No abstract

[1] An analysis of the climate of precipitation extremes as simulated by six European regional climate models (RCMs) is undertaken in order to describe/quantify future changes and to examine/interpret differences between models. Each model has adopted boundary conditions from the same ensemble of global climate model integrations for present and future (2071-2100) climate under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A2 emission scenario. The main diagnostics are multiyear return values of daily precipitation totals estimated from extreme value analysis. An evaluation of the RCMs against observations in the Alpine region shows that model biases for extremes are comparable to or even smaller than those for wet day intensity and mean precipitation. In winter, precipitation extremes tend to increase north of about 45°N, while there is an insignificant change or a decrease to the south. In northern Europe the 20-year return value of future climate corresponds to the 40-to 100-year return value of present climate. There is a good agreement between the RCMs, and the simulated change is similar to a scaling of present-day extremes by the change in average events. In contrast, there are large model differences in summer when RCM formulation contributes significantly to scenario uncertainty. The model differences are well explained by differences in the precipitation frequency and intensity process, but in all models, extremes increase more or decrease less than would be expected from the scaling of present-day extremes. There is evidence for a component of the change that affects extremes specifically and is consistent between models despite the large variation in the total response.

A precipitation downscaling method is presented using precipitation from a general circulation model (GCM) as predictor. The method extends a previous method from monthly to daily temporal resolution. The simplest form of the method corrects for biases in wet-day frequency and intensity. A more sophisticated variant also takes account of flow-dependent biases in the GCM. The method is flexible and simple to implement. It is proposed here as a correction of GCM output for applications where sophisticated methods are not available, or as a benchmark for the evaluation of other downscaling methods.Applied to output from reanalyses (ECMWF, NCEP) in the region of the European Alps, the method is capable of reducing large biases in the precipitation frequency distribution, even for high quantiles. The two variants exhibit similar performances, but the ideal choice of method can depend on the GCM/reanalysis and it is recommended to test the methods in each case. Limitations of the method are found in small areas with unresolved topographic detail that influence higher-order statistics (e.g. high quantiles). When used as benchmark for three regional climate models (RCMs), the corrected reanalysis and the RCMs perform similarly in many regions, but the added value of the latter is evident for high quantiles in some small regions.

Current options and recommendations for the treatment of thoracic aortic pathologies involving the aortic arch: an expert consensus document of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic surgery (EACTS) and the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS).