Search

We investigate the influence of bias correction of Global Climate Models (GCMs) prior to dynamical downscaling using regional climate models (RCMs), on the change in climate projected. We use 4 GCMs which are bias corrected against ERA-Interim re-analysis as a surrogate truth, and carry out bias corrected and non-bias corrected simulations over the CORDEX Australasia domain using the Weather Research and Forecasting model. Our results show that when considering the effect of bias correction on current and future climate separately, bias correction has a large influence on precipitation and temperature, especially for models which are known to have large biases. However, when considering the change in climate, i.e the Δ change (future minus current), we found that while differences between bias-corrected and non-corrected RCM simulations can be substantial (e.g. more than 1 ∘ C for temperatures) these differences are generally smaller than the models' inter-annual variability. Overall, averaged across all variables, bias corrected boundary conditions produce an overall reduction in the range, standard deviation and mean absolute deviation of the change in climate projected by the 4 models tested, over 61.5%, 62% and 58% of land area, with a larger reduction for precipitation as compared to temperature indices. In addition, we show that changes in the Δ change for DJF tasmax are broadly linked to precipitation changes and consequently soil moisture and surface sensible heat flux and changes in the Δ changefor JJA tasmin are linked to downward longwave heat flux. This study shows that bias correction of GCMs against re-analysis prior to dynamical downscaling can increase our confidence in projected future changes produced by downscaled ensembles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional climate models (RCMs) are used to dynamically downscale global climate models (GCMs) to provide high-resolution projections of future climate change to better inform policy and decision making at the regional scale. However, biases from GCMs are transferred to RCMs and this can limit the usefulness of the regional climate projections. This paper investigates the influence of bias correcting 4 GCMs from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 3, for regional climate simulations over the CORDEX-Australasia domain using Weather Research and Forecasting. The GCM outputs are bias corrected against ERA-Interim reanalysis as a surrogate truth. Results show that over decadal time scales bias correction removes large systematic precipitation and temperature biases. However, bias correction also introduced biases where there were none, introduced biases of the opposite sign, or enhanced existing biases in other regions in some instances. The dynamical mechanisms driving the changes in the biases are explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Community Atmosphere Biosphere Land Exchange (CABLE) model is a third‐generation land surface model (LSM). CABLE is commonly used as a stand‐alone LSM, coupled to the Australian Community Climate and Earth Systems Simulator global climate model and coupled to the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model for regional applications. Here, we evaluate an updated version of CABLE within a WRF physics ensemble over the COordinated Regional Downscaling EXperiment (CORDEX) AustralAsia domain. The ensemble consists of different cumulus, radiation and planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes. Simulations are carried out within the NASA Unified WRF modeling framework, NU‐WRF. Our analysis did not identify one configuration that consistently performed the best for all diagnostics and regions. Of the cumulus parameterizations the Grell‐Freitas cumulus scheme consistently overpredicted precipitation, while the new Tiedtke scheme was the best in simulating the timing of precipitation events. For the radiation schemes, the RRTMG radiation scheme had a general warm bias. For the PBL schemes, the YSU scheme had a warm bias, and the MYJ PBL scheme a cool bias. Results are strongly dependent on the region of interest, with the northern tropics and southwest Western Australia being more sensitive to the choice of physics options compared to southeastern Australia which showed less overall variation and overall better performance across the ensemble. Comparisons with simulations using the Unified Noah LSM showed that CABLE in NU‐WRF has a more realistic simulation of evapotranspiration when compared to GLEAM estimates. Key Points: We identify WRF physics configurations that perform well with CABLESimulation of latent heat fluxes over Australia are more skillful with WRF‐LIS‐CABLE than WRF‐Noah [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional climate models are sensitive to the forcing data used, as well as different model physics options. Additionally, the behaviour of physics parameterisations may vary depending on the location of the domain due to different climatic regimes. In this study, we carry out a sensitivity analysis of the weather research and forecasting model to different driving data and model physics options over a 10-km resolution domain in the southwest of Western Australia, a region with Mediterranean climate. Simulations are carried out on a seasonal time-scale, in order to better inform future long-term regional climate simulations for this region. We show that the choice of radiation scheme had a strong influence on both temperature and precipitation; the choice of planetary boundary layer scheme has a particularly large influence on minimum temperatures; and, the choice of cumulus scheme or more complex micro-physics did not strongly influence precipitation simulations. More importantly, we show that the same radiation scheme, when used with different driving data, can lead to different results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]