Evaluation of methods for selecting climate models to simulate future hydrological change
A challenge for climate impact studies is the selection of a limited number of climate model projections among the dozens that are typically available. Here, we examine the impacts of methods for climate model selection on projections of runoff change for five different watersheds across the conterminous USA. The results from an ensemble of 29 global climate models and 29 corresponding hydrological model simulations are compared with the results that would have been obtained by applying six different selection methods to the climate model data and using only the selected models to drive the hydrological model. We evaluate each selection method based on whether the runoff projections produced by the method meet the method’s objective and on whether the results are sensitive to the number of models chosen. The Katsavounidis–Kuo–Zhang (KKZ) method, which is intended to maximize the spread in the projected climate change, was the only method that met both criteria for suitability. Although the KKZ method generally performed well, the results from both it and the other methods varied somewhat unpredictably based on region and number of models chosen. This study shows that the methods and models used in similar top–down studies should be carefully chosen and that the results obtained should be interpreted with caution.
KeywordsClimate model ensembles Hydrological change Model selection Model uncertainty
We thank the anonymous reviewers and editor for comments that improved this manuscript.We also thank the World Climate Research Programme’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, the Global Organization for Earth System Science Portals, and the climate modeling groups (Table S1) for their roles in CMIP, as well as the providers of the downscaled hydrology projections.
Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation (CBET-1360286), Pennsylvania Sea Grant (NA10OAR4170063), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NA16NOS4780207 to Virginia Institute of Marine Science).
- Brekke L, Thrasher BL, Maurer EP, Pruitt T (2013) Downscaled CMIP3 and CMIP5 climate projections: release of downscaled CMIP5 climate projections, comparison with preceding information, and summary of user needs. Technical report, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation Technical Services Center, DenverGoogle Scholar
- Brekke L, Wood A, Pruitt T (2014) Downscaled CMIP3 and CMIP5 climate and hydrology projections: release of hydrology projections, comparison with preceding information, and summary of user needs. Technical report, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation Technical Services Center, DenverGoogle Scholar
- Casajus N, Périé C, Logan T, Lambert M-C, de Blois S, Berteaux D (2016) An objective approach to select climate scenarios when projecting species distribution under climate change. PLoS ONE:11Google Scholar
- Hartigan JA, Wong MA (1979) Algorithm AS 136: a k-means clustering algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat) 28(1):100–108Google Scholar
- Herger N, Abramowitz G, Knutti R, Angélil O, Lehmann K, Sanderson BM (2017) Selecting a climate model subset to optimise key ensemble properties. Earth Syst Dyn Discuss 2017:1–24Google Scholar
- Masson D, Knutti R (2011) Climate model genealogy. Geophys Res Lett:38Google Scholar
- Schewe J, Heinke J, Gerten D, Haddeland I, Arnell NW, Clark DB, Dankers R, Eisner S, Fekete BM, Colón-González FJ, Gosling SN, Kim H, Liu X, Masaki Y, Portmann FT, Satoh Y, Stacke T, Tang Q, Wada Y, Wisser D, Albrecht T, Frieler K, Piontek F, Warszawski L, Kabat P (2014) Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111(9):3245–3250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Terando A, Keller K, Easterling WE (2012) Probabilistic projections of agro-climate indices in North America. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres:117Google Scholar
- Vetter T, Reinhardt J, Flörke M, Griensven A, Hattermann F, Huang S, Koch H, Pechlivanidis IG, Plötner S, Seidou O, Su B, Vervoort RW, Krysanova V (2017) Evaluation of sources of uncertainty in projected hydrological changes under climate change in 12 large-scale river basins. Clim Chang:141Google Scholar
- Whetton P, Macadam I, Bathols J, O’Grady J (2007) Assessment of the use of current climate patterns to evaluate regional enhanced greenhouse response patterns of climate models. Geophys Res Lett:34Google Scholar