Are large scale models useful? A case of nested model domains for assessing current and future stream runoff and sediments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alena Bartosova ◽  
Berit Arheimer ◽  
Alban de Lavenne ◽  
René Capell ◽  
Johan Strömqvist
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Spatial Patterns ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Aridity Index ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Nested Model ◽  
Nested Models ◽  
Changing Climate ◽  
Scale Models

<p>Continental and global dynamic hydrological models have emerged recently as tools for e.g. flood forecasting, large-scale climate impact analyses, and estimation of time-dynamic water fluxes into sea basins. One such tool is a dynamic process-based rainfall-runoff and water quality model Hydrological Predictions for Environment (HYPE). We present and compare historical simulations of runoff, soil moisture, aridity, and sediment concentrations for three nested model domains using global, continental (Europe), and national (Sweden) catchment-based HYPE applications. Future impacts on hydrological variables from changing climate were then assessed using the global and continental HYPE applications with ensembles based on 3 CMIP5 global climate models (GCMs).</p><p>Simulated historical sediment concentrations varied considerably among the nested models in spatial patterns while runoff values were more similar. Regardless of the variation, the global model was able to provide information on climate change impacts comparable to those from the continental and national models for hydrological indicators. Output variables that were calibrated, e.g. runoff, were shown to result in more reliable and consistent projected changes among the different model scales than derived variables such as the actual aridity index. The comparison was carried out for ensemble averages as well as individual GCMs to illustrate the variability and the need for robust assessments.</p><p>Global hydrological models are shown to be valuable tools for e.g. first screenings of climate change effects and detection of spatial patterns and can be useful to provide information on current and future hydrological states at various domains. The challenge is (1) in deciding when we should use the large-scale models and (2) in interpreting the results, considering the uncertainty of the model results and quality of data especially at the global scale. Comparison across nested domains demonstrates the significance of scale which needs to be considered when interpreting the impacts alongside with model performance.</p><p>Bartosova et al, 2021: Large-scale hydrological and sediment modeling in nested domains under current and changing climate. Accepted to Special Issue Journal of Hydraulic Engineering.</p>

Global scale hydrological modelling at 100 m, 1 h resolution, in Python

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kor de Jong ◽  
Marc van Kreveld ◽  
Debabrata Panja ◽  
Oliver Schmitz ◽  
Derek Karssenberg
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Flow Direction ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Continental Scale ◽  
Modelling Framework ◽  
Scale Models

<p>Data availability at global scale is increasing exponentially. Although considerable challenges remain regarding the identification of model structure and parameters of continental scale hydrological models, we will soon reach the situation that global scale models could be defined at very high resolutions close to 100 m or less. One of the key challenges is how to make simulations of these ultra-high resolution models tractable ([1]).</p><p>Our research contributes by the development of a model building framework that is specifically designed to distribute calculations over multiple cluster nodes. This framework enables domain experts like hydrologists to develop their own large scale models, using a scripting language like Python, without the need to acquire the skills to develop low-level computer code for parallel and distributed computing.</p><p>We present the design and implementation of this software framework and illustrate its use with a prototype 100 m, 1 h continental scale hydrological model. Our modelling framework ensures that any model built with it is parallelized. This is made possible by providing the model builder with a set of building blocks of models, which are coded in such a manner that parallelization of calculations occurs within and across these building blocks, for any combination of building blocks. There is thus full flexibility on the side of the modeller, without losing performance.</p><p>This breakthrough is made possible by applying a novel approach to the implementation of the model building framework, called asynchronous many-tasks, provided by the HPX C++ software library ([3]). The code in the model building framework expresses spatial operations as large collections of interdependent tasks that can be executed efficiently on individual laptops as well as computer clusters ([2]). Our framework currently includes the most essential operations for building large scale hydrological models, including those for simulating transport of material through a flow direction network. By combining these operations, we rebuilt an existing 100 m, 1 h resolution model, thus far used for simulations of small catchments, requiring limited coding as we only had to replace the computational back end of the existing model. Runs at continental scale on a computer cluster show acceptable strong and weak scaling providing a strong indication that global simulations at this resolution will soon be possible, technically speaking.</p><p>Future work will focus on extending the set of modelling operations and adding scalable I/O, after which existing models that are currently limited in their ability to use the computational resources available to them can be ported to this new environment.</p><p>More information about our modelling framework is at https://lue.computationalgeography.org.</p><p><strong>References</strong></p><p>[1] M. Bierkens. Global hydrology 2015: State, trends, and directions. Water Resources Research, 51(7):4923–4947, 2015.<br>[2] K. de Jong, et al. An environmental modelling framework based on asynchronous many-tasks: scalability and usability. Submitted.<br>[3] H. Kaiser, et al. HPX - The C++ standard library for parallelism and concurrency. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(53):2352, 2020.</p>

scholarly journals Evaluation of drought propagation in an ensemble mean of large-scale hydrological models

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 8375-8424 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. F. Van Loon ◽  
M. H. J. Van Huijgevoort ◽  
H. A. J. Van Lanen
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Dry Season ◽  
Hydrological Drought ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Drought Characteristics ◽  
Snow Season ◽  
Scale Models ◽  
Ensemble Mean ◽  
Semi Arid

Abstract. Hydrological drought is increasingly studied using large-scale models. It is, however, not sure whether large-scale models reproduce the development of hydrological drought correctly. The pressing question is: how well do large-scale models simulate the propagation from meteorological to hydrological drought? To answer this question, we evaluated the simulation of drought propagation in an ensemble mean of ten large-scale models, both land-surface models and global hydrological models, that were part of the model intercomparison project of WATCH (WaterMIP). For a selection of case study areas, we studied drought characteristics (number of droughts, duration, severity), drought propagation features (pooling, attenuation, lag, lengthening), and hydrological drought typology (classical rainfall deficit drought, rain-to-snow-season drought, wet-to-dry-season drought, cold snow season drought, warm snow season drought, composite drought). Drought characteristics simulated by large-scale models clearly reflected drought propagation, i.e. drought events became less and longer when moving through the hydrological cycle. However, more differentiation was expected between fast and slowly responding systems, with slowly responding systems having less and longer droughts in runoff than fast responding systems. This was not found using large-scale models. Drought propagation features were poorly reproduced by the large-scale models, because runoff reacted immediately to precipitation, in all case study areas. This fast reaction to precipitation, even in cold climates in winter and in semi-arid climates in summer, also greatly influenced the hydrological drought typology as identified by the large-scale models. In general, the large-scale models had the correct representation of drought types, but the percentages of occurrence had some important mismatches, e.g. an overestimation of classical rainfall deficit droughts, and an underestimation of wet-to-dry-season droughts and snow-related droughts. Furthermore, almost no composite droughts were simulated for slowly responding areas, while many multi-year drought events were expected in these systems. We conclude that drought propagation processes are reasonably well reproduced by the ensemble mean of large-scale models in contrasting catchments in Europe and that some challenges remain in catchments with cold and semi-arid climates and catchments with large storage in aquifers or lakes. Improvement of drought simulation in large-scale models should focus on a better representation of hydrological processes that are important for drought development, such as evapotranspiration, snow accumulation and melt, and especially storage. Besides the more explicit inclusion of storage (e.g. aquifers) in large-scale models, also parametrisation of storage processes requires attention, for example through a global scale dataset on aquifer characteristics.

RAT (Robustness Assessment Test): a straightforward evaluation of hydrological model robustness to a changing climate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vazken Andréassian ◽  
Léonard Santos ◽  
Torben Sonnenborg ◽  
Alban de Lavenne ◽  
Göran Lindström ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Hydrological Model ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Climate Variables ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Hydrological Characteristics ◽  
Changing Climate ◽  
Split Sample ◽  
Sample Test ◽  
Model Robustness

<p>Hydrological models are increasingly used under evolving climatic conditions. They should thus be evaluated regarding their temporal transferability (application in different time periods) and extrapolation capacity (application beyond the range of known past conditions). In theory, parameters of hydrological models are independent of climate. In practice, however, many published studies based on the Split-Sample Test (Klemeš, 1986), have shown that model performances decrease systematically when it is used out of its calibration period. The RAT test proposed here aims at evaluating model robustness to a changing climate by assessing potential undesirable dependencies of hydrological model performances to climate variables. The test compares, over a long data period, the annual value of several climate variables (temperature, precipitation and aridity index) and the bias of the model over each year. If a significant relation exists between the climatic variable and the bias, the model is not considered to be robust to climate change on the catchment. The test has been compared to the Generalized Split-Sample Test (Coron et al., 2012) and showed similar results.</p><p>Here, we report on a large scale application of the test for three hydrological models with different level of complexity (GR6J, HYPE, MIKE-SHE) on a data set of 352 catchments in Denmark, France and Sweden. The results show that the test behaves differently given the evaluated variable (be temperature, precipitation or aridity) and the hydrological characteristics of each catchment. They also show that, although of different level of complexity, the robustness of the three models is similar on the overall data set. However, they are not robust on the same catchments and, then, are not sensitive to the same hydrological characteristics. This example highlights the applicability of the RAT test regardless of the model set-up and calibration procedure and its ability to provide a first evaluation of the model robustness to climate change.</p><p> </p><p><strong>References</strong></p><p>Coron, L., V. Andréassian, C. Perrin, J. Lerat, J. Vaze, M. Bourqui, and F. Hendrickx, 2012. Crash testing hydrological models in contrasted climate conditions: An experiment on 216 Australian catchments, Water Resour. Res., 48, W05552, doi:10.1029/2011WR011721</p><p>Klemeš, V., 1986. Operational testing of hydrological simulation models, Hydrol. Sci. J., 31, 13–24, doi:10.1080/02626668609491024</p><p> </p>

A simple approach to mimic the effect of active vegetation in hydrological models to better estimate hydrological variables under climate change

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thedini Asali Peiris ◽  
Petra Döll
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Potential Evapotranspiration ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Net Radiation ◽  
Ensemble Mean ◽  
The Impact

<p>Unlike global climate models, hydrological models cannot simulate the feedbacks among atmospheric processes, vegetation, water, and energy exchange at the land surface. This severely limits their ability to quantify the impact of climate change and the concurrent increase of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations on evapotranspiration and thus runoff. Hydrological models generally calculate actual evapotranspiration as a fraction of potential evapotranspiration (PET), which is computed as a function of temperature and net radiation and sometimes of humidity and wind speed. Almost no hydrological model takes into account that PET changes because the vegetation responds to changing CO<sub>2</sub> and climate. This active vegetation response consists of three components. With higher CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations, 1) plant stomata close, reducing transpiration (physiological effect) and 2) plants may grow better, with more leaves, increasing transpiration (structural effect), while 3) climatic changes lead to changes in plants growth and even biome shifts, changing evapotranspiration. Global climate models, which include dynamic vegetation models, simulate all these processes, albeit with a high uncertainty, and take into account the feedbacks to the atmosphere.</p><p>Milly and Dunne (2016) (MD) found that in the case of RCP8.5 the change of PET (computed using the Penman-Monteith equation) between 1981- 2000 and 2081-2100 is much higher than the change of non-water-stressed evapotranspiration (NWSET) computed by an ensemble of global climate models. This overestimation is partially due to the neglect of active vegetation response and partially due to the neglected feedbacks between the atmosphere and the land surface.</p><p>The objective of this paper is to present a simple approach for hydrological models that enables them to mimic the effect of active vegetation on potential evapotranspiration under climate change, thus improving computation of freshwater-related climate change hazards by hydrological models. MD proposed an alternative approach to estimate changes in PET for impact studies that is only a function of the changes in energy and not of temperature and achieves a good fit to the ensemble mean change of evapotranspiration computed by the ensemble of global climate models in months and grid cells without water stress. We developed an implementation of the MD idea for hydrological models using the Priestley-Taylor equation (PET-PT) to estimate PET as a function of net radiation and temperature. With PET-PT, an increasing temperature trend leads to strong increases in PET. Our proposed methodology (PET-MD) helps to remove this effect, retaining the impact of temperature on PET but not on long-term PET change.</p><p>We implemented the PET-MD approach in the global hydrological model WaterGAP2.2d. and computed daily time series of PET between 1981 and 2099 using bias-adjusted climate data of four global climate models for RCP 8.5. We evaluated, computed PET-PT and PET-MD at the grid cell level and globally, comparing also to the results of the Milly-Dunne study. The global analysis suggests that the application of PET-MD reduces the PET change until the end of this century from 3.341 mm/day according to PET-PT to 3.087 mm/day (ensemble mean over the four global climate models).</p><p>Milly, P.C.D., Dunne K.A. (2016). DOI:10.1038/nclimate3046.</p>

scholarly journals Climate change and landscape-use patterns influence recent past distribution of giant pandas

2020 ◽  
Vol 287 (1929) ◽  
pp. 20200358
Author(s):  
Junfeng Tang ◽  
Ronald R. Swaisgood ◽  
Megan A. Owen ◽  
Xuzhe Zhao ◽  
Wei Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climatic Factors ◽  
Ailuropoda Melanoleuca ◽  
Seasonal Temperature ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Giant Pandas ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
Changing Climate ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation

Climate change is one of the most pervasive threats to biodiversity globally, yet the influence of climate relative to other drivers of species depletion and range contraction remain difficult to disentangle. Here, we examine climatic and non-climatic correlates of giant panda ( Ailuropoda melanoleuca ) distribution using a large-scale 30 year dataset to evaluate whether a changing climate has already influenced panda distribution. We document several climatic patterns, including increasing temperatures, and alterations to seasonal temperature and precipitation. We found that while climatic factors were the most influential predictors of panda distribution, their importance diminished over time, while landscape variables have become relatively more influential. We conclude that the panda's distribution has been influenced by changing climate, but conservation intervention to manage habitat is working to increasingly offset these negative consequences.

scholarly journals Evaluation of drought propagation in an ensemble mean of large-scale hydrological models

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 4057-4078 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. F. Van Loon ◽  
M. H. J. Van Huijgevoort ◽  
H. A. J. Van Lanen
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Dry Season ◽  
Hydrological Drought ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Drought Characteristics ◽  
Snow Season ◽  
Scale Models ◽  
Ensemble Mean ◽  
Semi Arid

Abstract. Hydrological drought is increasingly studied using large-scale models. It is, however, not sure whether large-scale models reproduce the development of hydrological drought correctly. The pressing question is how well do large-scale models simulate the propagation from meteorological to hydrological drought? To answer this question, we evaluated the simulation of drought propagation in an ensemble mean of ten large-scale models, both land-surface models and global hydrological models, that participated in the model intercomparison project of WATCH (WaterMIP). For a selection of case study areas, we studied drought characteristics (number of droughts, duration, severity), drought propagation features (pooling, attenuation, lag, lengthening), and hydrological drought typology (classical rainfall deficit drought, rain-to-snow-season drought, wet-to-dry-season drought, cold snow season drought, warm snow season drought, composite drought). Drought characteristics simulated by large-scale models clearly reflected drought propagation; i.e. drought events became fewer and longer when moving through the hydrological cycle. However, more differentiation was expected between fast and slowly responding systems, with slowly responding systems having fewer and longer droughts in runoff than fast responding systems. This was not found using large-scale models. Drought propagation features were poorly reproduced by the large-scale models, because runoff reacted immediately to precipitation, in all case study areas. This fast reaction to precipitation, even in cold climates in winter and in semi-arid climates in summer, also greatly influenced the hydrological drought typology as identified by the large-scale models. In general, the large-scale models had the correct representation of drought types, but the percentages of occurrence had some important mismatches, e.g. an overestimation of classical rainfall deficit droughts, and an underestimation of wet-to-dry-season droughts and snow-related droughts. Furthermore, almost no composite droughts were simulated for slowly responding areas, while many multi-year drought events were expected in these systems. We conclude that most drought propagation processes are reasonably well reproduced by the ensemble mean of large-scale models in contrasting catchments in Europe. Challenges, however, remain in catchments with cold and semi-arid climates and catchments with large storage in aquifers or lakes. This leads to a high uncertainty in hydrological drought simulation at large scales. Improvement of drought simulation in large-scale models should focus on a better representation of hydrological processes that are important for drought development, such as evapotranspiration, snow accumulation and melt, and especially storage. Besides the more explicit inclusion of storage in large-scale models, also parametrisation of storage processes requires attention, for example through a global-scale dataset on aquifer characteristics, improved large-scale datasets on other land characteristics (e.g. soils, land cover), and calibration/evaluation of the models against observations of storage (e.g. in snow, groundwater).

scholarly journals Terrestrial Aridity and Its Response to Greenhouse Warming across CMIP5 Climate Models

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (14) ◽  
pp. 5583-5600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Scheff ◽  
Dargan M. W. Frierson
Keyword(s):  
Land Surface ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Potential Evapotranspiration ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Aridity Index ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Greenhouse Warming ◽  
Dimensionless Ratio ◽  
The Tropics

Abstract The aridity of a terrestrial climate is often quantified using the dimensionless ratio of annual precipitation (P) to annual potential evapotranspiration (PET). In this study, the climatological patterns and greenhouse warming responses of terrestrial P, Penman–Monteith PET, and are compared among 16 modern global climate models. The large-scale climatological values and implied biome types often disagree widely among models, with large systematic differences from observational estimates. In addition, the PET climatologies often differ by several tens of percent when computed using monthly versus 3-hourly inputs. With greenhouse warming, land P does not systematically increase or decrease, except at high latitudes. Therefore, because of moderate, ubiquitous PET increases, decreases (drying) are much more widespread than increases (wetting) in the tropics, subtropics, and midlatitudes in most models, confirming and expanding on earlier findings. The PET increases are also somewhat sensitive to the time resolution of the inputs, although not as systematically as for the PET climatologies. The changes in the balance between P and PET are also quantified using an alternative aridity index, the ratio , which has a one-to-one but nonlinear correspondence with . It is argued that the magnitudes of changes are more uniformly relevant than the magnitudes of changes, which tend to be much higher in wetter regions. The ratio and its changes are also found to be excellent statistical predictors of the land surface evaporative fraction and its changes.

scholarly journals Leishmaniasis and Climate Change—Case Study: Argentina

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oscar Daniel Salomón ◽  
María Gabriela Quintana ◽  
Andrea Verónica Mastrángelo ◽  
María Soledad Fernández
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Vector Borne Diseases ◽  
Scale Models ◽  
Vector Borne

Vector-borne diseases closely associated with the environment, such as leishmaniases, have been a usual argument about the deleterious impact of climate change on public health. From the biological point of view interaction of different variables has different and even conflicting effects on the survival of vectors and the probability transmission of pathogens. The results on ecoepidemiology of leishmaniasis in Argentina related to climate variables at different scales of space and time are presented. These studies showed that the changes in transmission due to change or increase in frequency and intensity of climatic instability were expressed through changes in the probability of vector-human reservoir effective contacts. These changes of contact in turn are modulated by both direct effects on the biology and ecology of the organisms involved, as by perceptions and changes in the behavior of the human communities at risk. Therefore, from the perspective of public health and state policy, and taking into account the current nonlinear increased velocity of climate change, we concluded that discussing the uncertainties of large-scale models will have lower impact than to develop-validate mitigation strategies to be operative at local level, and compatibles with sustainable development, conservation biodiversity, and respect for cultural diversity.

Downscaling Climate Information

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rasmus Benestad
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Southern Oscillation ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Local Climate ◽  
Skill Scores ◽  
The Right

What are the local consequences of a global climate change? This question is important for proper handling of risks associated with weather and climate. It also tacitly assumes that there is a systematic link between conditions taking place on a global scale and local effects. It is the utilization of the dependency of local climate on the global picture that is the backbone of downscaling; however, it is perhaps easiest to explain the concept of downscaling in climate research if we start asking why it is necessary. Global climate models are our best tools for computing future temperature, wind, and precipitation (or other climatological variables), but their limitations do not let them calculate local details for these quantities. It is simply not adequate to interpolate from model results. However, the models are able to predict large-scale features, such as circulation patterns, El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), and the global mean temperature. The local temperature and precipitation are nevertheless related to conditions taking place over a larger surrounding region as well as local geographical features (also true, in general, for variables connected to weather/climate). This, of course, also applies to other weather elements. Downscaling makes use of systematic dependencies between local conditions and large-scale ambient phenomena in addition to including information about the effect of the local geography on the local climate. The application of downscaling can involve several different approaches. This article will discuss various downscaling strategies and methods and will elaborate on their rationale, assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses. One important issue is the presence of spontaneous natural year-to-year variations that are not necessarily directly related to the global state, but are internally generated and superimposed on the long-term climate change. These variations typically involve phenomena such as ENSO, the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), and the Southeast Asian monsoon, which are nonlinear and non-deterministic. We cannot predict the exact evolution of non-deterministic natural variations beyond a short time horizon. It is possible nevertheless to estimate probabilities for their future state based, for instance, on projections with models run many times with slightly different set-up, and thereby to get some information about the likelihood of future outcomes. When it comes to downscaling and predicting regional and local climate, it is important to use many global climate model predictions. Another important point is to apply proper validation to make sure the models give skillful predictions. For some downscaling approaches such as regional climate models, there usually is a need for bias adjustment due to model imperfections. This means the downscaling doesn’t get the right answer for the right reason. Some of the explanations for the presence of biases in the results may be different parameterization schemes in the driving global and the nested regional models. A final underlying question is: What can we learn from downscaling? The context for the analysis is important, as downscaling is often used to find answers to some (implicit) question and can be a means of extracting most of the relevant information concerning the local climate. It is also important to include discussions about uncertainty, model skill or shortcomings, model validation, and skill scores.

scholarly journals The Response of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean to Climate Change

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 405-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Alexander ◽  
Sang-ik Shin ◽  
James D. Scott ◽  
Enrique Curchitser ◽  
Charles Stock
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Atlantic Ocean ◽  
Gulf Stream ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Gulf Of Maine ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
The Other ◽  
Surface Salinity

AbstractROMS, a high-resolution regional ocean model, was used to study how climate change may affect the northwestern Atlantic Ocean. A control (CTRL) simulation was conducted for the recent past (1976–2005), and simulations with additional forcing at the surface and lateral boundaries, obtained from three different global climate models (GCMs) using the RCP8.5 scenario, were conducted to represent the future (2070–99). The climate change response was obtained from the difference between the CTRL and each of the three future simulations. All three ROMS simulations indicated large increases in sea surface temperatures (SSTs) over most of the domain except off the eastern U.S. seaboard resulting from weakening of the Gulf Stream. There are also substantial intermodel differences in the response, including a southward shift of the Gulf Stream in one simulation and a slight northward shift in the other two, with corresponding changes in eddy activity. The depth of maximum warming varied among the three simulations, resulting in differences in the bottom temperature response in coastal regions, including the Gulf of Maine and the West Florida Shelf. The surface salinity decreased in the northern part of the domain and increased in the south in all three experiments, although the freshening extended much farther south in one ROMS simulation relative to the other two, and also relative to the GCM that provided the large-scale forcing. Thus, while high resolution allows for a better representation of currents and bathymetry, the response to climate change can vary considerably depending on the large-scale forcing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document