Abstract
We present an intercomparison of a suite of high-resolution downscaled climate projections based on a six-member General Circulation Model (GCM) ensemble from Coupled Models Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). The CMIP6 GCMs have been downscaled using dynamical and statistical downscaling techniques based on two meteorological reference observations over the conterminous United States. We use the regional climate model, RegCM4, for dynamical downscaling, double bias correction constructed analogs method for statistical downscaling, and Daymet and Livneh datasets as the reference observations for statistical training and bias-correction. We evaluate the performances of downscaled data in both historical and future periods under the SSP585 scenario. While dynamical downscaling improves the simulation of some performance evaluation indices, it adds an extra bias in others, highlighting the need for statistical correction before its use in impact assessments. Downscaled datasets after bias-correction compare exceptionally well with observations. However, the choice of downscaling techniques and the underlying reference observations influence the hydroclimate characteristics of downscaled data. For instance, the statistical downscaling generally preserves the GCMs climate change signal but overestimates the frequency of hot extremes. Similarly, simulated future changes are sensitive to the choice of reference observations, particularly for precipitation extremes that exhibit a higher projected increase in the ensembles trained and/or corrected by Daymet than Livneh. Overall, these results demonstrate that multiple factors, including downscaling techniques and reference observations, can substantially influence the outcome of downscaled climate projections and stress the need for a comprehensive understanding of such method-based uncertainties.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | e2022EF002734 |
Journal | Earth's Future |
Volume | 10 |
Issue number | 8 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Aug 2022 |
Funding
The authors thank Dr. David W. Pierce and Dr. Daniel R. Cayan from the University of California, Santa Cruz for their advice and help with Livneh data set. This study is supported by the US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office as a part of the SECURE Water Act Section 9505 Assessment. Support for the climate simulations, data storage, and analysis is provided by the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility. This manuscript has been authored by employees of UT-Battelle, LLC, under contract DEAC05-00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy (DOE). Accordingly, the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes. DOE will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (https://www.energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan). The authors thank Dr. David W. Pierce and Dr. Daniel R. Cayan from the University of California, Santa Cruz for their advice and help with Livneh data set. This study is supported by the US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office as a part of the SECURE Water Act Section 9505 Assessment. Support for the climate simulations, data storage, and analysis is provided by the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility. This manuscript has been authored by employees of UT‐Battelle, LLC, under contract DEAC05‐00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy (DOE). Accordingly, the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US government retains a nonexclusive, paid‐up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes. DOE will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan ( https://www.energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan ).
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'How May the Choice of Downscaling Techniques and Meteorological Reference Observations Affect Future Hydroclimate Projections?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Datasets
-
CMIP6-based Multi-model Hydroclimate Projection over the Conterminous US, Version 1.1
Kao, S.-C. (Creator), Ashfaq, M. (Creator), Rastogi, D. (Creator) & Gangrade, S. (Creator), Constellation by Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF), Feb 29 2024
Dataset
-
CMIP6-based Multi-model Hydroclimate Projection over the Conterminous US
Kao, S.-C. (Creator), Ashfaq, M. (Creator), Rastogi, D. (Creator) & Gangrade, S. (Creator), HydroSource, Sep 1 2022
DOI: 10.21951/SWA9505V3/1887469
Dataset