Are floods really increasing? A case study from Krishna River Basin, India
By Paul Homewood
We often hear that floods are getting worse everywhere, but there is rarely any actual data supplied to prove it. Instead all we get is “proof” from climate models.
Here, a highly detailed study of one river basin in India concludes that floods are not increasing:
Abstract
With increased awareness and discussions about climate variability and climate change, backed up by several global-regional climate circulation-prediction models, it is often said that hydrological extremes are increasing. The present study analyzed the historical floods in Krishna River Basin (KRB) using observed streamflow and precipitation records along with published reports, including news articles, to corroborate, “are the floods increasing in KRB”?
The methodology involved quantitative and qualitative analysis of floods in KRB at the subsystem scale (K1 to K12). The quantitative analysis involved i) Development of unregulated flow series through hydrological modelling, ii) Frequency analysis of unregulated flows and precipitation, iii) Threshold selection for defining the small, medium, and large floods, iv) Identification of flood events in observed streamflow series and v) Identification of causal rainfall and its relationship with flood peak.
The qualitative analysis focused on published reports and news articles to discover multiple aspects of flood characteristics and losses. The study concluded that floods are neither increasing nor decreasing for most subsystems of KRB except K7 (Lower Krishna Basin), where floods are decreasing. Cyclic patterns analogous to Noah and Joseph effect are seen in the case of small floods for all the subsystems except K7, whereas single-year extremes affecting the entire series similar to Noah and Joseph erratic behaviour have been observed in medium and large floods except the K12 subbasin (Munneru Basin). The study confirms that qualitative analysis cannot determine the trend in floods as every event in the historical record is uniquely described, covering different dimensions ranging from various flood characteristics, losses, short and long-term impacts.
This study can provide a guideline to identify changes in floods, especially in basins with altered hydrologic regimes. This shall provide crucial information to the administrators to restructure and develop ameliorative policies for flood management.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666592123000677
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
It’s not even worth commenting on. The alarmists will simply ignore it, the BBC,ABC, NPR, Guardian etc won’t report it and it will be consigned to the “misinformation “ category.
I have just made an enquiry to the BBC for them to define the term “climate misinformation” after it appeared in three separate articles on the same day. I hopefully will post their response IF(?) I get one.
Simple – anything they don’t like.
But what about the”Torygraph”? Since the Barclays had it snatched away, it seems to be dithering a bit.
I am a big picture kind of guy.
So the planet is getting warmer. So what? Would the catastrophists prefer it to be cooling?
That asininity aside, just because it may be warming and precipitation overall should be increasing as a consequence that consequence does not offers any indication of cause which the word weasels deliberately gloss over and avoid and no wonder. This is because the “science” or is it cyense that the cretinous and the dubious spout about does not exist because to have science there MUST be statistically significant empirical data and no models do not produce empirical data. There is no statistically significant empirical data tying 1. CO2 to surface temperature change and 2. Man liberating CO2 back into the Carbon Cycle having been measured in anyway showing it is responsible for all or an identified part of the current welcome warming.
There is no climate crisis, man made or otherwise. What there is, is a truth crisis because bad actors need project climate fear (among their other nasty little schemes) to get us all to accept handing over more control over our increasingly besieged lives.
Those famous and erudite climate scientists Emma Thomson and Richard Curtis say there is a climate crisis so there must be one!
Do you not find it telling that we NEVER have real scientists standing up and defending…their pro AGM “science”! The fact that we are treated to a clown show of celebrities and weasel politicians big and small spouting baseless claims unchallenged should tell anyone that this is a crock of smelly brown stuff.
“because to have science there MUST be statistically significant empirical data and no models do not produce empirical data.
And that’s why you’ll never make a “climate scientist”, pmfb!
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
~ Prof. Chris Folland ~ (Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research)
Straight from the horse’s mouth!
With all the fiddling of the data, UHI, dodgy weatherstation locations can we be really sure that it is actually warming?
‘Here, a highly detailed study of one river basin in India concludes that floods are not increasing’
Don’t bite on this logic trap! Should floods be increasing, it wouldn’t matter, either.
The “See, floods aren’t increasing!” argument leaves you in a pickle if they start increasing.
It’s just weather. Weather changes. Up. Down.
I just became of a few lefties tweeting a 2021 graphic based on 2020 data
“Bad news for wild swimmers! UK is ranked LAST in Europe for bathing water quality, new report claims”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9644789/UK-ranked-Europe-bathing-water-quality.html
The fact was it the research was a farce
It was a Covid year
And the reason why the UK seemed to have a low number of its river swims marked as high quality
is that 80% were not sampled .. so given zero
The text says of 640 monitored bathing sites, 457 were not sampled that year