9 research outputs found
Daily precipitation statistics in a EURO-CORDEX RCM ensemble: added value of raw and bias-corrected high-resolution simulations
Daily precipitation statistics as simulated by the ERA-Interim-driven EURO-CORDEX regional climate model (RCM) ensemble are evaluated over two distinct regions of the European continent, namely the European Alps and Spain. The potential added value of the high-resolution 12 km experiments with respect to their 50 km resolution counterparts is investigated. The statistics considered consist of wet-day intensity and precipitation frequency as a measure of mean precipitation, and three precipitation-derived indicators (90th percentile on wet days?90pWET, contribution of the very wet days to total precipitation?R95pTOT and number of consecutive dry days?CDD). As reference for model evaluation high resolution gridded observational data over continental Spain (Spain011/044) and the Alpine region (EURO4M-APGD) are used. The assessment and comparison of the two resolutions is accomplished not only on their original horizontal grids (approximately 12 and 50 km), but the high-resolution RCMs are additionally regridded onto the coarse 50 km grid by grid cell aggregation for the direct comparison with the low resolution simulations. The direct application of RCMs e.g. in many impact modelling studies is hampered by model biases. Therefore bias correction (BC) techniques are needed at both resolutions to ensure a better agreement between models and observations. In this work, the added value of the high resolution (before and after the bias correction) is assessed and the suitability of these BC methods is also discussed. Three basic BC methods are applied to isolate the effect of biases in mean precipitation, wet-day intensity and wet-day frequency on the derived indicators. Daily precipitation percentiles are strongly affected by biases in the wet-day intensity, whereas the dry spells are better represented when the simulated precipitation frequency is adjusted to the observed one. This confirms that there is no single optimal way to correct for RCM biases, since correcting some distributional features typically leads to an improvement of some aspects but to a deterioration of others. Regarding mean seasonal biases before the BC, we find only limited evidence for an added value of the higher resolution in the precipitation intensity and frequency or in the derived indicators. Thereby, evaluation results considerably depend on the RCM, season and indicator considered. High resolution simulations better reproduce the indicators? spatial patterns, especially in terms of spatial correlation. However, this improvement is not statistically significant after applying specific BC methods.The authors are grateful to Prof. C. Schär for his helpful comments and E. van Meijgaard for making available the RACMO model data. We acknowledge the observational data providers. Calculations for WRF311F were made using the TGCC super computers under the GENCI time allocation GEN6877. The WRF331A from CRP-GL (now LIST) was funded by the Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) through grant FNR C09/SR/16 (CLIMPACT). The KNMI-RACMO2 simulations were supported by the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. The CCLM and REMO simulations were supported by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and performed under the Konsortial share at the German Climate Computing Centre (DKRZ). The CCLM simulations were furthermore supported by the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre (CSCS) under project ID s78. Part of the SMHI contribution was carried out in the Swedish Mistra-SWECIA programme founded by Mistra (the Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research). This work is supported by CORWES (CGL2010-22158-C02) and EXTREMBLES (CGL2010-21869) projects funded by the Spanish R&D programme and the European COST ACTION VALUE (ES1102). A. C. thanks the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness for the funding provided within the FPI programme (BES-2011-047612 and EEBB-I-13-06354). We also thank two anonymous referees for their useful comments that helped to improve the original manuscript
Use of very high resolution climate model data for hydrological modelling: baseline performance and future flood changes
Comparison of uncertainty sources for climate change impacts: flood frequency in England
This paper investigates the uncertainty in the impact of climate change on flood frequency in England, through the use of continuous simulation of river flows. Six different sources of uncertainty are discussed: future greenhouse gas emissions; Global Climate Model (GCM) structure; downscaling from GCMs (including Regional Climate Model structure); hydrological model structure; hydrological model parameters and the internal variability of the climate system (sampled by applying different GCM initial conditions). These sources of uncertainty are demonstrated (separately) for two example catchments in England, by propagation through to flood frequency impact. The results suggest that uncertainty from GCM structure is by far the largest source of uncertainty. However, this is due to the extremely large increases in winter rainfall predicted by one of the five GCMs used. Other sources of uncertainty become more significant if the results from this GCM are omitted, although uncertainty from sources relating to modelling of the future climate is generally still larger than that relating to emissions or hydrological modelling. It is also shown that understanding current and future natural variability is critical in assessing the importance of climate change impacts on hydrology