A comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from global and catchment-scale hydrological models

We present a comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from two types of distributed hydrological model, a global hydrological model (GHM) and catchment-scale hydrological models (CHM). Analyses are conducted for six catchments that are global in coverage and feature strong contrasts in spatial scale as well as climatic and development conditions. These include the Liard (Canada), Mekong (SE Asia), Okavango (SW Africa), Rio Grande (Brazil), Xiangu (China) and Harper's Brook (UK). A single GHM (Mac-PDM.09) is applied to all catchments whilst different CHMs are applied for each catchment. The CHMs typically simulate water resources impacts based on a more explicit representation of catchment water resources than that available from the GHM, and the CHMs include river routing. Simulations of average annual runoff, mean monthly runoff and high (Q5) and low (Q95) monthly runoff under baseline (1961-1990) and climate change scenarios are presented. We compare the simulated runoff response of each hydrological model to (1) prescribed increases in global mean temperature from the HadCM3 climate model and (2)a prescribed increase in global-mean temperature of 2oC for seven GCMs to explore response to climate model and structural uncertainty. We find that differences in projected changes of mean annual runoff between the two types of hydrological model can be substantial for a given GCM, and they are generally larger for indicators of high and low flow. However, they are relatively small in comparison to the range of projections across the seven GCMs. Hence, for the six catchments and seven GCMs we considered, climate model structural uncertainty is greater than the uncertainty associated with the type of hydrological model applied. Moreover, shifts in the seasonal cycle of runoff with climate change are presented similarly by both hydrological models, although for some catchments the monthly timing of high and low flows differs.This implies that for studies that seek to quantify and assess the role of climate model uncertainty on catchment-scale runoff, it may be equally as feasible to apply a GHM as it is to apply a CHM, especially when climate modelling uncertainty across the range of available GCMs is as large as it currently is. Whilst the GHM is able to represent the broad climate change signal that is represented by the CHMs, we find, however, that for some catchments there are differences between GHMs and CHMs in mean annual runoff due to differences in potential evaporation estimation methods, in the representation of the seasonality of runoff, and in the magnitude of changes in extreme monthly runoff, all of which have implications for future water management issues

The global-scale impacts of climate change on water resources and flooding under new climate and socio-economic scenarios

This paper presents a preliminary assessment of the relative effects of rate of climate change (four Representative Concentration Pathways - RCPs), assumed future population (five Shared Socio-economic Pathways - SSPs), and pattern of climate change (19 CMIP5 climate models) on regional and global exposure to water resources stress and river flooding. Uncertainty in projected future impacts of climate change on exposure to water stress and river flooding is dominated by uncertainty in the projected spatial and seasonal pattern of change in climate. There is little clear difference in impact between RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 in 2050, and between RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 in 2080. Impacts under RCP8.5 are greater than under the other RCPs in 2050 and 2080. For a given RCP, there is a difference in the absolute numbers of people exposed to increased water resources stress or increased river flood frequency between the five SSPs. With the ‘middle-of-the-road’ SSP2, climate change by 2050 would increase exposure to water resources stress for between approximately 920 and 3400 million people under the highest RCP, and increase exposure to river flood risk for between 100 and 580 million people. Under RCP2.6, exposure to increased water scarcity would be reduced in 2050 by 22-24%, compared to impacts under the RCP8.5, and exposure to increased flood frequency would be reduced by around 16%. The implications of climate change for actual future losses and adaptation depend not only on the numbers of people exposed to changes in risk, but also on the qualitative characteristics of future worlds as described in the different SSPs. The difference in ‘actual’ impact between SSPs will therefore be greater than the differences in numbers of people exposed to impact

Pattern scaling using ClimGen: monthly-resolution future climate scenarios including changes in the variability of precipitation

Development, testing and example applications of the pattern-scaling approach for generating future climate change projections are reported here, with a focus on a particular software application called “ClimGen”. A number of innovations have been implemented, including using exponential and logistic functions of global-mean temperature to represent changes in local precipitation and cloud cover, and interpolation from climate model grids to a finer grid while taking into account land-sea contrasts in the climate change patterns. Of particular significance is a new approach for incorporating changes in the inter-annual variability of monthly precipitation simulated by climate models. This is achieved by diagnosing simulated changes in the shape of the gamma distribution of monthly precipitation totals, applying the pattern-scaling approach to estimate changes in the shape parameter under a future scenario, and then perturbing sequences of observed precipitation anomalies so that their distribution changes according to the projected change in the shape parameter. The approach cannot represent changes to the structure of climate timeseries (e.g. changed autocorrelation or teleconnection patterns) were they to occur, but is shown here to be more successful at representing changes in low precipitation extremes than previous pattern-scaling methods

Digital pulse-shape discrimination of fast neutrons and gamma rays

Discrimination of the detection of fast neutrons and gamma rays in a liquid scintillator detector has been investigated using digital pulse-processing techniques. An experimental setup with a 252Cf source, a BC-501 liquid scintillator detector, and a BaF2 detector was used to collect waveforms with a 100 Ms/s, 14 bit sampling ADC. Three identical ADC's were combined to increase the sampling frequency to 300 Ms/s. Four different digital pulse-shape analysis algorithms were developed and compared to each other and to data obtained with an analogue neutron-gamma discrimination unit. Two of the digital algorithms were based on the charge comparison method, while the analogue unit and the other two digital algorithms were based on the zero-crossover method. Two different figure-of-merit parameters, which quantify the neutron-gamma discrimination properties, were evaluated for all four digital algorithms and for the analogue data set. All of the digital algorithms gave similar or better figure-of-merit values than what was obtained with the analogue setup. A detailed study of the discrimination properties as a function of sampling frequency and bit resolution of the ADC was performed. It was shown that a sampling ADC with a bit resolution of 12 bits and a sampling frequency of 100 Ms/s is adequate for achieving an optimal neutron-gamma discrimination for pulses having a dynamic range for deposited neutron energies of 0.3-12 MeV. An investigation of the influence of the sampling frequency on the time resolution was made. A FWHM of 1.7 ns was obtained at 100 Ms/s.Comment: 26 pages, 14 figures, submitted to Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research

Scenarios as the basis for assessment of mitigation and adaptation

The possibilities and need for adaptation and mitigation depends on uncertain future developments with respect to socio-economic factors and the climate system. Scenarios are used to explore the impacts of different strategies under uncertainty. In this chapter, some scenarios are presented that are used in the ADAM project for this purpose. One scenario explores developments with no mitigation, and thus with high temperature increase and high reliance on adaptation (leading to 4oC increase by 2100 compared to pre-industrial levels). A second scenario explores an ambitious mitigation strategy (leading to 2oC increase by 2100 compared to pre-industrial levels). In the latter scenario, stringent mitigation strategies effectively reduces the risks of climate change, but based on uncertainties in the climate system a temperature increase of 3oC or more cannot be excluded. The analysis shows that, in many cases, adaptation and mitigation are not trade-offs but supplements. For example, the number of people exposed to increased water resource stress due to climate change can be substantially reduced in the mitigation scenario, but even then adaptation will be required for the remaining large numbers of people exposed to increased stress. Another example is sea level rise, for which adaptation is more cost-effective than mitigation, but mitigation can help reduce damages and the cost of adaptation. For agriculture, finally, only the scenario based on a combination of adaptation and mitigation is able to avoid serious climate change impacts

The impacts avoided with a 1.5 °C climate target: a global and regional assessment

The 2015 Paris Agreement commits countries to pursue efforts to limit the increase in global mean temperature to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. We assess the consequences of achieving this target in 2100 for the impacts that are avoided, using several indicators of impact (exposure to drought, river flooding, heat waves and demands for heating and cooling energy). The proportion of impacts that are avoided is not simply equal to the proportional reduction in temperature. At the global scale, the median proportion of projected impacts avoided by the 1.5 °C target relative to a rise of 4 °C ranges between 62 and 95% across sectors: the greatest reduction is for heat wave impacts. The 1.5 °C target results in impacts that would be between 27 and 62% lower than with the 2 °C target. For each indicator, there are differences in the proportions of impacts avoided between regions depending on exposure and the regional changes in climate (particularly precipitation). Uncertainty in the proportion of impacts that are avoided for a specific sector depends on the range in the shape of the relationship between global temperature change and impact, and this varies between sectors

Restricted Attentional Capacity within but Not between Sensory Modalities: An Individual Differences Approach

Background Most people show a remarkable deficit to report the second of two targets when presented in close temporal succession, reflecting an attentional blink (AB). An aspect of the AB that is often ignored is that there are large individual differences in the magnitude of the effect. Here we exploit these individual differences to address a long-standing question: does attention to a visual target come at a cost for attention to an auditory target (and vice versa)? More specifically, the goal of the current study was to investigate a) whether individuals with a large within-modality AB also show a large cross-modal AB, and b) whether individual differences in AB magnitude within different modalities correlate or are completely separate. Methodology/Principal Findings While minimizing differential task difficulty and chances for a task-switch to occur, a significant AB was observed when targets were both presented within the auditory or visual modality, and a positive correlation was found between individual within-modality AB magnitudes. However, neither a cross-modal AB nor a correlation between cross-modal and within-modality AB magnitudes was found. Conclusion/Significance The results provide strong evidence that a major source of attentional restriction must lie in modality-specific sensory systems rather than a central amodal system, effectively settling a long-standing debate. Individuals with a large within-modality AB may be especially committed or focused in their processing of the first target, and to some extent that tendency to focus could cross modalities, reflected in the within-modality correlation. However, what they are focusing (resource allocation, blocking of processing) is strictly within-modality as it only affects the second target on within-modality trials. The findings show that individual differences in AB magnitude can provide important information about the modular structure of human cognition

The impacts of climate change across the globe: a multi-sectoral assessment

The overall global-scale consequences of climate change are dependent on the distribution of impacts across regions, and there are multiple dimensions to these impacts.This paper presents a global assessment of the potential impacts of climate change across several sectors, using a harmonised set of impacts models forced by the same climate and socio-economic scenarios. Indicators of impact cover the water resources, river and coastal flooding, agriculture, natural environment and built environment sectors. Impacts are assessed under four SRES socio-economic and emissions scenarios, and the effects of uncertainty in the projected pattern of climate change are incorporated by constructing climate scenarios from 21 global climate models. There is considerable uncertainty in projected regional impacts across the climate model scenarios, and coherent assessments of impacts across sectors and regions therefore must be based on each model pattern separately; using ensemble means, for example, reduces variability between sectors and indicators. An example narrative assessment is presented in the paper. Under this narrative approximately 1 billion people would be exposed to increased water resources stress, around 450 million people exposed to increased river flooding, and 1.3 million extra people would be flooded in coastal floods each year. Crop productivity would fall in most regions, and residential energy demands would be reduced in most regions because reduced heating demands would offset higher cooling demands. Most of the global impacts on water stress and flooding would be in Asia, but the proportional impacts in the Middle East North Africa region would be larger. By 2050 there are emerging differences in impact between different emissions and socio-economic scenarios even though the changes in temperature and sea level are similar, and these differences are greater in 2080. However, for all the indicators, the range in projected impacts between different climate models is considerably greater than the range between emissions and socio-economic scenarios

The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale

This paper presents an assessment of the implications of climate change for global river flood risk. It is based on the estimation of flood frequency relationships at a grid resolution of 0.5 × 0.5°, using a global hydrological model with climate scenarios derived from 21 climate models, together with projections of future population. Four indicators of the flood hazard are calculated; change in the magnitude and return period of flood peaks, flood-prone population and cropland exposed to substantial change in flood frequency, and a generalised measure of regional flood risk based on combining frequency curves with generic flood damage functions. Under one climate model, emissions and socioeconomic scenario (HadCM3 and SRES A1b), in 2050 the current 100-year flood would occur at least twice as frequently across 40 % of the globe, approximately 450 million flood-prone people and 430 thousand km2 of flood-prone cropland would be exposed to a doubling of flood frequency, and global flood risk would increase by approximately 187 % over the risk in 2050 in the absence of climate change. There is strong regional variability (most adverse impacts would be in Asia), and considerable variability between climate models. In 2050, the range in increased exposure across 21 climate models under SRES A1b is 31–450 million people and 59 to 430 thousand km2 of cropland, and the change in risk varies between −9 and +376 %. The paper presents impacts by region, and also presents relationships between change in global mean surface temperature and impacts on the global flood hazard. There are a number of caveats with the analysis; it is based on one global hydrological model only, the climate scenarios are constructed using pattern-scaling, and the precise impacts are sensitive to some of the assumptions in the definition and application