Climate Model Biases and Modification of the Climate Change Signal by Intensity-Dependent Bias Correction

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (16) ◽  
pp. 6591-6610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Aleksandrov Ivanov ◽  
Jürg Luterbacher ◽  
Sven Kotlarski

Climate change impact research and risk assessment require accurate estimates of the climate change signal (CCS). Raw climate model data include systematic biases that affect the CCS of high-impact variables such as daily precipitation and wind speed. This paper presents a novel, general, and extensible analytical theory of the effect of these biases on the CCS of the distribution mean and quantiles. The theory reveals that misrepresented model intensities and probability of nonzero (positive) events have the potential to distort raw model CCS estimates. We test the analytical description in a challenging application of bias correction and downscaling to daily precipitation over alpine terrain, where the output of 15 regional climate models (RCMs) is reduced to local weather stations. The theoretically predicted CCS modification well approximates the modification by the bias correction method, even for the station–RCM combinations with the largest absolute modifications. These results demonstrate that the CCS modification by bias correction is a direct consequence of removing model biases. Therefore, provided that application of intensity-dependent bias correction is scientifically appropriate, the CCS modification should be a desirable effect. The analytical theory can be used as a tool to 1) detect model biases with high potential to distort the CCS and 2) efficiently generate novel, improved CCS datasets. The latter are highly relevant for the development of appropriate climate change adaptation, mitigation, and resilience strategies. Future research needs to focus on developing process-based bias corrections that depend on simulated intensities rather than preserving the raw model CCS.

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 3011-3028 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Maraun ◽  
M. Widmann

Abstract. To assess potential impacts of climate change for a specific location, one typically employs climate model simulations at the grid box corresponding to the same geographical location. But based on regional climate model simulations, we show that simulated climate might be systematically displaced compared to observations. In particular in the rain shadow of moutain ranges, a local grid box is therefore often not representative of observed climate: the simulated windward weather does not flow far enough across the mountains; local grid boxes experience the wrong airmasses and atmospheric circulation. In some cases, also the local climate change signal is deteriorated. Classical bias correction methods fail to correct these location errors. Often, however, a distant simulated time series is representative of the considered observed precipitation, such that a non-local bias correction is possible. These findings also clarify limitations of bias correcting global model errors, and of bias correction against station data.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Lehner ◽  
Imran Nadeem ◽  
Herbert Formayer

Abstract. Daily meteorological data such as temperature or precipitation from climate models is needed for many climate impact studies, e.g. in hydrology or agriculture but direct model output can contain large systematic errors. Thus, statistical bias adjustment is applied to correct climate model outputs. Here we review existing statistical bias adjustment methods and their shortcomings, and present a method which we call EQA (Empirical Quantile Adjustment), a development of the methods EDCDFm and PresRAT. We then test it in comparison to two existing methods using real and artificially created daily temperature and precipitation data for Austria. We compare the performance of the three methods in terms of the following demands: (1): The model data should match the climatological means of the observational data in the historical period. (2): The long-term climatological trends of means (climate change signal), either defined as difference or as ratio, should not be altered during bias adjustment, and (3): Even models with too few wet days (precipitation above 0.1 mm) should be corrected accurately, so that the wet day frequency is conserved. EQA fulfills (1) almost exactly and (2) at least for temperature. For precipitation, an additional correction included in EQA assures that the climate change signal is conserved, and for (3), we apply another additional algorithm to add precipitation days.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 1409-1429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sjoukje Philip ◽  
Sarah Sparrow ◽  
Sarah F. Kew ◽  
Karin van der Wiel ◽  
Niko Wanders ◽  
...  

Abstract. In August 2017 Bangladesh faced one of its worst river flooding events in recent history. This paper presents, for the first time, an attribution of this precipitation-induced flooding to anthropogenic climate change from a combined meteorological and hydrological perspective. Experiments were conducted with three observational datasets and two climate models to estimate changes in the extreme 10-day precipitation event frequency over the Brahmaputra basin up to the present and, additionally, an outlook to 2 ∘C warming since pre-industrial times. The precipitation fields were then used as meteorological input for four different hydrological models to estimate the corresponding changes in river discharge, allowing for comparison between approaches and for the robustness of the attribution results to be assessed. In all three observational precipitation datasets the climate change trends for extreme precipitation similar to that observed in August 2017 are not significant, however in two out of three series, the sign of this insignificant trend is positive. One climate model ensemble shows a significant positive influence of anthropogenic climate change, whereas the other large ensemble model simulates a cancellation between the increase due to greenhouse gases (GHGs) and a decrease due to sulfate aerosols. Considering discharge rather than precipitation, the hydrological models show that attribution of the change in discharge towards higher values is somewhat less uncertain than in precipitation, but the 95 % confidence intervals still encompass no change in risk. Extending the analysis to the future, all models project an increase in probability of extreme events at 2 ∘C global heating since pre-industrial times, becoming more than 1.7 times more likely for high 10-day precipitation and being more likely by a factor of about 1.5 for discharge. Our best estimate on the trend in flooding events similar to the Brahmaputra event of August 2017 is derived by synthesizing the observational and model results: we find the change in risk to be greater than 1 and of a similar order of magnitude (between 1 and 2) for both the meteorological and hydrological approach. This study shows that, for precipitation-induced flooding events, investigating changes in precipitation is useful, either as an alternative when hydrological models are not available or as an additional measure to confirm qualitative conclusions. Besides this, it highlights the importance of using multiple models in attribution studies, particularly where the climate change signal is not strong relative to natural variability or is confounded by other factors such as aerosols.


Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 2266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Soriano ◽  
Luis Mediero ◽  
Carlos Garijo

Climate projections provided by EURO-CORDEX predict changes in annual maximum series of daily rainfall in the future in some areas of Spain because of climate change. Precipitation and temperature projections supplied by climate models do not usually fit exactly the statistical properties of the observed time series in the control period. Bias correction methods are used to reduce such errors. This paper seeks to find the most adequate bias correction techniques for temperature and precipitation projections that minimizes the errors between observations and climate model simulations in the control period. Errors in flood quantiles are considered to identify the best bias correction techniques, as flood quantiles are used for hydraulic infrastructure design and safety assessment. In addition, this study aims to understand how the expected changes in precipitation extremes and temperature will affect the catchment response in flood events in the future. Hydrological modelling is required to characterize rainfall-runoff processes adequately in a changing climate, in order to estimate flood changes expected in the future. Four catchments located in the central-western part of Spain have been selected as case studies. The HBV hydrological model has been calibrated in the four catchments by using the observed precipitation, temperature and streamflow data available on a daily scale. Rainfall has been identified as the most significant input to the model, in terms of its influence on flood response. The quantile mapping polynomial correction has been found to be the best bias correction method for precipitation. A general reduction in flood quantiles is expected in the future, smoothing the increases identified in precipitation quantiles by the reduction of soil moisture content in catchments, due to the expected increase in temperature and decrease in mean annual precipitations.


2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. 2777-2788 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Bosshard ◽  
S. Kotlarski ◽  
T. Ewen ◽  
C. Schär

Abstract. The annual cycle of temperature and precipitation changes as projected by climate models is of fundamental interest in climate impact studies. Its estimation, however, is impaired by natural variability. Using a simple form of the delta change method, we show that on regional scales relevant for hydrological impact models, the projected changes in the annual cycle are prone to sampling artefacts. For precipitation at station locations, these artefacts may have amplitudes that are comparable to the climate change signal itself. Therefore, the annual cycle of the climate change signal should be filtered when generating climate change scenarios. We test a spectral smoothing method to remove the artificial fluctuations. Comparison against moving monthly averages shows that sampling artefacts in the climate change signal can successfully be removed by spectral smoothing. The method is tested at Swiss climate stations and applied to regional climate model output of the ENSEMBLES project. The spectral method performs well, except in cases with a strong annual cycle and large relative precipitation changes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 1061-1078 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdelkader Mezghani ◽  
Andreas Dobler ◽  
Rasmus Benestad ◽  
Jan Erik Haugen ◽  
Kajsa M. Parding ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTMost impact studies using downscaled climate data as input assume that the selection of few global climate models (GCMs) representing the largest spread covers the likely range of future changes. This study shows that including more GCMs can result in a very different behavior. We tested the influence of selecting various subsets of GCMs on the climate change signal over Poland from simulations based on dynamical and empirical–statistical downscaling methods. When the climate variable is well simulated by the GCM, such as temperature, results showed that both downscaling methods agree on a warming over Poland by up to 2° or 5°C assuming intermediate or high emission scenarios, respectively, by 2071–2100. As a less robust simulated signal through GCMs, precipitation is expected to increase by up to 10% by 2071–2100 assuming the intermediate emission scenario. However, these changes are uncertain when the high emission scenario and the end of the twenty-first century are of interest. Further, an additional bootstrap test revealed an underestimation in the warming rate varying from 0.5° to more than 4°C over Poland that was found to be largely influenced by the selection of few driving GCMs instead of considering the full range of possible climate model outlooks. Furthermore, we found that differences between various combinations of small subsets from the GCM ensemble of opportunities can be as large as the climate change signal.


2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 2421-2442 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W. Pierce ◽  
Daniel R. Cayan ◽  
Edwin P. Maurer ◽  
John T. Abatzoglou ◽  
Katherine C. Hegewisch

Abstract Global climate model (GCM) output typically needs to be bias corrected before it can be used for climate change impact studies. Three existing bias correction methods, and a new one developed here, are applied to daily maximum temperature and precipitation from 21 GCMs to investigate how different methods alter the climate change signal of the GCM. The quantile mapping (QM) and cumulative distribution function transform (CDF-t) bias correction methods can significantly alter the GCM’s mean climate change signal, with differences of up to 2°C and 30% points for monthly mean temperature and precipitation, respectively. Equidistant quantile matching (EDCDFm) bias correction preserves GCM changes in mean daily maximum temperature but not precipitation. An extension to EDCDFm termed PresRat is introduced, which generally preserves the GCM changes in mean precipitation. Another problem is that GCMs can have difficulty simulating variance as a function of frequency. To address this, a frequency-dependent bias correction method is introduced that is twice as effective as standard bias correction in reducing errors in the models’ simulation of variance as a function of frequency, and it does so without making any locations worse, unlike standard bias correction. Last, a preconditioning technique is introduced that improves the simulation of the annual cycle while still allowing the bias correction to take account of an entire season’s values at once.


2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 670-678 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. S Vithlani ◽  
H. D Rank

For the future projections Global climate models (GCMs) enable development of climate projections and relate greenhouse gas forcing to future potential climate states. When focusing it on smaller scales it exhibit some limitations to overcome this problem, regional climate models (RCMs) and other downscaling methods have been developed. To ensure statistics of the downscaled output matched the corresponding statistics of the observed data, bias correction was used. Quantify future changes of climate extremes were analyzed, based on these downscaled data from two RCMs grid points. Subset of indices and models, results of bias corrected model output and raw for the present day climate were compared with observation, which demonstrated that bias correction is important for RCM outputs. Bias correction directed agreements of extreme climate indices for future climate it does not correct for lag inverse autocorrelation and fraction of wet and dry days. But, it was observed that adjusting both the biases in the mean and variability, relatively simple non-linear correction, leads to better reproduction of observed extreme daily and multi-daily precipitation amounts. Due to climate change temperature and precipitation will increased day by day.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Sonntag ◽  
Matthias Gassmann

<p>Due to climate change, meteorological extremes affect the environment and our society in the past decades. But not only the extremes are piling up, the average temperatures and the precipitation regimes have changed in recent decades. The change in meteorological conditions also affects the water balance and thus also the generation processes of runoff. The aim of this work is to estimate this future change for a small low-mountain catchment in central Germany using climate projections and hydrological modelling.</p><p>As input to the hydrological model HBV Light, climate data from seven different combinations of global and regional climate models are used. However, due to their substantial bias it is necessary to apply bias correction. For each of the three climate input time series used by HBV Light, different bias correction methods are tested: Precipitation (Linear Scaling Multiplication, Quantile Mapping, Power Transformation, Distribution Mapping Gamma), Temperature (Linear Scaling Addition, Quantile Mapping, Variance Scaling, Distribution Mapping Normal) and Potential Evapotranspiration (Linear Scaling Multiplication, Linear Scaling Addition, Quantile Mapping). The corrected climate model outputs are compared to the observed timeseries and rated based on three different efficiency criteria. Overall, the combination of different climate models and bias correction methods generates 63 future hydrological projections. Based on this ensemble, the future water balance of the catchment is assessed. The results show that (1) the biggest uncertainties in the hydrological simulation were generated by uncorrected climate model outputs; (2) the uncertainties in hydrological simulations increase till the end of the century; (3) Power Transformation and Quantile Mapping perform best for precipitation, Linear Scaling Addition and Quantile Mapping for temperature, Linear Scaling Addition and Quantile Mapping for potential evapotranspiration; (4) the total annual outflow increases till 2070 because of an increase of the outflow in winter and spring; (5) in the future, interflow will increase in spring and winter and reduce in summer and autumn; (6) till the end of the century the baseflow will rise in spring and in the rest of year the baseflow will decrease. This study shows that even if changes in the annual total discharge for small catchments have no significant trend, the generation processes and the seasonal values may change in the future.</p>


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Tabari ◽  
Rozemien De Troch ◽  
Olivier Giot ◽  
Rafiq Hamdi ◽  
Piet Termonia ◽  
...  

Abstract. This study explores whether climate models with higher spatial resolution provide higher accuracy for precipitation simulations and/or different climate change signals. The outputs from two convection-permitting climate models (ALARO and CCLM) with a spatial resolution of 3–4 km are compared with those from the coarse scale driving models or reanalysis data for simulating/projecting daily and sub-daily precipitation quantiles. The high-resolution ALARO and CCLM models reveal an added value to capture sub-daily precipitation extremes during summer compared to the driving GCMs and reanalysis data. Further validation of historical climate simulations based on design precipitation statistics derived from intensity–duration–frequency (IDF) curves shows a better match of the convection-permitting model results with the observations-based IDF statistics. Results moreover indicate that one has to be careful in assuming spatial scale independency of climate change signals for the delta change downscaling method, as high-resolution models may show larger changes in extreme precipitation. These larger changes appear to be dependent on the climate model, since such intensification is not observed for the ALARO model.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document