Assessment of future flood intensification in Central Vietnam using a super-high-resolution climate model output

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Do Hoai Nam ◽  
Keiko Udo ◽  
Akira Mano
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Annual Rainfall ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Correction Model ◽  
Central Vietnam ◽  
The Future ◽  
Climate Model Output

This paper presents an assessment of the changes in future floods. The ranked area-average heavy daily rainfall amounts simulated by a super-high-resolution (20 km mesh) global climate model output are corrected with consideration of the effects of the topography on heavy rainfall patterns and used as a basis to model design storm hyetographs. The rainfall data are then used as the input for a nearly calibration-free parameter rainfall–runoff model to simulate floods in the future climate (2075–2099) at the Upper Thu Bon River basin in Central Vietnam. The results show that although the future mean annual rainfall will not be considerably different compared to the present-day climate (1979–2003), extreme rainfall is projected to increase vigorously, leading to a similar order of intensification of future floods. It is very likely that the flood peak with a 25-year recurrence will increase approximately 42% relative to the present-day climate. The occurrence of floods with a 10-year recurrence may exceed those with a 25-year recurrence in the present-day climate. The projection results also exhibit insignificant uncertainties caused by an artificial neural network-based bias correction model. Additionally, the presented bias correction model shows advantages over a simple climatology scaling method.

scholarly journals Constructing High-Resolution, Bias-Corrected Climate Products: A Comparison of Methods

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 455-475
Author(s):  
Maike F. Holthuijzen ◽  
Brian Beckage ◽  
Patrick J. Clemins ◽  
Dave Higdon ◽  
Jonathan M. Winter
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Maximum Temperature ◽  
Daily Maximum Temperature ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Station Data ◽  
Climate Model Output ◽  
Mapping Techniques

AbstractHigh-resolution, bias-corrected climate data are necessary for climate impact studies at local scales. Gridded historical data are convenient for bias correction but may contain biases resulting from interpolation. Long-term, quality-controlled station data are generally superior climatological measurements, but because the distribution of climate stations is irregular, station data are challenging to incorporate into downscaling and bias-correction approaches. Here, we compared six novel methods for constructing full-coverage, high-resolution, bias-corrected climate products using daily maximum temperature simulations from a regional climate model (RCM). Only station data were used for bias correction. We quantified performance of the six methods with the root-mean-square-error (RMSE) and Perkins skill score (PSS) and used two ANOVA models to analyze how performance varied among methods. We validated the six methods using two calibration periods of observed data (1980–89 and 1980–2014) and two testing sets of RCM data (1990–2014 and 1980–2014). RMSE for all methods varied throughout the year and was larger in cold months, whereas PSS was more consistent. Quantile-mapping bias-correction techniques substantially improved PSS, while simple linear transfer functions performed best in improving RMSE. For the 1980–89 calibration period, simple quantile-mapping techniques outperformed empirical quantile mapping (EQM) in improving PSS. When calibration and testing time periods were equivalent, EQM resulted in the largest improvements in PSS. No one method performed best in both RMSE and PSS. Our results indicate that simple quantile-mapping techniques are less prone to overfitting than EQM and are suitable for processing future climate model output, whereas EQM is ideal for bias correcting historical climate model output.

scholarly journals Changes in Climate Extremes over North Thailand, 1960–2099

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Badrul Masud ◽  
Peeyush Soni ◽  
Sangam Shrestha ◽  
Nitin K. Tripathi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Annual Rainfall ◽  
Trend Test ◽  
Daily Maximum ◽  
Climate Extreme ◽  
The Future ◽  
North Thailand ◽  
Extreme Indices

This study analyzes 24 climate extreme indices over North Thailand using observed data for daily maximum and minimum temperatures and total daily rainfall for the 1960–2010 period, and HadCM3 Global Climate Model (GCM) and PRECIS Regional Climate Model simulated data for the 1960–2100 period. A statistical downscaling tool is employed to downscale GCM outputs. Variations in and trends of historical and future climates are identified using the nonparametric Mann-Kendall trend test and Sen’s slope. Temperature extreme indices showed a significant rising trend during the observed period and are expected to increase significantly with an increase in summer days and tropical nights in the future. A notable decline in the number of cool days and nights is also expected in the study area while the number of warm days and nights is expected to increase. There was an insignificant decrease in total annual rainfall, number of days with rainfall more than 10 and 20 mm. However, the annual rainfall is projected to increase by 9.65% in the future 2011–2099 period compared to the observed 1960–2010 period.

scholarly journals Impact of a Statistical Bias Correction on the Projected Hydrological Changes Obtained from Three GCMs and Two Hydrology Models

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 556-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Hagemann ◽  
Cui Chen ◽  
Jan O. Haerter ◽  
Jens Heinke ◽  
Dieter Gerten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Hydrological Cycle ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Statistical Bias ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Climate Model Output ◽  
Statistical Bias Correction

Abstract Future climate model scenarios depend crucially on the models’ adequate representation of the hydrological cycle. Within the EU integrated project Water and Global Change (WATCH), special care is taken to use state-of-the-art climate model output for impacts assessments with a suite of hydrological models. This coupling is expected to lead to a better assessment of changes in the hydrological cycle. However, given the systematic errors of climate models, their output is often not directly applicable as input for hydrological models. Thus, the methodology of a statistical bias correction has been developed for correcting climate model output to produce long-term time series with a statistical intensity distribution close to that of the observations. As observations, global reanalyzed daily data of precipitation and temperature were used that were obtained in the WATCH project. Daily time series from three GCMs (GCMs) ECHAM5/Max Planck Institute Ocean Model (MPI-OM), Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques Coupled GCM, version 3 (CNRM-CM3), and the atmospheric component of the L’Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace Coupled Model, version 4 (IPSL CM4) coupled model (called LMDZ-4)—were bias corrected. After the validation of the bias-corrected data, the original and the bias-corrected GCM data were used to force two global hydrology models (GHMs): 1) the hydrological model of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPI-HM) consisting of the simplified land surface (SL) scheme and the hydrological discharge (HD) model, and 2) the dynamic global vegetation model called LPJmL. The impact of the bias correction on the projected simulated hydrological changes is analyzed, and the simulation results of the two GHMs are compared. Here, the projected changes in 2071–2100 are considered relative to 1961–90. It is shown for both GHMs that the usage of bias-corrected GCM data leads to an improved simulation of river runoff for most catchments. But it is also found that the bias correction has an impact on the climate change signal for specific locations and months, thereby identifying another level of uncertainty in the modeling chain from the GCM to the simulated changes calculated by the GHMs. This uncertainty may be of the same order of magnitude as uncertainty related to the choice of the GCM or GHM. Note that this uncertainty is primarily attached to the GCM and only becomes obvious by applying the statistical bias correction methodology.

scholarly journals Technical Note: The impact of spatial scale in bias correction of climate model output for hydrologic impact studies

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 685-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. P. Maurer ◽  
D. L. Ficklin ◽  
W. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Scale ◽  
Statistical Downscaling ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Mapping Bias ◽  
Climate Model Output

Abstract. Statistical downscaling is a commonly used technique for translating large-scale climate model output to a scale appropriate for assessing impacts. To ensure downscaled meteorology can be used in climate impact studies, downscaling must correct biases in the large-scale signal. A simple and generally effective method for accommodating systematic biases in large-scale model output is quantile mapping, which has been applied to many variables and shown to reduce biases on average, even in the presence of non-stationarity. Quantile-mapping bias correction has been applied at spatial scales ranging from hundreds of kilometers to individual points, such as weather station locations. Since water resources and other models used to simulate climate impacts are sensitive to biases in input meteorology, there is a motivation to apply bias correction at a scale fine enough that the downscaled data closely resemble historically observed data, though past work has identified undesirable consequences to applying quantile mapping at too fine a scale. This study explores the role of the spatial scale at which the quantile-mapping bias correction is applied, in the context of estimating high and low daily streamflows across the western United States. We vary the spatial scale at which quantile-mapping bias correction is performed from 2° ( ∼  200 km) to 1∕8° ( ∼  12 km) within a statistical downscaling procedure, and use the downscaled daily precipitation and temperature to drive a hydrology model. We find that little additional benefit is obtained, and some skill is degraded, when using quantile mapping at scales finer than approximately 0.5° ( ∼  50 km). This can provide guidance to those applying the quantile-mapping bias correction method for hydrologic impacts analysis.

scholarly journals Bias correction techniques for meteorological data of A2 scenario climate model output in Chao Phraya River Basin of Thailand

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Somchai Baimoung ◽  
Taikan Oki ◽  
Boonlert Archevarahuprok ◽  
Aphantree Yuttaphan ◽  
Manoon Pangpom
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Meteorological Data ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Climate Model Output ◽  
Chao Phraya River
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document