the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Assessing economic impacts of future GLOFs in Nepal’s Everest region under different SSP scenarios using three-dimensional simulations
Abstract. This study investigates simulated glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) at five glacial lakes in the Everest region of Nepal using the three-dimensional model OpenFOAM. It presents the evolution of GLOF characteristics in the 21st century considering different moraine breach scenarios and two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways scenarios. The results demonstrate that in low-magnitude scenarios, the five lakes generate GLOFs that inundate between 0.35 and 2.23 km2 of agricultural land with an average water depth of 0.9 to 3.58 meters. These GLOFs reach distances of 59 to 84 km, affect 30 to 88 km of roads, and inundate 183 to 1,699 buildings with 1.2 to 4.9 m of water. In higher scenarios, GLOFs can extend over 100 km and also affect larger settlements in the foothills. Between 80 and 100 km of roads, between 735 and 1,989 houses and between 0.85 and 3.52 km2 of agricultural land could be inundated, with average water depths of up to 10 meters. The high precision of the 3D flood modeling, with detailed simulations of turbulence and viscosity, provides valuable insights into 21st-century GLOF evolution, supporting more accurate risk assessments and effective adaptation strategies.
- Preprint
(2471 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(268 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 15 Apr 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-50', Adam Emmer, 21 Mar 2025
reply
This study models potential future GLOFs from three existing and two future glacial lakes in Nepal. This study brings novelty while integrating OpenFOAM modelling with SSP scenarios. The study details the impacts of potential GLOF scenarios on people and infrastructure while it fails to justify some of the basic assumptions.
Strikingly, the breach scenarios (Table 1) are defined regardless moraine dam geometry, physical limits of breach development, internal structure and possibly overdeepened bedrock terrain. Why 30, 60 and 90 m? Why not 20, 40 or 60 m? Or 10, 20 and 30 m? It is important to highlight that anyhow sophisticated modelling outcomes are totally dependent on rather arbitrary definition of these breach scenarios. It is also important to highlight that these scenarios have different probabilities for individual studied lakes and that some are not even realistic.
Now what is called BR1 (lower boundary; 30 m breach depth) is already pretty harsh scenario and the term “lower boundary” is misleading in this context. How many examples of 30 m deep breaches do we have from lakes of similar size and topographic setting? I don't think about many. The BR2 (upper boundary; 60 m breach depth) is not only unlikely but also unrealistic for lakes with flat and wide dam geometry (such as Imja which dam height is 55 m, according to 10.5194/hess-29-733-2025 or 35 m according to 10.5194/hess-19-1401-2015).
For a comparison, the breach which developed during the 2023 South Lhonak GLOF – the largest GLOF from a moraine-dammed lake in High Mountain Asia in past decades – is 55 m deep (see 10.1126/science.ads2659). The use of as extreme scenario as BR3 (90 m breach depth) needs special justification on a case-by-case basis.
In conclusion, in the study of 5 lakes, breach scenarios should rather be tailored to specific dam properties of individual studied lakes and I encourage the authors to address this issue (I recommend major revisions). Thank you.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-50-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
74 | 18 | 2 | 94 | 29 | 2 | 2 |
- HTML: 74
- PDF: 18
- XML: 2
- Total: 94
- Supplement: 29
- BibTeX: 2
- EndNote: 2
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1