• Treffer 2 von 2
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Comparison of storm damage functions and their performance

  • Winter storms are the most costly natural hazard for European residential property. We compare four distinct storm damage functions with respect to their forecast accuracy and variability, with particular regard to the most severe winter storms. The analysis focuses on daily loss estimates under differing spatial aggregation, ranging from district to country level. We discuss the broad and heavily skewed distribution of insured losses posing difficulties for both the calibration and the evaluation of damage functions. From theoretical considerations, we provide a synthesis between the frequently discussed cubic wind-damage relationship and recent studies that report much steeper damage functions for European winter storms. The performance of the storm loss models is evaluated for two sources of wind gust data, direct observations by the German Weather Service and ERA-Interim reanalysis data. While the choice of gust data has little impact on the evaluation of German storm loss, spatially resolved coefficients of variation revealWinter storms are the most costly natural hazard for European residential property. We compare four distinct storm damage functions with respect to their forecast accuracy and variability, with particular regard to the most severe winter storms. The analysis focuses on daily loss estimates under differing spatial aggregation, ranging from district to country level. We discuss the broad and heavily skewed distribution of insured losses posing difficulties for both the calibration and the evaluation of damage functions. From theoretical considerations, we provide a synthesis between the frequently discussed cubic wind-damage relationship and recent studies that report much steeper damage functions for European winter storms. The performance of the storm loss models is evaluated for two sources of wind gust data, direct observations by the German Weather Service and ERA-Interim reanalysis data. While the choice of gust data has little impact on the evaluation of German storm loss, spatially resolved coefficients of variation reveal dependence between model and data choice. The comparison shows that the probabilistic models by Heneka et al. (2006) and Prahl et al. (2012) both provide accurate loss predictions for moderate to extreme losses, with generally small coefficients of variation. We favour the latter model in terms of model applicability. Application of the versatile deterministic model by Klawa and Ulbrich (2003) should be restricted to extreme loss, for which it shows the least bias and errors comparable to the probabilistic model by Prahl et al. (2012).zeige mehrzeige weniger

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Boris F. PrahlORCiDGND, Diego RybskiORCiDGND, Olaf Burghoff, Jürgen KroppORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-769-2015
ISSN:1561-8633
Titel des übergeordneten Werks (Englisch):Natural hazards and earth system sciences
Verlag:Copernicus
Verlagsort:Göttingen
Publikationstyp:Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Sprache:Englisch
Jahr der Erstveröffentlichung:2015
Erscheinungsjahr:2015
Datum der Freischaltung:27.03.2017
Band:15
Ausgabe:4
Seitenanzahl:20
Erste Seite:769
Letzte Seite:788
Fördernde Institution:European Community [308497]
Organisationseinheiten:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Geowissenschaften
Peer Review:Referiert
Publikationsweg:Open Access
Name der Einrichtung zum Zeitpunkt der Publikation:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften
Externe Anmerkung:Zweitveröffentlichung in der Schriftenreihe Postprints der Universität Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe ; 492
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.