Skip to main content

Consistency of simulated and observed regional changes in temperature, sea level pressure and precipitation

Climatic Change volume 118, pages 799–810 (2013)Cite this article

Abstract

There is increasing pressure from stakeholders for highly localised climate change projections. A comprehensive assessment of climate model performance at the grid box scale in simulating recent change, however, is not available at present. Therefore, we compare observed changes in near-surface temperature, sea level pressure (SLP) and precipitation with simulations available from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects 3 and 5 (CMIP3 and CMIP5). In both multi-model datasets we find coherent areas of inconsistency between observed and simulated local trends per degree global warming in both temperature and SLP in the majority of models. Localised projections should thus take into account the possibility of regional biases shared across models. In contrast, simulated changes in precipitation are not significantly different from observations due to low signal-to-noise ratio of local precipitation changes. Therefore, recent regional rainfall change is likely not providing useful constraints for future projections as of yet. Comparing the two most recent sets of internationally coordinated climate model experiments, we find no indication of improvement in the models’ ability to reproduce local trends in temperature, SLP and precipitation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Allan R, Ansell T (2006) A new globally complete monthly historical gridded mean sea level pressure dataset (HadSLP2): 1850-2004. J Climate 19(22):5816–5842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews T, Gregory JM, Webb MJ, Taylor KE (2012) Forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity in CMIP5 coupled atmosphere-ocean climate models. Geophys Res Lett 39(9):L09,712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annan JD, Hargreaves JC (2011) Understanding the CMIP3 multimodel ensemble. J Climate 24(16):4529–4538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck C, Grieser J, Rudolf B (2005) A new monthly precipitation climatology for the global land areas for the period 1951 to 2000. Climate Status Report 2004, German Weather Service, pp 181–190

  • Bhend J, von Storch H (2008) Consistency of observed winter precipitation trends in northern Europe with regional climate change projections. Clim Dyn 31(1):17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen J, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gao X, Held I, Jones R, Kolli R, Kwon WT, Laprise R, Magaña Rueda V, Mearns L, Menéndez C, Räisänen J, Rinke A, Sarr A, Whetton P (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom andNew York, NY, USA, chap Regional Climate Projections, pp 847–940

  • Compo GP, Whitaker JS, Sardeshmukh PD, Matsui N, Allan RJ, Yin X, Gleason BE, Vose RS, Rutledge G, Bessemoulin P, Brönnimann S, Brunet M, Crouthamel RI, Grant AN, Groisman PY, Jones PD, Kruk MC, Kruger AC, Marshall GJ, Maugeri M, Mok HY, Nordli O, Ross TF, Trigo RM, Wang XL, Woodruff SD, Worley SJ (2011) The twentieth century reanalysis project. Q J R Meteorol Soc 137(654):1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson C, Villarini G (2012) Detecting inhomogeneities in the twentieth century reanalysis over the central United States. J Geophys Res 117:D05123. doi:10:1029/2011JD016988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fronzek S, Carter T, Räisänen J, Ruokolainen L, Luoto M (2010) Applying probabilistic projections of climate change with impact models: a case study for sub-arctic Palsa Mires in Fennoscandia. Climatic Change 99:515–534. doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9679-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillett NP, Stott PA (2009) Attribution of anthropogenic influence on seasonal sea level pressure. Geophys Res Lett 36(23):L23,709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giorgi F, Francisco R (2000) Uncertainties in regional climate change prediction: a regional analysis of ensemble simulations with the HADCM2 coupled AOGCM. Clim Dyn 16:169–182. doi:10.1007/PL00013733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilyardi E, Bellenger H, Collins M, Ferrett S, Cai W, Wittenberg A (2012) A first look at ENSO in CMIP5. CLIVAR Exchanges No 58 17(1):29–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen J, Ruedy R, Sato M, Lo K (2010) Global surface temperature change. Rev Geophys 48(4):RG4004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jun M, Knutti R, Nychka D (2008) Spatial analysis to quantify numerical model bias and dependence. J Am Stat Assoc 103(483):934–947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karoly DJ, Wu QG (2005) Detection of regional surface temperature trends. J Climate 18(21):4337–4343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson D, Knutti R (2011a) Climate model genealogy. Geophys Res Lett 38(8):L08,703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson D, Knutti R (2011b) Spatial-scale dependence of climate model performance in the CMIP3 ensemble. J Climate 24(11):2680–2692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehl GA, Covey C, Delworth T, Latif M, McAvaney B, Mitchell JFB, Stouffer RJ, Taylor KE (2007) The WCRP CMIP3 multimodel dataset—a new era in climate change research. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 88:1383–1394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavelsky TM, Smith LC (2006) Intercomparison of four global precipitation data sets and their correlation with increased Eurasian river discharge to the Arctic Ocean. J Geophys Res 111(D21):D21,112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall D, Wood R, Bony S, Colman R, Fichefet T, Fyfe J, Kattsov V, Pitman A, Shukla J, Srinivasan J, Stouffer R, Sumi A, Taylor K (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, chap Climate Models and Their Evaluation, pp 589–662

  • Räisänen J (2007) How reliable are climate models? Tellus A 59(1):2–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichler T, Kim J (2008) How well do coupled models simulate today’s climate? Bull Am Meteorol Soc 89(3):303–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sexton D, Murphy J, Collins M, Webb M (2011) Multivariate probabilistic projections using imperfect climate models part I: outline of methodology. Clim Dynam 38(11–12):2513–2542. doi:10.1007/s00382-011-1208-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith I, Chandler E (2010) Refining rainfall projections for the Murray Darling Basin of south-east Australia—the effect of sampling model results based on performance. Climatic Change 102:377–393. doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9757-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterl A (2004) On the (in)homogeneity of reanalysis products. J Climate 17(19):3866–3873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2011) An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93(4):485–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Haren R, van Oldenborgh G, Lenderink G, Collins M, Hazeleger W (2012) SST and circulation trend biases cause an underestimation of European precipitation trends. Clim Dynam 40(1–2):1–20. doi:10.1007/s00382-012-1401-5

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oldenborgh GJ, Drijfhout S, van Ulden A, Haarsma R, Sterl A, Severijns C, Hazeleger W, Dijkstra H (2009) Western Europe is warming much faster than expected. Clim Past 5:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ventura V, Paciorek CJ, Risbey JS (2004) Controlling the proportion of falsely rejected hypotheses when conducting multiple tests with climatological data. J Climate 17(22):4343–4356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe M, Suzuki T, O’ishi R, Komuro Y, Watanabe S, Emori S, Takemura T, Chikira M, Ogura T, Sekiguchi M, Takata K, Yamazaki D, Yokohata T, Nozawa T, Hasumi H, Tatebe H, Kimoto M (2010) Improved climate simulation by MIROC5: mean states, variability, and climate sensitivity. J Climate 23(23):6312–6335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wentz FJ, Ricciardulli L, Hilburn K, Mears C (2007) How much more rain will global warming bring? Science 317(5835):233–235

    Article  Google 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 34(14):L14701. doi:10.1029/2007GL030025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilks DS (1997) Resampling hypothesis tests for autocorrelated fields. J Climate 10(1):65–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yokohata T, Annan J, Collins M, Jackson C, Tobis M, Webb M, Hargreaves J (2011) Reliability of multi-model and structurally different single-model ensembles. Clim Dynam in print, pp 1–18. doi:10.1007/s00382-011-1203-1

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Zwiers F, Hegerl GC, Lambert FH, Gillett NP, Solomon S, Stott PA, T N (2007) Detection of human influence on twentieth-century precipitation trends. Nature 448:461–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling, which is responsible for CMIP, and we thank the climate modelling groups for producing and making available their model output. For CMIP the U.S. Department of Energy’s Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI) provides coordinating support and led development of software infrastructure in partnership with the Global Organization for Earth System Science Portals.

Support for the Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project dataset is provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science Innovative and Novel Computational Impact on Theory and Experiment (DOE INCITE) program, and Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Climate Program Office.

We thank David Kent and Tim Erwin for software to facilitate the analysis of large multi-model datasets, and we thank Janice Bathols for help with downloading the CMIP5 data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Private Bag 1, Aspendale, VIC, 3195, Australia

    J. Bhend

  2. CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship, Aspendale, VIC, 3195, Australia

    J. Bhend & P. Whetton

Authors
  1. J. Bhend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Whetton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Bhend.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(PDF 428 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bhend, J., Whetton, P. Consistency of simulated and observed regional changes in temperature, sea level pressure and precipitation. Climatic Change 118, 799–810 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0691-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0691-2

Keywords

  • CMIP5 Model
  • Global Precipitation Climatology Centre
  • World Climate Research Programme
  • Anthropogenic Forcings
  • CMIP5 Ensemble