scholarly journals Corrigendum to "The implications of climate change scenario selection for future streamflow projection in the Upper Colorado River Basin" published in Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3989–4007, 2012

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 4223-4223
Author(s):  
B. L. Harding ◽  
A. W. Wood ◽  
J. R. Prairie
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Climate Change Scenario ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Change Scenario ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin ◽  
Selection For

scholarly journals The implications of climate change scenario selection for future streamflow projection in the Upper Colorado River Basin

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 3989-4007 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. L. Harding ◽  
A. W. Wood ◽  
J. R. Prairie
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Change Scenario ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Model Ensemble ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. The impact of projected 21st century climate conditions on streamflow in the Upper Colorado River Basin was estimated using a multi-model ensemble approach wherein the downscaled outputs of 112 future climate projections from 16 global climate models (GCMs) were used to drive a macroscale hydrology model. By the middle of the century, the impacts on streamflow range, over the entire ensemble, from a decrease of approximately 30% to an increase of approximately the same magnitude. Although prior studies and associated media coverage have focused heavily on the likelihood of a drier future for the Colorado River Basin, approximately 25 to 35% of the ensemble of runs, by 2099 and 2039, respectively, result in no change or increases in streamflow. The broad range of projected impacts is primarily the result of uncertainty in projections of future precipitation, and a relatively small part of the variability of precipitation across the projections can be attributed to the effect of emissions pathways. The simulated evolution of future temperature is strongly influenced by emissions, but temperature has a smaller influence than precipitation on flow. Period change statistics (i.e., the change in flow from one 30-yr period to another) vary as much within a model ensemble as between models and emissions pathways. Even by the end of the current century, the variability across the projections is much greater than changes in the ensemble mean. The relatively large ensemble analysis described herein provides perspective on earlier studies that have used fewer scenarios, and suggests that impact analyses relying on one or a few climate scenarios are unacceptably influenced by the choice of projections.

scholarly journals Causes for the Century-Long Decline in Colorado River Flow

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (23) ◽  
pp. 8181-8203 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Hoerling ◽  
J. Barsugli ◽  
B. Livneh ◽  
J. Eischeid ◽  
X. Quan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Basin ◽  
River Flow ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Uncertainty Range ◽  
Percent Change ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin

Abstract Upper Colorado River basin streamflow has declined by roughly 20% over the last century of the instrumental period, based on estimates of naturalized flow above Lees Ferry. Here we assess factors causing the decline and evaluate the premise that rising surface temperatures have been mostly responsible. We use an event attribution framework involving parallel sets of global model experiments with and without climate change drivers. We demonstrate that climate change forcing has acted to reduce Upper Colorado River basin streamflow during this period by about 10% (with uncertainty range of 6%–14% reductions). The magnitude of the observed flow decline is found to be inconsistent with natural variability alone, and approximately one-half of the observed flow decline is judged to have resulted from long-term climate change. Each of three different global models used herein indicates that climate change forcing during the last century has acted to increase surface temperature (~+1.2°C) and decrease precipitation (~−3%). Using large ensemble methods, we diagnose the separate effects of temperature and precipitation changes on Upper Colorado River streamflow. Precipitation change is found to be the most consequential factor owing to its amplified impact on flow resulting from precipitation elasticity (percent change in streamflow per percent change in precipitation) of ~2. We confirm that warming has also driven streamflow declines, as inferred from empirical studies, although operating as a secondary factor. Our finding of a modest −2.5% °C−1 temperature sensitivity, on the basis of our best model-derived estimate, indicates that only about one-third of the attributable climate change signal in Colorado River decline resulted from warming, whereas about two-thirds resulted from precipitation decline.

scholarly journals The implications of climate change scenario selection for future streamflow projection in the Upper Colorado River Basin

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 847-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. L. Harding ◽  
A. W. Wood ◽  
J. R. Prairie
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Change Scenario ◽  
Model Ensemble ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin ◽  
Emissions Scenarios ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. The impact of projected 21st century climate conditions on streamflow in the Upper Colorado River Basin was estimated using a multi-model ensemble approach wherein the downscaled outputs of 112 future climate scenarios from 16 global climate models (GCMs) were used to drive a macroscale hydrology model. By the middle of the century, the impacts on streamflow range, over the entire ensemble, from a decrease of approximately 30% to an increase of approximately the same magnitude. Although prior studies and associated media coverage have focused heavily on the likelihood of a drier future for the Colorado River Basin, approximately one-third of the ensemble of runs result in little change or increases in streamflow. The broad range of projected impacts is primarily the result of uncertainty in projections of future precipitation, and a relatively small part of the variability of precipitation across the projections can be attributed to the effect of emissions scenarios. The simulated evolution of future temperature is strongly influenced by emissions, but temperature has a smaller influence than precipitation on flow. Period change statistics (i.e., the change in flow from one 30-yr period to another) vary as much within a model ensemble as between models and emissions scenarios. Even over the course of the current century, the variability across the projections is much greater than the trend in the ensemble mean. The relatively large ensemble analysis described herein provides perspective on earlier studies that have used fewer scenarios, and suggests that impact analyses relying on one or a few scenarios, as is still common in dynamical downscaling assessments, are unacceptably influenced by choice of projections.

scholarly journals How will baseflow respond to climate change in the Upper Colorado River Basin?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia L. Miller ◽  
Matthew P. Miller ◽  
Patrick C. Longley ◽  
Jay R. Alder ◽  
Lindsay A. Bearup ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin

scholarly journals A Subseasonal Regime Approach for Assessing Intra-annual Variability of Evapotranspiration and Application to the Upper Colorado River Basin

2022 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiancong Chen ◽  
Baptiste Dafflon ◽  
Haruko M. Wainwright ◽  
Anh Phuong Tran ◽  
Susan S. Hubbard
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Colorado River ◽  
Markov Models ◽  
Snow Accumulation ◽  
Meteorological Conditions ◽  
Colorado River Basin ◽  
Summer Drought ◽  
Annual Variability ◽  
Upper Colorado River Basin

Evapotranspiration (ET) is strongly influenced by gradual climate change and fluctuations in meteorological conditions, such as earlier snowmelt and occurrence of droughts. While numerous studies have investigated how climate change influences the inter-annual variability of ET, very few studies focused on quantifying how subseasonal events control the intra-variability of ET. In this study, we developed the concept of subseasonal regimes, whose timing and duration are determined statistically using Hidden Markov Models (HMM) based on meteorological conditions. We tested the value of subseasonal regimes for quantitatively characterizing the variability of seasonal and subseasonal events, including the onset of snow accumulation, snowmelt, growing season, monsoon, and defoliation. We examined how ET varied as a function of the timing of these events within a year and across six watersheds in the region. Variability of annual ET across these six sites is much less significant than the variability in hydroclimate attributes at the sites. Subseasonal ET, defined as the total ET during a given subseasonal regime, provides a measure of intra-annual variability of ET. Our study suggests that snowmelt and monsoon timing influence regime transitions and duration, such as earlier snowmelt can increase springtime ET rapidly but can trigger long-lasting fore-summer drought conditions that lead to decrease subseasonal ET. Overall, our approach provides an enhanced statistically based framework for quantifying how the timing of subseasonal-event transitions influence ET variability. The improved understanding of subseasonal ET variability is important for predicting the future impact of climate change on water resources from the Upper Colorado River Basin regions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document