scholarly journals Climate Change Impact Assessment for Aji Basin Using Statistical Downscaling and Bias Correction of Climate Model Outputs

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 670-678 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. S Vithlani ◽  
H. D Rank
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Climate Extremes ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Climate Indices ◽  
Climate Projections

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.

scholarly journals On the need for bias correction in regional climate scenarios to assess climate change impacts on river runoff

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 1189-1204 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Muerth ◽  
B. Gauvin St-Denis ◽  
S. Ricard ◽  
J. A. Velázquez ◽  
J. Schmid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Runoff ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Hydrological Models

Abstract. In climate change impact research, the assessment of future river runoff as well as the catchment-scale water balance is impeded by different sources of modeling uncertainty. Some research has already been done in order to quantify the uncertainty of climate projections originating from the climate models and the downscaling techniques, as well as from the internal variability evaluated from climate model member ensembles. Yet, the use of hydrological models adds another layer of uncertainty. Within the QBic3 project (Québec–Bavarian International Collaboration on Climate Change), the relative contributions to the overall uncertainty from the whole model chain (from global climate models to water management models) are investigated using an ensemble of multiple climate and hydrological models. Although there are many options to downscale global climate projections to the regional scale, recent impact studies tend to use regional climate models (RCMs). One reason for that is that the physical coherence between atmospheric and land-surface variables is preserved. The coherence between temperature and precipitation is of particular interest in hydrology. However, the regional climate model outputs often are biased compared to the observed climatology of a given region. Therefore, biases in those outputs are often corrected to facilitate the reproduction of historic runoff conditions when used in hydrological models, even if those corrections alter the relationship between temperature and precipitation. So, as bias correction may affect the consistency between RCM output variables, the use of correction techniques and even the use of (biased) climate model data itself is sometimes disputed among scientists. For these reasons, the effect of bias correction on simulated runoff regimes and the relative change in selected runoff indicators is explored. If it affects the conclusion of climate change analysis in hydrology, we should consider it as a source of uncertainty. If not, the application of bias correction methods is either unnecessary to obtain the change signal in hydro-climatic projections, or safe to use for the production of present and future river runoff scenarios as it does not alter the change signal. The results of the present paper highlight the analysis of daily runoff simulated with four different hydrological models in two natural-flow catchments, driven by different regional climate models for a reference and a future period. As expected, bias correction of climate model outputs is important for the reproduction of the runoff regime of the past, regardless of the hydrological model used. Then again, its impact on the relative change of flow indicators between reference and future periods is weak for most indicators, with the exception of the timing of the spring flood peak. Still, our results indicate that the impact of bias correction on runoff indicators increases with bias in the climate simulations.

scholarly journals On the need for bias correction in regional climate scenarios to assess climate change impacts on river runoff

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 10205-10243 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Muerth ◽  
B. Gauvin St-Denis ◽  
S. Ricard ◽  
J. A. Velázquez ◽  
J. Schmid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Runoff ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Hydrological Models

Abstract. In climate change impact research, the assessment of future river runoff as well as the catchment scale water balance is impeded by different sources of modeling uncertainty. Some research has already been done in order to quantify the uncertainty of climate projections originating from the climate models and the downscaling techniques as well as from the internal variability evaluated from climate model member ensembles. Yet, the use of hydrological models adds another layer of incertitude. Within the QBic3 project (Québec-Bavaria International Collaboration on Climate Change) the relative contributions to the overall uncertainty from the whole model chain (from global climate models to water management models) are investigated using an ensemble of multiple climate and hydrological models. Although there are many options to downscale global climate projections to the regional scale, recent impact studies tend to use Regional Climate Models (RCMs). One reason for that is that the physical coherence between atmospheric and land-surface variables is preserved. The coherence between temperature and precipitation is of particular interest in hydrology. However, the regional climate model outputs often are biased compared to the observed climatology of a given region. Therefore, biases in those outputs are often corrected to reproduce historic runoff conditions from hydrological models using them, even if those corrections alter the relationship between temperature and precipitation. So, as bias correction may affect the consistency between RCM output variables, the use of correction techniques and even the use of (biased) climate model data itself is sometimes disputed among scientists. For those reasons, the effect of bias correction on simulated runoff regimes and the relative change in selected runoff indicators is explored. If it affects the conclusion of climate change analysis in hydrology, we should consider it as a source of uncertainty. If not, the application of bias correction methods is either unnecessary in hydro-climatic projections, or safe to use as it does not alter the change signal of river runoff. The results of the present paper highlight the analysis of daily runoff simulated with four different hydrological models in two natural-flow catchments, driven by different regional climate models for a reference and a future period. As expected, bias correction of climate model outputs is important for the reproduction of the runoff regime of the past regardless of the hydrological model used. Then again, its impact on the relative change of flow indicators between reference and future period is weak for most indicators with the exception of the timing of the spring flood peak. Still, our results indicate that the impact of bias correction on runoff indicators increases with bias in the climate simulations.

scholarly journals Comparison of Statistical and Dynamic Downscaling Techniques in Generating High-Resolution Temperatures in China from CMIP5 GCMs

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Zhang ◽  
YinLong Xu ◽  
ChunChun Meng ◽  
XinHua Li ◽  
Huan Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Maximum Temperature ◽  
The Tibetan Plateau ◽  
Dynamic Downscaling

AbstractIn aiming for better access to climate change information and for providing climate service, it is important to obtain reliable high-resolution temperature simulations. Systematic comparisons are still deficient between statistical and dynamic downscaling techniques because of their inherent unavoidable uncertainties. In this paper, 20 global climate models (GCMs) and one regional climate model [Providing Regional Climates to Impact Studies (PRECIS)] are employed to evaluate their capabilities in reproducing average trends of mean temperature (Tm), maximum temperature (Tmax), minimum temperature (Tmin), diurnal temperature range (DTR), and extreme events represented by frost days (FD) and heat-wave days (HD) across China. It is shown generally that bias of temperatures from GCMs relative to observations is over ±1°C across more than one-half of mainland China. PRECIS demonstrates better representation of temperatures (except for HD) relative to GCMs. There is relatively better performance in Huanghuai, Jianghuai, Jianghan, south Yangzi River, and South China, whereas estimation is not as good in Xinjiang, the eastern part of northwest China, and the Tibetan Plateau. Bias-correction spatial disaggregation is used to downscale GCMs outputs, and bias correction is applied for PRECIS outputs, which demonstrate better improvement to a bias within ±0.2°C for Tm, Tmax, Tmin, and DTR and ±2 days for FD and HD. Furthermore, such improvement is also verified by the evidence of increased spatial correlation coefficient and symmetrical uncertainty, decreased root-mean-square error, and lower standard deviation for reproductions. It is seen from comprehensive ranking metrics that different downscaled models show the most improvement across different climatic regions, implying that optional ensembles of models should be adopted to provide sufficient high-quality climate information.

scholarly journals Balanced estimate and uncertainty assessment of European climate change using the large EURO-CORDEX regional climate model ensemble

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Evin ◽  
Samuel Somot ◽  
Benoit Hingray
Keyword(s):  
Regional Climate Model ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Uncertainty Assessment ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Total Uncertainty ◽  
Near Surface

Abstract. Large Multiscenarios Multimodel Ensembles (MMEs) of regional climate model (RCM) experiments driven by Global Climate Models (GCM) are made available worldwide and aim at providing robust estimates of climate changes and associated uncertainties. Due to many missing combinations of emission scenarios and climate models leading to sparse Scenario-GCM-RCM matrices, these large ensembles are however very unbalanced, which makes uncertainty analyses impossible with standard approaches. In this paper, the uncertainty assessment is carried out by applying an advanced statistical approach, called QUALYPSO, to a very large ensemble of 87 EURO-CORDEX climate projections, the largest ensemble ever produced for regional projections in Europe. This analysis provides i) the most up-to-date and balanced estimates of mean changes for near-surface temperature and precipitation in Europe, ii) the total uncertainty of projections and its partition as a function of time, and iii) the list of the most important contributors to the model uncertainty. For changes of total precipitation and mean temperature in winter (DJF) and summer (JJA), the uncertainty due to RCMs can be as large as the uncertainty due to GCMs at the end of the century (2071–2099). Both uncertainty sources are mainly due to a small number of individual models clearly identified. Due to the highly unbalanced character of the MME, mean estimated changes can drastically differ from standard average estimates based on the raw ensemble of opportunity. For the RCP4.5 emission scenario in Central-Eastern Europe for instance, the difference between balanced and direct estimates are up to 0.8 °C for summer temperature changes and up to 20 % for summer precipitation changes at the end of the century.

scholarly journals New Tendencies in Global Climate Change and Their Effects on the Climate of Hungary

Hadmérnök ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-107
Author(s):  
László Földi ◽  
László Halász
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Lower Atmosphere ◽  
The Earth

Defining the term of climate, we investigate the role of natural causes and effects of human activities in climate change. The temperature of the Earth is determined by the balance between the amount of radiation energy received from the Sun and that emitted from the surface of the Earth towards the outer space. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides, act to make the surface much warmer, because they absorb and emit heat energy in all directions (including downwards), keeping Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere warm. The primary cause of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil and coal, which emits greenhouse gases into the atmosphere – primarily carbon dioxide. We give a review about the activity of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the United Nations Climate Change Conferences. Shortly investigate the different global climate models and some regional climate models. Finally discuss the results of regional climate model simulations for the Carpathian Basin.

scholarly journals A regional climate modelling projection ensemble experiment – NARCliM

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 5117-5139 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Evans ◽  
F. Ji ◽  
C. Lee ◽  
P. Smith ◽  
D. Argüeso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Regional Climate Modelling ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Modelling ◽  
User Engagement

Abstract. Including the impacts of climate change in decision making and planning processes is a challenge facing many regional governments including the New South Wales (NSW) and Australian Capital Territory (ACT) governments in Australia. NARCliM (NSW/ACT Regional Climate Modelling project) is a regional climate modelling project that aims to provide a comprehensive and consistent set of climate projections that can be used by all relevant government departments when considering climate change. To maximise end user engagement and ensure outputs are relevant to the planning process, a series of stakeholder workshops were run to define key aspects of the model experiment including spatial resolution, time slices, and output variables. As with all such experiments, practical considerations limit the number of ensembles members that can be simulated such that choices must be made concerning which Global Climate Models (GCMs) to downscale from, and which Regional Climate Models (RCMs) to downscale with. Here a methodology for making these choices is proposed that aims to sample the uncertainty in both GCMs and RCMs, as well as spanning the range of future climate projections present in the full GCM ensemble. The created ensemble provides a more robust view of future regional climate changes.

scholarly journals High-Resolution Climate Projections for a Densely Populated Mediterranean Region

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 3684
Author(s):  
Mohamed Salem Nashwan ◽  
Shamsuddin Shahid ◽  
Eun-Sung Chung
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Far Future

The present study projected future climate change for the densely populated Central North region of Egypt (CNE) for two representative concentration pathways (RCPs) and two futures (near future: 2020–2059, and far future: 2060–2099), estimated by a credible subset of five global climate models (GCMs). Different bias correction models have been applied to correct the bias in the five interpolated GCMs’ outputs onto a high-resolution horizontal grid. The 0.05° CNE datasets of maximum and minimum temperatures (Tmx, and Tmn, respectively) and the 0.1° African Rainfall Climatology (ARC2) datasets represented the historical climate. The evaluation of bias correction methodologies revealed the better performance of linear and variance scaling for correcting the rainfall and temperature GCMs’ outputs, respectively. They were used to transfer the correction factor to the projections. The five statistically bias-corrected climate projections presented the uncertainty range in the future change in the climate of CNE. The rainfall is expected to increase in the near future but drastically decrease in the far future. The Tmx and Tmn are projected to increase in both future periods reaching nearly a maximum of 5.50 and 8.50 °C for Tmx and Tmn, respectively. These findings highlighted the severe consequence of climate change on the socio-economic activities in the CNE aiming for better sustainable development.

scholarly journals Regional climate change projections from NA-CORDEX and their relation to climate sensitivity

2020 ◽  
Vol 162 (2) ◽  
pp. 645-665
Author(s):  
Melissa S. Bukovsky ◽  
Linda O. Mearns
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Regional Scale ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Continental Scale

Abstract The climate sensitivity of global climate models (GCMs) strongly influences projected climate change due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. Reasonably, the climate sensitivity of a GCM may be expected to affect dynamically downscaled projections. However, there has been little examination of the effect of the climate sensitivity of GCMs on regional climate model (RCM) ensembles. Therefore, we present projections of temperature and precipitation from the ensemble of projections produced as a part of the North American branch of the international Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (NA-CORDEX) in the context of their relationship to the climate sensitivity of their parent GCMs. NA-CORDEX simulations were produced at 50-km and 25-km resolutions with multiple RCMs which downscaled multiple GCMs that spanned nearly the full range of climate sensitivity available in the CMIP5 archive. We show that climate sensitivity is a very important source of spread in the NA-CORDEX ensemble, particularly for temperature. Temperature projections correlate with driving GCM climate sensitivity annually and seasonally across North America not only at a continental scale but also at a local-to-regional scale. Importantly, the spread in temperature projections would be reduced if only low, mid, or high climate sensitivity simulations were considered, or if only the ensemble mean were considered. Precipitation projections correlate with climate sensitivity, but only at a continental scale during the cold season, due to the increasing influence of other processes at finer scales. Additionally, it is shown that the RCMs do alter the projection space sampled by their driving GCMs.

Investigation of future climate characteristics over the Carpathian Region by “tuning” CORDEX temperature time series – a new perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Csaba Zsolt Torma
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Standard Procedure ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Global Changes ◽  
Regional Warming ◽  
Mean Temperature

<p>The answers to the following questions ‘What are the consequences of climate change (warming)…?’ and ‘By when do we have to be prepared for that level of climate change (warming)?’ must be given only with caution. On the one hand, regional or local changes can be inconsistent with global changes, as local processes might not accurately interpreted by global climate models (GCMs) due to their relative coarse resolution. On the other hand, climate model simulations’ outputs are prone to biases compared to observations; furthermore, climate projections can be very different in modelling future temperature characteristics. In this context, while the magnitude of expected change described by a climate model may seem to be reasonable, but the projected temperature is not necessarily realistic (considering the model’s relative bias compared to observations). More specifically, the standard procedure of assessing climate change can be illustrated by taking the mean for a future period (e.g. 2070–2099) and compute the change relative to a reference period (e.g. 1976−2005). Keeping in mind the expected changes based on those projections might come with high degree of uncertainty as simulations might show different mean temperature values for the same assessed periods with even a range of few degrees of °C. When regional climate change is assessed based on at a given regional warming level (WL, e.g. 1.5 °C) added to the observed mean, then the aforementioned uncertainty range is reduced as the models (GCM or regional climate models) are assessed with respect to the same 30-year mean temperature value, but not for the same periods (noting that the WL is defined at regional and not at global scale). Thus the uncertainty of expected changes with regard to temperature can be significantly reduced. In this case an additional uncertainty factor might rise: time, as climate models can reach that WL at different times. Accordingly, we can give information on relative changes with a specific uncertainty as a metric based on the timing of reaching the assessed WL. Aim of the present work is to illustrate the feasibility of this concept for the region of the Carpathian Basin based on high-resolution EURO- and Med-CORDEX simulations.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document