Assessing reservoir operations risk under climate change

Risk-based planning offers a robust way to identify strategies that permit adaptive water resources management under climate change. This paper presents a flexible methodology for conducting climate change risk assessments involving reservoir operations. Decision makers can apply this methodology to their systems by selecting future periods and risk metrics relevant to their planning questions and by collectively evaluating system impacts relative to an ensemble of climate projection scenarios (weighted or not). This paper shows multiple applications of this methodology in a case study involving California\u27s Central Valley Project and State Water Project systems. Multiple applications were conducted to show how choices made in conducting the risk assessment, choices known as analytical design decisions, can affect assessed risk. Specifically, risk was reanalyzed for every choice combination of two design decisions: (1) whether to assume climate change will influence flood-control constraints on water supply operations (and how), and (2) whether to weight climate change scenarios (and how). Results show that assessed risk would motivate different planning pathways depending on decision-maker attitudes toward risk (e.g., risk neutral versus risk averse). Results also show that assessed risk at a given risk attitude is sensitive to the analytical design choices listed above, with the choice of whether to adjust flood-control rules under climate change having considerably more influence than the choice on whether to weight climate scenarios

Fine-Resolution climate projections enhance regional climate change impact studies

A new data set enhances the abilities of researchers and decision-makers to assess possible future climates, explore societal impacts, and approach policy responses from a risk-based perspective. The data set, which consists of a library of 112 fine-resolution climate projections, based on 16 climate models and three greenhouse gas emissions scenarios, is now publicly available. Monthly climate projections from 1950 to 2099 were downscaled to a spatial resolution of 1/8° (about 140 square kilometers per grid cell) covering the conterminous United States and portions of Canada and Mexico

Guidelines for constructing climate scenarios

Scientists and others from academia, government, and the private sector increasingly are using climate model outputs in research and decision support. For the most recent assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 18 global modeling centers contributed outputs from hundreds of simulations, coordinated through the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 3 (CMIP3), to the archive at the Program for Climate Model Diagnostics and Intercomparison (PCMDI; http://pcmdi3.llnl.gov) [Meehl et al., 2007]. Many users of climate model outputs prefer downscaled data—i.e., data at higher spatial resolution—to direct global climate model (GCM) outputs; downscaling can be statistical [e.g., Meehl et al., 2007] or dynamical [e.g., Mearns et al., 2009]. More than 800 users have obtained downscaled CMIP3 results from one such Web site alone (see http://gdo-dcp.ucllnl.org/downscaled cmip3_projections/, described by Meehl et al., [2007])

An Enhanced Archive Facilitating Climate Impacts and Adaptation Analysis

We describe the expansion of a publicly available archive of downscaled climate and hydrology projections for the United States. Those studying or planning to adapt to future climate impacts demand downscaled climate model output for local or regional use. The archive we describe attempts to fulfill this need by providing data in several formats, selectable to meet user needs. Our archive has served as a resource for climate impacts modelers, water managers, educators, and others. Over 1,400 individuals have transferred more than 50 TB of data from the archive. In response to user demands, the archive has expanded from monthly downscaled data to include daily data to facilitate investigations of phenomena sensitive to daily to monthly temperature and precipitation, including extremes in these quantities. New developments include downscaled output from the new Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) climate model simulations at both the monthly and daily time scales, as well as simulations of surface hydrologi- cal variables. The web interface allows the extraction of individual projections or ensemble statistics for user-defined regions, promoting the rapid assessment of model consensus and uncertainty for future projections of precipitation, temperature, and hydrology. The archive is accessible online (http://gdo-dcp.ucllnl.org/downscaled_ cmip_projections)

Characterizing uncertainty of the hydrologic impacts of climate change

The high climate sensitivity of hydrologic systems, the importance of those systems to society, and the imprecise nature of future climate projections all motivate interest in characterizing uncertainty in the hydrologic impacts of climate change. We discuss recent research that exposes important sources of uncertainty that are commonly neglected by the water management community, especially, uncertainties associated with internal climate system variability, and hydrologic modeling. We also discuss research exposing several issues with widely used climate downscaling methods. We propose that progress can be made following parallel paths: first, by explicitly characterizing the uncertainties throughout the modeling process (rather than using an ad hoc “ensemble of opportunity”) and second, by reducing uncertainties through developing criteria for excluding poor methods/models, as well as with targeted research to improve modeling capabilities. We argue that such research to reveal, reduce, and represent uncertainties is essential to establish a defensible range of quantitative hydrologic storylines of climate change impacts

Characterizing uncertainty of the hydrologic impacts of climate change

The high climate sensitivity of hydrologic systems, the importance of those systems to society, and the imprecise nature of future climate projections all motivate interest in characterizing uncertainty in the hydrologic impacts of climate change. We discuss recent research that exposes important sources of uncertainty that are commonly neglected by the water management community, especially, uncertainties associated with internal climate system variability, and hydrologic modeling. We also discuss research exposing several issues with widely used climate downscaling methods. We propose that progress can be made following parallel paths: first, by explicitly characterizing the uncertainties throughout the modeling process (rather than using an ad hoc “ensemble of opportunity”) and second, by reducing uncertainties through developing criteria for excluding poor methods/models, as well as with targeted research to improve modeling capabilities. We argue that such research to reveal, reduce, and represent uncertainties is essential to establish a defensible range of quantitative hydrologic storylines of climate change impacts

Understanding uncertainties in future Colorado River streamflow

Artículo -- Universidad de Costa Rica. Centro de Investigaciones Geofísicas, 2014The Colorado River is the primary water source for more than 30 million people in the United States and Mexico. Recent studies that project streamflow changes in the Colorado River all project annual declines, but the magnitude of the projected decreases range from less than 10% to 45% by the mid-twenty-first century. To understand these differences, we address the questions the management community has raised: Why is there such a wide range of projections of impacts of future climate change on Colorado River streamflow, and how should this uncertainty be interpreted? We identify four major sources of disparities among studies that arise from both methodological and model differences. In order of importance, these are differences in 1) the global climate models (GCMs) and emission scenarios used; 2) the ability of land surface and atmospheric models to simulate properly the high-elevation runoff source areas; 3) the sensitivities of land surface hydrology models to precipitation and temperature changes; and 4) the methods used to statistically downscale GCM scenarios. In accounting for these differences, there is substantial evidence across studies that future Colorado River streamflow will be reduced under the current trajectories of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions because of a combination of strong temperature-induced runoff curtailment and reduced annual precipitation. Reconstructions of preinstrumental streamflows provide additional insights; the greatest risk to Colorado River streamflows is a multidecadal drought, like that observed in paleoreconstructions, exacerbated by a steady reduction in flows due to climate change. This could result in decades of sustained streamflows much lower than have been observed in the ~100 years of instrumental record.Universidad de Costa Rica. Centro de Investigaciones GeofísicasLamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia UniversityUCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Básicas::Centro de Investigaciones Geofísicas (CIGEFI

Contrasting lumped and distributed hydrology models for estimating climate change impacts on California watersheds

We compare the projected changes to streamflows for three Sierra Nevada rivers using statistically downscaled output from 22 global climate projections. The downscaled meteorological data are used to drive two hydrology models: the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting model and the variable infiltration capacity model. These two models differ in their spatial resolution, computational time step, and degree and objective of calibration, thus producing significantly different simulations of current and future streamflow. However, the projected percentage changes in monthly streamflows through mid-21st Century generally did not differ, with the exceptions of streamflow during low flow months, and extreme low flows. These findings suggest that for physically based hydrology models applied to snow-dominated basins in Mediterranean climate regimes like the Sierra Nevada, California, model formulation, resolution, and calibration are secondary factors for estimating projected changes in extreme flows (seasonal or daily). For low flows, hydrology model selection and calibration can be significant factors in assessing impacts of projected climate change

Significance of model credibility in estimating climate projection distributions for regional hydroclimatological risk assessments

Ensembles of historical climate simulations and climate projections from the World Climate Research Programme’s (WCRP’s) Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) multi-model dataset were investigated to determine how model credibility affects apparent relative scenario likelihoods in regional risk assessments. Methods were developed and applied in a Northern California case study. An ensemble of 59 twentieth century climate simulations from 17 WCRP CMIP3 models was analyzed to evaluate relative model credibility associated with a 75-member projection ensemble from the same 17 models. Credibility was assessed based on how models realistically reproduced selected statistics of historical climate relevant to California climatology. Metrics of this credibility were used to derive relative model weights leading to weight-threshold culling of models contributing to the projection ensemble. Density functions were then estimated for two projected quantities (temperature and precipitation), with and without considering credibility-based ensemble reductions. An analysis for Northern California showed that, while some models seem more capable at recreating limited aspects twentieth century climate, the overall tendency is for comparable model performance when several credibility measures are combined. Use of these metrics to decide which models to include in density function development led to local adjustments to function shapes, but led to limited affect on breadth and central tendency, which were found to be more influenced by “completeness” of the original ensemble in terms of models and emissions pathways