Search

Climate projections at relevant temporal and spatial scales are essential to assess potential future climate change impacts on climatologically diverse regions such as the northeast United States. Here, we show how both statistical and dynamical downscaling methods applied to relatively coarse-scale atmosphere-ocean general circulation model output are able to improve simulation of spatial and temporal variability in temperature and precipitation across the region. We then develop high-resolution projections of future climate change across the northeast USA, using IPCC SRES emission scenarios combined with these downscaling methods. The projections show increases in temperature that are larger at higher latitudes and inland, as well as the potential for changing precipitation patterns, particularly along the coast. While the absolute magnitude of change expected over the coming century depends on the sensitivity of the climate system to human forcing, significantly higher increases in temperature and in winter precipitation are expected under a higher as compared to lower scenario of future emissions from human activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the influence of global climate change at the regional scale, we examine past and future changes in key climate, hydrological, and biophysical indicators across the US Northeast (NE). We first consider the extent to which simulations of twentieth century climate from nine atmosphere-ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs) are able to reproduce observed changes in these indicators. We then evaluate projected future trends in primary climate characteristics and indicators of change, including seasonal temperatures, rainfall and drought, snow cover, soil moisture, streamflow, and changes in biometeorological indicators that depend on threshold or accumulated temperatures such as growing season, frost days, and Spring Indices (SI). Changes in indicators for which temperature-related signals have already been observed (seasonal warming patterns, advances in high-spring streamflow, decreases in snow depth, extended growing seasons, earlier bloom dates) are generally reproduced by past model simulations and are projected to continue in the future. Other indicators for which trends have not yet been observed also show projected future changes consistent with a warmer climate (shrinking snow cover, more frequent droughts, and extended low-flow periods in summer). The magnitude of temperature-driven trends in the future are generally projected to be higher under the Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) mid-high (A2) and higher (A1FI) emissions scenarios than under the lower (B1) scenario. These results provide confidence regarding the direction of many regional climate trends, and highlight the fundamental role of future emissions in determining the potential magnitude of changes we can expect over the coming century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Precise evaluations of climate model precipitation outputs are valuable for making decisions regarding agriculture, water resource, and ecosystem management. Many downscaling techniques have been developed in the past few years for projection of weather variables. We need to apply dynamical and statistical downscaling (DD and SD) to bridge the gap between the coarse resolution general circulation model (GCM) outputs and the need for high-resolution climate information over a semi-arid region. We compare the requirements of DD (RegCM4) and SD (Delta) approaches, evaluate the historical run of NNRP1 data in comparison with station data, and analyze the changes in wet days and precipitation values through both methods during 1990–2010. In this study, we did not want to use prediction data under different scenarios of climate change, and we have just applied observed data to assess the amount of precise of NNRP1 data, over the observed period. SD method requires less time and computing power than DD. The DD approach performs better over the evaluation period according to efficiency criteria. In general, the Pearson correlation in DD with observation data in evaluation period was higher than (r > 0.72 and R2 > 0.52) SD (r > 0.65 and R2 > 0.41) over three study stations. Similarly, MAE and NSE show better results from DD relative to SD. SD underestimates the number annual mean wet-days for all three stations examined. DD overestimates a number of annual mean wet-days, but with less deviation from the observed mean. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]