The North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (NARCCAP) is an international effort designed to investigate the uncertainties in regional-scale projections of future climate and produce highresolution climate change scenarios using multiple regional climate models (RCMs) nested within atmosphere–ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs) forced with the Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) A2 scenario, with a common domain covering the conterminous United States, northern Mexico, and most of Canada. The program also includes an evaluation component (phase I) wherein the participating RCMs, with a grid spacing of 50 km, are nested within 25 years of National Centers for Environmental Prediction–Department of Energy (NCEP–DOE) Reanalysis II. This paper provides an overview of evaluations of the phase I domain-wide simulations focusing on monthly and seasonal temperature and precipitation, as well as more detailed investigation of four subregions. The overall quality of the simulations is determined, comparing the model performances with each other as well as with other regional model evaluations over North America. The metrics used herein do differentiate among the models but, as found in previous studies, it is not possible to determine a “best” model among them. The ensemble average of the six models does not perform best for all measures, as has been reported in a number of global climate model studies. The subset ensemble of the two models using spectral nudging is more often successful for domain-wide root-mean-square error (RMSE), especially for temperature. This evaluation phase of NARCCAP will inform later program elements concerning differentially weighting the models for use in producing robust regional probabilities of future climate change.

We review the challenges and future perspectives of regional climate model (RCM), or dynamical downscaling, activities. Among the main technical issues in need of better understanding are those of selection and sensitivity to the model domain and resolution, techniques for providing lateral boundary conditions, and RCM internal variability. The added value (AV) obtained with the use of RCMs remains a central issue, which needs more rigorous and comprehensive analysis strategies. Within the context of regional climate projections, large ensembles of simulations are needed to better understand the models and characterize uncertainties. This has provided an impetus for the development of the Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX), the first international program offering a common protocol for downscaling experiments, and we discuss how CORDEX can address the key scientific challenges in downscaling research. Among the main future developments in RCM research, we highlight the development of coupled regional Earth system models and the transition to very high-resolution, cloud-resolving models.

There are two main uncertainties in determining future climate: the trajectories of future emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols, and the response of the global climate system to any given set of future emissions [Meehl et al., 2007]. These uncertainties normally are elucidated via application of global climate models, which provide information at relatively coarse spatial resolutions. Greater interest in, and concern about, the details of climate change at regional scales has provided the motivation for the application of regional climate models, which introduces additional uncertainty [Christensen et al., 2007a]. These uncertainties in fine‐scale regional climate responses, in contrast to uncertainties of coarser spatial resolution global models in which regional models are nested, now have been documented in numerous contexts [Christensen et al., 2007a] and have been found to extend to uncertainties in climate impacts [Wood et al., 2004; Oleson et al., 2007]. While European research in future climate projections has moved forward systematically to examine combined uncertainties from global and regional models [Christensen et al., 2007b], North American climate programs have lagged behind.

[1] A comprehensive intercomparison of historical wind speed trends over the contiguous United States is presented based on two observational data sets, four reanalysis data sets, and output from two regional climate models (RCMs). This research thus contributes to detection, quantification, and attribution of temporal trends in wind speeds within the historical/contemporary climate and provides an evaluation of the RCMs being used to develop future wind speed scenarios. Under the assumption that changes in wind climates are partly driven by variability and evolution of the global climate system, such changes should be manifest in direct observations, reanalysis products, and RCMs. However, there are substantial differences in temporal trends derived from observational wind speed data, reanalysis products, and RCMs. The two observational data sets both exhibit an overwhelming dominance of trends toward declining values of the 50th and 90th percentile and annual mean wind speeds, which is also the case for simulations conducted using MM5 with NCEP-2 boundary conditions. However, converse trends are seen in output from the North American Regional Reanalysis, other global reanalyses (NCEP-1 and ERA-40), and the Regional Spectral Model. Equally, the relationship between changing annual mean wind speed and interannual variability is not consistent among the different data sets. NCEP-1 and NARR exhibit some tendency toward declining (increasing) annual mean wind speeds being associated with decreased (increased) interannual variability, but this is not the case for the other data sets considered. Possible causes of the differences in temporal trends from the eight data sources analyzed are provided. Motivation and Objectives[2] Wind speed time series have been subject to far fewer trend analyses than temperature and precipitation records [Gower, 2002;Keimig and Bradley, 2002;McAvaney et al., 2001;McVicar et al., 2008; Tomasin, 1999, 2003;Pryor and Barthelmie, 2003;Tuller, 2004;Brazdil et al., 2009], in part because of data homogeneity issues [Thomas et al., 2008;Tuller, 2004;DeGaetano, 1998]. However, understanding how evolution of the global climate system has been manifest as changes in near-surface wind regimes in the past and how near-surface wind speed regimes might alter in the future is of great relevance to the insurance industry [Changnon et al., 1999;Thornes, 1991], the construction and maritime industries [Ambrose and Vergun, 1997;Caires and Sterl, 2005;Caires et al., 2006], surface energy balance estimation [Rayner, 2007], the community charged with mitigating coastal erosion [Bijl, 1997;Viles and Goudie, 2003], the agricultural industry [O'Neal et al., 2005], forest and infrastructure protection communities [Jungo et al., 2002], and the burgeoning wind energy industry [Pryor et al., 2006b]. With respect to the latter, it is worth noting that during 2005-2008 over 18,000 MW of wind energy developments came online in the continental United States, increasing installed capacity to over 25 GW (AWEA wind ene...

Abstract. The COordinated Regional Downscaling EXperiment (CORDEX) is a diagnostic model intercomparison project (MIP) in CMIP6. CORDEX builds on a foundation of previous downscaling intercomparison projects to provide a common framework for downscaling activities around the world. The CORDEX Regional Challenges provide a focus for downscaling research and a basis for making use of CMIP6 global climate model (GCM) output to produce downscaled projected changes in regional climates and assess sources of uncertainties in the projections, all of which can potentially be distilled into climate change information for vulnerability, impacts and adaptation studies. CORDEX Flagship Pilot Studies advance regional downscaling by targeting one or more of the CORDEX Regional Challenges. A CORDEX-CORE framework is planned that will produce a baseline set of homogeneous high-resolution, downscaled projections for regions worldwide. In CMIP6, CORDEX coordinates with ScenarioMIP and is structured to allow cross comparisons with HighResMIP and interaction with the CMIP6 VIACS Advisory Board.