![Sample our Geography journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5937/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Geography.jpg"})
Abstract
One of the most significant climate change impacts on arctic urban landscapes is the warming and degradation of permafrost, which negatively affects the structural integrity of infrastructure. We estimate potential changes in stability of Russian urban infrastructure built on permafrost in response to the projected climatic changes provided by six preselected General Circulation Models (GCMs) participated in the most recent Climate Model Inter‐comparison Project (CMIP5). The analysis was conducted for the entire extent of the Russian permafrost‐affected area. According to our analysis a significant (at least 25%) climate‐induced reduction in the urban infrastructure stability throughout the Russian permafrost region should be expected by the mid‐21st century. However, the high uncertainty, resulting from the GCM‐produced climate projections, prohibits definitive conclusion about the rate and magnitude of potential climate impacts on permafrost infrastructure. Results presented in this paper can serve as guidelines for developing adequate adaptation and mitigation strategy for Russian northern cities.
This research was supported by U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) grants PLR‐1231294, PLR‐1304555, ICER‐1558389 to the George Washington University and by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant 14‐17‐00037 to the State Hydrological Institute, Russia. Opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF or RSF. We are grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript.
This research was supported by U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) grants PLR‐1231294, PLR‐1304555, ICER‐1558389 to the George Washington University and by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant 14‐17‐00037 to the State Hydrological Institute, Russia. Opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF or RSF. We are grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript.
Notes
This research was supported by U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) grants PLR‐1231294, PLR‐1304555, ICER‐1558389 to the George Washington University and by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant 14‐17‐00037 to the State Hydrological Institute, Russia. Opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF or RSF. We are grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript.