not representative of present or future climate
conditions?
Winter mean T in Helsinki (1961-2008)
1961-
20081961-
1990
Temperature (°C)
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
-12 4
Simplest case: change in mean climate,
with no change in the magnitude of variability
If variability changes as well, the two tails of the distribution
(e.g., warm and cold) will be affected differently.
IPCC (2001
/media/ces/RaisanenJouni_CES_2010.pdf
)
Best case (1.5 C increase; 2%
increase in prec)
BAU A B
Change +30 % C D
Scenario
combination
Impact
Adaptation measures
North South North South
A *
CC: Possible increase in the
amount of snow more
snow clearing increase in
operational costs
S-E: increase in traffic
volume increased wear of
roads increase in
maintenance cost.
**
CC: Possibly less snow,
more rain
/media/loftslag/Group3-The-future-of-the-Finnish-national-road-network.pdf
telecommunication
Accommodation (GPS coordinates) and other places you plan to visit/stop at
Few words about the equipment
Plan B
Travellers can leave their travel plan with ICE-SAR, provided it includes a contact or relative whose responsibility is to alert ICE-SAR if the travellers do not arrive at the right time. ICE-SAR also provides a more extensive service with shared responsibility
/about-imo/news/nr/2497
coordinates) and other places you plan to visit/stop at
Few words about the equipment
Plan B
Travellers can leave their travel plan with ICE-SAR, provided it includes a contact or relative whose responsibility is to alert ICE-SAR if the travellers do not arrive at the right time. ICE-SAR also provides a more extensive service with trip monitoring as an option within the travel plan
/about-imo/news/nr/2707
Grímsvötn volcano
Status Report: 17:00 GMT, 1 November 2010
Icelandic Meteorological Office and Institute of Earth Sciences, University of Iceland
Compiled by: Thorunn Skaftadottir, Egill Axelsson, Rikke Pedersen,
Gunnar B. Gudmundsson and Matthew J. Roberts.
Based on: IMO seismic monitoring; IES-IMO GPS monitoring; IMO hydrological data.
Meltwater: On 29 October, water
/media/vatnafar/flod/Grimsvotn_status_2010-11-01_IES_IMO.pdf
Eruption in Eyjafjallajökull
Status Report: 12:00 GMT, 4 June 2010
Icelandic Meteorological Office and Institute of Earth Sciences, University
of Iceland
Compiled by: Gunnar B. Guðmundsson, Teitur Arason, Hrafn Guðmundsson, Ármann
Höskuldsson and Sigrún Hreinsdóttir
Based on: IMO seismic monitoring; IES-IMO GPS monitoring; IMO hydrological data;
web cameras, ATDnet – UK Met. Offices
/media/jar/Eyjafjallajokull_status_2010-06-04_IES_IMO.pdf
of possible future scenarios may identify the weakest
links within the system, and help define and prioritize mitigation efforts to minimize floodings.
References
Bates, B., Kundzewicz, Z. W., Wu, S., & Palutikof, J. (Eds.). (2008). Climate Change and Water. Technical
Paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC Secretariat.
Jónas Elíasson. (1999). The deriviation of IDF
/media/loftslag/Abstract_Impacts_of_Climate_Change_on_Stormwater_Systems_in_Reykjavik.pdf
but the uncertainty range is large. We are looking two cases: worst case (+4 C degrees
increase) and best case (1.5 C increase). Increase in prec: more rain in the winter
Decrease in the predictability of weather
Natural variability
ii. Socioeconomics
a. Change in traffic volume
b. BAU
Ten-year time steps
National main roads
Geographic area: The whole country
Fig. 3
/media/loftslag/Group3-Road-scenarios.pdf