Towards a More Robust Evaluation of Climate Model and Hydrological Impact Uncertainties
-
Published:2022-06-14
Issue:10
Volume:36
Page:3545-3560
-
ISSN:0920-4741
-
Container-title:Water Resources Management
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Water Resour Manage
Author:
Pastén-Zapata E.ORCID, Eberhart T., Jensen K. H., Refsgaard J. C., Sonnenborg T. O.
Abstract
AbstractThe uncertainty of climate model projections is recognized as being large. This represents a challenge for decision makers as the simulation spread of a climate model ensemble can be large, and there might even be disagreement on the direction of the climate change signal among the members of the ensemble. This study quantifies changes in the hydrological projection uncertainty due to different approaches used to select a climate model ensemble. The study assesses 16 Euro-CORDEX Regional Climate Models (RCMs) that drive three different conceptualizations of the MIKE-SHE hydrological model for the Ahlergaarde catchment in western Denmark. The skills of the raw and bias-corrected RCMs to simulate historical precipitation are evaluated using sets of nine, six, and three metrics assessing means and extremes in a series of steps, and results in reduction of projection uncertainties. After each step, the overall lowest-performing model is removed from the ensemble and the standard deviation is estimated, only considering the members of the new ensemble. This is performed for nine steps. The uncertainty of raw RCM outputs is reduced the most for river discharge (5 th , 50 th and 95 th percentiles) when using the set of three metrics, which only assess precipitation means and one ‘moderate’ extreme metrics. In contrast, the uncertainty of bias-corrected RCMs is reduced the most when using all nine metrics, which evaluate means, ‘moderate’ extremes and high extremes. Similar results are obtained for groundwater head (GWH). For the last step of the method, the initial standard deviation of the raw outputs decreases up to 38% for GWH and 37% for river discharge. The corresponding decreases when evaluating the bias-corrected outputs are 63% and 42%. For the bias corrected outputs, the approach proposed here reduces the projected hydrological uncertainty and provides a stronger change signal for most of the months. This
analysis provides an insight on how different approaches used to select a climate
model ensemble affect the uncertainty of the hydrological projections and, in this case,
reduce the uncertainty of the future projections.
Funder
European Commission University of Eastern Finland (UEF) including Kuopio University Hospital
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Water Science and Technology,Civil and Structural Engineering
Reference47 articles.
1. Abbott MB, Bathurst JC, Cunge JA, O’Connell PE, Rasmussen J (1986) An introduction to the European Hydrological System - Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, “SHE”, 1: History and philosophy of a physically-based, distributed modelling system. J Hydrol. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(86)90114-9 2. Chen J, Brissette FP, Lucas-Picher P, Caya D (2017) Impacts of weighting climate models for hydro-meteorological climate change studies. J Hydrol 549:534–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.04.025 3. Christensen JH, Kjellström E, Giorgi F, Lenderink G, Rummukainen M (2010) Weight assignment in regional climate models. Clim Res 44(2–3):179–194. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr00916 4. Collins M (2017) Still weighting to break the model democracy. Geophys Res Lett 44(7):3328–3329. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073370 5. Cisneros BEJ, Oki T, Arnell NW, Benito G, Cogley JG, Döll P, Jiang T, Mwakalila SS (2014) Freshwater resources. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY , USA, pp. 229–269
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|