Search for: All records

Global water models are increasingly used to understand past, present and future water cycles, but disagreements between simulated variables make model-based inferences uncertain. Although there is empirical evidence of different large-scale relationships in hydrology, these relationships are rarely considered in model evaluation. Here we evaluate global water models using functional relationships that capture the spatial co-variability of forcing variables (precipitation, net radiation) and key response variables (actual evapotranspiration, groundwater recharge, total runoff). Results show strong disagreement in both shape and strength of model-based functional relationships, especially for groundwater recharge. Empirical and theory-derived functional relationships show varying agreements with models, indicating that our process understanding is particularly uncertain for energy balance processes, groundwater recharge processes and in dry and/or cold regions. Functional relationships offer great potential for model evaluation and an opportunity for fundamental advances in global hydrology and Earth system research in general.

 

Abstract Droughts are anticipated to intensify in many parts of the world due to climate change. However, the issue of drought definition, namely the diversity of drought indices, makes it difficult to compare drought assessments. This issue is widely known, but its relative importance has never been quantitatively evaluated in comparison to other sources of uncertainty. Here, encompassing three drought categories (meteorological, agricultural, and hydrological droughts) with four temporal scales of interest, we evaluated changes in the drought frequency using multi-model and multi-scenario simulations to identify areas where the definition issue could result in pronounced uncertainties and to what extent. We investigated the disagreement in the signs of changes between drought definitions and decomposed the variance into four main factors: drought definitions, greenhouse gas concentration scenarios, global climate models, and global water models, as well as their interactions. The results show that models were the primary sources of variance over 82% of the global land area. On the other hand, the drought definition was the dominant source of variance in the remaining 17%, especially in parts of northern high-latitudes. Our results highlight specific regions where differences in drought definitions result in a large spread among projections, including areas showing opposite signs of significant changes. At a global scale, 7% of the variance resulted independently from the definition issue, and that value increased to 44% when 1st and 2nd order interactions were considered. The quantitative results suggest that by clarifying hydrological processes or sectors of interest, one could avoid these uncertainties in drought assessments to obtain a clearer picture of future drought change. 

Abstract. Billions of people rely on groundwater as being an accessible source of drinking water and for irrigation, especially in times of drought. Its importance will likely increase with a changing climate. It is still unclear, however, how climate change will impact groundwater systems globally and, thus, the availability of this vital resource. Groundwater recharge is an important indicator for groundwater availability, but it is a water flux that is difficult to estimate as uncertainties in the water balance accumulate, leading to possibly large errors in particular in dry regions. This study investigates uncertainties in groundwater recharge projections using a multi-model ensemble of eight global hydrological models (GHMs) that are driven by the bias-adjusted output of four global circulation models (GCMs). Pre-industrial and current groundwater recharge values are compared with recharge for different global warming (GW) levels as a result of three representative concentration pathways (RCPs). Results suggest that projected changes strongly vary among the different GHM–GCM combinations, and statistically significant changes are only computed for a few regions of the world. Statistically significant GWR increases are projected for northern Europe and some parts of the Arctic, East Africa, and India. Statistically significant decreases are simulated in southern Chile, parts of Brazil, central USA, the Mediterranean, and southeastern China. In some regions, reversals of groundwater recharge trends can be observed with global warming. Because most GHMs do not simulate the impact of changing atmospheric CO2 and climate on vegetation and, thus, evapotranspiration, we investigate how estimated changes in GWR are affected by the inclusion of these processes. In some regions, inclusion leads to differences in groundwater recharge changes of up to 100 mm per year. Most GHMs with active vegetation simulate less severe decreases in groundwater recharge than GHMs without active vegetation and, in some regions, even increases instead of decreases are simulated. However, in regions where GCMs predict decreases in precipitation and where groundwater availability is the most important, model agreement among GHMs with active vegetation is the lowest. Overall, large uncertainties in the model outcomes suggest that additional research on simulating groundwater processes in GHMs is necessary. 

Abstract. Global water models (GWMs) simulate the terrestrial watercycle on the global scale and are used to assess the impacts of climatechange on freshwater systems. GWMs are developed within different modellingframeworks and consider different underlying hydrological processes, leadingto varied model structures. Furthermore, the equations used to describevarious processes take different forms and are generally accessible onlyfrom within the individual model codes. These factors have hindered aholistic and detailed understanding of how different models operate, yetsuch an understanding is crucial for explaining the results of modelevaluation studies, understanding inter-model differences in theirsimulations, and identifying areas for future model development. This studyprovides a comprehensive overview of how 16 state-of-the-art GWMs aredesigned. We analyse water storage compartments, water flows, and humanwater use sectors included in models that provide simulations for theInter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b (ISIMIP2b). Wedevelop a standard writing style for the model equations to enhance modelintercomparison, improvement, and communication. In this study, WaterGAP2used the highest number of water storage compartments, 11, and CWatM used 10compartments. Six models used six compartments, while four models (DBH,JULES-W1, Mac-PDM.20, and VIC) used the lowest number, three compartments.WaterGAP2 simulates five human water use sectors, while four models (CLM4.5,CLM5.0, LPJmL, and MPI-HM) simulate only water for the irrigation sector. Weconclude that, even though hydrological processes are often based on similarequations for various processes, in the end these equations have beenadjusted or models have used different values for specific parameters orspecific variables. The similarities and differences found among the modelsanalysed in this study are expected to enable us to reduce the uncertaintyin multi-model ensembles, improve existing hydrological processes, andintegrate new processes. 

Anthropogenic climate change is expected to affect global river flow. Here, we analyze time series of low, mean, and high river flows from 7250 observatories around the world covering the years 1971 to 2010. We identify spatially complex trend patterns, where some regions are drying and others are wetting consistently across low, mean, and high flows. Trends computed from state-of-the-art model simulations are consistent with the observations only if radiative forcing that accounts for anthropogenic climate change is considered. Simulated effects of water and land management do not suffice to reproduce the observed trend pattern. Thus, the analysis provides clear evidence for the role of externally forced climate change as a causal driver of recent trends in mean and extreme river flow at the global scale.