Cargando…

A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events

Extreme precipitation can have profound consequences for communities, resulting in natural hazards such as rainfall‐triggered landslides that cause casualties and extensive property damage. A key challenge to understanding and predicting rainfall‐triggered landslides comes from observational uncerta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Culler, Elsa S., Badger, Andrew M., Minear, Justin Toby, Tiampo, Kristy F., Zeigler, Spencer D., Livneh, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8361727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34413571
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14260
_version_ 1783738005659320320
author Culler, Elsa S.
Badger, Andrew M.
Minear, Justin Toby
Tiampo, Kristy F.
Zeigler, Spencer D.
Livneh, Ben
author_facet Culler, Elsa S.
Badger, Andrew M.
Minear, Justin Toby
Tiampo, Kristy F.
Zeigler, Spencer D.
Livneh, Ben
author_sort Culler, Elsa S.
collection PubMed
description Extreme precipitation can have profound consequences for communities, resulting in natural hazards such as rainfall‐triggered landslides that cause casualties and extensive property damage. A key challenge to understanding and predicting rainfall‐triggered landslides comes from observational uncertainties in the depth and intensity of precipitation preceding the event. Practitioners and researchers must select from a wide range of precipitation products, often with little guidance. Here we evaluate the degree of precipitation uncertainty across multiple precipitation products for a large set of landslide‐triggering storm events and investigate the impact of these uncertainties on predicted landslide probability using published intensity–duration thresholds. The average intensity, peak intensity, duration, and NOAA‐Atlas return periods are compared ahead of 177 reported landslides across the continental United States and Canada. Precipitation data are taken from four products that cover disparate measurement methods: near real‐time and post‐processed satellite (IMERG), radar (MRMS), and gauge‐based (NLDAS‐2). Landslide‐triggering precipitation was found to vary widely across precipitation products with the depth of individual storm events diverging by as much as 296 mm with an average range of 51 mm. Peak intensity measurements, which are typically influential in triggering landslides, were also highly variable with an average range of 7.8 mm/h and as much as 57 mm/h. The two products more reliant upon ground‐based observations (MRMS and NLDAS‐2) performed better at identifying landslides according to published intensity–duration storm thresholds, but all products exhibited hit ratios of greater than 0.56. A greater proportion of landslides were predicted when including only manually verified landslide locations. We recommend practitioners consider low‐latency products like MRMS for investigating landslides, given their near‐real time data availability and good performance in detecting landslides. Practitioners would be well‐served considering more than one product as a way to confirm intense storm signals and minimize the influence of noise and false alarms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8361727
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83617272021-08-17 A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events Culler, Elsa S. Badger, Andrew M. Minear, Justin Toby Tiampo, Kristy F. Zeigler, Spencer D. Livneh, Ben Hydrol Process Impacts of Observational Uncertainty on Analysis and Modelling of Hydrological Processes Extreme precipitation can have profound consequences for communities, resulting in natural hazards such as rainfall‐triggered landslides that cause casualties and extensive property damage. A key challenge to understanding and predicting rainfall‐triggered landslides comes from observational uncertainties in the depth and intensity of precipitation preceding the event. Practitioners and researchers must select from a wide range of precipitation products, often with little guidance. Here we evaluate the degree of precipitation uncertainty across multiple precipitation products for a large set of landslide‐triggering storm events and investigate the impact of these uncertainties on predicted landslide probability using published intensity–duration thresholds. The average intensity, peak intensity, duration, and NOAA‐Atlas return periods are compared ahead of 177 reported landslides across the continental United States and Canada. Precipitation data are taken from four products that cover disparate measurement methods: near real‐time and post‐processed satellite (IMERG), radar (MRMS), and gauge‐based (NLDAS‐2). Landslide‐triggering precipitation was found to vary widely across precipitation products with the depth of individual storm events diverging by as much as 296 mm with an average range of 51 mm. Peak intensity measurements, which are typically influential in triggering landslides, were also highly variable with an average range of 7.8 mm/h and as much as 57 mm/h. The two products more reliant upon ground‐based observations (MRMS and NLDAS‐2) performed better at identifying landslides according to published intensity–duration storm thresholds, but all products exhibited hit ratios of greater than 0.56. A greater proportion of landslides were predicted when including only manually verified landslide locations. We recommend practitioners consider low‐latency products like MRMS for investigating landslides, given their near‐real time data availability and good performance in detecting landslides. Practitioners would be well‐served considering more than one product as a way to confirm intense storm signals and minimize the influence of noise and false alarms. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-07-14 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8361727/ /pubmed/34413571 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14260 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Hydrological Processes published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Impacts of Observational Uncertainty on Analysis and Modelling of Hydrological Processes
Culler, Elsa S.
Badger, Andrew M.
Minear, Justin Toby
Tiampo, Kristy F.
Zeigler, Spencer D.
Livneh, Ben
A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title_full A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title_fullStr A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title_full_unstemmed A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title_short A multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
title_sort multi‐sensor evaluation of precipitation uncertainty for landslide‐triggering storm events
topic Impacts of Observational Uncertainty on Analysis and Modelling of Hydrological Processes
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8361727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34413571
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14260
work_keys_str_mv AT cullerelsas amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT badgerandrewm amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT minearjustintoby amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT tiampokristyf amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT zeiglerspencerd amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT livnehben amultisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT cullerelsas multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT badgerandrewm multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT minearjustintoby multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT tiampokristyf multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT zeiglerspencerd multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents
AT livnehben multisensorevaluationofprecipitationuncertaintyforlandslidetriggeringstormevents