Risk Frontiers’ Seminar – Thursday 12th October, 2017

As of July 1 Risk Frontiers is now a privately owned R&D company, having spun out of Macquarie University, its former home for some 23 years. The centre is excited about the journey ahead and believes its newly acquired independent status paves the way for new opportunities including the chance to tap into external funding and monetise parts of the business to fund research in new areas like coastal erosion, machine learning and cyber security.

This year’s annual seminar will preserve its by now familiar format and we will use the occasion to celebrate some of Risk Frontiers’ historical successes and showcase its capability in new areas of risk science. In terms of its historical achievement we would be loath not to mention the following:

  • The development of the PerilAUS database of deaths and building losses arising from Australian natural hazard events. This database is now considered complete back to 1900.
  • The National Flood Information and Flood Exclusion Zone databases, the former developed with Willis Re and with the support of the Insurance Council of Australia. These now provide base information on flood risks for some 92% of properties, allowing insurers to price this risk and emergency managers to understand their exposure and threats to community resilience.
  • Risk Frontiers’ catastrophe loss modelling suite for Australian perils including bushfire, earthquake, flood, hail and tropical cyclone, and NZ earthquake, all of which are now available on our Multi-Peril Workbench. We are working with other vendors and platform providers to give users more flexibility in the mode of delivery of these models.
  • Normalisation of historical loss databases that allow the costs of historic Nat Cat event losses to be compared as if all events were to impact where and how we live today.
  • The first-ever physically-based ground motion prediction models for Australian seismic ground motions.
  • The development of a machine learning-based wind field model in the Australian region using our methodology recently published in Monthly Weather Review. This new model will be incorporated in a future Workbench update.
  • New work showing heatwaves to be a greater killer than all other natural perils put together and associated social science and policy research in relation to the management of floods, bushfires and heatwaves.

Come along and participate in this year’s seminar to learn more about the latest risk science from Risk Frontiers specialists and their capabilities.

Programme

Long-term natural records of tropical cyclones
This year’s guest speaker, Professor Jonathon Nott, is a geoscientist who, inter alia, has reconstructed long term records of extreme storm surge events on the Australian coastline. Come and learn how representative is the recent satellite era of the longer-term history of landfalling cyclones.

Synthesis of Risk Frontiers’ social research findings
Andrew Gissing distils key learnings in context of fire, flood, heatwave and tropical cyclone events.

Vignettes de recherche
Listen to Lucinda Coates on our updated PerilAUS record of deaths from natural hazard events and Tahiry Rabehaja on how to update the updating of PerilAUS. Thomas Mortlock will talk about coastal erosion and TC Debbie while Mingzhu Wang explains how machine-learning techniques are improving FireAUS.

Seasonal drivers of bushfire weather risks in SE Australia
Stuart Browning goes back to 1851 and further still to develop a long-term history of bushfire climate risks.

And did I mention it? There are drinks as well!!

Registration

Employees of Sponsor Companies (Aon Benfield, Guy Carpenter, IAG, QBE, Suncorp and Swiss Re)

Please click here for Registration Form

Employees of Non-Sponsor Companies

Please visit Eventbrite to register.

Bridging the divide between studies on disaster risk reduction education and child-centred disaster risk reduction – a critical review

There has been a recent increase in the body of knowledge related to children and disasters. These studies converge into three main fields of research: the impact of disasters on children and their psychological recovery, the integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) into the education sectors and children’s participation in DRR. This article provides a literature review of the two latter fields of research where the focus is on reducing disaster losses and building resilience prior to a disaster. Overall, 48 studies are critically reviewed and compared in relation to the strengths and weaknesses of their aims, methods, locations of research, impact, and outcomes. The review identified a number of differences between the two fields and significant opportunities for linking the two approaches, sharing lessons and knowledge. Based on the review, recommendations for further research are outlined.

read more

Newsletter Volume 17, Issue 1 – August 2017

In this issue:

  • A Natural Hazard Building Loss Profile for Australia: 1900-2015
  • Risk Frontiers’ Annual Seminar: A Provisional Programme
  • Weather-related Natural Disasters: Should we be concerned about a reversion to the mean?

A Natural Hazard Building Loss Profile for Australia: 1900-2015

J McAneney¹,², N Madappatt¹, L Coates¹,² R Crompton¹,² R D’Arcy¹ and R Blong¹
¹Risk Frontiers, Macquarie University, NSW 2019
²Bushfire &Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre

This study examined building damage as recorded in PerilAUS (e.g. Coates et al. (2014)) to determine the national profile of natural peril impacts and frequencies. The analysis employed Risk Frontiers’ Damage Index based on a House Equivalent (HE) loss metric introduced by Blong (2003); a simple normalisation correction based on Crompton et al. (2010) and a lower bound event threshold of 25 normalised HE. The latter is equivalent to a monetary loss of around $10m in 2015-16. Normalisation puts historical events on a common footing with losses that would be incurred given 2015 societal and demographic conditions; it answers the question: what would be the losses if historic events were to recur today?

While more analysis remains to be done to validate the HE calculations and the spatial distribution of losses across States and Territories, we find that there have been on average 5.85 events per year causing losses in excess of 25 normalised HE (Figure 1). This frequency exhibits no statistically significant change since 1900. The mean loss per event is $118m with a standard deviation of $430m. The absence of a trend over time is insensitive to the threshold HE employed.

Figure 1: Number of events per financial year (July 1 to June 30) causing normalised building losses in excess of $10m. Events are grouped by financial year to discriminate between Southern Hemisphere summers when many weather-dependent events occur.

The most costly event in terms of building damage is the 1999 Sydney hailstorm, which was also the most expensive insured loss. The losses broadly follow a Pareto distribution in which 20% of events account for 80% of the aggregated normalised building losses and the top 20 are responsible for 50% of those losses. We can expect natural disaster events as costly as the 1999 Sydney hailstorm

to occur about once per century, events like the Brisbane floods once every 30 to 40 years and that of the Hobart Bushfires about once a decade.

Figure 2: The top 300 normalised losses against rank. The straight line shows a Pareto (power law) distribution.

The pattern of losses shown in Figure 2 demonstrates the ‘heavy-tailed’ character of the natural peril losses where there is always the possibility of event losses far in excess of the historical mean. This may occur because of an event of higher intensity or larger footprint, that footprint impacting an area of higher-valued exposure, or all of these together.

A preliminary breakdown of damage by perils shows tropical cyclones to have been most destructive and responsible for 30% of the national building damage since 1900. Bushfires, floods and hail have all been similarly costly each accounting for another 18% of building losses, although when hailstorms are combined with other storm events (excluding cyclones), thunderstorms similarly contribute 30% of the losses. Compared with meteorological hazards, geophysical perils have had a minor influence on building damage over the last 116 years with earthquake losses dominated by a single event — the 1989 Newcastle earthquake. However this time period is too short to predict the frequency of damaging seismic events and, in the case of this peril, as with some others, the spatial pattern of losses shown here could be overturned by another extreme event loss.

While we believe the above results to be robust, further validation of the House Equivalent calculations is required with particular scrutiny on Central Damage Value estimates by peril. Ongoing work will undertake a comparison with the normalised ICA Disaster List (Crompton and McAneney 2008) once this has been updated by Risk Frontiers later this year and with insurance claims information for key events.

References

Blong RJ (2003) A new damage index, Natural Hazards, 30, 1-23.

Coates L, Haynes KA, O’Brien J, McAneney KJ and Dimer de Oliveira F (2014) Exploring 167 years of vulnerability: An examination of extreme heat events in Australia 1844-2010, Environmental Science and Policy, 42, 33-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.05.003.

Crompton RP and McAneney KJ (2008) Normalised Australian insured losses from meteorological hazards: 1967-2006 Environ, Science & Policy 11 (5), 371-378.

Crompton RP, McAneney KJ, Chen K, Pielke Jr RA and Haynes KA (2010) Influence of location, population, and climate on building damage and fatalities due to Australian bushfire: 1925-2009, Weather, Climate and Society, 2, 300-310.

Risk Frontiers’ Annual Seminar: A Provisional Programme

Thursday 12th October, 2017, commencing 2.00pm at the Museum of Sydney, cnr Phillip & Bridge Streets, Sydney

And on the menu:

Long-term natural records of tropical cyclones
This year’s guest speaker, Professor Jonathon Nott, is a geoscientist who, inter alia, has reconstructed long term records of extreme storm surge events on the Australian coastline. Come and learn how representative is the recent satellite era of the longer-term history of landfalling cyclones.

Synthesis of Risk Frontiers’ social research findings
Andrew Gissing distils key learnings in context of fire, flood, heatwave and tropical cyclone events.

Vignettes de recherche
Listen to Lucinda Coates on our updated PerilAUS record of deaths from natural hazard events and Tahiry Rabehaja on how to update the updating of PerilAUS. Thomas Mortlock will talk about coastal erosion and TC Debbie while Mingzhu Wang explains how machine-learning techniques are improving FireAUS.

Seasonal drivers of bushfire weather risks in SE Australia
Stuart Browning goes back to 1851 and further still to develop a long-term history of bushfire climate risks.

And did I mention it? There are drinks as well!!

Invitations will be distributed shortly and are also available on our website: riskfrontiers.com.au

Weather-related Natural Disasters: Should we be concerned about a reversion to the mean?

Professor Roger Pielke Jr (University of Colorado, Boulder)

The world is presently in an era of unusually low weather disasters. This holds for the weather phenomena that have historically caused the most damage: tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes and drought. Given how weather events have become politicized in debates over climate change, some find this hard to believe. Fortunately, government and IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) analysis allow such claims to be adjudicated based on science, and not politics.  Here I briefly summarize recent relevant data.The world is presently in an era of unusually low weather disasters. This holds for the weather phenomena that have historically caused the most damage: tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes and drought. Given how weather events have become politicized in debates over climate change, some find this hard to believe. Fortunately, government and IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) analysis allow such claims to be adjudicated based on science, and not politics.  Here I briefly summarize recent relevant data.

Every six months Munich Re publishes a tally of the costs of disasters around the world for the past half year. This is an excellent resource for tracking disaster costs over time.  The data allows us to compare disaster costs to global GDP, to get a sense of the magnitude of these costs in the context of economic activity.  Using data from the UN, Figure 1 shows how that data looks since 1990, when we have determined that data is most reliable and complete.

The data shows that since 2005 the world has had a remarkable streak of good luck when it comes to big weather disasters, specifically:

  • From 2006 to present there have been 7/11 years with weather disasters costing less than 0.20% of global GDP.
  • The previous 11 years saw 6 with more than 0.20% of global GDP.
  • From 2006 to present there has been zero years with losses greater than 0.30% of global GDP.
  • The previous 11 years had 2, as did the 6 years before that, or about once every 4 years.
  • According to a simple linear trend over this time period, global disasters are 50% what they were 27 years ago, as a proportion of GDP.

Why has this occurred? Is it good luck, climate change or something else?

By disaggregating the data phenomenon by phenomenon we can get a better sense of why it is that disaster costs are, as a proportion of global GDP, so low in recent years.

Figure 1

A good place to start is with tropical cyclones, given that they are often the most costly weather events to occur each year. Figure 2 shows global tropical cyclone landfalls from 1990 through 2016. These are the storms that cause the overwhelming majority of property damage. Since 1990 there has been a reduction of about 3 landfalling storms per year (from ~17 to ~14), which certainly helps to explain why disaster losses are somewhat depressed.

Figure 2

Even more striking is the extended period in the United States, which has the most exposure to tropical cyclone damage, without the landfall of an intense hurricane. Figure 3 shows the number of days between each landfall of a Category 3+ hurricane in the US, starting in 1900. As of this writing the tally is approaching 4500 days, which is a streak of good fortune not seen in the historical record.

Figure 3

A very conservative estimate of the effects of this “intense hurricane drought” is that the United States is some $70 billion in arrears with respect to expected hurricane damage since 2006. In fact, it is not widely appreciated but the US has seen a decrease of about 20% in both hurricane frequency and intensity at landfall since 1900. I urge caution placing too much significance on linear trends, as they are quite sensitive to start and end dates, but there is very little to indicate that tropical cyclones are either more frequent or intense.

Data on floods, droughts and tornadoes are similar in that they show little to no indication of becoming more severe or frequent.  The IPCC concludes:

  • “There continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”
  • “There is low confidence in observed trends in small spatial-scale phenomena such as tornadoes and hail.”
  • “There is low confidence in detection and attribution of changes in drought over global land areas since the mid-20th century.

”Thus, it is fair to conclude that the costs of disasters worldwide is depressed because, as the global economy has grown, disaster costs have not grown at the same rate. Thus, disaster costs as a proportion of GDP have decreased. One important reason for this is a lack of increase in the weather events that cause disasters, most notably, tropical cyclones worldwide and especially hurricanes in the United States.

Climate change, of course, is all too real and has a significant human component. The IPCC has concluded that there is evidence indicating that heatwaves have become more common as too has extreme rainfall in some parts of the world.  Projections for the future suggest that some other types of extremes – including tropical cyclones, floods, drought and tornadoes – may yet become more intense or frequent. However, there is great uncertainty about how extremes will evolve in the climate future.

But we don’t need climate scenarios to be worried about more disasters. To the extent that people believe that we are presently in an era of large or unusual disasters, many will be in for a shock when large weather disasters again occur. And they will. A simple regression to the mean would imply disasters of a scale not seen worldwide in more than a decade.

Consider that 2005 saw weather disasters totaling 0.5% of global GDP. In 2017, if the world economy totaled $90 trillion (in a round number), then an equivalent amount of 2017 disaster losses to the proportional costs to 2005 GDP would be about $450 billion. That is about equivalent to Hurricane Katrina, Superstorm Sandy, Hurricane Andrew, the 2011 Thailand floods, the 1998 Yangtze floods all occurring in one year plus about $100 billion more in other disaster losses. And there is no reason why we should consider 0.5% of GDP to be an upper limit. Think about that.

The world has had a run of good luck when it comes to weather disasters. That will inevitably come to an end. Understanding loss potential in the context of inexorable global development and long term climate patterns is hard enough.  It is made even more difficult with the politicized overlay that often accompanies the climate issue. Fortunately, there is good science and solid data available to help cut through the noise. Bigger disasters are coming – will you be ready?

Sources

Mohleji S, & Pielke Jr R (2014). Reconciliation of trends in global and regional economic losses from weather events: 1980–2008. Natural Hazards Review, 15(4), 04014009.

Munich Re (2017)  Natural catastrophe review for the first half of 2017 https://www.munichre.com/en/media-relations/publications/press-releases/2017/2017-07-18-press-release/index.html

Murray V, & Ebi KL (2012). IPCC special report on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation (SREX).

Pielke Jr R (2014) The rightful place of science: disasters and climate change. (CSPO: ASU)

Stocker TF, et al. (2013) IPCC, 2013: climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.

Weinkle J, Maue R, & Pielke Jr, R. (2012) Historical global tropical cyclone landfalls. Journal of Climate, 25:4729-4735.

Earth’s rotation affects the wide world of sports

Ryan Crompton and Paul Somerville, Risk Frontiers.


Newton’s laws of motion describe the motion of an object in an inertial (non-accelerating) frame of reference. When Newton’s laws are transformed to a rotating frame of reference (such as the earth’s surface), the Coriolis force and centrifugal force appear.  These forces are important in oceans and atmospheres. As water or air moves away from the equator toward the poles, its rotation rate about the earth’s rotation axis increases to conserve angular momentum as the distance to the axis of rotation decreases. Rather than flowing directly from areas of high pressure to low pressure, as they would in a non-rotating system, winds and currents tend to flow to the right of this direction north of the equator and to the left of this direction south of it. This effect is responsible for the rotation of large cyclones and the generation of warm currents that travel north and south from equatorial waters in the western Pacific Ocean.  As described in IOP on 31 March 2017, reproduced here, these forces can also have a significant impact on sports.


The inertial forces generated by the Earth as it rotates can have an impact on sports as varied as cricket, bowls, rowing, swimming and horse racing, Australian researchers have shown.

Dr Garry Robinson, from the University of New South Wales, Canberra, and his brother Dr Ian Robinson, from Victoria University, Melbourne, looked at how the Coriolis force – which produces a sideways movement – and the centrifugal force, both resulting from the earth’s rotation, affect everything from a bowled cricket ball to a rowing scull.

They published their results today in the journal Physica Scripta. Ian Robinson said: “We wanted to explore what effect these forces would have on sports like cricket, where the ball is thrown or bowled; on golf – where the ball travels a longer distance; on lawn bowls, where accuracy is paramount; and on rowing and running, where large distances are covered.”

“Newton’s laws of motion apply in an inertial system, but our rotating Earth is not an inertial system. Two additional forces are present – the Coriolis force, and the centrifugal force. Generally, these two inertial forces produce noticeable effects only on the large scale, when either the time of travel and/or the path lengths are large – for example the Coriolis effect is extremely important for navigation.”

The researchers added both the forces to the equations of motion, and also included a ground friction-type force to simulate a ball rolling over a surface, or a body moving through something resistive like water.

Their expectation was that the effect for small-scale ball games – golf, and cricket – would be fairly small. This proved to be the case, with sideways movement for a cricketer’s throw from the boundary being less than one centimetre and less than 10 centimetres for a long drive in golf.

Garry Robinson said: “However, there were some sports where the effect was more than sufficient to make a difference to the outcome. In lawn bowls, for example, the sideways movement can be up to 2.8 centimetres, which is enough to affect the outcome of the game.

“Even more significantly, in a two kilometre rowing race the sideways movement can be up to 40 metres, if it is not compensated for, while an athlete running a four-minute mile will be subjected to a sideways movement of nearly 20 metres, again if not compensated for.

“It’s possible the participants in these sports aren’t even aware of the potential sideways effect, and could be compensating for it without knowing. Even if they are, we calculated that in the case of the rower, they will need to apply up to 7.5 per cent of their forward propulsion force to counteract it.”

Another example is found in horse racing. The Coriolis force can ‘push’ a horse towards the inner rail running in one direction, and towards the outer rail running in the opposite direction, with a potential sideways movement of up to 4 metres in a 1,200 metre sprint.

This is automatically (unknowingly) compensated for, and normally is likely to be totally masked by other effects. Nevertheless, the effects of the Coriolis force may sometimes be significant, as in some areas of the world horses run in a clockwise direction in one state, and in a counter-clockwise direction in a neighbouring state, with horses regularly moving between locations.

The researchers also noted that the matter is further complicated because the size of the effect is latitude dependent; it reverses in right/left direction in going from one hemisphere to the other; and, for a fixed hemisphere, it reverses from, for example, an east to west or north to south direction if the direction of the velocity reverses.

Ian Robinson said: “It is possible therefore, that there are subtle effects not noticed by athletes that may inhibit their performance, particularly if there is a change of venue or hemisphere.”

Weather-related Natural Disasters: Should we be concerned about a reversion to the mean?

Professor Roger Pielke Jr (University of Colorado Boulder)


Roger is a long-term Research Fellow of Risk Frontiers and recently it was our pleasure to be able to host him, once again, in Sydney. During this visit, we were rewarded with an insightful seminar entitled Natural Disasters and Climate Change: The Science and the Politics. Below is a brief synopsis of some of the key points raised in Roger’s talk. A pdf of his presentation is available for those wanting further information.

We would also direct readers to Roger’s book entitled: The Rightful Place of Science: Disasters and Climate Change as the most accessible and thoughtful compendium of research in this area and of discussion as to the correct role of science in informing political debate and policy in contentious and important areas like global climate change. (https://www.amazon.com.au/d/ebook/Rightful-Place-Science-Disasters-Climate-Change-Pielke/B00SZ83XMG/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1501026563&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=roger+Pielke+jr).


The world is presently in an era of unusually low weather disasters. This holds for the weather phenomena that have historically caused the most damage: tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes and drought. Given how weather events have become politicized in debates over climate change, some find this hard to believe. Fortunately, government and IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) analyses allow such claims to be adjudicated based on science, and not politics.  Here I briefly summarize recent relevant data.

Every six months Munich Re publishes a tally of the costs of disasters around the world for the past half year. This is an excellent resource for tracking disaster costs over time.  The data allows us to compare disaster costs to global GDP, to get a sense of the magnitude of these costs in the context of economic activity.  Using data from the UN, here is how that data looks since 1990, when we have determined that data is most reliable and complete.

The data shows that since 2005 the world has had a remarkable streak of good luck when it comes to big weather disasters, specifically:

  • From 2006 to present there have been 7/11 years with weather disasters costing less than 0.20% of global GDP.
  • The previous 11 years saw 6 with more than 0.20% of global GDP.
  • From 2006 to present there has be zero years with losses greater than 0.30% of global GDP.
  • The previous 11 years had 2, as did the 6 years before that, or about once every 4 years.
  • According to a simple linear trend over this time period, global disasters are 50% what they were 27 years ago, as a proportion of GDP.

Why has this occurred? Is it good luck, climate change or something else?

By disaggregating the data phenomenon by phenomenon we can get a better sense of why it is that disaster costs are, as a proportion of global GDP, so low in recent years.

A good place to start is with tropical cyclones, given that they are often the most costly weather events to occur each year.  The figure below shows global tropical cyclone landfalls from 1990 through 2016. These are the storms that cause the overwhelming majority of property damage. Since 1990 there has been a reduction of about 3 landfalling storms per year (from ~17 to ~14), which certainly helps to explain why disaster losses are somewhat depressed.

Even more striking is the extended period in the United States, which has the most exposure to tropical cyclone damage, without the landfall of an intense hurricane. The figure below shows the number of days between each landfall of a Category 3+ hurricane in the US, starting in 1900. As of this writing the tally is approaching 4500 days, which is a streak of good fortune not seen in the historical record.

A very conservative estimate of the effects of this “intense hurricane drought” is that the United States is some $70 billion in arrears with respect to expected hurricane damage since 2006. In fact, it is not widely appreciated but the US has seen a decrease of about 20% in both hurricane frequency and intensity at landfall since 1900. I urge caution placing too much significance on linear trends, as they are quite sensitive to start and end dates, but there is very little to indicate that tropical cyclones are either more frequent or intense.

Data on floods, drought and tornadoes are similar in that they show little to no indication of becoming more severe or frequent.  The IPCC concludes:

  • “There continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”
  • “There is low confidence in observed trends in small spatial-scale phenomena such as tornadoes and hail.”
  • “There is low confidence in detection and attribution of changes in drought over global land areas since the mid-20th century.”

Thus, it is fair to conclude that the costs of disasters worldwide is depressed because, as the global economy has grown, disaster costs have not grown at the same rate. Thus, disaster costs as a proportion of GDP have decreased. One important reason for this is a lack of increase in the weather events that cause disasters, most notably, tropical cyclones worldwide and especially hurricanes in the United States.

Climate change, of course, is all too real and has a significant human component. The IPCC has concluded that there is evidence indicating that heat waves have become more common as too has extreme rainfall in some parts of the world.  Projections for the future suggest that some other types of extremes – including tropical cyclones, floods, drought and tornadoes – may yet become more intense or frequent. However, there is great uncertainty about how extremes will evolve in the climate future.

But we don’t need climate scenarios to be worried about more disasters. To the extent that people believe that we are presently in an era of large or unusual disasters, many will be in for a shock when large weather disasters again occur. And they will. A simple regression to the mean would imply disasters of a scale not seen worldwide in more than a decade.

Consider that 2005 saw weather disasters totaling 0.5% of global GDP. In 2017, if the world economy totaled $90 trillion (in a round number), then an equivalent amount of 2017 disaster losses to the proportional costs to 2005 GDP would be about $450 billion. That is about equivalent to Hurricane Katrina, Superstorm Sandy, Hurricane Andrew, the 2011 Thailand floods, the 1998 Yangtze floods all occurring in one year plus about $100 billion more in other disaster losses. And there is no reason why we should consider 0.5% of GDP to be an upper limit. Think about that.

The world has had a run of good luck when it comes to weather disasters. That will inevitably come to an end. Understanding loss potential in the context of inexorable global development and long term climate patterns is hard enough.  It is made even more difficult with the politicized overlay that often accompanies the climate issue. Fortunately, there is good science and solid data available to help cut through the noise. Bigger disasters are coming – will you be ready?

References

Mohleji, S., & Pielke Jr, R. (2014). Reconciliation of trends in global and regional economic losses from weather events: 1980–2008. Natural Hazards Review, 15(4), 04014009.

Munich Re, 2017.  Natural catastrophe review for the first half of 2017 https://www.munichre.com/en/media-relations/publications/press-releases/2017/2017-07-18-press-release/index.html

Murray, V., & Ebi, K. L. (2012). IPCC special report on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation (SREX).

Pielke, R. (2014). The rightful place of science: disasters and climate change. (CSPO: ASU)

Stocker, T. F., et al. (2013). IPCC, 2013: climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.

Weinkle, J., Maue, R., & Pielke Jr, R. (2012). Historical global tropical cyclone landfalls. Journal of Climate, 25:4729-4735.

 

Heatwave impacts and community responses

New South Wales in 2017 experienced one of its hottest summers on records including several Heatwave events. With the support of the Bureau of Meteorology and the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre, Risk Frontiers completed a study of the impacts of these events and community responses across Western Sydney and the Northern Rivers Region. The results are summarised in the following reports.

http://www.bnhcrc.com.au/publications/biblio/bnh-3824
http://www.bnhcrc.com.au/publications/biblio/bnh-3823

‘Astounding’: Shifting storms under climate change to worsen coastal perils

By Thomas Mortlock

This was the headline of a news report in the Sydney Morning Herald last week (July 20). The article (and others in the media recently) is based on a research article published by fellow OEH Coastal Process Node members UNSW Water Research Laboratory (Harley et al., 2017). The paper reports on observations of the June 2016 East Coast Low (ECL) storm along the NSW coast, and highlights the importance of storm wave direction in determining coastal erosion magnitude.

To quantify coastal impacts, the authors undertook repeat airborne measurements of beaches along the coast before and directly after the June 2016 ECL. At Narrabeen-Collaroy the erosion magnitude was the largest in four decades. They attribute this to the storm’s anomalous wave direction and call for greater attention – from both research and management – on the impacts of changing storm wave direction in a changing climate.

Agreement of observations and modelling

It is encouraging that observations from this work echo the same conclusions made by Risk Frontiers’ modelling study of this storm, published back in February in the open-access journal Water (http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/9/2/121).

In this paper, we compared the impacts of a ‘regular’ ECL – with waves coming from the south-east, with the anomalous 2016 event where waves came from the east to north-east.

We demonstrated the reason for the large erosion was the anomalous wave direction focussing energy at sections of the coastline not equilibrated with high wave exposure. This was particularly damaging at Collaroy because the easterly extension of Long Reef headland set up a mega rip-current circulation, lowering the beach and focussing erosion at this location (Figure 1).

This agrees with the recently-published observations of Harley et al. (2017) that sites in the south and central sections of beaches along the NSW coast suffered the worse beach losses, and that erosion at Collaroy-Narrabeen was the largest seen in four decades.

Figure 1 Modelled pattern of surface water currents at Collaroy-Narrabeen during the June 2016 ECL, showing the mega-rip forming off Collaroy. Inset photos (with locations shown on main figure) show severe erosion damage exactly at this location.

Changes to wave direction as the tropics expand

A number of media reports have linked this event to a sign of things to come, with the expectation that “storm direction will shift in the future with climate change”, but the mechanism for this is perhaps not clear.

Over the past 30 years, there has been a measured expansion of the tropics at a rate of about 0.5 – 1.0 degree latitude per decade, in both hemispheres (Lucas et al., 2014). Most Global Climate Models (GCMs) predict the expansion trend to continue with global warming.

As the tropics expand, more tropical-origin storms – like the 2016 ECL, tropical lows or tropical cyclones – are likely to become a more common feature of the storm wave climate along the NSW coast (outside the tropics), replacing the traditional storm types that have their origin in the Tasman Sea or Southern Ocean (Goodwin et al., 2016).

This means the average storm wave direction may shift towards the east or north-east (coming from), as opposed to the current south-east direction of most ECL storms.  As witnessed in June 2016, the storm wave direction is of key importance in determining erosion magnitude.

The topic of directional wave climate change and coastal response has been a core research theme for the past 30 years at the Marine Climate Risk Group at Macquarie University, a group with which Risk Frontiers works closely.

The Catalyst program Stormageddon, aired on ABC in July 2016, provides a good overview on this topic, featuring A/Prof Goodwin of the Marine Climate Risk Group (http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4503317.htm).

References

Goodwin, I.D. et al. (2016), Tropical and extratropical-origin storm wave types and their influence on the East Australian longshore sand transport system under a changing climate, J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 121, 7.

Harley, M.D. et al. (2017), Extreme coastal erosion enhanced by anomalous extratropical storm wave direction, Sci. Rep., 7, 6033.

Lucas et al. (2014), The expanding tropics: a critical assessment of the observational and modeling studies, Wiley Interdiscip Rev, 5, 1.

Mortlock, T.R. et. al. (2017), The June 2016 Australian East Coast Low: Importance of Wave Direction for Coastal Erosion Assessment, Water, 9(2), 121.

Position Vacant: Senior Research Consultant

·        St Leonards, Sydney
·        Challenging and interesting projects
·        Diverse and high performing team

Risk Frontiers is a leading independent research and development company, focused on providing practical and pragmatic solutions to interesting and challenging risk and resilience problems. Risk Frontiers works will global insurance companies, infrastructure corporations and the government and non-government sectors to deliver risk modelling, risk management, resilience and social research solutions. Our research expertise covers natural hazards, climate change, cyber security, infrastructure vulnerability and the human dimensions of risk.

An exciting opportunity is available for an innovative, adaptable and strategic thinker, with excellent research and analytical skills to join our risk and resilience team as we continue to grow and enter new markets. You will be responsible for engaging with Risk Frontiers’ clients to undertake a diversity of research, evaluation and consulting projects focused in areas of social research and resilience. You will lead the completion of high quality facilitation, advice, plans and reports to ultimately improve the management of risk and the resilience of organisations and communities.

About you

  • Demonstrated thought leader with highly developed research, analytical and stakeholder engagement skills
  • Excellent presentation and facilitation skills, including written and verbal communication skills
  • Demonstrated strategic and innovative thinking with the ability to develop unique solutions to address complex problems
  • Demonstrated time management skills with the ability to manage multiple projects and priorities
  • Previous professional services experience is desirable
  • A post graduate research degree or equivalent industry experience is desirable

Located at St Leonards with a short walk to public transport, we offer flexible working options, professional development and a great team working environment to foster your potential.

To apply please forward a covering letter and resume outlining your suitability. All applicants are encouraged to obtain an information package by contacting Carol Robertson at info@riskfrontiers.com.

We want to know about your experience.

Did you stay with your home or business, or evacuate during the recent floods?

We are inviting residents and business owners in the Richmond, Brunswick and Tweed river catchments to participate in an online survey. We are interested in your experiences of evacuating and/or staying with your property during the floods following tropical cyclone Debbie on March 31st.

We recognise that many families have experienced significant losses as a result of the flooding and we sincerely apologise for any distress completing this survey may cause. If you require support, you can access free counselling and support through Lifeline (ph: 13 11 14) or the Flood Support Line (available Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm, ph: 1300 137 934).

This survey is being conducted by Risk Frontiers at Macquarie University in conjunction with the NSW State Emergency Service (SES) and the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Co-operative Research Centre (BNHCRC). By telling us about your experience you will be making an important contribution to improving community safety during extreme flooding events. The results of this survey will help improve community engagement and emergency management policy, and will be available publicly.

Participation in this survey is voluntary. All information will remain confidential. This project has been approved by the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee. The survey should take 20 minutes to complete. The survey closes on Monday 31 July.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/X2H2DHS

If you have any questions or concerns about this survey, please contact Dr. Katharine Haynes on Katharine.haynes@mq.edu.au

Thank you for your time and help,

Katharine Haynes
Dr Katharine Haynes | Senior Research Fellow
Department of Geography and Planning
Macquarie University | Sydney 2109 Australia
Katharine.haynes@mq.edu.au

Risk Frontiers spins out of Macquarie University

This article by Professor John McAneney — CEO Risk Frontiers and Anna Game-Lopata appeared in the ANZIIF Writer on18 Jul 2017.

“For 23 years, Risk Frontiers has been at the cutting edge of catastrophe loss modelling, applying advances in technology and science to better assess the threats posed by some of the country’s most costly natural hazard events: cyclones, floods, bushfires, earthquakes and convective storms.

In addition to its suite of home-grown loss models, Risk Frontiers has also been at the forefront of efforts to understand the social dimensions of these risks in ways to help make communities more resilient. These risk themes will continue to motivate the organisation’s new R&D agenda.”

Read more