An official website of the United States government
Conventional computational models of climate adaptation frameworks inadequately consider decision-makers’ capacity to learn, update, and improve decisions. Here, we investigate the potential of reinforcement learning (RL), a machine learning technique that efficaciously acquires knowledge from the environment and systematically optimizes dynamic decisions, in modeling and informing adaptive climate decision-making. We consider coastal flood risk mitigations for Manhattan, New York City, USA (NYC), illustrating the benefit of continuously incorporating observations of sea-level rise into systematic designs of adaptive strategies. We find that when designing adaptive seawalls to protect NYC, the RL-derived strategy significantly reduces the expected net cost by 6 to 36% under the moderate emissions scenario SSP2-4.5 (9 to 77% under the high emissions scenario SSP5-8.5), compared to conventional methods. When considering multiple adaptive policies, including accomodation and retreat as well as protection, the RL approach leads to a further 5% (15%) cost reduction, showing RL’s flexibility in coordinatively addressing complex policy design problems. RL also outperforms conventional methods in controlling tail risk (i.e., low probability, high impact outcomes) and in avoiding losses induced by misinformation about the climate state (e.g., deep uncertainty), demonstrating the importance of systematic learning and updating in addressing extremes and uncertainties related to climate adaptation.
more »
« less
A Flood Damage Allowance Framework for Coastal Protection With Deep Uncertainty in Sea Level Rise
Abstract Deep uncertainty describes situations when there is either ignorance or disagreement over (1) models used to describe key system processes and (2) probability distributions used to characterize the uncertainty of key variables and parameters. Future projections of Antarctic ice sheet (AIS) mass loss remain characterized by deep uncertainty. This complicates decisions on long‐lived coastal protection projects when determining what margin of safety to implement. If the chosen margin of safety does not properly account for uncertainties in sea level rise, the effectiveness of flood protection could decrease over time, potentially putting lives and properties at a greater risk. To address this issue, we develop a flood damage allowance framework for calculating the height of a flood protection strategy needed to ensure that a given level of financial risk is maintained. The damage allowance framework considers decision maker preferences such as planning horizons, protection strategies, and subjective views of AIS stability. We use Manhattan—with the population and built environment fixed in time—to illustrate how our framework could be used to calculate a range of damage allowances based on multiple plausible scenarios of AIS melt. Under high greenhouse gas emissions, we find that results are sensitive to the selection of the upper limit of AIS contributions to sea level rise. Design metrics that specify financial risk targets, such as expected flood damage, allow for the calculation of avoided flood damages (i.e., benefits) that can be combined with estimates of construction cost and then integrated into existing financial decision‐making approaches (e.g., benefit‐cost analysis).
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1663807
- PAR ID:
- 10373614
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Earth's Future
- Volume:
- 8
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2328-4277
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The first New Jersey Science and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP) on Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Storms was convened by Rutgers University on behalf of the NJ Climate Change Alliance in 2015, culminating in a 2016 report that identified planning options for practitioners to enhance the resilience of New Jersey’s people, places, and assets to sea-level rise, coastal storms, and the resulting flood risk (Kopp et al., 2016). An innovative approach used to inform the 2016 report was the complementary convening of a panel of practitioners to offer insights on the application of the STAP science to state and local planning and decision-making. Following the same process, the same team at Rutgers University was engaged by the State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to update the 2016 report based on the most current scientific information. Similar to the inaugural work, the 2019 STAP was charged with identifying and evaluating the most current science on sea-level rise projections and changing coastal storms, considering the implications for the practices and policies of local and regional stakeholders, and providing practical options for stakeholders to incorporate science into risk-based decision processes.more » « less
-
Rising waters and land subsidence are increasing relative sea levels in western and northern Alaska, forcing communities to relocate or armor in place. To appropriately plan and make equitable decisions, there is a need to forecast the risk of flood exposure in coastal Alaskan communities and to evaluate methods to mitigate that risk. This paper conducts use-inspired science to evaluate the current and future flood exposure of roads in Hooper Bay, Alaska, proposes a unit cost of flood exposure to estimate the cost of flooding, and compares various mitigation efforts including elevating roads and building dikes. Nine historic storms and their associated flood depths were subject to return-period analysis and modeled for several sea level rise scenarios. Based on the simulated road flood exposure (km hours/storm), and the storm-return period, an annual flood exposure (km hours/year) was computed. Then, the unit cost of flood exposure (USD/km hours) was determined as the ratio of the cost of flood mitigation (USD/year) to the annual flood exposure mitigated by the project. The analysis found that the unit cost of flood exposure, in conjunction with flood exposure calculations, does provide an approximate flood risk calculation, though a unitized cost of flood exposure needs to be divided into lump sum costs and materials costs. The analysis also found that dikes may be a more cost-effective alternative than road elevation. The flood risk calculation, based on the unit cost of flood exposure, could be made for all of the communities in a given region to identify those communities that face a high flood risk. Furthermore, if one divides the unit cost of flood exposure by the population, one obtains a cost/benefit ratio that potentially could be used to prioritize flood mitigation work.more » « less
-
Abstract Sea‐level rise and associated flood hazards pose severe risks to the millions of people globally living in coastal zones. Models representing coastal adaptation and impacts are important tools to inform the design of strategies to manage these risks. Representing the often deep uncertainties influencing these risks poses nontrivial challenges. A common uncertainty characterization approach is to use a few benchmark cases to represent the range and relative probabilities of the set of possible outcomes. This has been done in coastal adaptation studies, for example, by using low, moderate, and high percentiles of an input of interest, like sea‐level changes. A key consideration is how this simplified characterization of uncertainty influences the distributions of estimated coastal impacts. Here, we show that using only a few benchmark percentiles to represent uncertainty in future sea‐level change can lead to overconfident projections and underestimate high‐end risks as compared to using full ensembles for sea‐level change and socioeconomic parametric uncertainties. When uncertainty in future sea level is characterized by low, moderate, and high percentiles of global mean sea‐level rise, estimates of high‐end (95th percentile) damages are underestimated by between 18% (SSP1‐2.6) and 46% (SSP5‐8.5). Additionally, using the 5th and 95th percentiles of sea‐level scenarios underestimates the 5%–95% width of the distribution of adaptation costs by a factor ranging from about two to four, depending on SSP‐RCP pathway. The resulting underestimation of the uncertainty range in adaptation costs can bias adaptation and mitigation decision‐making.more » « less
-
Climate-driven sea-level rise is increasing the frequency of coastal flooding worldwide, exacerbated locally by factors like land subsidence from groundwater and resource extraction. However, a process rarely considered in future sea-level rise scenarios is sudden (over minutes) land subsidence associated with great (>M8) earthquakes, which can exceed 1 m. Along the Washington, Oregon, and northern California coasts, the next great Cascadia subduction zone earthquake could cause up to 2 m of sudden coastal subsidence, dramatically raising sea level, expanding floodplains, and increasing the flood risk to local communities. Here, we quantify the potential expansion of the 1 % floodplain (i.e., the area with an annual flood risk of 1%) under low (~0.5 m), medium (~1 m), and high (~2 m) earthquake-driven subsidence scenarios at 24 Cascadia estuaries. If a great earthquake occurred today, floodplains could expand by 90 km² (low), 160 km² (medium), or 300 km² (high subsidence), more than doubling the flooding exposure of residents, structures, and roads under the high subsidence scenario. By 2100, when climate-driven sea-level rise will compound the hazard, a great earthquake could expand floodplains by 170 km² (low), 240 km² (medium), or 370 km² (high subsidence), more than tripling the flooding exposure of residents, structures, and roads under the high subsidence scenario compared to the 2023 floodplain. Our findings can support decision makers and coastal communities along the Cascadia subduction zone as they prepare for compound hazards from earthquake-cycle and climate-driven sea-level rise, and provide critical insights for tectonically active coastlines globally.more » « less
