2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical downscaling of CMIP5 outputs for projecting future changes in rainfall in the Onkaparinga catchment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
27
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
1
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, GCMs generate rainfall forecasts at relatively coarse spatial scales, in the order of a few hundred kilometres and are unable to resolve the effects of sub-grid scale features such as topography and land use [16]. These outputs cannot be directly used in catchment scale studies, which require hydroclimatic data at fine spatial resolutions [17].…”
Section: South-east Queensland Regionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, GCMs generate rainfall forecasts at relatively coarse spatial scales, in the order of a few hundred kilometres and are unable to resolve the effects of sub-grid scale features such as topography and land use [16]. These outputs cannot be directly used in catchment scale studies, which require hydroclimatic data at fine spatial resolutions [17].…”
Section: South-east Queensland Regionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The scale mismatch between the GCM outputs and the hydroclimatic required at the catchment level is a major obstacle in climate studies of hydrology and water resources [17]. As a solution to the scale mismatch between the GCM's outputs and the information required at the catchment scale, downscaling techniques have been developed [16,17]. However, results from using this approach applied to catchments in eastern Australia [15] demonstrate little improvement over climatology, a major limitation being the low level of skill in the monthly rainfall forecasts from the general circulation model at the course grid scale [5].…”
Section: South-east Queensland Regionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Precipitation bias after ensemble simulation always remains, and the less the bias between ensemble outputs and observations, the more reliable the future projection based on these data [21,22]. Generally, there are two methods to correct the bias: one corrects the predictor variables before downscaling, and the other corrects the bias between downscaled precipitation and observations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is common to adopt the outputs of general circulation models (GCMs) with predefined scenarios to forecast future weather conditions and to assess their impacts on regional water resources (Arora, ; Timbal et al, ; Alkuwari et al, ; Beecham et al, ; Mahmood and Babel, ; Rashid et al, ; Tofiq and Guven, ). However, GCM outputs are represented in a grid ranging from 150–300 km in size, which is too spatially coarse for regional weather and water resource conditions, and further limits their direct regional application (Arora, ; Timbal et al, ; Beecham et al, ; Manor and Berkovic, ; Su et al, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared to dynamical downscaling, statistical downscaling is relatively easy to implement and computationally less expensive (Wilby and Wigley, ; Wilby et al, ; Fowler et al, ; Jeong et al, ; Sachindra et al, ). Therefore, statistical downscaling with the concept of transfer functions is commonly employed in many hydrological applications (Charles et al, ; Dibike and Coulibaly, ; Fowler et al, ; Jeong et al, ; Mehrotra et al, ; Mekanik et al, ; Beecham et al, ; Rashid et al, ; Laflamme et al, ). Once the relationship is established, it can further be utilized with different future scenarios of the GCMs to forecast impacts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%