RCMs produced at ~0.5° (available in the NA-CORDEX database esgf-node.ipsl.upmc.fr/search/cordex-ipsl/) address issues related to coarse resolution of GCMs (produced at 2° to 4°). Nevertheless, due to systematic and random model errors, bias correction is needed for regional study applications. However, an acceptable threshold for magnitude of bias correction that will not affect future RCM projection behavior is unknown. The goal of this study is to evaluate the implications of a bias correction technique (distribution mapping) for four GCM-RCM combinations for simulating regional precipitation and, subsequently, streamflow, surface runoff, and water yield when integrated into Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) applications for the Des Moines River basin (31,893 km²) in Iowa-Minnesota, U.S. The climate projections tested in this study are an ensemble of 2 GCMs (MPI-ESM-MR and GFDL-ESM2M) and 2 RCMs (WRF and RegCM4) for historical (1981-2005) and future (2030-2050) projections in the NA-CORDEX CMIP5 archive. The PRISM dataset was used for bias correction of GCM-RCM historical precipitation and for SWAT baseline simulations. We found bias correction improves historical total annual volumes for precipitation, seasonality, spatial distribution and mean error for all GCM-RCM combinations. However, improvement of correlation coefficient occurred only for the RegCM4 simulations. Monthly precipitation was overestimated for all raw models from January to April, and WRF overestimated monthly precipitation from January to August. The bias correction method improved monthly average precipitation for all four GCM-RCM combinations. The ability to detect occurrence of precipitation events was slightly better for the raw models, especially for the GCM-WRF combinations. Simulated historical streamflow was compared across 26 monitoring stations: Historical GCM-RCM outputs were unable to replicate PRISM KGE statistical results (KGE>0.5). However, the Pbias streamflow results matched the PRISM simulation for all bias-corrected models and for the raw GFDL-RegCM4 combination. For future scenarios there was no change in the annual trend, except for raw WRF models that estimated an increase of about 35% in annual precipitation. Seasonal variability remained the same, indicating wetter summers and drier winters. However, most models predicted an increase in monthly precipitation from January to March, and a reduction in June and July (except for raw WRF models). The impact on hydrological simulations based on future projected conditions was observed for surface runoff and water yield. Both variables were characterized by monthly volume overestimation; the raw WRF models predicted up to three times greater volume compared to the historical run. RegCM4 projected increased surface runoff and water yield for winter and spring by two times, and a slight volume reduction in summer and autumn. Meanwhile, the bias-corrected models showed changes in prediction signals: In some cases, raw models projected an increase in surface runoff and water yield but the bias-corrected models projected a reduction of these variables. These findings underscore the need for more extended research on bias correction and transposition between historical and future data.
more »
« less
Assessing the Influence of a Bias Correction Method on Future Climate Scenarios Using SWAT as an Impact Model Indicator
In this study, we evaluate the implications of a bias correction method on a combination of Global/Regional Climate Models (GCM and RCM) for simulating precipitation and, subsequently, streamflow, surface runoff, and water yield in the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). The study area is the Des Moines River Basin, U.S.A. The climate projections are two RCMs driven by two GCMs for historical simulations (1981–2005) and future projections (2030–2050). Bias correction improves historical precipitation for annual volumes, seasonality, spatial distribution, and mean error. Simulated monthly historical streamflow was compared across 26 monitoring stations with mostly satisfactory results for percent bias (Pbias). There were no changes in annual trends for future scenarios except for raw WRF models. Seasonal variability remained the same; however, most models predicted an increase in monthly precipitation from January to March and a reduction for June and July. Meanwhile, the bias-corrected models showed changes in prediction signals. In some cases, raw models projected an increase in surface runoff and water yield, but the bias-corrected models projected a reduction in these variables. This suggests the bias correction may be larger than the climate-change signal and indicates the procedure is not a small correction but a major factor.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1855902
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10424627
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Water
- Volume:
- 15
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 2073-4441
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 750
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)This study presents near future (2020–2044) temperature and precipitation changes over the Antarctic Peninsula under the high-emission scenario (RCP8.5). We make use of historical and projected simulations from 19 global climate models (GCMs) participating in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5). We compare and contrast GCMs projections with two groups of regional climate model simulations (RCMs): (1) high resolution (15-km) simulations performed with Polar-WRF model forced with bias-corrected NCAR-CESM1 (NC-CORR) over the Antarctic Peninsula, (2) medium resolution (50-km) simulations of KNMI-RACMO21P forced with EC-EARTH (EC) obtained from the CORDEX-Antarctica. A further comparison of historical simulations (1981–2005) with respect to ERA5 reanalysis is also included for circulation patterns and near-surface temperature climatology. In general, both RCM boundary conditions represent well the main circulation patterns of the historical period. Nonetheless, there are important differences in projections such as a notable deepening and weakening of the Amundsen Sea Low in EC and NC-CORR, respectively. Mean annual near-surface temperatures are projected to increase by about 0.5–1.5 ◦ C across the entire peninsula. Temperature increase is more substantial in autumn and winter ( ∼ 2 ◦C). Following opposite circulation pattern changes, both EC and NC-CORR exhibit different warming rates, indicating a possible continuation of natural decadal variability. Although generally showing similar temperature changes, RCM projections show less warming and a smaller increase in melt days in the Larsen Ice Shelf compared to their respective driving fields. Regarding precipitation, there is a broad agreement among the simulations, indicating an increase in mean annual precipitation ( ∼ 5 to 10%). However, RCMs show some notable differences over the Larsen Ice Shelf where total precipitation decreases (for RACMO) and shows a small increase in rain frequency. We conclude that it seems still difficult to get consistent projections from GCMs for the Antarctic Peninsula as depicted in both RCM boundary conditions. In addition, dominant and common changes from the boundary conditions are largely evident in the RCM simulations. We argue that added value of RCM projections is driven by processes shaped by finer local details and different physics schemes that are introduced by RCMs, particularly over the Larsen Ice Shelf.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Predicting future streamflow change is essential for water resources management and understanding the impacts of projected climate and land use changes on water availability. The Budyko framework is a useful and computationally efficient tool to model streamflow at larger spatial scales. This study predicts future streamflow changes in 889 watersheds in the contiguous United States based on projected climate and land use changes from 2040 to 2069. The temporal variability of surface water balance controls, represented by the Budyko
ω parameter, was modeled using multiple linear regression, random forest (RF), and gradient boosting. Results show that RF is the optimal model and can explain >85% of the variance in most watersheds. Relative cumulative moisture surplus, forest coverage, crop land and urban land are the most important variables of the time‐varyingω in most watersheds. There are statistically significant increases in mean annual precipitation, potential evapotranspiration, andω in 2040–2069, as compared to 1950–2005. This leads to a statistically significant decrease in the runoff ratio (Q /P ). Streamflow is projected to decrease in the central, southwestern, and southeastern United States and increase in the northeast. These projections of water availability which are based on future climate and land use change scenarios can inform water resources management and adaptation strategies. -
more » « less
Abstract Statistical bias correction techniques are commonly used in climate model projections to reduce systematic biases. Among the several bias correction techniques, univariate linear bias correction (e.g., quantile mapping) is the most popular, given its simplicity. Univariate linear bias correction can accurately reproduce the observed mean of a given climate variable. However, when performed separately on multiple variables, it does not yield the observed multivariate cross‐correlation structure. In the current study, we consider the intrinsic properties of two candidate univariate linear bias‐correction approaches (simple linear regression and asynchronous regression) in estimating the observed cross‐correlation between precipitation and temperature. Two linear regression models are applied separately on both the observed and the projected variables. The analytical solution suggests that two candidate approaches simply reproduce the cross‐correlation from the general circulation models (GCMs) in the bias‐corrected data set because of their linearity. Our study adopts two frameworks, based on the Fisher
z ‐transformation and bootstrapping, to provide 95% lower and upper confidence limits (referred as the permissible bound) for the GCM cross‐correlation. Beyond the permissible bound, raw/bias‐corrected GCM cross‐correlation significantly differs from those observed. Two frameworks are applied on three GCMs from the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble over the coterminous United States. We found that (a) the univariate linear techniques fail to reproduce the observed cross‐correlation in the bias‐corrected data set over 90% (30–50%) of the grid points where the multivariate skewness coefficient values are substantial (small) and statistically significant (statistically insignificant) from zero; (b) the performance of the univariate linear techniques under bootstrapping (Fisherz ‐transformation) remains uniform (non‐uniform) across climate regions, months, and GCMs; (c) grid points, where the observed cross‐correlation is statistically significant, witness a failure fraction of around 0.2 (0.8) under the Fisherz ‐transformation (bootstrapping). The importance of reproducing cross‐correlations is also discussed along with an enquiry into the multivariate approaches that can potentially address the bias in yielding cross‐correlations. -
Abstract. Assessing impacts of climate change on hydrologic systemsis critical for developing adaptation and mitigation strategies for waterresource management, risk control, and ecosystem conservation practices. Suchassessments are commonly accomplished using outputs from a hydrologic modelforced with future precipitation and temperature projections. The algorithmsused for the hydrologic model components (e.g., runoff generation) canintroduce significant uncertainties into the simulated hydrologic variables.Here, a modeling framework was developed that integrates multiple runoffgeneration algorithms with a routing model and associated parameteroptimizations. This framework is able to identify uncertainties from bothhydrologic model components and climate forcings as well as associatedparameterization. Three fundamentally different runoff generationapproaches, runoff coefficient method (RCM, conceptual), variableinfiltration capacity (VIC, physically based, infiltration excess), andsimple-TOPMODEL (STP, physically based, saturation excess), were coupledwith the Hillslope River Routing model to simulate surface/subsurface runoffand streamflow. A case study conducted in Santa Barbara County, California,reveals increased surface runoff in February and March but decreasedrunoff in other months, a delayed (3 d, median) and shortened (6 d,median) wet season, and increased daily discharge especially for theextremes (e.g., 100-year flood discharge, Q100). The Bayesian modelaveraging analysis indicates that the probability of such an increase can be up to85 %. For projected changes in runoff and discharge, general circulationmodels (GCMs) and emission scenarios are two major uncertainty sources,accounting for about half of the total uncertainty. For the changes inseasonality, GCMs and hydrologic models are two major uncertaintycontributors (∼35 %). In contrast, the contribution ofhydrologic model parameters to the total uncertainty of changes in thesehydrologic variables is relatively small (<6 %), limiting theimpacts of hydrologic model parameter equifinality in climate change impactanalysis. This study provides useful information for practices associatedwith water resources, risk control, and ecosystem conservation and forstudies related to hydrologic model evaluation and climate change impactanalysis for the study region as well as other Mediterranean regions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/w15040750
