Jonathan M. Eden

Skill, correction, and downscaling of GCM-simulated precipitation

AbstractThe ability of general circulation models (GCMs) to correctly simulate precipitation is usually assessed by comparing simulated mean precipitation with observed climatologies. However, to what extent the skill in simulating average precipitation indicates how well the models represent temporal changes is unclear. A direct assessment of the latter is hampered by the fact that freely evolving climate simulations for past periods are not set up to reproduce the specific evolution of internal atmospheric variability. Therefore, model-to-real-world comparisons of time series of daily, monthly, or annual precipitation are not meaningful. Here, for the first time, the authors quantify GCM skill in simulating precipitation variability using simulations in which the temporal evolution of the large-scale atmospheric state closely matches that of the real world. This is achieved by nudging the atmospheric states in the ECHAM5 GCM, but crucially not the precipitation field itself, toward the 40-yr European Ce...

Stochastic Model Output Statistics for Bias Correcting and Downscaling Precipitation Including Extremes

Precipitation is highly variable in space and time; hence, rain gauge time series generally exhibit additional random small-scale variability compared to area averages. Therefore, differences between daily precipitation statistics simulated by climate models and gauge observations are generally not only caused by model biases, but also by the corresponding scale gap. Classical bias correction methods, in general, cannot bridge this gap; they do not account for small-scale random variability and may produce artifacts. Here, stochastic model output statistics is proposed as a bias correction framework to explicitly account for random small-scale variability. Daily precipitation simulated by a regional climate model (RCM) is employed to predict the probability distribution of local precipitation. The pairwise correspondence between predictor and predictand required for calibration is ensured by driving the RCM with perfect boundary conditions. Wet day probabilities are described by a logistic regression, and precipitation intensities are described by a mixture model consisting of a gamma distribution for moderate precipitation and a generalized Pareto distribution for extremes. The dependence of the model parameters on simulated precipitation is modeled by a vector generalized linear model. The proposed model effectively corrects systematic biases and correctly represents local-scale random variability for most gauges. Additionally, a simplified model is considered that disregards the separate tail model. This computationally efficient model proves to be a feasible alternative for precipitation up to moderately extreme intensities. The approach sets a new framework for bias correction that combines the advantages of weather generators and RCMs.

Comparison of GCM‐ and RCM‐simulated precipitation following stochastic postprocessing

In order to assess to what extent regional climate models (RCMs) yield better representations of climatic states than general circulation models (GCMs), the output of each is usually directly compared with observations. RCM output is often bias corrected, and in some cases correction methods can also be applied to GCMs. This leads to the question of whether bias-corrected RCMs perform better than bias-corrected GCMs. Here the first results from such a comparison are presented, followed by discussion of the value added by RCMs in this setup. Stochastic postprocessing, based on Model Output Statistics (MOS), is used to estimate daily precipitation at 465 stations across the United Kingdom between 1961 and 2000 using simulated precipitation from two RCMs (RACMO2 and CCLM) and, for the first time, a GCM (ECHAM5) as predictors. The large-scale weather states in each simulation are forced toward observations. The MOS method uses logistic regression to model precipitation occurrence and a Gamma distribution for the wet day distribution, and is cross validated based on Brier and quantile skill scores. A major outcome of the study is that the corrected GCM-simulated precipitation yields consistently higher validation scores than the corrected RCM-simulated precipitation. This seems to suggest that, in a setup with postprocessing, there is no clear added value by RCMs with respect to downscaling individual weather states. However, due to the different ways of controlling the atmospheric circulation in the RCM and the GCM simulations, such a strong conclusion cannot be drawn. Yet the study demonstrates how challenging it is to demonstrate the value added by RCMs in this setup.

Downscaling of GCM-Simulated Precipitation Using Model Output Statistics

AbstractProducing reliable estimates of changes in precipitation at local and regional scales remains an important challenge in climate science. Statistical downscaling methods are often utilized to bridge the gap between the coarse resolution of general circulation models (GCMs) and the higher resolutions at which information is required by end users. As the skill of GCM precipitation, particularly in simulating temporal variability, is not fully understood, statistical downscaling typically adopts a perfect prognosis (PP) approach in which high-resolution precipitation projections are based on real-world statistical relationships between large-scale atmospheric predictors and local-scale precipitation. Using a nudged simulation of the ECHAM5 GCM, in which the large-scale weather states are forced toward observations of large-scale circulation and temperature for the period 1958–2001, previous work has shown ECHAM5 skill in simulating temporal variability of precipitation to be high in many parts of the ...

Multi-method attribution analysis of extreme precipitation in Boulder, Colorado

Understanding and attributing the characteristics of extreme events that lead to societal impacts is a key challenge in climate science. Detailed analysis of individual case studies is particularly important in assessing how anthropogenic climate change is changing the likelihood of extreme events and their associated risk at relevant spatial scales. Here, we conduct a comprehensive multi-method attribution analysis of the heavy precipitation that led to widespread flooding in Boulder, Colorado in September 2013. We provide clarification on the source regions of moisture associated with this event in order to highlight the difficulty of separating dynamic and thermodynamic contributions. Using extreme value analysis of, first of all, historical observations, we then assess the influence of anthropogenic climate change on the overall likelihood of one- and five-day precipitation events across the Boulder area. The same analysis is extended to the output of two general circulation model ensembles. By combining the results of different methods we deduce an increase in the likelihood of extreme one-day precipitation but of a smaller magnitude than what would be expected in a warming world according to the Clausius–Clapeyron relation. For five-day extremes, we are unable to detect a change in likelihood. Our results demonstrate the benefits of a multi-method approach to making robust statements about the anthropogenic influence on changes in the overall likelihood of such an event irrespective of its cause. We note that, in this example, drawing conclusions solely on the basis of thermodynamics would have overestimated the increase in risk.

Was the cold European winter 2009-2010 modified by anthropogenic climate change? An attribution study.

AbstractAn attribution study has been performed to investigate the degree to which the unusually cold European winter of 2009/10 was modified by anthropogenic climate change. Two different methods have been included for the attribution: one based on large HadGEM3-A ensembles and one based on a statistical surrogate method. Both methods are evaluated by comparing simulated winter temperature means, trends, standard deviations, skewness, return periods, and 5% quantiles with observations. While the surrogate method performs well, HadGEM3-A in general underestimates the trend in winter by a factor of ⅔. It has a mean cold bias dominated by the mountainous regions and also underestimates the cold 5% quantile in many regions of Europe. Both methods show that the probability of experiencing a winter as cold as 2009/10 has been reduced by approximately a factor of 2 because of anthropogenic changes. The method based on HadGEM3-A ensembles gives somewhat larger changes than the surrogate method because of differe...