<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NHESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NHESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1684-9981</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/nhess-22-1863-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Generating reliable estimates of tropical-cyclone-induced coastal hazards along the Bay of Bengal for current and future <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>climates using synthetic tracks</article-title><alt-title>Generating reliable estimates of tropical-cyclone-induced hazards</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Generating reliable estimates of tropical-cyclone-induced hazards}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{T.~W.~B.~Leijnse~et~al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Leijnse</surname><given-names>Tim Willem Bart</given-names></name>
          <email>tim.leijnse@deltares.nl</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1873-3387</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Giardino</surname><given-names>Alessio</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8744-5886</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Nederhoff</surname><given-names>Kees</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0552-3428</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Caires</surname><given-names>Sofia</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8201-8313</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Deltares, Delft, 2600MH, the Netherlands</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Deltares USA, 8601 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Asian Development Bank, 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550, Metro Manila, the Philippines</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Tim Willem Bart Leijnse (tim.leijnse@deltares.nl)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>7</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>1863</fpage><lpage>1891</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>21</day><month>June</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>28</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>7</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>7</day><month>July</month><year>2021</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e124">Deriving reliable estimates of design water levels and wave conditions resulting from tropical cyclones is a challenging problem of high relevance
for, among other things, coastal and offshore engineering projects and risk assessment studies. Tropical cyclone geometry and wind speeds have been
recorded for the past few decades only, thus resulting in poorly reliable estimates of the extremes, especially in regions characterized by a
low number of past tropical cyclone events. In this paper, this challenge is overcome by using synthetic tropical cyclone tracks and wind fields
generated by the open-source tool TCWiSE (Tropical Cyclone Wind Statistical Estimation Tool) to create thousands of realizations representative of
1000 years of tropical cyclone activity for the Bay of Bengal. Each of these realizations is used to force coupled storm surge and wave
simulations by means of the processed-based Delft3D Flexible Mesh Suite. It is shown that the use of synthetic tracks provides reliable estimates of
the statistics of the first-order hazard (i.e., wind speed) compared to the statistics derived for historical tropical cyclones. Based on estimated
wind fields, second-order hazards (i.e., storm surge and waves) are computed that are generated by the first-order hazard of wind. The estimates of
the extreme values derived for wind speed, wave height and storm surge are shown to converge within the 1000 years of simulated cyclone
tracks. Comparing second-order hazard estimates based on historical and synthetic tracks shows that, for this case study, the use of historical
tracks (a deterministic approach) leads to an underestimation of the mean computed storm surge of up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>30 %. Differences between the use of
synthetic versus historical tracks are characterized by a large spatial variability along the Bay of Bengal, where regions with a lower probability
of occurrence of tropical cyclones show the largest difference in predicted storm surge and wave heights. In addition, the use of historical tracks
leads to much larger uncertainty bands in the estimation of both storm surges and wave heights, with confidence intervals being <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>80 % larger
compared to those estimated by using synthetic tracks (probabilistic approach). Based on the same tropical cyclone realizations, the effect that
changes in tropical cyclone frequency and intensity, possibly resulting from climate change, may have on modeled storm surge and wave heights was
computed. As a proof of concept, an increase in tropical cyclone frequency of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>25.6 % and wind intensity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.6 %, based on literature
values and without accounting for uncertainties in future climate projection, was estimated to possibly result in an increase in storm surge and
wave heights of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11 % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>9 %, respectively. This suggests that climate change could increase tropical-cyclone-induced coastal hazards
more than just the actual increase in maximum wind speeds.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e179">Tropical cyclones (TCs) are among the most destructive natural hazards worldwide. Over the last 2 centuries, it is estimated that 1.9 million people
have lost their lives as a result of TCs worldwide (Shultz et al., 2005; Nicholls et al., 1995). While only about 7 % of the global TCs form in the
Indian Ocean, associated damage and casualties surrounding this ocean basin are much larger than in any other region. Between 1960–2004 it is
estimated that more than half a million inhabitants of Bangladesh died because of TCs (Shultz et al., 2005). The recent Cyclone Amphan (2020) showed
that strong TCs still occur in the Bay of Bengal (BoB), where the direct impact has however been mitigated through early warning systems, cyclone
shelters and embankments.</p>
      <p id="d1e182">A challenge in several coastal engineering applications consists in the determination of reliable estimates of design water levels and wave conditions
resulting from these TCs, for both present and future climate scenarios. The estimation of design values resulting from TCs is often based on a limited
number of recorded historical tropical cyclones (HTCs) in a given region (for the BoB see, e.g., Chiu and Small, 2016; Dube et al., 2009). This results
in a large statistical uncertainty in estimating the first-order hazards resulting from TCs (e.g., wind speeds) due to the limited number of
observations at a certain location. One approach to overcome this is by using synthetic tropical cyclones (STCs) based on the statistics of the
properties of observed HTCs. The Tropical Cyclone Wind Statistical Estimation Tool (TCWiSE; Nederhoff et al., 2021) can, for example, be used to
generate numerous synthetic tracks. These synthetic tracks allow for the creation of a much longer-term dataset than what is otherwise available through HTC tracks
only and can be used to calculate more reliable estimates of first-order hazards. Subsequently, these STCs can then be modeled using hydrodynamic
and wave models to generate better estimates of second-order hazards like storm surge and wave heights that are generated by the first-order hazard of
wind. Other datasets and methods to generate STCs are those of Vickery et al. (2000), Hardy et al. (2003), James and Mason (2005), Emanuel
et al. (2006, 2008), Haigh et al. (2014), Nakajo et al. (2014), Lee et al. (2018), and Bloemendaal et al. (2020). Hereby, the literature so far has
mainly focused on deriving STC tracks and corresponding wind and pressure fields. Some work has been done exploring the effect of using these to
derive offshore extremes for storm surge and wave heights compared to considering HTCs only (e.g., Meza-Padilla et al., 2015; Appendini et al., 2017)
but with focus on different regions than the BoB (e.g., Australia – Haigh et al., 2014; Mexico – Meza-Padilla et al., 2015; northern Pacific Ocean – Mori and Takemi, 2016; Mori et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2020; or the USA – Lin et al., 2012; Appendini et al., 2017; Marsooli et al., 2019) or without taking waves into account, which is found to be an important factor leading to flooding in the northern BoB
(Krien et al., 2017) and arguably worldwide.</p>
      <p id="d1e185">The effects that climate change and global warming have on TCs are subject to scientific debate. As discussed in Knutson et al. (2010), this is related
to the large temporal fluctuations in TC frequency and intensity, making it difficult to derive reliable trends. Recent work has shown that, globally,
a statistically significant trend towards an increase in TC intensity can be found (Kossin et al., 2020). According to Knutson et al. (2010), future
projections indicate an increase towards stronger storms of 2 %–11 % by 2100 and a decrease in the globally averaged frequency of TCs by
6 %–34 %, with a large variation between models and different basins. These general findings were confirmed in the modeling study by Knutson
et al. (2015). The authors assessed, by means of CMIP5 model ensembles, the possible changes in TC frequency and intensity under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 for the late
twenty-first century compared to the period 1982–2005. Large differences between basins were depicted in the modeling study. For the north Indian
Ocean (NIO) basin, an increase in TC frequency was estimated to be equal to 25.6 % for TCs of categories 1–5. The increase was even larger for TCs of
categories 4–5 (200 %, although the change is marked as not being statistically significant). An increase in intensification of TCs in the NIO
during the last few decades has already been reported by several authors (Webster, 2005; Singh et al., 2001; Singh, 2007; Deo et al., 2011; Kishtawal
et al., 2012). According to Knutson et al. (2015), this increase in intensity was estimated to be 1.6 % for TCs of categories 1–5. Nevertheless,
the values described by different authors suggest a large scatter, making it difficult to derive statistically robust trends and conclusions. In
combination with sea level rise, an increase in TC intensity will lead to significant and amplified increases in flood risk (Karim and Mimura, 2008).</p>
      <p id="d1e188">In this study, TCWiSE was applied in combination with the hydrodynamic Delft3D Flexible Mesh Suite (Delft3D FM; Kernkamp et al., 2011) and the coupled
wave model SWAN (Booij et al., 1999) to estimate storm surge and wave conditions along the BoB. TCWiSE was extended to be able to derive estimates
for present and future scenarios, therefore accounting for the possible influence of climate change. In particular, downscaled projections of TC
frequency and intensity based on Knutson et al. (2015) were used as input to the modeling study. Estimates of extreme storm surge and wave conditions
were derived along the BoB (4000<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in total) at an alongshore resolution of 5–25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> following the coastal segments of the DIVA
database (Vafeidis et al., 2008). Derived estimates can be used as boundary conditions for the
estimation of present and future hazards and risks resulting from TC events for the entire region and the conceptual design of suitable mitigation
options, in combination with higher-resolution local models. The methodology and tool are generic and can in principle be applied to any location
worldwide that is exposed to TCs.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e218">List of countries, regions/states/provinces (abbreviation in parentheses) and coastal cities for further detailed analyses. Charchenga is sometimes also referred to as Charchanga (e.g., in Mamnun et al., 2020).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Country</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Regions/states/provinces</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Coastal cities for</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">detailed analysis</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sri Lanka</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Batticaloa</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">India</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tamil Nadu (TN)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Chennai</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Andhra Pradesh (AP)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Visakhapatnam</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Odisha and West Bengal (OWB)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Puri</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Andaman and Nicobar Islands (ANI)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Port Blair</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bangladesh</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Khulna and Barisal (KB)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Charchenga</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Chittagong (CH)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Chittagong</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Myanmar</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Rakhine and Ayeyarwady (RA)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sittwe</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Yangon and Mon (YM)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Mawlamyine</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Data and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Study area</title>
      <p id="d1e379">The BoB is the northeastern part of the NIO, bounded to the southwest by Sri Lanka, to the west and northwest by India, to the north by Bangladesh,
and to the east by Myanmar. Within the bay lie the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (see “ANI” in Fig. 1). The different countries and regions considered
in the study are described in Table 1. Per region, one representative location is included for further analysis and shown in Fig. 1 (“Coastal
cities”). The entire Bay of Bengal, in particular the northern part, is highly affected by TCs. Extreme sea levels around the bay, including
maximum tidal levels and storm surge, increase towards Bangladesh as a result of the bay geometry and the shallow continental shelf (Fig. 1 and Muis
et al., 2016).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e384">Map of the Bay of Bengal with satellite image (Esri) and bed elevation (GEBCO; Becker et al., 2009) including locations of output points for detailed analysis at different coastal cities along the bay (white circles with dot), water levels (blue dots) and waves (red dots). Country and state boundaries are indicated in white lines (Esri). For a summary of countries, regions (with abbreviations used) and locations for further detailed analysis, see Table 1.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Data</title>
      <p id="d1e401">Different datasets were used in order to set up the numerical modeling system, namely bathymetry, coastal segments and HTC tracks with associated
maximum wind speeds.s</p>
      <p id="d1e404">Deep-water bathymetry data for the BoB were derived from the GEBCO 2008 global bathymetric dataset (Becker et al., 2009); see Fig. 1. These bathymetric data were used as input for both the hydrodynamic and the wave models.</p>
      <p id="d1e407">Output locations were chosen based on DIVA coastal segmentation as in Vafeidis et al. (2008),
allowing a global spatial determination of similar stretches (segments) of coastline (linear coastal segments). A total of 197 output locations (1 per segment) along the entire coastline were defined, at which time series of extreme storm surge and significant wave heights were extracted as in
Muis et al. (2016). Each segment has a length of approximately 5–25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the wave conditions, the locations in the DIVA segments were
translated into locations in deeper water to provide deep-water wave conditions and were therefore not affected by the local bathymetry. For each location,
the closest point with a water depth larger than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was chosen (Fig. 1).</p>
      <p id="d1e426">HTC data were derived from the IBTrACS (International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship) database version v04r00 (Knapp et al., 2018). The
IBTrACS database contains the most complete global set of HTCs available. From the IBTrACS dataset, the best-track data of the Joint Typhoon Warning
Center (JTWC) for the NIO were chosen as a source, including reliable satellite-derived data (Singh, 2010) available for the period 1972–2020. The data
contain TC information including the best-track coordinates and maximum wind speeds. The 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> averaged wind speeds were converted into
10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> wind speeds using, as a correction factor, the value 0.93, following Harper et al. (2010). In total, 110 historical tracks were available
for the NIO, of which 81 originated in the BoB including the recent Cyclone Amphan (2020). In the dataset, two distinct periods with TC activity can
be identified, corresponding to the pre-monsoon period (May) and the post-monsoon period (November, e.g., Alam et al., 2003; Islam and Peterson,
2009). Generally, about 2–4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">TCs</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> per year are generated in the NIO, though this is not spread evenly through time as the TC generation is
influenced by a number of external factors such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle (e.g., Singh et al., 2000; Hoarau et al.,
2012). The HTC tracks were used to derive the STC tracks in TCWiSE. Figure 2a illustrates the selected HTC tracks, with different colors indicating
different wind speed categories, while Fig. 2b shows the generated STC tracks based on the HTCs. Note that wind speeds on land may be less reliable as
they are affected by several factors (e.g., land friction, local topography). Nevertheless, these uncertainties are not relevant for this study, which
instead focuses on storm surge and waves in the ocean and coastal zone.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e456">Cyclone tracks subdivided into different cyclone wind speed categories based on the intensity scale of the India Meteorological Department: <bold>(a)</bold> historical tropical cyclones (HTCs) for the period 1972–2020; <bold>(b)</bold> synthetic tropical cyclones (STCs) for a period of 1000 years.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e479">The methodology which was followed for generating extreme values for surge and waves for both historical and synthetic tracks is described in
Fig. 3. From the IBTrACS dataset, a regional subset of HTCs are extracted for the NIO. In particular, TC characteristics (i.e., location, wind speed)
describing the HTCs are extracted and used for generating the STCs with TCWiSE. The HTCs and STCs are then converted into wind and pressure fields using
WES (Wind Enhancement Scheme; Deltares, 2019), which is a routine incorporated within TCWiSE. The generated wind and pressure fields are then used to
force the numerical hydrodynamic and wave models Delft3D FM and SWAN. From these models, time series of storm surge and wave heights are extracted at
the DIVA segments, and, per location, an extreme value analysis (EVA) is performed using the peaks-over-threshold (POT) method. The results are extreme
values of storm surge and wave heights for different return periods at each location, which are used to perform regional comparisons between the
obtained HTC and STC datasets.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e484">Flow diagram showing the procedure to generate regional comparisons of surge and waves values. Abbreviations: IBTrACS (International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship), TCWiSE (Tropical Cyclone Wind Statistical Estimation Tool), HTC (historical tropical cyclone), STC (synthetic tropical cyclone), STCC (synthetic tropical cyclone current climate), STCF (synthetic tropical cyclone future climate), WES (Wind Enhancement Scheme), POT (peaks-over-threshold method), EVA (extreme value analysis) and RP (return period). The sections in which each of the steps is elaborated are also indicated.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>2.3.1</label><title>Generation of synthetic cyclone tracks</title>
      <p id="d1e500">The generation of STC tracks was carried out using TCWiSE (Nederhoff et al., 2021). The tool allows the generation of synthetic tracks based on a
Markov model where observed data serve as a data source to compute synthetic tracks. The main variables it keeps track of are location (latitude and
longitude); time; and the statistics of maximum sustained wind speeds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), forward speed (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and heading (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) as spatially varying
PDFs (probability density functions). TC genesis is computed through randomly sampling the locations for each track from a spatially varying PDF. TC
termination is estimated based on PDFs describing the probability that a TC will terminate at a certain location and with a given wind speed. These
spatially varying PDFs are all constructed based on historical input data and created on a 0.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid for the entire NIO. Furthermore, the
number of TCs per year and the probable period within the year of TC generation are used to provide each track with a unique time within the synthetic
year.</p>
      <p id="d1e537">At first, the 81 HTC tracks which have occurred in the BoB over a period of 48 years, with location and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, were extracted from the IBTrACS
dataset (Fig. 4). After calculating the PDFs of the different variables based on the HTCs, TCWiSE was run to estimate 1000 years of synthetic tracks for
both current climates (synthetic tropical cyclone current climate, STCC) and future climates (synthetic tropical cyclone future climate, STCF). The
estimation of the effects of future climate on TCs was based on Knutson et al. (2015). The authors estimated that the frequency of TCs per year may
increase to 25.6 % by the end of the century, for all TC categories (categories 1–5), defined as TCs with wind speeds larger than 33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and according to an RCP 4.5 scenario. In order to avoid creating sampling differences when creating the synthetic tracks for current and future
scenarios separately, the total tracks for the STCF were generated first, resulting in 2191 tracks. Then, the first 1745 tracks were
selected as representative of 1000 years of TCs in the current climate (Fig. 4). The ratio between these two values (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2191</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1745</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) represents the
25.6 % TC frequency increase between the future and current scenario. Similarly, according to Knutson et al. (2015), the intensity (i.e., maximum wind
speed) may increase by 1.6 % for the future climate. Only after generating all synthetic tracks were the wind speeds for all time steps of the STCF
tracks increased by 1.6 % to represent the intensity increase for the future climate.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e582">Normalized wave height and number of tracks for HTCs (black), STCC (blue) and STCF (red) at Charchenga, Bangladesh.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>2.3.2</label><title>Generation of pressure and wind fields</title>
      <p id="d1e600">For each HTC and STC track, time-varying and spatially varying wind and pressure fields were generated based on the parametric wind model of Holland
et al. (2010) using WES. The wind–pressure relations of Holland (2008) were used to compute the maximum pressure drop and create corresponding
spatially varying pressure fields. The calibrated coefficients for the NIO basin based on Nederhoff et al. (2019) were used to compute TC geometry (most probable radius of maximum winds (RMW) and radius of gale force winds (R35)). TC asymmetry
between the different quadrants was defined using Schwerdt et al. (1979). Furthermore, a constant inflow angle of 22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> based on Zhang and
Uhlhorn (2012) was assumed and a wind decay after landfall was included based on Kaplan and DeMaria (1995).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS3">
  <label>2.3.3</label><title>Hydrodynamic and wave numerical models</title>
      <p id="d1e620">The effects of each individual TC on storm surge and wave conditions were modeled using a coupled hydrodynamic (Delft3D FM) and wave model (SWAN),
where water levels are exchanged every hour and the wave radiation stresses are communicated from SWAN to Delft3D FM as well. The resolution of the
models was chosen in such a way as to keep the running time sufficiently low to be able to run the entire set of thousands of tracks and still allow
sufficient accuracy to simulate realistic results. For the hydrodynamic model, the finest grid size was equal to about 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nearshore, extracted from the GTSM (Global Tide and Surge Model; Muis et al., 2016) grid, and forced with wind and pressure fields only from the TCs. Therefore,
storm surge estimates are computed based on both wind speed and atmospheric pressure. Tidal forcing was excluded from the model to be able to
intercompare the impact of different TCs directly and focus on the wind-driven and atmospheric-pressure-driven surge components only, without the timing of
the actual high or low water of the tide playing a role. In reality, non-linearities between tide and surge can, depending on the tidal range, have a
large effect on the estimated total water level values (Chiu and Small, 2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e631">For the wave model, a constant resolution of 0.02<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was used to allow the simulation of the large number of tracks. This
resolution is not sufficient to accurately model nearshore processes like wave shoaling and breaking. Therefore, only results in water depths deeper
than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were used. The wave model was run in non-stationary mode, with a time step of 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and forced by wind fields from the TCs
only. No background winds or wave heights were included since these are not available for the synthetic tracks and they would alter the comparison
with the historical tracks. For more details regarding the setup of the numerical models, see Appendix A. Per DIVA section, the generated time series
of storm surge and significant wave heights per track were combined to generate 1000-year-long time series of STCs. Additionally, a 48-year-long
time series of storm surge and wave heights was also created forcing the models with the HTC winds and pressures.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS4">
  <label>2.3.4</label><title>Extreme value analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e682">An EVA was carried out on the extreme storm surge and wave heights using a POT method and an exponential fit (Caires, 2016). Extreme values were
derived along the entire coastline at each DIVA segment and based on the created time series, for return periods corresponding to 10, 25, 50 and
100 years. The POT thresholds were automatically selected between the 99th percentile, as the minimum threshold, and the 99.9th percentile as the maximum
threshold, using the threshold stability criteria (Caires, 2016). For the HTCs, the 98th percentile was used as a minimum percentile to create stable EVA
fits as the time series contained a lower number of peaks. Additionally, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were computed and based on the CI of a
generalized Pareto distribution (GPD), by applying the relative values of the lower and upper estimates relative to the point estimates. The point
estimates are determined with a plotting position <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lu</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the sample size, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the order and
lu the Poisson rate. Hereafter, for the comparison between the HTC, STCC and STCF results, the absolute values per DIVA section were averaged into larger
regions, as indicated in Table 1.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Verification of synthetic cyclone tracks</title>
      <p id="d1e765">Time series of 1000 years of synthetic tracks for the BoB for current climate (STCC) and future climate (STCF) were generated using TCWiSE. Since the
synthetic tracks were based on historical data, statistical properties for the STCC should be similar to those of the HTCs. Nederhoff et al. (2021)
demonstrated this through an application of TCWiSE for the Gulf of Mexico, by comparing statistical properties for 10 000 years of synthetic tracks
and those of 133 years of historical data.</p>
      <p id="d1e768">Here, a similar analysis is presented for the BoB. Spatial patterns for genesis, occurrence and termination were compared qualitatively and
quantitatively using the correlation parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> based on the similarity score of Kirchhofer (1974) in Fig. B1 in the Appendix. The closer <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is
to 1, the more similar the spatial patterns of the HTCs and subsequently generated STCC are. The regions with the highest probability of TC genesis in
the historical data were found around the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the middle of the BoB (Fig. B1a and b). The spatial genesis patterns of the
STCC appear very similar to those of the HTCs, which is confirmed by the correlation parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> being 0.88 (–). For the probability of termination
of TCs, the patterns appear similar as well (Fig. B1c and d), but the magnitudes are more spread out for the STCC, leading to a slightly lower
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of 0.82. The main regions of TCs making landfall are around eastern India, Bangladesh and northern Myanmar. The highest TC occurrence is
found in the middle of the BoB (Fig. B1e and f). The yearly occurrences are quite well reproduced with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of 0.68. The lower correlation is
due to the spatial patterns of the synthetic tracks being more smoothed out compared to that of the HTCs due to the much larger number of
realizations. The maximum yearly probability of the HTCs is about 0.4 (i.e., return period of 2.5 years), indicating that a particular region in the
NIO is likely to be affected by a TC on average once every 2.5 years. The spatial coverage of the probability of genesis, probability of termination
and yearly probability estimation over the whole BoB, as well as the similarities in spatial patterns between the HTCs and the STCC, indicate that the
STCC can be used as a basis for quantifying wave heights and storm surges along the entire coast.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e808">Comparison between CDFs of maximum wind speed (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for HTCs (black line) with 75 % confidence intervals (dashed line) and STCC (blue line) at nine locations along the Bay of Bengal. The functions are estimated based on TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius of each location. The number of samples (time steps of a TC) within the 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius is indicated (#HTC and #STCC), alongside several statistical parameters comparing the HTCs and STCC distributions (i.e., absolute difference in maxima (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), normalized mean absolute error (nMAE), the relative bias of the median value (bias) and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the whole CDF. The nine locations are shown in Fig. 1.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e855">A comparison between the cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of maximum wind speeds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for HTCs and STCC, at nine locations along the
BoB, is shown in Fig. 5. The functions are estimated based on TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius of each of the nine locations. Per location, the
number of samples of time steps of TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius is included; this is between a factor 6 and 34 larger for the STCC compared to
HTCs and includes 1000 samples or more except in the case of Mawlamyine (Myanmar). The CDFs of the other parameters (i.e., forward speed and heading) are
presented in Figs. B2 and B3, respectively, of Appendix B. Additionally, a number of statistical parameters describing the differences between the two
distributions are computed (i.e., absolute difference in maxima (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), normalized mean absolute error (nMAE), the relative bias of the
median value (bias) and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the whole CDF). Locations characterized by a higher HTC occurrence, such as the ones
in India and Bangladesh, generally have a lower absolute bias. For locations with a lower HTC occurrence, for example Batticaloa (Sri Lanka) and
Mawlamyine (Myanmar), the bias is larger and the CDFs of the HTCs indicate a less smooth distribution as a result of the lower number of tracks
included. The nMAE varies between 0.01 and 0.06, according to the location, and the RMSE between 1 and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with the largest
discrepancies seen at Batticaloa. At Batticaloa, there are a limited number of samples for the HTCs with a clear distinction of tracks with a wind
speed of either below 15 or above 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 5), while for the STCC a more gradual distribution can be seen, including also
realizations in between these values. Maximum wind speeds are generally higher for the STCC than for the HTCs, meaning that more extremes are captured
in the STCC, with the largest differences observed at Port Blair reaching up to 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Smoother distributions of the parameters
describing the TCs are one of the advantages of using synthetic tracks computed over a long period of 1000 years. Similar patterns are also visible
for the forward speed, heading and central pressure (Figs. B2–B4). In these cases, the RMSE for the forward speed ranges between 0.4 and
1.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nMAE 0.1–0.5), the RMSE for the heading ranges between 11.3 and 50.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (nMAE 0–0.04) and the RMSE for the central
pressure ranges between 2.3 and 16.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nMAE 0–0.08). Here, the central pressure values were not sampled in TCWiSE directly but are derived
after applying the Holland (2008) estimates of pressure based on maximum wind speed.</p>
      <p id="d1e981">Based on these results it can be concluded that the first-order hazard of wind speed is well resembled by the synthetic tracks created by TCWiSE
for the current climate compared to historical observations. Therefore, the computed synthetic tracks and wind speed will be used for further analysis
in the paper to estimate the resulting second-order hazards (i.e., storm surge and wave height).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Convergence of synthetic results</title>
      <p id="d1e992">After validation of the synthetic cyclone tracks, spatially varying wind fields were created and used as input to force coupled Delft3D FM and SWAN
models to estimate storm surge and wave heights along the BoB. It is first verified how dependent the estimated variables of wind speed, wave heights
and storm surge are on the number of years of synthetic data included and if or how fast the results converge. In Fig. 6 an example for Charchenga
(Bangladesh) is shown. To verify the convergence, 99 000 EVAs were performed on the time series of wind speeds, wave heights and storm surge to
estimate the 100-year return period value while increasing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> number of years extracted from the available 1000-year time series
(i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10, 20, 30, …, 1000 years). Hereby for every <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> number of years extracted, these years are selected randomly and
combined into one new time series after which an EVA is computed. This is repeated 1000 times per <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> number of years included to obtain a stable
estimate. Estimates of the 2.5th, 50th and 97.5th percentiles for a 100-year return period value were computed at each iteration. Therefore, per
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> years of data included, the 95 % CI spread of the estimated median value was calculated over the 1000 realizations, which is shown in Fig. 6a,
c and e as green fill. The estimated median value of this spread is included as orange line. The same was calculated for the 2.5th- and 97.5th-percentile values, with their respective median values of the spread shown as gray and black lines, respectively, and with their combined total spread
as gray fill. Figure 6a, c and e show that the more years of synthetic data that are included, the smaller the CIs become and the more the median values
converge to a stable value. The number of years of data to be included to reach this stable value depends on the variable that is analyzed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1040">Verification of the convergence of the 100-year return period computed wind speed, wave height and storm surge as a function of the number of years of STCC tracks included in the analysis. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>, <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(e)</bold> refer to wind speed, wave height and storm surge, respectively. The 95 % spread (97.5th <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.5th percentile) is indicated by the gray fill; the median value of the 97.5th percentile is shown as a black line, and the median value of the 2.5th percentile is shown as a gray line. The green fill shows the 95 % spread of the median values, while the orange line indicates the median of the median value. Panels <bold>(b)</bold>, <bold>(d)</bold> and <bold>(f)</bold> show the range of the 95 % spread of the median value (green line) and the relative difference with respect to the true value, which is the estimate based on 1000 years of STCC tracks (orange line) for wind speed, wave height and storm surge, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1075">To quantify how quickly each of the different variables converges, the relative (%) ratio between the median value of the 50th percentile
(i.e., computed based on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> years of data) and the same median value based on 1000 years of data (i.e., here assumed to be the “true value”) is
presented as orange lines in Fig. 6b, d and f. These results show that, for all variables, the convergence is exponential. While the variables wind
speed and wave height already have a relative difference of less than 5 % (dashed orange line) compared to the true value after about 380 and
350 years, respectively, for the storm surge this takes about 450 years. In the same figure, the range describing the difference in spreading of
the median value (i.e., the size of the green fill in Fig. 6a, c and e) is also shown as a green
line. This range indicates how “wrong” the estimated median values can be after including a certain number of years of data. After including
200 years of data, the 95 % spread of the median values is still 15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the wind speed, 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the wave height and
0.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the storm surge. This decreases more rapidly for the wave heights and more slowly for the wind speed and storm surge. The difference
in convergence can be explained by the related probability distribution for each of the variables, also known as “tail dependence” in probability
theory. For wind speed and storm surges, the range of possible values is generally larger (type-I tail denotes no upper limit), while this is more
limited for wave heights (type-III tail is with an upper limit). This can be explained physically by the influence area of the variables wind speed and
resulting storm surge that is limited to close to the landfall location of a TC. Swell waves generated by a TC can travel hundreds of kilometers and
have a larger area of influence, so higher wave heights are more often reached, and the range of possible values is more limited. Since all
three variables reach a relative difference of a maximum of 5 % within 450 years and a maximum difference of 2 % (dotted orange line) within using
830 years of data, we can assume that results have converged after including the full 1000 years of data, and these are further used in this
analysis for comparison with the HTC data.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Evaluation of predicted storm surge and wave heights for historical versus synthetic tracks</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>3.3.1</label><title>Local differences based on one location</title>
      <p id="d1e1133">To compare the results of predicted storm surge and wave heights based on historical and synthetic tracks for the current climate, first an EVA is
performed and discussed for one example location at Charchenga. Afterwards, results for all points combined are presented as general differences based
on all modeled locations (Sect. 3.3.2), as well as differences between regions within the BoB (Sect. 3.3.3). In all figures, results for HTCs, STCC and STCF are
shown in black, blue and red, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1138">Example of an EVA for storm surge at Charchenga, Bangladesh, for HTCs (black), STCC (blue) and STCF (red). The horizontal axis represents the return period on a logarithmic scale, while the vertical axis represents the storm surge in meters. Shown are the data points with respective return periods (dots), the EVA fit (solid line) and the 95 % confidence intervals (colored fills).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1147">Focusing on the differences at one location first, Fig. 7 shows a comparison of the EVA specifically for storm surge at Charchenga. The EVA for the
HTCs is based on 14 data points only, with just 4 points above a return period of 10 years. Given the length of the record equals 48 years, the
maximum value of the dataset has an estimated return period of approximately 48 years. Thus, in order to obtain values for longer return periods
(e.g., 100-year return period), one needs to extrapolate from the fitted GPD. For the STCC, there are 100 data points that have a return period of at
least 10 years and the maximum return period in the dataset is approximately 1000 years. This leads to a much smaller 95 % CI for the STCC. In
particular, the STCC has a 95 % CI of 0.95 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for a return period of 100 years versus 2.34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the HTCs.</p>
      <p id="d1e1167">For return periods lower than 5 years, the point estimates of the HTC and STCC converge. This gives further confidence in the local validity of
the STCC estimates, in addition to the verification as described in Sect. 3.1 and 3.2. The estimated storm surge for the 100-year return period is
underestimated when using the HTCs with respect to the use of the STCC. This underestimation is a result of a limited number of data points on which to
fit the GPD (i.e., undersampling). This may lead to a different fit, as shown in Fig. 7, where the lines of the HTCs and STCC are approximately
parallel but that of the STCC is shifted upwards (Fig. 7). The result is, for example, that the highest value modeled of the HTCs, with a storm surge
close to 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, has a return period estimate close to the length of the dataset of 48 years. However, based on the STCC results, this event
has a return period of only 30 years.</p>
      <p id="d1e1178">In the STCC the maximum modeled surge is 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> higher than observed with historical events. Given that the CDFs of the maximum wind speed for
HTCs and STCC are very similar and the maximum wind speed is only 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> larger (Fig. 5), this means that more disadvantageous (but
statistically plausible) trajectories in terms of landfall location, heading and forward speed are included in the synthetic dataset compared to
historic events, meaning in turn that the worst event for this location may not have happened yet in recorded history. The same figure but for wave heights
is shown in the appendix (Fig. B5).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>3.3.2</label><title>General differences based on all locations</title>
      <p id="d1e1214">Besides analyzing the difference in modeled values and CIs of the EVA at a specific location (Fig. 7), such analysis was also performed for all 197 DIVA segments
together, over the entire BoB. Figure 8 shows the results presented as scatterplots for different return periods for both storm surge
(Fig. 8a) and wave height (Fig. 8b), where computed
values based on HTCs are shown on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis and computed values based on STCC are shown on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis. The figure shows that, with an increasing
return period, the root-mean-square difference (RMSD) also increases. Computed storm surges are in general slightly larger when using the STCC
(increase of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 %–10 % depending on the return period), while computed wave heights are in general larger when using the HTCs (increase of
up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 % for larger return periods, though with more scatter). These increases for the HTCs and STCC are calculated as relative
bias with respect to HTCs, though since the values based on HTCs are not the true values (i.e., the length of the historical record is too short to
reliably describe the current climate), this is referred to as a trend. In Fig. 9, the same information is shown but for the 95 % CI, computed as
the difference between the 97.5th- and the 2.5th-percentile estimates. The 95 % CIs are significantly smaller for the STCC compared to the HTCs
with a trend between 60 % and 80 %.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1247">Scatterplots of computed storm surge <bold>(a)</bold> and wave heights <bold>(b)</bold>, both resulting from HTCs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and STCC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years, for all locations along the Bay of Bengal. Root-mean-square differences (RMSDs) and the trend (%) of STCC compared to HTCs are also shown.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e1278">Scatterplots of 95 % confidence intervals (97.5th minus 2.5th percentile) for storm surge <bold>(a)</bold> and wave heights <bold>(b)</bold>, both resulting from HTCs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and STCC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years, for all locations along the Bay of Bengal. Root-mean-square differences (RMSDs) and the trend (%) of STCC compared to HTCs are also shown.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS3">
  <label>3.3.3</label><title>Regional differences within the Bay of Bengal</title>
      <p id="d1e1315">The differences between storm surge and wave heights computed based on HTCs and STCC also vary spatially within the BoB. At locations where TCs occur
more frequently, for example Chittagong in Bangladesh (Sect. 3.3.1), the STCC results generally fall within the CI of the HTCs, though using the HTC results,
underestimations are still present (Fig. 10). At locations with a lower TC occurrence, for instance Batticaloa (Sri Lanka), the use of HTCs to
estimate storm surge leads to much larger confidence intervals and lower values of the storm surge than those predicted based on STCC, which could
be an underestimation of the potential hazard using the HTCs. Since the number of TCs making impact at these locations is very limited, TCs that could
possibly hit these stretches of coast may not have occurred yet in the historical events. Therefore, using a large synthetic dataset largely reduces
the confidence intervals and improves the estimation of the coastal hazards of extreme events since a larger range of possible events is covered. For
wave heights, the differences between using HTCs and STCC are smaller (Fig. 11). This is because waves are in general a less local effect than storm
surge with extreme waves at one location possibly being the result of a TC passing at a certain distance from a specific location, leading to more
events for the HTCs. The estimated values for waves based on STCC also fall within the CI of the HTC estimates, while for storm surge this is not
always the case.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e1320">Extreme value analysis for nine different locations for storm surge based on HTCs (black), STCC (blue) and STCF (red). Per panel both the fit (solid line) and 95 % confidence intervals (background fill) are included. The horizontal axis is the return period on a logarithmic scale, and the vertical axis is storm surge in meters. Note the orientation of locations goes in a clockwise direction through the Bay of Bengal from Batticaloa to Port Blair and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis varies per location.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e1338">Extreme value analysis for nine different locations for significant wave height based on HTCs (black), STCC (blue) and STCF (red). Per panel both the fit (solid line) and 95 % confidence intervals (background fill) are included. The horizontal axis is the return period on a logarithmic scale, and the vertical axis is significant wave height in meters. Note the orientation of locations goes in a clockwise direction through the Bay of Bengal from Batticaloa to Port Blair and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis varies per location.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f11.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e1357"><bold>(a)</bold> Regionally averaged storm surges along the Bay of Bengal estimated based on STCC for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years. <bold>(b)</bold> Regionally averaged relative difference (in %) of storm surges estimated based on HTCs compared to STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>. <bold>(c)</bold> Regionally averaged size of confidence interval of storm surge based on STCC as a percentage (%) of the absolute value of STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>. <bold>(d)</bold> Regionally averaged size of confidence interval of storm surge based on HTCs as a percentage (%) of the absolute value of STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f12.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F13" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e1389"><bold>(a)</bold> Regionally averaged wave heights along the Bay of Bengal estimated based on STCC for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years. <bold>(b)</bold> Regionally averaged relative difference (in %) of wave heights estimated based on HTCs compared to STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>. <bold>(c)</bold> Regionally averaged size of confidence interval of wave heights based on STCC as a percentage (%) of the absolute value of STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>. <bold>(d)</bold> Regionally averaged size of confidence interval of wave heights based on HTCs as a percentage (%) of the absolute value of STCC of panel <bold>(a)</bold>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f13.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1422">Storm surge and significant wave heights estimated based on STCC (regular typeface), HTCs (in bold) and STCF (in italic) including confidence intervals (2.5th, 97.5th), for return periods of 10 and 100 years, averaged over the entire BoB and per region. Regions are as in Table 1: Sri Lanka (whole country), India (TN, Tamil Nadu; AP, Andhra Pradesh; OWB, Odisha and West Bengal; AN, Andaman and Nicobar Islands), Bangladesh (KB, Khulna and Barisal; CH, Chittagong) and Myanmar (RA, Rakhine and Ayeyarwady; YM, Yangon and Mon). A dash (–) is displayed if no 10-year return period could be determined.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.71}[.71]?><oasis:tgroup cols="12">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Variable</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sri Lanka</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">India </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center" colsep="1">Bangladesh </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col10" nameend="col11" align="center">Myanmar </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SL</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">IN-TN</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">IN-AP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">IN-OD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">IN-AN</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">BA-KB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">BA-CH</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">MY-RA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">MY-YM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">Averaged over Bay</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">of Bengal</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Storm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STCC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.67</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">surge</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[–, –]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[–, –]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[0.11, 0.11]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">[0.46, 0.49]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">[0.03, 0.03]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">[1.23, 1.29]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">[1.07, 1.13]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">[0.45, 0.49]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">[0.35, 0.40]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">[0.65, 0.69]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10-year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>HTCs</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.05</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>0.11</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.17</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>0.38</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.03</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>0.96</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>1.03</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>0.35</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>0.44</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>0.46</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">return</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>CI</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>[0.04, 0.07]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>[0.08, 0.14]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>[0.11, 0.25]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>[0.27, 0.51]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>[0.03, 0.04]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>[0.71, 1.26]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>[0.79, 1.29]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>[0.24, 0.51]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>[0.33, 0.62]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>[0.34, 0.62]</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>STCF</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>0.13</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>0.16</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>0.53</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>0.04</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>1.35</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>1.26</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>0.54</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>0.4</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>0.71</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>CI</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[–, –]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>[0.13, 0.13]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>[0.16, 0.16]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>[0.50, 0.55]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>[0.03, 0.04]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>[1.32, 1.39]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>[1.22, 1.30]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>[0.52, 0.57]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>[0.38, 0.43]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>[0.69, 0.74]</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Storm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STCC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1.19</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">surge</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[0.23, 0.34]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[0.37, 0.49]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[0.45, 0.61]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">[1.08, 1.40]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">[0.09, 0.13]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">[2.32, 2.82]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">[2.17, 2.61]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">[0.88, 1.12]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">[0.61, 0.86]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">[1.06, 1.33]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">100-year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>HTCs</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.12</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>0.28</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.52</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>0.89</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.06</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.09</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>2.25</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>0.81</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>0.82</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.04</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">return</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>CI</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>[0.05, 0.20]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>[0.16, 0.43]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>[0.22, 0.91]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>[0.49, 1.35]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>[0.04, 0.10]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>[1.30, 3.04]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>[1.51, 3.07]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>[0.44, 1.29]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>[0.50, 1.33]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>[0.62, 1.56]</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>STCF</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>0.34</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>0.48</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>0.59</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>1.34</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>0.12</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>2.72</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>2.49</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>1.1</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>0.76</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>1.28</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>CI</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>[0.28, 0.40]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>[0.42, 0.54]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>[0.51, 0.67]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>[1.18, 1.51]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>[0.10, 0.15]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>[2.49, 2.97]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>[2.28, 2.70]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>[0.98, 1.23]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>[0.66, 0.89]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>[1.14, 1.42]</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STCC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">6.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">5.45</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[1.69, 1.72]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[5.47, 5.69]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[5.31, 5.47]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">[5.60, 5.92]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">[2.74, 2.83]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">[6.86, 7.10]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">[7.01, 7.27]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">[6.00, 6.22]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">[2.13, 2.21]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">[5.35, 5.56]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10-year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>HTCs</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>2.44</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>5.33</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>5.74</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>6.17</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>2.34</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>6.6</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>6.83</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>5.52</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>2.34</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>5.36</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">return</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>CI</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>[1.97, 3.08]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>[4.64, 6.15]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>[4.81, 6.85]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>[5.07, 7.44]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>[2.04, 2.67]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>[5.30, 8.24]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>[5.44, 8.42]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>[4.40, 6.82]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>[2.01, 2.81]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>[4.38, 6.51]</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>STCF</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>3.27</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>6.14</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>5.96</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>6.59</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>3.05</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>7.52</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>7.67</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>6.72</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>2.38</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>5.97</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>CI</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>[3.20, 3.33]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>[5.97, 6.31]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>[5.84, 6.09]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>[6.41, 6.77]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>[2.97, 3.13]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>[7.36, 7.70]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>[7.50, 7.85]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>[6.56, 6.89]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>[2.31, 2.46]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>[5.83, 6.12]</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STCC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">11.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">10.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">3.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">9.47</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[5.90, 7.08]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[9.38, 10.96]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[8.77, 10.29]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">[10.01, 11.63]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">[4.75, 5.83]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">[11.09, 12.89]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">[11.17, 12.85]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">[9.49, 11.06]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">[3.39, 4.31]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">[8.75, 10.23]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">100-year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>HTCs</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>4.55</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>9.43</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>10.77</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>11.97</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>3.87</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>12.07</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>12.73</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>10.49</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>4.08</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>10.04</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">return</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>CI</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>[2.83, 6.89]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>[6.84, 12.56]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>[7.29, 14.93]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>[8.38, 16.11]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>[2.79, 5.06]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>[8.58, 16.48]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><bold>[8.97, 17.03]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><bold>[7.18, 14.39]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><bold>[2.85, 5.84]</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>[6.97, 13.68]</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>STCF</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>6.99</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>10.67</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>10.25</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>11.56</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>5.73</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>12.64</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>12.48</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>11.11</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>4.18</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>10.1</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>CI</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>[6.38, 7.63]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>[9.94, 11.43]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><italic>[9.51, 11.05]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>[10.74, 12.44]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><italic>[5.21, 6.30]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><italic>[11.78, 13.59]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><italic>[11.71, 13.35]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><italic>[10.33, 11.93]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><italic>[3.76, 4.67]</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><italic>[9.38, 10.88]</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2712">To visualize these regional differences, the estimated regionally averaged values for storm surge and wave heights along the BoB based on the STCC are
presented in Figs. 12a and 13a, respectively, as well as summarized in Table 2. The regions with higher values for storm surge and wave
heights are also the regions with a higher TC occurrence. Furthermore, the presence of a wide shallow continental shelf such as in front of Bangladesh
contributes to further amplifying the storm surge as a result of a larger wind-driven setup. Therefore, the highest storm surge can be found
there. Over the entire BoB, the average storm surge due to TCs is estimated to be 1.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for a 100-year return period event. For waves
(Fig. 13a) there is less regional variability because wave impact due to TCs is a less local event than storm surge, though still some
differences are visible. The largest wave heights are again found in front of the coast of Bangladesh. The averaged deep-water significant wave
height over the entire BoB is 9.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for a 100-year return period.</p>
      <p id="d1e2731">The relative differences in estimated storm surge and wave heights computed as HTCs compared to STCC are shown in Figs. 12b and 13b, respectively. The
largest differences are observed for the storm surge, in particular in the southern part of the BoB, with differences of more than 50 %. The
storm surge is relatively small here and can be both relatively large/small for storm surge derived based on STCC compared to those derived based on HTCs
(see also Table 2). In the northern part of the BoB (i.e., Bangladesh) differences are relatively small (less than 20 %); however the difference
in magnitude is much larger (see also Table 2). Storm surge estimated based on STCC is here consistently larger than that derived based on HTCs for
all return periods.</p>
      <p id="d1e2735">For the wave heights the differences are in general smaller. In the south of the BoB (Sri Lanka, Andaman and Nicobar Islands), the use of HTCs leads to
an underestimation of the predicted wave height with respect to the use of STCC for larger return periods, while along the main continent a contrasting
behavior can be seen, although with relatively minor differences (see also Table 2).</p>
      <p id="d1e2738">Comparing the sizes of the CI per region as a percentage of the computed absolute value based on STCC (of Figs. 12a and 13a), the size of the CI for
storm surge is much smaller based on the STCC (Fig. 12c) as opposed to based on the HTCs (Fig. 12d). The maximum size for the STCC is 35 % compared
to the computed 100-year return period value, while for the HTCs the CI can be just as large as the computed value or higher (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). The same holds for the wave height (Fig. 13c), which with 25 % for the STCC is much smaller than the 80 % based on HTCs (Fig. 13d).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Effects of a changed future climate on storm surge and wave heights</title>
      <p id="d1e2760">The effect that a future climate with changes in cyclone wind speed (intensity) and frequency, possibly resulting from climate change, could have on
resulting storm surge and wave heights was investigated using synthetic tracks (STCF, Sect. 2.3.1). Using the projected TC frequency and intensity
changes in Knutson et al. (2015) for the NIO under RCP 4.5 for 2100, it was quantified how changes in the first-order hazard (wind speed) could
result in changes in the second-order hazards (storm surge and waves). In particular, it was estimated that, as a result of a TC frequency increase
of 25.6 % and an increase in maximum wind speed of 1.6 %, there could be a relative increase in predicted storm surge of 11 % and
6 % for return periods of 10 and 100 years, respectively, and an increase of 9 % and 6 % for the wave height (see Figs. 10 and 11 and
Table 2). Therefore, the increase in storm surge and wave height could be larger than the increase in TC intensity only but lower than the increase
in TC frequency as a result of a combined effect resulting from an increase in TC intensity and frequency. If only the TC intensity increase were
relevant, one would expect an increase in second-order hazards of 2.56 % since storm surge and wave heights are in the limit proportional to the
wind speed squared. Besides, the CIs remain approximately the same as for the STCC case due to the already large number of samples for that scenario
(see Fig. B7 in Appendix B).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <label>3.5</label><title>Summary of the results</title>
      <p id="d1e2772">To summarize the results, the values of Figs. 12 and 13 are combined into Table 2, which also includes the results estimated based on STCF. The values
are presented for return periods of 10 and 100 years, as averaged values both over the entire BoB and per region. Included are the CI values (2.5th,
97.5th percentiles), indicating that the CIs are significantly smaller based on synthetic tracks.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2784">For clarity, discussion points have been grouped under three main topics, namely the generation of synthetic cyclone tracks, numerical modeling of
storm surge and waves, and effects of a changed future climate on tropical cyclones.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Generation of synthetic tropical cyclone tracks</title>
      <p id="d1e2794">As shown by the reduction in the CI in the GPD fit (see, e.g., Fig. 10), the uncertainty in modeling TC-induced second-order hazards (i.e., storm
surge and wave heights) is greatly reduced by using synthetic tracks. However, this is a reduction in the uncertainty in the fitting parameters and
thus estimates of return values and periods. Uncertainties regarding the wind parametrization and the correct representation of the climate in the
underlying dataset of the TCs persist. The former source of modeling uncertainties can be quantified by comparison with locally observed data. The
latter, however, is a known unknown. TCWiSE is constrained to reproduce the statistics of the historical record. This means that the tool will not be
able to (fully) reproduce physically credible and statistically unlikely tracks that are not recorded in observations. Additionally, in regions of
rare TC occurrence, the lack of multiple tracks in historical records as a basis of the climate representation creates an unknown in terms of how accurately the
generated STC tracks represent the “real climate” here. They will resemble the observed historical data with more realizations, where the historical
data could in themselves be biased within the limited time span of the observations compared to the real climate. This cannot be verified but means
that, in these regions, the results should be handled with care. However, for determining design criteria it is very common to use datasets of this
(limited) time span.</p>
      <p id="d1e2797">Also, the STCs have been generated using TCWiSE only once and used for both current and future climate conditions. When rerunning TCWiSE multiple times
the generated tracks will be different (though with the same statistics). The effect of this difference in sampling has not been
investigated. Additionally, using the HTC data, only one method to generate STC tracks was used although many more methods exist besides TCWiSE,
e.g., Vickery et al. (2000), Hardy et al. (2003), James and Mason (2005), Emanuel et al. (2006), Haigh et al. (2014), Nakajo
et al. (2014), Lee et al. (2018), and Bloemendaal et al. (2020). Furthermore, looking at physics-based
methods rather than historical track-based methods (e.g., Emanuel et al., 2008; Mori et al., 2019)
could also lead to different results, though it is expected that the main patterns
and general conclusions will remain the same.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Numerical modeling of waves and storm surge</title>
      <p id="d1e2808">The currently used numerical models still have a relatively coarse resolution near the shore (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and therefore are not capable of
representing nearshore bathymetric features and their effects on nearshore wave conditions (e.g., wave shoaling, refraction, breaking)  or very
local wind-induced setup changes to storm surge. The use of a higher-resolution model would not be computationally feasible when run in combination
with thousands of tracks and for a large domain such as the BoB. For this reason, the estimated wave conditions were extracted at a water depth larger than
30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, under the assumption that waves would not be affected by bathymetric features at this depth. The extraction depth was not changed
for storm surge since this larger-scale process generally is less sensitive to the exact extraction depth, which is however an assumption in the model
setup.</p>
      <p id="d1e2834"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>As the scope of the paper lies in the comparison between hazards estimated by using historical and synthetic tracks and how the use of synthetic
tracks can reduce the confidence intervals around the estimation of these hazards, the difference between simulated storm surge and wave heights on the one hand
and observed values on the other was not quantified. Combined with the limitations of the model resolution nearshore, presented results should be considered indicative results and not as values to be used directly in detailed design.</p>
      <p id="d1e2838">Only storm surge induced by wind and by the inverse barometric effect is considered for modeling extreme water levels since tides are not included. This is
justified by the purpose of the paper (i.e., comparison between hazards induced by historical and synthetic tracks) and makes the comparison
easier. Nevertheless, tidal effects would be important for the simulation of the total extreme water levels (see, e.g., Chiu and Small,
2016). Additionally, river runoff due to extreme precipitation events could also increase local extreme water levels.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Effects of changes in future climate on tropical cyclones</title>
      <p id="d1e2849">The current approach of incorporating climate-change-induced effects via only including the change in TC intensity and frequency is still heuristic
and limited in terms of physical representation. Potential effects like changes in sea surface temperature that result in changes in the statistics used of
locations of TC generation and termination, forward speed, and heading have not yet been incorporated. Also, changes to the central pressure of TCs are not
forced directly but only through the relation to the intensity increase in wind speed. Moreover, a multi-model ensemble of different climate models
feeding into the model train could result in more robust findings. The cyclone frequency increase used in this study based on Knutson et al. (2015) is
of a similar order of magnitude to that of, e.g., Sugi et al. (2017), which for the NOI describes a 21 % frequency increase for category 3–5 TCs, and also to similar trends described in other literature (e.g., Walsh et al., 2016). However, uncertainty remains as at the same time,  for low-wind-speed
categories, Sugi et al. (2017) found a reduction in cyclone frequency. In general, for specific regions/countries within the BoB the exact effects of
climate change on TCs are still the subject of debate in the literature, as for instance seen in the spread of the model results in Knutson
et al. (2020). Furthermore, in Knutson et al. (2015), different cyclone frequency increases are
mentioned for different wind speed categories, not all of which are statistically significant. The 200 % frequency increase for categories 4–5 mentioned
in Knutson et al. (2015) would lead to even stronger increases in derived values of storm surge and wave height, but the likelihood of such an
increase is uncertain and marked as statistically insignificant (Knutson et al., 2015). Also, so far, historical data do not seem to suggest any
clear local trends. These predictions will also keep on being extended and improved, for example to investigate more extreme relative changes
(e.g., Knutson et al., 2020; Walsh et al., 2019). For
instance, Knutson et al. (2020) indicate, after comparing results from different studies, a small
decrease in the median frequency change for the NIO for categories 0–5 combined and a small frequency increase for the more intense categories 4–5. For the
intensity increase, the median increase is about 5 % (Knutson et al., 2020). A large spread in
projections remains, indicating that the results in this study following Knutson et al. (2015) alone should be interpreted as a proof of
concept on the possible effects of climate change, based on one of many possible and different future scenarios.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2862">In this study, estimates of extreme storm surge and significant wave heights induced by tropical cyclones were derived along the Bay of Bengal,
based on both historical (deterministic method) and synthetic tracks (probabilistic method). Synthetic tropical cyclones tracks were generated by means of TCWiSE for a period of 1000 years using the statistics of historical tropical cyclones as a basis but including a much larger number of
realizations (i.e., 81 historical tracks versus 1745 synthetic tracks). It is shown that the statistics of the first-order hazard of wind speed are
well reproduced by the synthetic tracks. Consequently, created wind fields were used to simulate the second-order hazards, namely storm surge and wave
heights, based on the coupled process-based models Delft3D FM and SWAN. The study shows that, for the Bay of Bengal, about 400 years of synthetic
results is required to reach convergence with results for wind speed, wave heights and storm surges, with slight differences between the different
variables. Since this is within 1000 years, the synthetic tracks produce reliable estimates to compare to the results based on historical tracks.</p>
      <p id="d1e2865">An extreme value analysis performed over the computed storm surge and wave heights showed that, for the Bay of Bengal, the 95 % confidence
intervals using the synthetic tracks are 70 %–80 % smaller than the confidence intervals estimated based on historical tracks. The use of the
deterministic method leads to an underestimation ranging between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>31 % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13 % for the estimated storm surge with return periods of 10
and 100 years and an under-/overestimation of between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2 % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6 % for the wave heights for the same intervals. The use of synthetic tracks
allows us to more robustly sample the full parameter space describing the tropical cyclones and to more accurately capture modeled extreme values,
representing events with both more disadvantageous and more advantageous trajectories which could statistically be plausible but may not have happened yet
historically. Hereby, regional differences occur where regions in the south of the Bay of Bengal (e.g., Sri Lanka), which generally have a lower
probability/number of historical cyclone events, show the largest underestimation of extreme waves computed based on the deterministic method
compared to the probabilistic method. For extreme storm surge there is more variability from region to region, indicating that in regions with a
higher tropical cyclone probability, using a deterministic method could also lead to an under- or overestimation of predicted values. The probabilistic
method of deriving tropical-cyclone-induced coastal hazards using synthetic tracks of TCWiSE can thereby improve the derivation of local design values
anywhere in the world where tropical cyclone hazards exist.</p>
      <p id="d1e2896">Simulations were carried out both for current climate conditions and assuming changes in the frequency and intensity of tropical cyclones,
representing a future climate including possible effects of climate change. Literature values were used to describe possible changes in tropical
cyclone frequency and intensity by the year 2100, and what this could imply in terms of changes in storm surge and wave heights was modeled. By
assuming a possible increase in tropical cyclone frequency of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>25.6 % and tropical cyclone intensity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.6 %, results show that this
could result in an increase in the second-order hazard storm surge ranging between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11 % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6 % for return periods of 10
and 100 years, respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>9 % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6 % for the wave heights. Thus, the combination of an increase in tropical cyclone frequency and intensity
could result in a much larger increase in second-order hazards (storm surges and wave heights) than the actual increase in tropical cyclone
intensity only (first-order hazard wind speed), albeit lower than the increase in tropical cyclone frequency. However, the exact quantification of the
effects of climate change on future tropical cyclones is still subject to debate, and these differences are still smaller than the governing confidence
intervals or differences in results when using a deterministic approach. Presented results regarding the future climate hazards therefore only provide
a first insight into the possible changes and should be interpreted as a proof of concept.</p>
      <p id="d1e2942">Since for local studies the approach followed of modeling thousands of synthetic tropical cyclones is (probably) not feasible considering that the
(relatively coarse) numerical models of this study had a running time of about an hour per tropical cyclone, future work should focus on defining and
reducing the number of synthetic tropical cyclone tracks needed or using faster methods to derive storm surge and wave height values (e.g., van Ormondt
et al., 2021).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title>Software used</title>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS1">
  <label>A1</label><title>TCWiSE</title>
      <p id="d1e2963">Code revision 66 of TCWiSE has been used, which is the same as described in Nederhoff et al. (2021). The open-source tool is available at the
following link: <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/tcwise/</uri> (last access: 31 May 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e2969">Settings used are as follows.
<list list-type="custom"><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e2974"><monospace>basinid <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> `NI'</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e2986"><monospace>dx <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.1</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e2998"><monospace>source <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> `usa'</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3010"><monospace>window_KDE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 300</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3022"><monospace>window_dx <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3034"><monospace>nyears <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1000</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3046"><monospace>exclude_land_map_KDE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3058"><monospace>methodlandv_KDE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3070"><monospace>deleteclosezeros_KDE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> [1 1 0]</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3082"><monospace>merge_frac <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3094"><monospace>dt <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3107"><monospace>coupled_allowed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> [0 0]</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3119"><monospace>decoupled_allowed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> [1 1]</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3131"><monospace>latitude_allowed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> [0 0 0]</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3143"><monospace>additional_landeffect <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3155"><monospace>coefficientdecay <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0155</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3167"><monospace>termination_method <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3179"><monospace>stochastic_radii <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> [0 0]</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3191"><monospace>wind_conversion_factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.93</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3203"><monospace>cutoff_windspeed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0</monospace></p></list-item><list-item><label> </label>
      <p id="d1e3215"><monospace>cutoff_sst <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0</monospace></p></list-item></list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS2">
  <label>A2</label><title>Delft3D Flexible Mesh Suite</title>
      <p id="d1e3234">The version of Delft3D FM used in this study is 1.2.8.62394. The Delft3D FM model is based on the grid of the GTSM (Muis et al., 2016), with the
coarsest resolution of 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on the ocean and the finest resolution along the coast of about 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3253">The applied wind drag coefficient does not linearly increase with wind speed. As described by Vatvani et al. (2012) the drag coefficient first
increases linearly up to a wind speed of 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.005) and then it decreases linearly again up to a wind speed of
50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0025). For even higher wind speeds the drag coefficient remains constant at this last value.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS3">
  <label>A3</label><title>SWAN</title>
      <p id="d1e3340">The version of SWAN used in this study is 40.91AB. For the SWAN model a rectilinear grid with a resolution of 0.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> was used
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The model was run in non-stationary mode with a time step of 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. At the southern boundary at the open ocean no
information was applied, and therefore all waves were generated internally as a result of the forced cyclones. No background wind is included either
for non-tropical cyclone conditions. A drag coefficient limiter was used with maximum value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cap</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.002 (–) as can be interpreted from
Zijlema et al. (2012) to limit the wave growth for very high wind speeds. For the whitecapping the formula of van der Westhuysen et al. (2007) was
used. The bottom friction was set to a constant bottom friction coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.038 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as advised in Zijlema et al. (2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e3433">Water levels and flow velocities were coupled with the wave model and updated every 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The directional grid covers the full circle
(360<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), allowing for waves to travel to and from all directions. The number of directional bins was 36, which results in a directional
resolution of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The spectral grid covers a frequency range from 0.033 to 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Hz</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, allowing for wave periods from 2 to
33.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The number of frequency bins is 30.</p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</sec>
</app>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S2">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{B}?><label>Appendix B</label><title>Additional figures</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F14"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B1</label><caption><p id="d1e3490">Probability of TC genesis: <bold>(a)</bold> historical and <bold>(b)</bold> synthetic. Probability of TC termination: <bold>(c)</bold> historical and <bold>(d)</bold> synthetic. Yearly probability of a passing TC: <bold>(e)</bold> historical and <bold>(f)</bold> synthetic (STCC). Indicated error statistic is the correlation parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> based on Kirchhofer (1974).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f14.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F15" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B2</label><caption><p id="d1e3529">Comparison between CDFs of forward speed for HTCs (black line) with 75 % confidence intervals (dashed line) and STCC (blue line) at nine locations along the Bay of Bengal. The functions are estimated based on TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius of each location. The number of samples (time steps of a TC) within the 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius is indicated (#HTC and #STCC), alongside several statistical parameters comparing the HTC and STCC distributions (i.e., absolute difference in maxima (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), normalized mean absolute error (nMAE), the relative bias of the median value (bias) and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the whole CDF. The nine locations are shown in Fig. 1.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f15.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F16" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B3</label><caption><p id="d1e3567">Comparison between CDFs of heading direction for HTCs (black line) with 75 % confidence intervals (dashed line) and STCC (blue line) at nine locations along the Bay of Bengal. The functions are estimated based on TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius of each location. The number of samples (time steps of a TC) within the 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius is indicated (#HTC and #STCC), alongside several statistical parameters comparing the HTC and STCC distributions (i.e., absolute difference in maxima (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), normalized mean absolute error (nMAE), the relative bias of the median value (bias) and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the whole CDF. The nine locations are shown in Fig. 1.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f16.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F17" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B4</label><caption><p id="d1e3604">Comparison between CDFs of central pressure for HTCs (black line) with 75 % confidence intervals (dashed line) and STCC (blue line) at nine locations along the Bay of Bengal. The functions are estimated based on TCs within a 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius of each location. The number of samples (time steps of a TC) within the 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> radius is indicated (#HTC and #STCC), alongside several statistical parameters comparing the HTC and STCC distributions (i.e., absolute difference in minima (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>min⁡</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), normalized mean absolute error (nMAE), the relative bias of the median value (bias) and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the whole CDF. The nine locations are shown in Fig. 1.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f17.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F18"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B5</label><caption><p id="d1e3641">Example of an extreme values analysis for significant wave height at Charchenga, Bangladesh, for HTCs (black), STCC (blue) and STCF (red). The horizontal axis represents the return period on a logarithmic scale, while the vertical axis represents the significant wave height in meters. Shown are the data points with respective return periods (dots), the EVA fit (solid line) and the 95 % confidence intervals (colored fills).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f18.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F19"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B6</label><caption><p id="d1e3654">Scatterplots of computed storm surge <bold>(a)</bold> and wave heights <bold>(b)</bold>, both resulting from STCC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and STCF (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years, for all locations along the Bay of Bengal. Root-mean-square differences (RMSDs) and the trend (%) of STCF compared to STCC are also shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f19.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S2.F20"><?xmltex \currentcnt{B7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure B7</label><caption><p id="d1e3689">Scatterplots of 95 % confidence intervals (97.5th minus 2.5th percentile) for storm surge <bold>(a)</bold> and wave heights <bold>(b)</bold>, both resulting from STCC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and STCF (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), for return periods of 10, 25, 50 and 100 years, for all locations along the Bay of Bengal. Root-mean-square differences (RMSDs) and the trend (%) of STCF compared to STCC are also shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/22/1863/2022/nhess-22-1863-2022-f20.png"/>

      </fig>

</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e3724">The ORCA toolbox to derive the POT GPD is not open source but is available through <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/orca/</uri> (Deltares, 2022a). TCWiSE is available through <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/tcwise/</uri> (Deltares, 2022b). The Delft3D Flexible Mesh Suite is available through <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/delft3d-flexible-mesh-suite/</uri> (Deltares, 2022c).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e3739">The IBTrACS dataset for HTC tracks is publicly available from <uri>https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ibtracs/</uri>  (Knapp et al., 2018). The calculated values of storm surge and wave heights along the Bay of Bengal of the STCC used in Figs. 11a and 12a are freely available as a dataset from Zenodo: <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6420739" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.6420739</ext-link> (Leijnse et al., 2022).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e3751">All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the paper. Conceptualization, methodology and writing – review and editing were by all authors; software and resources were contributed by TWBL and KN; formal analysis was by TWBL  and SC; investigation, data curation and visualization were by TWBL ; writing – original draft preparation was by TWBL  and AG; funding acquisition was by AG.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e3757">The contact author has declared that neither they nor their co-authors have any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \hack{~\\[99mm]}?><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e3765">The views expressed in this article do not reflect the views of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e3774">This article is part of the special issue “Coastal hazards and hydro-meteorological extremes”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3781">We acknowledge Deltares' internal research programs, which have provided funding to carry out the study and write the paper. Furthermore, we would like to thank Björn Röbke for helping in improving Fig. 1.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e3786">This research has been supported by Deltares' internal research programs (“Planning for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience”, “Seas and Coastal Zones” and “Natural Hazards”).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e3792">This paper was edited by Piero Lionello and reviewed by Christian Mario Appendini Albrechtsen and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Alam, M. M., Hossain, M. A., and Shafee, S.:
Frequency of Bay of Bengal cyclonic storms and depressions crossing different coastal zones, Int. J. Climatol., 23, 1119–1125, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.927" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.927</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 2?><mixed-citation>Appendini, C. M., Pedrozo-Acuña, A., Meza-Padilla, R., Torres-Freyermuth, A., Cerezo-Mota, R., López-González, J., and Ruiz-Salcines, P.:
On the Role of Climate Change on Wind Waves Generated by Tropical Cyclones in the Gulf of Mexico, Coast. Eng. J., 59, 1740001-1–1740001-32, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0578563417400010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1142/S0578563417400010</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 3?><mixed-citation>Becker, J. J., Sandwell, D. T., Smith, W. H. F., Braud, J., Binder, B., Depner, J., Fabre, D., Factor, J., Ingalls, S., Kim, S.-H., Ladner, R., Marks, K., Nelson, S., Pharaoh, A., Trimmer, R., Von Rosenberg, J., Wallace, G., and Weatherall, P.:
Global Bathymetry and Elevation Data at 30 Arc Seconds Resolution: SRTM30_PLUS, Mar. Geod., 32, 355–371, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01490410903297766" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/01490410903297766</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 4?><mixed-citation>Bloemendaal, N., Haigh, I. D., Moel, H. De, Muis, S., Haarsma, R. J., and Aerts, J. C. J. H.:
Generation of a global synthetic tropical cyclone hazard dataset using STORM, Sci. Data,   7, 40,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0381-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41597-020-0381-2</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 5?><mixed-citation>Booij, N., Ris, R. C., and Holthuijsen, L. H.:
A third-generation wave model for coastal regions: 1. Model description and validation, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 7649–7666, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JC02622" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JC02622</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 6?><mixed-citation>Caires, S.:
A Comparative Simulation Study of the Annual Maxima and the Peaks-Over-Threshold Methods, J. Offshore Mech. Arct., 138, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033563" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1115/1.4033563</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 7?><mixed-citation>Chiu, S. and Small, C.:
Observations of Cyclone-Induced Storm Surge in Coastal Bangladesh, J. Coastal Res., 321, 1149–1161, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00030.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00030.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 8?><mixed-citation>
Deltares:
Wind Enhancement Scheme for cyclone modelling – User Manual, Version 3.01, Deltares, Delft, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Deltares: ORCA, Deltares [code],  <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/orca/</uri>, last access: 31 May 2022a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Deltares: TCWiSE, Deltares [code], <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/tcwise/</uri>,  last access: 31 May 2022b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Deltares:
Delft3D FM Suite,  Deltares [code], <uri>https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/delft3d-flexible-mesh-suite/</uri>, last access: 31 May 2022c.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 9?><mixed-citation>Deo, A. A., Ganer, D. W., and Nair, G.:
Tropical cyclone activity in global warming scenario, Nat. Hazards, 59, 771–786, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9794-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11069-011-9794-8</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 10?><mixed-citation>Dube, S. K., Jain, I., Rao, A. D., and Murty, T. S.:
Storm surge modelling for the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea, Nat. Hazards, 51, 3–27, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9397-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11069-009-9397-9</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 11?><mixed-citation>Emanuel, K., Ravela, S., Vivant, E., and Risi, C.:
A Statistical Deterministic Approach to Hurricane Risk Assessment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 87, S1–S5, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-87-3-Emanuel" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-87-3-Emanuel</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Emanuel, K., Sundararajan, R., and Williams, J.: Hurricanes and Global Warming: Results from Downscaling IPCC AR4 Simulations, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 89, 347–368, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-347" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-89-3-347</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 12?><mixed-citation>Haigh, I. D., MacPherson, L. R., Mason, M. S., Wijeratne, E. M. S., Pattiaratchi, C. B., Crompton, R. P., and George, S.:
Estimating present day extreme water level exceedance probabilities around the coastline of Australia: tropical cyclone-induced storm surges, Clim. Dynam., 42, 139–157, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1653-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-012-1653-0</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 13?><mixed-citation>Hardy, T. A., McConochie, J. D., and Mason, L. B.:
Modeling tropical cyclone wave population of the Great Barrier Reef, J. Waterw. Port. Coast. Ocean Eng., 129, 104–113, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2003)129:3(104)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2003)129:3(104)</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 14?><mixed-citation>
Harper, B. A., Kepert, J. D., and Ginger, J. D.:
Between Various Wind Averaging Periods in Guidelines for Converting Between Various Wind Averaging Periods in Tropical, World Meteorol. Organ., Geneva, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 15?><mixed-citation>Hoarau, K., Bernard, J., and Chalonge, L.:
Intense tropical cyclone activities in the northern Indian Ocean, Int. J. Climatol., 32, 1935–1945, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2406" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.2406</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 16?><mixed-citation>Holland, G.:
A Revised Hurricane Pressure–Wind Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 3432–3445, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2395.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008MWR2395.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 17?><mixed-citation>Holland, G. J., Belanger, J. I., and Fritz, A.:
A revised model for radial profiles of hurricane winds, Mon. Weather Rev., 138, 4393–4401, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3317.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010MWR3317.1</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 18?><mixed-citation>Islam, T. and Peterson, R. E.:
Climatology of landfalling tropical cyclones in Bangladesh 1877–2003, Nat. Hazards, 48, 115–135, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9252-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11069-008-9252-4</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 19?><mixed-citation>James, M. K. and Mason, L. B.:
Synthetic tropical cyclone database, J. Waterw. Port. Coast. Ocean Eng., 131, 181–192, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2005)131:4(181)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2005)131:4(181)</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 20?><mixed-citation>Kaplan, J. and DeMaria, M.: A Simple Empirical Model for Predicting the Decay of Tropical Cyclone Winds after Landfall, J. Appl. Meteorol., 34, 2499–2512, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1995)034&lt;2499:ASEMFP&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0450(1995)034&lt;2499:ASEMFP&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 21?><mixed-citation>Karim, M. and Mimura, N.:
Impacts of climate change and sea-level rise on cyclonic storm surge floods in Bangladesh, Global Environ. Chang., 18, 490–500, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.05.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.05.002</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 22?><mixed-citation>Kernkamp, H. W. J., Van Dam, A., Stelling, G. S., and De Goede, E. D.:
Efficient scheme for the shallow water equations on unstructured grids with application to the Continental Shelf, Ocean Dynam., 61, 1175–1188, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-011-0423-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10236-011-0423-6</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 23?><mixed-citation>Kirchhofer, W.:
Classification of European 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> patterns, Swiss Meteorological Institute, <uri>https://scholar.google.nl/scholar?hl=nl&amp;as_sdt=0,5&amp;q=Classification+of+European+500+mb+patterns+Kirchhofer&amp;btnG=)</uri> (last access: 26 March 2020), 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 24?><mixed-citation>Kishtawal, C. M., Jaiswal, N., Singh, R., and Niyogi, D.:
Tropical cyclone intensification trends during satellite era (1986–2010), Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L10810, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051700" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL051700</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 25?><mixed-citation>Knapp, K. R., Diamond, H. J., Kossin, J. P., Kruk, M. C., and Schreck, C. J.:
International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) Project, Version 4, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25921/82ty-9e16" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25921/82ty-9e16</ext-link>, NOAA Natl. Centers Environ. Inf., 2018 (data available at:  <uri>https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ibtracs/</uri>, last access: 26 May 2020).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Knutson, T., Camargo, S. J., Chan, J. C. L., Emanuel, K., Ho, C.-H., Kossin, J., Mohapatra, M., Satoh, M., Sugi, M., Walsh, K., and Wu, L.: Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part II: Projected Response to Anthropogenic Warming, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E303–E322, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0194.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0194.1</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 26?><mixed-citation>Knutson, T. R., McBride, J. L., Chan, J., Emanuel, K., Holland, G., Landsea, C., Held, I., Kossin, J. P., Srivastava, A. K., and Sugi, M.:
Tropical cyclones and climate change, Nat. Geosci., 3, 157–163, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo779" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo779</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 27?><mixed-citation>Knutson, T. R., Sirutis, J. J., Zhao, M., Tuleya, R. E., Bender, M., Vecchi, G. A., Villarini, G., and Chavas, D.:
Global Projections of Intense Tropical Cyclone Activity for the Late Twenty-First Century from Dynamical Downscaling of CMIP5/RCP4.5 Scenarios, J. Climate, 28, 7203–7224, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0129.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0129.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 28?><mixed-citation>Kossin, J. P., Knapp, K. R., Olander, T. L., and Velden, C. S.:
Global increase in major tropical cyclone exceedance probability over the past four decades, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,  17, 11975–11980,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920849117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1920849117</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 29?><mixed-citation>Krien, Y., Testut, L., Islam, A. K. M. S., Bertin, X., Durand, F., Mayet, C., Tazkia, A. R., Becker, M., Calmant, S., Papa, F., Ballu, V., Shum, C. K., and Khan, Z. H.:
Towards improved storm surge models in the northern Bay of Bengal, Cont. Shelf Res., 135, 58–73, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2017.01.014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.csr.2017.01.014</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 30?><mixed-citation>Lee, C. Y., Tippett, M. K., Sobel, A. H., and Camargo, S. J.:
An environmentally forced tropical cyclone hazard model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 223–241, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001186" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017MS001186</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Leijnse, T., Giardino, A., Nederhoff, K., and Caires, S.: Generating reliable estimates of tropical cyclone induced coastal hazards along the Bay of Bengal for current and future climates using synthetic tracks, Zenodo [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6420739" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.6420739</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 31?><mixed-citation>Lin, N., Emanuel, K., Oppenheimer, M., and Vanmarcke, E.:
Physically based assessment of hurricane surge threat under climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 462–467, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1389" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nclimate1389</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mamnun, N., Bricheno, L. M., and Rashed-Un-Nabi, M.: Forcing ocean model with atmospheric model outputs to simulate storm surge in the Bangladesh coast, Trop. Cyclone Res. Rev.,  9, 117–134, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.04.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.04.002</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 32?><mixed-citation>Marsooli, R., Lin, N., Emanuel, K., and Feng, K.:
Climate change exacerbates hurricane flood hazards along US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts in spatially varying patterns, Nat. Commun., 10, 1–9, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11755-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-019-11755-z</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 33?><mixed-citation>Meza-Padilla, R., Appendini, C. M., and Pedrozo-Acuña, A.:
Hurricane-induced waves and storm surge modeling for the Mexican coast, Ocean Dynam., 65, 1199–1211, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-015-0861-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10236-015-0861-7</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 35?><mixed-citation>Mori, N. and Takemi, T.:
Impact assessment of coastal hazards due to future changes of tropical cyclones in the North Pacific Ocean, Weather and Climate Extremes, 11, 53–69, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2015.09.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.wace.2015.09.002</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 34?><mixed-citation>Mori, N., Kjerland, M., Nakajo, S., Shibutani, Y., and Shimura, T.:
Impact assessment of climate change on coastal hazards in Japan. Hydrological Research Letters, 10, 101–105, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.10.101" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3178/hrl.10.101</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 36?><mixed-citation>Mori, N., Shimura, T., Yoshida, K., Mizuta, R., Okada, Y., Fujita, M., Khujanazarov, T., and Nakakita, E.:
Future changes in extreme storm surges based on mega-ensemble projection using 60-km resolution atmospheric global circulation model, Coast. Eng. J., 61, 295–307, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2019.1586290" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/21664250.2019.1586290</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 37?><mixed-citation>Muis, S., Verlaan, M., Winsemius, H. C., Aerts, J. C. J. H., and Ward, P. J.:
A global reanalysis of storm surges and extreme sea levels, Nat. Commun., 7, 11969, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11969" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ncomms11969</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nakajo, S., Mori, N., Yasuda, T., and Mase, H.: Global stochastic tropical cyclone model based on principal component analysis and cluster analysis, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 53, 1547–1577, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-08.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JAMC-D-13-08.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 38?><mixed-citation>Nederhoff, K., Giardino, A., van Ormondt, M., and Vatvani, D.: Estimates of tropical cyclone geometry parameters based on best-track data, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2359–2370, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2359-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-19-2359-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 38?><mixed-citation>Nederhoff, K., Hoek, J., Leijnse, T., van Ormondt, M., Caires, S., and Giardino, A.:
Simulating synthetic tropical cyclone tracks for statistically reliable wind and pressure estimations, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 861–878, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-861-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-21-861-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 39?><mixed-citation>
Nicholls, R. J., Mimura, N., and Topping, J. C.:
Climate change in south and south-east Asia: some implications for coastal areas, J. Glob. Environ. Eng., 1, 137–154, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 40?><mixed-citation>
Schwerdt, R. W., Ho, F. P., and Watkins, R. R.: Meteorological criteria for standard project hurricane and probable maximum hurricane windfields, Gulf and East Coasts of the United States, NOAA Tech. Rep. NWS 23, 1–317, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 41?><mixed-citation>Shultz, J. M., Russell, J., and Espinel, Z.:
Epidemiology of Tropical Cyclones: The Dynamics of Disaster, Disease, and Development, Epidemiol. Rev., 27, 21–35, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxi011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/epirev/mxi011</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 42?><mixed-citation>Singh, O. P.:
Long-term trends in the frequency of severe cyclones of Bay of Bengal: Observations and simulations, Mausam, 58, 59–66, <uri>http://metnet.imd.gov.in/mausamdocs/15816_F.pdf</uri> (last access: 22 May 2022), 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 43?><mixed-citation>Singh, O. P.: Recent Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity in the North Indian Ocean, in: Indian Ocean Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change, edited by: Charabi, Y., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 51–54, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3109-9_8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-90-481-3109-9_8</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 44?><mixed-citation>Singh, O. P., Ali Khan, T. M., and Rahman, M. S.:
Changes in the frequency of tropical cyclones over the North Indian Ocean, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 75, 11–20, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s007030070011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s007030070011</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 45?><mixed-citation>
Singh, O. P., Ali Khan, T. M., and Rahman, M. S.:
Has the frequency of intense tropical cyclones increased in the north Indian Ocean?, Curr. Sci. India, 80, 575–580, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 46?><mixed-citation>Sugi, M., Murakami, H., and Yoshida, K.:
Projection of future changes in the frequency of intense tropical cyclones, Clim. Dynam., 49, 619–632, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3361-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-016-3361-7</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vafeidis, A. T., Nicholls, R. J., McFadden, L., Tol, R. S. J., Hinkel, J., Spencer, T., Grashoff, P. S., Boot, G., and Klein, R. J. T.: A New Global Coastal Database for Impact and Vulnerability Analysis to Sea-Level Rise, J. Coast. Res., 244, 917–924, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2112/06-0725.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2112/06-0725.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 51?><mixed-citation>van der Westhuysen, A. J., Zijlema, M., and Battjes, J. A.:
Nonlinear saturation-based whitecapping dissipation in SWAN for deep and shallow water, Coast. Eng., 54, 151–170, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2006.08.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2006.08.006</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>van Ormondt, M., van Dongeren, A., and Roelvink, D.: A semi-empirical method for computing storm surges on open coasts during tropical cyclones, Coast. Eng., 165, 103839, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103839" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103839</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 47?><mixed-citation>Vatvani, D., Zweers, N. C., van Ormondt, M., Smale, A. J., de Vries, H., and Makin, V. K.:
Storm surge and wave simulations in the Gulf of Mexico using a consistent drag relation for atmospheric and storm surge models, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 2399–2410, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-2399-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-12-2399-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 48?><mixed-citation>Vickery, P. J., Skerlj, P. F., and Twisdale, L. A.:
Simulation of Hurricane Risk in the U. S. Using Empirical Track Model, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, 126, 1222–1237, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:10(1222)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:10(1222)</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 49?><mixed-citation>Walsh, K. J. E., McBride, J. L., Klotzbach, P. J., Balachandran, S., Camargo, S. J., Holland, G., Knutson, T. R., Kossin, J. P., Lee, T., Sobel, A., and Sugi, M.:
Tropical cyclones and climate change, WIREs Clim. Change, 7, 65–89, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.371" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/wcc.371</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 49?><mixed-citation>Walsh, K. J. E., McBride, J. L., Klotzbach, P. J., Balachandran, S., Camargo, S. J., Holland, G., Knutson, T. R., Kossin, J. P., Lee, T., Sobel, A., and Sugi, M.: Tropical cyclones and climate change, WIRES. Clim. Change, 7, 65–89, 2019.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 50?><mixed-citation>Webster, P. J.:
Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment, Science, 309, 1844–1846, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116448" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1116448</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 52?><mixed-citation>Yang, J. A., Kim, S. Y., Son, S. Y., Mori, N., and Mase, H.:
Assessment of uncertainties in projecting future changes to extreme storm surge height depending of future SST and greenhouse gas emission scenarios, Climatic Change, 162, 425–442, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02782-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10584-020-02782-7</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 53?><mixed-citation>Zhang, J. A. and Uhlhorn, E. W.:
Hurricane sea surface inflow angle and an observation-based parametric model, Mon. Weather Rev., 140, 3587–3605, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00339.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/MWR-D-11-00339.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 54?><mixed-citation>Zijlema, M., Van Vledder, G. P., and Holthuijsen, L. H.:
Bottom friction and wind drag for wave models, Coast. Eng., 65, 19–26, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2012.03.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2012.03.002</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Generating reliable estimates of tropical-cyclone-induced coastal hazards along the Bay of Bengal for current and future climates using synthetic tracks</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Alam, M. M., Hossain, M. A., and Shafee, S.:
Frequency of Bay of Bengal cyclonic storms and depressions crossing different coastal zones, Int. J. Climatol., 23, 1119–1125, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.927" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.927</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Appendini, C. M., Pedrozo-Acuña, A., Meza-Padilla, R., Torres-Freyermuth, A., Cerezo-Mota, R., López-González, J., and Ruiz-Salcines, P.:
On the Role of Climate Change on Wind Waves Generated by Tropical Cyclones in the Gulf of Mexico, Coast. Eng. J., 59, 1740001-1–1740001-32, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0578563417400010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1142/S0578563417400010</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Becker, J. J., Sandwell, D. T., Smith, W. H. F., Braud, J., Binder, B., Depner, J., Fabre, D., Factor, J., Ingalls, S., Kim, S.-H., Ladner, R., Marks, K., Nelson, S., Pharaoh, A., Trimmer, R., Von Rosenberg, J., Wallace, G., and Weatherall, P.:
Global Bathymetry and Elevation Data at 30 Arc Seconds Resolution: SRTM30_PLUS, Mar. Geod., 32, 355–371, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01490410903297766" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/01490410903297766</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bloemendaal, N., Haigh, I. D., Moel, H. De, Muis, S., Haarsma, R. J., and Aerts, J. C. J. H.:
Generation of a global synthetic tropical cyclone hazard dataset using STORM, Sci. Data,   7, 40,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0381-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0381-2</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Booij, N., Ris, R. C., and Holthuijsen, L. H.:
A third-generation wave model for coastal regions: 1. Model description and validation, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 7649–7666, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JC02622" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/98JC02622</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Caires, S.:
A Comparative Simulation Study of the Annual Maxima and the Peaks-Over-Threshold Methods, J. Offshore Mech. Arct., 138, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033563" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033563</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Chiu, S. and Small, C.:
Observations of Cyclone-Induced Storm Surge in Coastal Bangladesh, J. Coastal Res., 321, 1149–1161, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00030.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00030.1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Deltares:
Wind Enhancement Scheme for cyclone modelling – User Manual, Version 3.01, Deltares, Delft, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Deltares: ORCA, Deltares [code],  <a href="https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/orca/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 31 May 2022a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Deltares: TCWiSE, Deltares [code], <a href="https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/tcwise/" target="_blank"/>,  last access: 31 May 2022b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Deltares:
Delft3D FM Suite,  Deltares [code], <a href="https://www.deltares.nl/en/software/delft3d-flexible-mesh-suite/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 31 May 2022c.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Deo, A. A., Ganer, D. W., and Nair, G.:
Tropical cyclone activity in global warming scenario, Nat. Hazards, 59, 771–786, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9794-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9794-8</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Dube, S. K., Jain, I., Rao, A. D., and Murty, T. S.:
Storm surge modelling for the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea, Nat. Hazards, 51, 3–27, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9397-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9397-9</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Emanuel, K., Ravela, S., Vivant, E., and Risi, C.:
A Statistical Deterministic Approach to Hurricane Risk Assessment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 87, S1–S5, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-87-3-Emanuel" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-87-3-Emanuel</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Emanuel, K., Sundararajan, R., and Williams, J.: Hurricanes and Global Warming: Results from Downscaling IPCC AR4 Simulations, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 89, 347–368, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-347" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-347</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Haigh, I. D., MacPherson, L. R., Mason, M. S., Wijeratne, E. M. S., Pattiaratchi, C. B., Crompton, R. P., and George, S.:
Estimating present day extreme water level exceedance probabilities around the coastline of Australia: tropical cyclone-induced storm surges, Clim. Dynam., 42, 139–157, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1653-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1653-0</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Hardy, T. A., McConochie, J. D., and Mason, L. B.:
Modeling tropical cyclone wave population of the Great Barrier Reef, J. Waterw. Port. Coast. Ocean Eng., 129, 104–113, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2003)129:3(104)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2003)129:3(104)</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Harper, B. A., Kepert, J. D., and Ginger, J. D.:
Between Various Wind Averaging Periods in Guidelines for Converting Between Various Wind Averaging Periods in Tropical, World Meteorol. Organ., Geneva, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hoarau, K., Bernard, J., and Chalonge, L.:
Intense tropical cyclone activities in the northern Indian Ocean, Int. J. Climatol., 32, 1935–1945, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2406" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2406</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Holland, G.:
A Revised Hurricane Pressure–Wind Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 3432–3445, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2395.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2395.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Holland, G. J., Belanger, J. I., and Fritz, A.:
A revised model for radial profiles of hurricane winds, Mon. Weather Rev., 138, 4393–4401, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3317.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3317.1</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Islam, T. and Peterson, R. E.:
Climatology of landfalling tropical cyclones in Bangladesh 1877–2003, Nat. Hazards, 48, 115–135, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9252-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9252-4</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
James, M. K. and Mason, L. B.:
Synthetic tropical cyclone database, J. Waterw. Port. Coast. Ocean Eng., 131, 181–192, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2005)131:4(181)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2005)131:4(181)</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Kaplan, J. and DeMaria, M.: A Simple Empirical Model for Predicting the Decay of Tropical Cyclone Winds after Landfall, J. Appl. Meteorol., 34, 2499–2512, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1995)034&lt;2499:ASEMFP&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1995)034&lt;2499:ASEMFP&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Karim, M. and Mimura, N.:
Impacts of climate change and sea-level rise on cyclonic storm surge floods in Bangladesh, Global Environ. Chang., 18, 490–500, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.05.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.05.002</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Kernkamp, H. W. J., Van Dam, A., Stelling, G. S., and De Goede, E. D.:
Efficient scheme for the shallow water equations on unstructured grids with application to the Continental Shelf, Ocean Dynam., 61, 1175–1188, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-011-0423-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-011-0423-6</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Kirchhofer, W.:
Classification of European 500&thinsp;mb patterns, Swiss Meteorological Institute, <a href="https://scholar.google.nl/scholar?hl=nl&amp;as_sdt=0,5&amp;q=Classification+of+European+500+mb+patterns+Kirchhofer&amp;btnG=)" target="_blank"/> (last access: 26 March 2020), 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Kishtawal, C. M., Jaiswal, N., Singh, R., and Niyogi, D.:
Tropical cyclone intensification trends during satellite era (1986–2010), Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L10810, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051700" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051700</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Knapp, K. R., Diamond, H. J., Kossin, J. P., Kruk, M. C., and Schreck, C. J.:
International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) Project, Version 4, <a href="https://doi.org/10.25921/82ty-9e16" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.25921/82ty-9e16</a>, NOAA Natl. Centers Environ. Inf., 2018 (data available at:  <a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ibtracs/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 26 May 2020).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Knutson, T., Camargo, S. J., Chan, J. C. L., Emanuel, K., Ho, C.-H., Kossin, J., Mohapatra, M., Satoh, M., Sugi, M., Walsh, K., and Wu, L.: Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part II: Projected Response to Anthropogenic Warming, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E303–E322, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0194.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0194.1</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Knutson, T. R., McBride, J. L., Chan, J., Emanuel, K., Holland, G., Landsea, C., Held, I., Kossin, J. P., Srivastava, A. K., and Sugi, M.:
Tropical cyclones and climate change, Nat. Geosci., 3, 157–163, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo779" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo779</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Knutson, T. R., Sirutis, J. J., Zhao, M., Tuleya, R. E., Bender, M., Vecchi, G. A., Villarini, G., and Chavas, D.:
Global Projections of Intense Tropical Cyclone Activity for the Late Twenty-First Century from Dynamical Downscaling of CMIP5/RCP4.5 Scenarios, J. Climate, 28, 7203–7224, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0129.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0129.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Kossin, J. P., Knapp, K. R., Olander, T. L., and Velden, C. S.:
Global increase in major tropical cyclone exceedance probability over the past four decades, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,  17, 11975–11980,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920849117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920849117</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Krien, Y., Testut, L., Islam, A. K. M. S., Bertin, X., Durand, F., Mayet, C., Tazkia, A. R., Becker, M., Calmant, S., Papa, F., Ballu, V., Shum, C. K., and Khan, Z. H.:
Towards improved storm surge models in the northern Bay of Bengal, Cont. Shelf Res., 135, 58–73, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2017.01.014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2017.01.014</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, C. Y., Tippett, M. K., Sobel, A. H., and Camargo, S. J.:
An environmentally forced tropical cyclone hazard model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 223–241, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001186" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001186</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Leijnse, T., Giardino, A., Nederhoff, K., and Caires, S.: Generating reliable estimates of tropical cyclone induced coastal hazards along the Bay of Bengal for current and future climates using synthetic tracks, Zenodo [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6420739" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6420739</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, N., Emanuel, K., Oppenheimer, M., and Vanmarcke, E.:
Physically based assessment of hurricane surge threat under climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 462–467, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1389" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1389</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Mamnun, N., Bricheno, L. M., and Rashed-Un-Nabi, M.: Forcing ocean model with atmospheric model outputs to simulate storm surge in the Bangladesh coast, Trop. Cyclone Res. Rev.,  9, 117–134, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.04.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.04.002</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Marsooli, R., Lin, N., Emanuel, K., and Feng, K.:
Climate change exacerbates hurricane flood hazards along US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts in spatially varying patterns, Nat. Commun., 10, 1–9, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11755-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11755-z</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Meza-Padilla, R., Appendini, C. M., and Pedrozo-Acuña, A.:
Hurricane-induced waves and storm surge modeling for the Mexican coast, Ocean Dynam., 65, 1199–1211, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-015-0861-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-015-0861-7</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Mori, N. and Takemi, T.:
Impact assessment of coastal hazards due to future changes of tropical cyclones in the North Pacific Ocean, Weather and Climate Extremes, 11, 53–69, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2015.09.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2015.09.002</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Mori, N., Kjerland, M., Nakajo, S., Shibutani, Y., and Shimura, T.:
Impact assessment of climate change on coastal hazards in Japan. Hydrological Research Letters, 10, 101–105, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.10.101" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.10.101</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Mori, N., Shimura, T., Yoshida, K., Mizuta, R., Okada, Y., Fujita, M., Khujanazarov, T., and Nakakita, E.:
Future changes in extreme storm surges based on mega-ensemble projection using 60-km resolution atmospheric global circulation model, Coast. Eng. J., 61, 295–307, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2019.1586290" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2019.1586290</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Muis, S., Verlaan, M., Winsemius, H. C., Aerts, J. C. J. H., and Ward, P. J.:
A global reanalysis of storm surges and extreme sea levels, Nat. Commun., 7, 11969, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11969" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11969</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Nakajo, S., Mori, N., Yasuda, T., and Mase, H.: Global stochastic tropical cyclone model based on principal component analysis and cluster analysis, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 53, 1547–1577, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-08.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-08.1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Nederhoff, K., Giardino, A., van Ormondt, M., and Vatvani, D.: Estimates of tropical cyclone geometry parameters based on best-track data, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2359–2370, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2359-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2359-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Nederhoff, K., Hoek, J., Leijnse, T., van Ormondt, M., Caires, S., and Giardino, A.:
Simulating synthetic tropical cyclone tracks for statistically reliable wind and pressure estimations, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 861–878, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-861-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-861-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Nicholls, R. J., Mimura, N., and Topping, J. C.:
Climate change in south and south-east Asia: some implications for coastal areas, J. Glob. Environ. Eng., 1, 137–154, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Schwerdt, R. W., Ho, F. P., and Watkins, R. R.: Meteorological criteria for standard project hurricane and probable maximum hurricane windfields, Gulf and East Coasts of the United States, NOAA Tech. Rep. NWS 23, 1–317, 1979.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Shultz, J. M., Russell, J., and Espinel, Z.:
Epidemiology of Tropical Cyclones: The Dynamics of Disaster, Disease, and Development, Epidemiol. Rev., 27, 21–35, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxi011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxi011</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, O. P.:
Long-term trends in the frequency of severe cyclones of Bay of Bengal: Observations and simulations, Mausam, 58, 59–66, <a href="http://metnet.imd.gov.in/mausamdocs/15816_F.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 22 May 2022), 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, O. P.: Recent Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity in the North Indian Ocean, in: Indian Ocean Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change, edited by: Charabi, Y., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 51–54, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3109-9_8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3109-9_8</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, O. P., Ali Khan, T. M., and Rahman, M. S.:
Changes in the frequency of tropical cyclones over the North Indian Ocean, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 75, 11–20, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s007030070011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s007030070011</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, O. P., Ali Khan, T. M., and Rahman, M. S.:
Has the frequency of intense tropical cyclones increased in the north Indian Ocean?, Curr. Sci. India, 80, 575–580, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Sugi, M., Murakami, H., and Yoshida, K.:
Projection of future changes in the frequency of intense tropical cyclones, Clim. Dynam., 49, 619–632, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3361-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3361-7</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Vafeidis, A. T., Nicholls, R. J., McFadden, L., Tol, R. S. J., Hinkel, J., Spencer, T., Grashoff, P. S., Boot, G., and Klein, R. J. T.: A New Global Coastal Database for Impact and Vulnerability Analysis to Sea-Level Rise, J. Coast. Res., 244, 917–924, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2112/06-0725.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2112/06-0725.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
van der Westhuysen, A. J., Zijlema, M., and Battjes, J. A.:
Nonlinear saturation-based whitecapping dissipation in SWAN for deep and shallow water, Coast. Eng., 54, 151–170, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2006.08.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2006.08.006</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
van Ormondt, M., van Dongeren, A., and Roelvink, D.: A semi-empirical method for computing storm surges on open coasts during tropical cyclones, Coast. Eng., 165, 103839, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103839" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2020.103839</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Vatvani, D., Zweers, N. C., van Ormondt, M., Smale, A. J., de Vries, H., and Makin, V. K.:
Storm surge and wave simulations in the Gulf of Mexico using a consistent drag relation for atmospheric and storm surge models, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 2399–2410, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-2399-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-2399-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Vickery, P. J., Skerlj, P. F., and Twisdale, L. A.:
Simulation of Hurricane Risk in the U. S. Using Empirical Track Model, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, 126, 1222–1237, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:10(1222)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:10(1222)</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Walsh, K. J. E., McBride, J. L., Klotzbach, P. J., Balachandran, S., Camargo, S. J., Holland, G., Knutson, T. R., Kossin, J. P., Lee, T., Sobel, A., and Sugi, M.:
Tropical cyclones and climate change, WIREs Clim. Change, 7, 65–89, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.371" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.371</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Walsh, K. J. E., McBride, J. L., Klotzbach, P. J., Balachandran, S., Camargo, S. J., Holland, G., Knutson, T. R., Kossin, J. P., Lee, T., Sobel, A., and Sugi, M.: Tropical cyclones and climate change, WIRES. Clim. Change, 7, 65–89, 2019.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Webster, P. J.:
Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment, Science, 309, 1844–1846, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116448" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116448</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, J. A., Kim, S. Y., Son, S. Y., Mori, N., and Mase, H.:
Assessment of uncertainties in projecting future changes to extreme storm surge height depending of future SST and greenhouse gas emission scenarios, Climatic Change, 162, 425–442, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02782-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02782-7</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, J. A. and Uhlhorn, E. W.:
Hurricane sea surface inflow angle and an observation-based parametric model, Mon. Weather Rev., 140, 3587–3605, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00339.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00339.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Zijlema, M., Van Vledder, G. P., and Holthuijsen, L. H.:
Bottom friction and wind drag for wave models, Coast. Eng., 65, 19–26, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2012.03.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2012.03.002</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
