In Search of Climate Crisis in Greece Using Hydrological Data: 404 Not Found

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Editor,

The submitted work is a serious approach with a mild style by analyzing the data set for the entire Greek territory in detail. The methodology used by the authors and the excellent graphs leads to a realistic depiction of hydroclimatic changes and components in the Greek territory. So, I suggest publishing this original paper in your journal. I break down the reasons behind my decision:

Indeed, the clever title of the submitted paper that ends up in "404 Not Found" could be a proverbial allegorical quote indicating an inadequate "scientific meditation" without "ballast".

I recommend the authors modify the paper's title with a more concise one that could stimulate and escalate the reader's curiosity. For instance: “Climate crisis in Greece: 404 Not Found.”

Although the first reading of the title causes a little inertia in the reader's approach, the well-explanatory abstract and the documented introduction introduce the reader to the objectives of this paper.

In the current paper, the authors analyze two large long-term rainfall time series in Greece, presenting a detailed temporal and spatial mapping of rainfall in Greece and the measured characteristics and properties observations. According to statistical anticipation, the Monte Carlo simulation methodology was chosen to evaluate and establish whether or not changes occur, and it did under a Hurst-Kolmogorov process.

The paper's main result confirms small to negligible climate variability derived from mean and maximum rainfall heights, and the current period can be characterized as conventional.

The results and conclusions of the submitted work are an update and continuation of long-term research by the authors and collaborators of an integrated and modern framework for managing and protecting the country's water resources at the national and regional level [A].

[A] National Programme for Water Resources Management and Preservation. (In Greek) DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.25384.62727

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper deals with exciting, unthankful research that analyzes the flow and precipitation data. It is a very quality idea presented in the paper. A significant disadvantage is a need for more available data, especially in ungauged locations. 

I am proposing a major revision. Here are my reasons.

-literature review needs to be written better. There needs to be an overview of the existing literature and knowledge which deals with the proposed research. What other scientists and engineers were dealing with? Where is an insight into the current methodologies about the analyzed topic? 

-Why were the author's selected presented methods for their analysis?

-Chapter organization should be better. You can not put analysis and conclusion into one chapter. 

-Time series analysis should be applied. RAPS method, IPTA, or something similar. Climate changes and human activities impact the time series of the flow, so such should be elaborated, at least on the basic level. 

 

At least, a reading from the English language professor, or even a native English speaker, should be done. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper dovetails  hydrological Data in Greece with climate change studies. First of all, I found the title really compelling. I really appreciate also the definition of “climate crisis doctrine”. This allows to tell real studies based on data and merely speculations apart. I think that this work is worth publishing after considering the following comments:

Lines 36-37: please support the sentences with the following references. “Analysis of high streamflow extremes in climate change studies: How do we calibrate hydrological models?”; “Editorial: Understanding Hydrological Extremes and Their Impact in a Changing Climate: Observations, Modeling and Attribution”; “Climate change impact on flood and extreme precipitation increases with water availability”, if deemed appropriate.

Support the sentence “Moreover, the satellite data were not found reliable enough and had to be re-calibrated with ground data” with some proper references.

What the symbol “x” refers to in the presented Equations as well as X. I suggest adding a section about the methods adopted.

I suggest adding a subsection related to ERA5 drawbacks and limits, and if possible related to Greece. 

Why is the daily rainfall time series in Bologna useful? I suggest skipping it and focusing only on Athens stations.

Why is the “Expected value” introduced but not commented on?

Could the authors be more specific about the sentence “we understand that this trend is mostly the reflection”? Line 392.

Discussion and Conclusion do not reflect the introduction. I suggest linking better what is pointed out in the introduction with the paper outcomes which should be underlined in the discussion. This is of course my opinion but honestly all the references about the successful management were quite a surprise.

 

The authors should reduce the usage on informal expressions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

This time authors were done a lot of effort to improve their paper. I am very satisfied.