scholarly journals GLOBAL CLIMATE MODEL:A COMPREHENSIVE TOOL IN CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT STUDIES

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 30-44
Author(s):  
Dharmaveer Singh ◽  
Sanjay K. Jain ◽  
R. D. Gupta
2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 3301-3317 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Honti ◽  
A. Scheidegger ◽  
C. Stamm

Abstract. Climate change impact assessments have become more and more popular in hydrology since the middle 1980s with a recent boost after the publication of the IPCC AR4 report. From hundreds of impact studies a quasi-standard methodology has emerged, to a large extent shaped by the growing public demand for predicting how water resources management or flood protection should change in the coming decades. The "standard" workflow relies on a model cascade from global circulation model (GCM) predictions for selected IPCC scenarios to future catchment hydrology. Uncertainty is present at each level and propagates through the model cascade. There is an emerging consensus between many studies on the relative importance of the different uncertainty sources. The prevailing perception is that GCM uncertainty dominates hydrological impact studies. Our hypothesis was that the relative importance of climatic and hydrologic uncertainty is (among other factors) heavily influenced by the uncertainty assessment method. To test this we carried out a climate change impact assessment and estimated the relative importance of the uncertainty sources. The study was performed on two small catchments in the Swiss Plateau with a lumped conceptual rainfall runoff model. In the climatic part we applied the standard ensemble approach to quantify uncertainty but in hydrology we used formal Bayesian uncertainty assessment with two different likelihood functions. One was a time series error model that was able to deal with the complicated statistical properties of hydrological model residuals. The second was an approximate likelihood function for the flow quantiles. The results showed that the expected climatic impact on flow quantiles was small compared to prediction uncertainty. The choice of uncertainty assessment method actually determined what sources of uncertainty could be identified at all. This demonstrated that one could arrive at rather different conclusions about the causes behind predictive uncertainty for the same hydrological model and calibration data when considering different objective functions for calibration.


Eos ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 88 (47) ◽  
pp. 504-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin P. Maurer ◽  
Levi Brekke ◽  
Tom Pruitt ◽  
Philip B. Duffy

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 7621-7655 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Stoll ◽  
H. J. Hendricks Franssen ◽  
R. Barthel ◽  
W. Kinzelbach

Abstract. Future risks for groundwater resources, due to global change are usually analyzed by driving hydrological models with the outputs of climate models. However, this model chain is subject to considerable uncertainties. Given the high uncertainties it is essential to identify the processes governing the groundwater dynamics, as these processes are likely to affect groundwater resources in the future, too. Information about the dominant mechanisms can be achieved by the analysis of long-term data, which are assumed to provide insight in the reaction of groundwater resources to changing conditions (weather, land use, water demand). Referring to this, a dataset of 30 long-term time series of precipitation dominated groundwater systems in northern Switzerland and southern Germany is collected. In order to receive additional information the analysis of the data is carried out together with hydrological model simulations. High spatio-temporal correlations, even over large distances could be detected and are assumed to be related to large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns. As a result it is suggested to prefer innovative weather-type-based downscaling methods to other stochastic downscaling approaches. In addition, with the help of a qualitative procedure to distinguish between meteorological and anthropogenic causes it was possible to identify processes which dominated the groundwater dynamics in the past. It could be shown that besides the meteorological conditions, land use changes, pumping activity and feedback mechanisms governed the groundwater dynamics. Based on these findings, recommendations to improve climate change impact studies are suggested.


2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 4579-4638 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Peel ◽  
R. Srikanthan ◽  
T. A. McMahon ◽  
D. J. Karoly

Abstract. Two key sources of uncertainty in projections of future runoff for climate change impact assessments are uncertainty between Global Climate Models (GCMs) and within a GCM. Within-GCM uncertainty is the variability in GCM output that occurs when running a scenario multiple times but each run has slightly different, but equally plausible, initial conditions. The limited number of runs available for each GCM and scenario combination within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) and phase 5 (CMIP5) datasets, limits the assessment of within-GCM uncertainty. In this second of two companion papers, the primary aim is to approximate within-GCM uncertainty of monthly precipitation and temperature projections and assess its impact on modelled runoff for climate change impact assessments. A secondary aim is to assess the impact of between-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff. Here we approximate within-GCM uncertainty by developing non-stationary stochastic replicates of GCM monthly precipitation and temperature data. These replicates are input to an off-line hydrologic model to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on projected annual runoff and reservoir yield. To-date within-GCM uncertainty has received little attention in the hydrologic climate change impact literature and this analysis provides an approximation of the uncertainty in projected runoff, and reservoir yield, due to within- and between-GCM uncertainty of precipitation and temperature projections. In the companion paper, McMahon et al. (2014) sought to reduce between-GCM uncertainty by removing poorly performing GCMs, resulting in a selection of five better performing GCMs from CMIP3 for use in this paper. Here we present within- and between-GCM uncertainty results in mean annual precipitation (MAP), temperature (MAT) and runoff (MAR), the standard deviation of annual precipitation (SDP) and runoff (SDR) and reservoir yield for five CMIP3 GCMs at 17 world-wide catchments. Based on 100 stochastic replicates of each GCM run at each catchment, within-GCM uncertainty was assessed in relative form as the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean of the 100 replicate values of each variable. The average relative within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs for 2015–2044 (A1B) were: MAP 4.2%, SDP 14.2%, MAT 0.7%, MAR 10.1% and SDR 17.6%. The Gould–Dincer Gamma procedure was applied to each annual runoff time-series for hypothetical reservoir capacities of 1× MAR and 3× MAR and the average uncertainty in reservoir yield due to within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs were: 25.1% (1× MAR) and 11.9% (3× MAR). Our approximation of within-GCM uncertainty is expected to be an underestimate due to not replicating the GCM trend. However, our results indicate that within-GCM uncertainty is important when interpreting climate change impact assessments. Approximately 95% of values of MAP, SDP, MAT, MAR, SDR and reservoir yield from 1× MAR or 3× MAR capacity reservoirs are expected to fall within twice their respective relative uncertainty (standard deviation/mean). Within-GCM uncertainty has significant implications for interpreting climate change impact assessments that report future changes within our range of uncertainty for a given variable – these projected changes may be due solely to within-GCM uncertainty. Since within-GCM variability is amplified from precipitation to runoff and then to reservoir yield, climate change impact assessments that do not take into account within-GCM uncertainty risk providing water resources management decision makers with a sense of certainty that is unjustified.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 3159-3188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Huang ◽  
W. F. Yang ◽  
L. Chen

Abstract. Doubtlessly, global climate change and its impacts have caught increasing attention from all sectors of the society world-widely. Among all those affected aspects, hydrological circle has been found rather sensitive to climate change. Climate change, either as the result or as the driving-force, has intensified the uneven distribution of water resources in the Changjiang (Yangtze) River basin, China. In turn, drought and flooding problems have been aggravated which has brought new challenges to current hydraulic works such as dike or reservoirs which were designed and constructed based on the historical hydrological characteristics, yet has been significantly changed due to climate change impact. Thus, it is necessary to consider the climate change impacts in basin planning and water resources management, currently and in the future. To serve such purpose, research has been carried out on climate change impact on water resources (and hydrological circle) in Changjiang River. The paper presents the main findings of the research, including main findings from analysis of historical hydro-meteorological data in Changjiang River, and runoff change trends in the future using temperature and precipitation predictions calculated based on different emission scenarios of the 24 Global Climate Modes (GCMs) which has been used in the 4th IPCC assessment report. In this research, two types of macro-scope statistical and hydrological models were developed to simulate runoff prediction. Concerning the change trends obtained from the historical data and the projection from GCMs results, the trend of changes in water resources impacted by climate change was analyzed for Changjiang River. Uncertainty of using the models and data were as well analyzed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document