturation was observed. These results imply that CRNS could be transferred into an unprecedented method for continuous detection of spatially averaged SD and SWE for alpine snowpacks, though with sensitivity decreasing with increasing SWE. While initially different functions were found for accumulation and melting season conditions, this could be resolved by accounting for a limited measurement depth. This depth limit is in the range of 200 mm of SWE for dense snowpacks with high liquid water contents and associated snow density values around 450 kg m−3 and above. In contrast to prior studies with shallow snowpacks, interannual transferability of the results is very high regardless of presnowfall soil moisture conditions. This underlines the unexpectedly high potential of CRNS to close the gap between point‐scale measurements, hydrological models, and remote sensing of the cryosphere in alpine terrain