Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-jzjqj Total loading time: 0.563 Render date: 2022-08-16T10:52:15.389Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true
Climate Extremes and Society Climate Extremes and Society
Buy print or eBook[Opens in a new window]

Book contents

11 - Integrating hurricane loss models with climate models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2009

By
Charles C. Watson Jr.  and
Mark E. Johnson
Edited by
Henry F. Diaz  and
Richard J. Murnane
Charles C. Watson Jr.
Affiliation:
Kinetic Analysis Corporation, 330, Columbus Drive, Savannah, GA 31405, USA
Mark E. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816-2370, USA
Henry F. Diaz
Affiliation:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, District of Columbia
Richard J. Murnane
Affiliation:
Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Garrett Park, Maryland
Get access

Summary

Condensed summary

Hurricane loss modeling has become an important if not vital aspect of many elements of hurricane planning, especially in the financial sector. The insurance industry has provided financial motivation for the development of complex hurricane damage and loss models. These models rely on a number of databases and model subcomponents that interact in complex ways, the most critical of which is hurricane climatology. The required hurricane climatology is developed through various analyses of the historical record. Unfortunately, there are numerous issues with the historical record that make detailed analysis of that record problematic, such as the length of the record, the quality of the observations, and the potential that the record is complicated by natural or anthropogenic climate signals. As climate modeling continues to advance, there is increasing potential for the use of these models to drive loss models, overcoming many of the limitations of the existing historical record. Here we describe the results of a study conducted for the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology (FCHLPM), a part of which was an assessment of historical hurricane climatology, and the potential for the use of general circulation climate models in driving loss models for both existing and future climates. The Community Climate System Model (CCSM) was used to drive a mesoscale model, which in turn was used to create inputs to an ensemble of loss models.

Type
Chapter
Information
Climate Extremes and Society , pp. 209 - 224
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Purchase

Buy Book

Buy print or eBook[Opens in a new window]

References

Brand, S., Rabe, K., and Laevastu, T. (1977). Parameterization characteristics of a wind-wave tropical cyclone model for the western North Pacific Ocean. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 7, 739–46.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camargo, S., Barnston, A., and Zebiak, S. (2005). A statistical assessment of tropical cyclone activity in atmospheric general circulation models. Tellus, 57A, 589–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, K. M. (1986). A formal approach to catastrophe risk assessment and management. Proceedings of the Casualty Actuarial Society, Vol. LXXIII, No. 140, November.Google Scholar
Clark, K. M. (1997). Current and potential impact of hurricane variability on the insurance industry. In Hurricanes, Climate and Socioeconomic Impacts, ed. Diaz, H. F. and Pulwarty, R. S.. New York: Springer, pp. 273–83.Google Scholar
Emanuel, K. (2005a). Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature, 436, 686–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emanuel, K. (2005b). Emanuel replies. Nature, 438, E13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, D. G. (1984). Natural hazard risk assessment for an insurance program. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, 9(30).Google Scholar
Grell, G. A., Dudhia, J., and Stauffer, D. R. (1993). A Description of the Fifth-Generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5). NCAR Technical Note, NCAR/TN-398 + STR.
Ho, F. P., Su, J. C., Hanevich, K. L., Smith, R. J., and Richards, F. P. (1987). Hurricane Climatology for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States. NOAA Technical Report NWS 38, Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency.Google Scholar
Iman, R. L., Johnson, M. E., and Watson, C. Jr. (2005a). Sensitivity analysis for computer model projections of hurricane losses. Risk Analysis, 25, 1277–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iman, R. L., Johnson, M. E., and Watson, C. Jr. (2005b). Uncertainty analysis for computer model projections of hurricane losses. Risk Analysis, 25, 1299–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iman, R. L., Johnson, M. E., and Watson, C. Jr. (2006). Statistical aspects of forecasting and planning for hurricanes. The American Statistician, 60, 105–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvinen, B. R., Newman, C., and Davis, M. (1984). A Tropical Cyclone Data Tape for the North Atlantic Basin, 1886–1983: Contents, Limitations, and Uses. NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS NHC 22, Coral Gables, Florida.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. E., and Watson, C. Jr. (1999). Hurricane return period estimation. Proceedings of the Tenth Symposium on Global Change Studies, Dallas, Texas, pp. 478–9.Google Scholar
Landsea, C. (2005). Hurricanes and global warming. Brief communications arising in Nature, 438, E11–E13, with a reply from K. Emanuel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oouchi, K., Yoshimura, J., Yoshimura, H., et al. (2006). Tropical cyclone climatology in a global-warming climate as simulated in a 20 km-mesh global atmospheric model: frequency and wind intensity analyses. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan, 84(2), 259–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielke, R. A. Jr. (2005). Are there trends in hurricane destruction? Brief communications arising in Nature, 438, E12, with a reply from K. Emanuel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, M. D., Soukup, G., Cocke, S., et al. (2005). State of Florida Hurricane Loss Projection Model: atmospheric science component. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 93, 651–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, C. R., and Schrader, A. J. (2000). The Automated Tropical Cyclone Forecasting System (Version 3.2). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 81, 1231–40.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwerdt, R., Ho, F., and Watkins, R. (1979). Meteorological Criteria for Standard Project Hurricane and Probable Maximum Hurricane Wind Fields, Gulf and East Coasts of the United States. NOAA Technical Report NWS 23, Silver Spring, Maryland: National Weather Service.Google Scholar
Tenerelli, J. E., and Chen, S. S. (2001). High-resolution simulation of Hurricane Floyd (1999) using MM5 with a vortex following mesh refinement. Preprints, 14th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, July 30–August 2, 2001, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, American Meteorological Society, J54–J56.Google Scholar
Vickery, P. J., Skerlj, P. F., and Twisdale, L. A. (2000). Simulation of hurricane risk in the U.S. using Empirical Track Model. Journal of Structural Engineering, 126, 1222–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, C. Jr., and Johnson, M. (2004). Hurricane loss estimation models: opportunities for improving the state of the art. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 85, 1713–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, C., Jr., and Johnson, M. (2006). Assessment of Computer Generated Loss Costs in Florida. Report to the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology.
Watson, C. Jr, Johnson, M., and Simons, M. (2004). Insurance rate filings and hurricane loss estimation models. Journal of Insurance Research, 22, 39–64.Google Scholar
Wu, G., and Lau, N. C. (1992). A GCM simulation of the relationship between tropical storm formation and ENSO. Monthly Weather Review, 120, 958–77.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4
Cited by

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×