Regional climate projections are used in a wide range of impact studies, from assessing future flood risk to climate change impacts on food and energy production. These model projections are typically at 12–50-km resolution, providing valuable regional detail but with inherent limitations, in part because of the need to parameterize convection. The first climate change experiments at convection-permitting resolution (kilometer-scale grid spacing) are now available for the United Kingdom; the Alps; Germany; Sydney, Australia; and the western United States. These models give a more realistic representation of convection and are better able to simulate hourly precipitation characteristics that are poorly represented in coarser-resolution climate models. Here we examine these new experiments to determine whether future midlatitude precipitation projections are robust from coarse to higher resolutions, with implications also for the tropics. We find that the explicit representation of the convective storms themselves, only possible in convection-permitting models, is necessary for capturing changes in the intensity and duration of summertime rain on daily and shorter time scales. Other aspects of rainfall change, including changes in seasonal mean precipitation and event occurrence, appear robust across resolutions, and therefore coarse-resolution regional climate models are likely to provide reliable future projections, provided that large-scale changes from the global climate model are reliable. The improved representation of convective storms also has implications for projections of wind, hail, fog, and lightning. We identify a number of impact areas, especially flooding, but also transport and wind energy, for which very high-resolution models may be needed for reliable future assessments.
We investigate the effect of using convection-permitting models (CPMs) spanning a pan-European domain on the representation of precipitation distribution at a climatic scale. In particular we compare two 2.2km models with two 12km models run by ETH Zürich (ETH-12 km and ETH-2.2 km) and the Met-Office (UKMO-12 km and UKMO-2.2 km).The two CPMs yield qualitatively similar differences to the precipitation climatology compared to the 12 km models, despite using different dynamical cores and different parameterization packages. A quantitative analysis confirms that the CPMs give the largest differences compared to 12 km models in the hourly precipitation distribution in regions and seasons where convection is a key process: in summer across the whole of Europe and in autumn over the Mediterranean Sea and coasts. Mean precipitation is increased over high orography, with an increased amplitude of the diurnal cycle. We highlight that both CPMs show an
Extreme value theory is used as a diagnostic for two high-resolution (12-km parameterized convection and 1.5-km explicit convection) Met Office regional climate model (RCM) simulations. On subdaily time scales, the 12-km simulation has weaker June-August (JJA) short-return-period return levels than the 1.5-km RCM, yet the 12-km RCM has overly large high return levels. Comparisons with observations indicate that the 1.5-km RCM is more successful than the 12-km RCM in representing (multi)hourly JJA very extreme events. As accumulation periods increase toward daily time scales, the erroneous 12-km precipitation extremes become more comparable with the observations and the 1.5-km RCM. The 12-km RCM fails to capture the observed low sensitivity of the growth rate to accumulation period changes, which is successfully captured by the 1.5-km RCM. Both simulations have comparable December-February (DJF) extremes, but the DJF extremes are generally weaker than in JJA at daily or shorter time scales. Case studies indicate that ''gridpoint storms'' are one of the causes of unrealistic very extreme events in the 12-km RCM. Caution is needed in interpreting the realism of 12-km RCM JJA extremes, including short-return-period events, which have return values closer to observations. There is clear evidence that the 1.5-km RCM has a higher degree of realism than the 12-km RCM in the simulation of JJA extremes.
Here we present the first multi-model ensemble of regional climate simulations at kilometer-scale horizontal grid spacing over a decade long period. A total of 23 simulations run with a horizontal grid spacing of $$\sim $$ ∼ 3 km, driven by ERA-Interim reanalysis, and performed by 22 European research groups are analysed. Six different regional climate models (RCMs) are represented in the ensemble. The simulations are compared against available high-resolution precipitation observations and coarse resolution ($$\sim $$ ∼ 12 km) RCMs with parameterized convection. The model simulations and observations are compared with respect to mean precipitation, precipitation intensity and frequency, and heavy precipitation on daily and hourly timescales in different seasons. The results show that kilometer-scale models produce a more realistic representation of precipitation than the coarse resolution RCMs. The most significant improvements are found for heavy precipitation and precipitation frequency on both daily and hourly time scales in the summer season. In general, kilometer-scale models tend to produce more intense precipitation and reduced wet-hour frequency compared to coarse resolution models. On average, the multi-model mean shows a reduction of bias from $$\sim \,$$ ∼ −40% at 12 km to $$\sim \,$$ ∼ −3% at 3 km for heavy hourly precipitation in summer. Furthermore, the uncertainty ranges i.e. the variability between the models for wet hour frequency is reduced by half with the use of kilometer-scale models. Although differences between the model simulations at the kilometer-scale and observations still exist, it is evident that these simulations are superior to the coarse-resolution RCM simulations in the representing precipitation in the present-day climate, and thus offer a promising way forward for investigations of climate and climate change at local to regional scales.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.