Abstract

Our paper aims to improve flood forecasting by establishing whether a global hydrological forecast system could be used as an alternative to a regional system, or whether it could provide additional information. This paper was based on the operational Global Flood Awareness System (GloFAS) of the European Commission Copernicus Emergency Management Service, as well as on a regional hydrological forecast system named RHFS, which was created with observations recorded in the Wangjiaba river basin in China. We compared the discharge simulations of the two systems, and tested the influence of input. Then the discharge ensemble forecasts were evaluated for lead times of 1–7 d, and the impact on the forecasts of errors in initialization and modelling were considered. We also used quantile mapping (QM) to post-process the discharge simulations and forecasts. The results showed: (1) GloFAS (KGE of 0.54) had a worse discharge simulation than RHFS (KGE of 0.88), mainly because of the poor quality of the input; (2) the average forecast skill of GloFAS (CRPSS about 0.2) was inferior to that of RHFS (CRPSS about 0.6), because of the errors in the initialization and the model, however, GloFAS had a higher forecast quality than RHFS at high flow with longer lead times; (3) QM performed well at eliminating errors in input, the model, and the initialization.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call