Further dynamical downscaling of NARCCAP using WRF:

Similar documents
Using a high-resolution ensemble modeling method to inform risk-based decision-making at Taylor Park Dam, Colorado

CCRN Year 3 Results and Update on Progress Summer Storms and Convective Precipitation

Pseudo-Global warming approach using 4KM WRF model

Southern New England s Changing Climate. Raymond S. Bradley and Liang Ning Northeast Climate Science Center University of Massachusetts, Amherst

A 21st century HRRR-based approach to estimating probable maximum precipitation to enhance dam safety and community resilience

Kelly Mahoney NOAA ESRL Physical Sciences Division

Model resolution impact on Precipitation: Comparison to SNOTEL observations

Mesoscale Convective Systems Under Climate Change

WRF Historical and PGW Simulations over Alaska

Statistical analysis of regional climate models. Douglas Nychka, National Center for Atmospheric Research

Projected change in the East Asian summer monsoon from dynamical downscaling

North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program

Julie A. Winkler. Raymond W. Arritt. Sara C. Pryor. Michigan State University. Iowa State University. Indiana University

Training: Climate Change Scenarios for PEI. Training Session April Neil Comer Research Climatologist

On the Appropriateness of Spectral Nudging in Regional Climate Models

Diagnosing the Climatology and Interannual Variability of North American Summer Climate with the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS)

Projected Impacts of Climate Change in Southern California and the Western U.S.

INTRODUCTION HAZARDOUS CONVECTIVE WEATHER (HCW)

High-Resolution MPAS Simulations for Analysis of Climate Change Effects on Weather Extremes

Climate Modeling: From the global to the regional scale

Greenhouse Gas Induced Changes in Summer Precipitation over Colorado in NARCCAP Regional Climate Models*

Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curve Update for Newfoundland and Labrador

A COMPARISON OF VERY SHORT-TERM QPF S FOR SUMMER CONVECTION OVER COMPLEX TERRAIN AREAS, WITH THE NCAR/ATEC WRF AND MM5-BASED RTFDDA SYSTEMS

Combining Deterministic and Probabilistic Methods to Produce Gridded Climatologies

Use of the Combined Pacific Variability Mode for Climate Prediction in North America

High resolution rainfall projections for the Greater Sydney Region

The North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (NARCCAP) Raymond W. Arritt for the NARCCAP Team Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa USA

Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) CU-Boulder 2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Northern New England Climate: Past, Present, and Future. Basic Concepts

Water Balance in the Murray-Darling Basin and the recent drought as modelled with WRF

Artificial Neural Network Prediction of Future Rainfall Intensity

Christopher L. Castro Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona, USA

The western Canada high resolution WRF simulation

Funding provided by NOAA Sectoral Applications Research Project CLIMATE. Basic Climatology Colorado Climate Center

Use of Emerging Applications of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model to Investigate the North American Monsoon

Fine-scale climate projections for Utah from statistical downscaling of global climate models

Sensitivity of precipitation forecasts to cumulus parameterizations in Catalonia (NE Spain)

Downscaling ability of the HadRM3P model over North America

CLIMATE MODEL DOWNSCALING: HOW DOES IT WORK AND WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU?

Yuqing Wang. International Pacific Research Center and Department of Meteorology University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822

Climate Change and Runoff Statistics in the Rhine Basin: A Process Study with a Coupled Climate-Runoff Model

Erik Kabela and Greg Carbone, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina

Regional Climate Simulations with WRF Model

Uncertainty and regional climate experiments

Indices of droughts over Canada as simulated by a statistical downscaling model: current and future periods

Development and Validation of Polar WRF

NARCCAP and NetCDF. Seth McGinnis & Toni Rosati IMAGe NCAR.

Climate Change: Mesoscale and Synoptic- Scale Precipitation Events

Forecasts for the Future: Understanding Climate Models and Climate Projections for the 21 st Century

Downscaling and Probability

NIDIS Intermountain West Regional Drought Early Warning System February 7, 2017

Climate Change and the Chehalis River. Guillaume Mauger, Se-Yeun Lee, Christina Bandaragoda, Yolande Serra, and Jason Won September 21, 2016

Regional Climate Modeling Technology: Initial Results Regional Climate Modeling Consortium. Cliff Mass. UW, WSAS Member

Regionalization Techniques and Regional Climate Modelling

8-km Historical Datasets for FPA

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society and American Meteorological Society 21 st Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction 31 May 2012

Hydrologic Research Laboratory Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of California, Davis

Anticipated and Observed Trends in the Global Hydrological Cycle. Kevin E. Trenberth NCAR

A WRF-based rapid updating cycling forecast system of. BMB and its performance during the summer and Olympic. Games 2008

1. Introduction. In following sections, a more detailed description of the methodology is provided, along with an overview of initial results.

Areal Reduction Factors for the Colorado Front Range and Analysis of the September 2013 Colorado Storm

Future extreme precipitation events in the Southwestern US: climate change and natural modes of variability

Exploring the Use of Dynamical Weather and Climate Models for Risk Assessment

2010 CAPS Spring Forecast Experiment Program Plan (A Brief Version)

APPLICATIONS OF DOWNSCALING: HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES EXAMPLES

High Resolution Ensemble Prediction of Typhoon Morakot (2009) May 11, 2011

Assessment of Ensemble Forecasts

Future population exposure to US heat extremes

Presented at the NADP Technical Meeting and Scientific Symposium October 16, 2008

The Developmental Testbed Center (DTC) Steve Koch, NOAA/FSL

Christopher L. Castro Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Arizona

Model Based Climate Predictions for Utah. Thomas Reichler Department of Atmospheric Sciences, U. of Utah

Nesting large-eddy simulations within mesoscale simulations in WRF for wind energy applications

Adaptation by Design: The Impact of the Changing Climate on Infrastructure

Future Great Lakes climatology and water levels simulated using Regional Climate Models

Climate Summary for the Northern Rockies Adaptation Partnership

ClimateBC version history

Appendix E. OURANOS Climate Change Summary Report

HIGH-RESOLUTION CLIMATE PROJECTIONS everyone wants them, how do we get them? KATHARINE HAYHOE

Climate Change Scenarios in Southern California. Robert J. Allen University of California, Riverside Department of Earth Sciences

Improved rainfall and cloud-radiation interaction with Betts-Miller-Janjic cumulus scheme in the tropics

3B.3: Climate Controls on the Extreme Rainstorms in the Contiguous US:

Annex I to Target Area Assessments

Future hail characteristics using HAILCAST and well-behaved dynamically downscaled regional climate models

Possible Applications of Deep Neural Networks in Climate and Weather. David M. Hall Assistant Research Professor Dept. Computer Science, CU Boulder

ROCKY MOUNTAIN CLIMATE

A Comparison of Statistical and Dynamical Downscaling of Winter Precipitation over Complex Terrain

An Evaluation of Seeding Effectiveness in the Central Colorado Mountains River Basins Weather Modification Program

Applications/Users for Improved S2S Forecasts

Sierra Weather and Climate Update

A Quick Report on a Dynamical Downscaling Simulation over China Using the Nested Model

Added Value of Convection Resolving Climate Simulations (CRCS)

Areal Reduction Factors for the Colorado Front Range and Analysis of the September 2013 Colorado Storm

Drought Monitoring with Hydrological Modelling

Forecasting of Optical Turbulence in Support of Realtime Optical Imaging and Communication Systems

Extreme precipitation events in the. southeast U.S.

Influence of variations in low-level moisture and soil moisture on the organization of summer convective systems in the US Midwest

4.4 EVALUATION OF AN IMPROVED CONVECTION TRIGGERING MECHANISM IN THE NCAR COMMUNITY ATMOSPHERE MODEL CAM2 UNDER CAPT FRAMEWORK

Numerical Experiments of Tropical Cyclone Seasonality over the Western North Pacific

Regional climate model projections for the State of Washington

Transcription:

Further dynamical downscaling of NARCCAP using WRF: High-resolution simulations of extreme precipitation events in future NARCCAP climate scenarios Kelly Mahoney (UCAR-PACE) Michael Alexander, Jamie Scott, Joe Barsugli NARCCAP User s Workshop April 8 2011

Motivation: Extreme precipitation and climate change Extreme precipitation events generally predicted to increase* but why, when, where, and by how much? Global climate models not suited for simulation of extreme precipitation (resolution, parameterizations) Regional climate models often still too coarse, use CP schemes Projections, predictions most valuable at local, weather scales to users (public, planners) especially in mountainous, complex terrain Physical processes to be represented by a model Over most regions, precipitation is likely to be less frequent but more intense, and precipitation extremes are very likely to increase. *e.g., Frei et al. 1998; Meehl et al. 2005; IPCC 2007; Gutkowski et al. 2008; Karl et al. 2008 Precipitation forming in a 1-km gridbox

Research objectives Across the Front Range of the Colorado Rocky Mountains 1. Do elevation thresholds for storms, flooding, hail change in future scenarios? 2. Which storm-scale physical processes are most affected by changes in large-scale climate? (e.g., updraft strength, precipitation efficiency, entrainment?) 3. What are the strengths, limitations of various downscaling approaches? a. What is the best way to downscale climate extremes? b. Space, time scales required? Statistical vs. dynamical downscaling? Optimal approach to either? c. Research- and decision-making communities: Improved understanding of strengths, limitations of downscaling approaches inform selection of most appropriate approach to specific problem Regional dynamical downscaling Water Street (now Canyon Blvd.) in Boulder, CO during 1894 flood Denver Public Library Canadian Climate Change Scenarios Network

Methodology: Overview 1. Select extreme cases from regional climate model data 2. Create initial conditions for WRF simulations 3. Execute high-resolution simulations 4. Compare past, future high-resolution simulations 50-km gridspacing 1-km gridspacing

Methodology NARCCAP: North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program Initial, boundary conditions from 20 th, 21st century AOGCM experiments GFDL-timeslice, WRF-CCSM used (so far) Extreme event selection: 1. Target region: Colorado Front Range 2. For past (1971-2000), future (2041-2070) simulations: 1. Sort all warm-season (June-July-August) daily precipitation values in target region 2. 30 largest precipitation values Top 1% of events Target region Colorado

Three different downscaling methodologies (Overview) 1. Individual simulations 2. Composite-initialized simulations 3. Delta method/ PGW /climate-perturbed simulations of observed extreme event 1. Individual simulations: Comparison of top 10 past individual events vs. top 10 future individual events 2. Composite approach 3. Big Thompson Canyon Flood in GFDL-TS Future 24h total precip (mm)

WRF runs: Model set-up WRFV3.1 4km outer domain: 450x450 gridpoints 1.33 km inner domain: 574x601 gridpoints Hourly output for 24-h Parameterizations: WSM6 microphysics YSU Planetary Boundary Layer scheme RRTM, Dudhia LW/SW radiation physics Noah land surface model (4-layers) Initial conditions for runs shown here: Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) GCM Timeslice simulations GFDL AM2.1; 20C3M; SRES-A2 (Historical simulations not based on real events) Domain 1 (4-km) WRF Domain 2 (1.3-km) GFDL Topography over target region (m)

Examples of preliminary results*: 1. Individual simulations 2. Composite-initialized simulations 3. Delta method/ PGW /climate-perturbed simulations of observed extreme event *Main results shown are from one NARCCAP regional climate model dataset: the GFDL-timeslices experiment brief comparison at end

As seen at 50-km regional climate scale: Top 10 Past vs. Top 10 Future Events Past Top 10 1 Target region CO 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 WRF model domain 6 Total precipitation/24h (mm, shaded), surface winds (vectors) Future Top 10 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 WRF model domain 6

1TR 2 3 4 5 Top 10 Past vs. Top 10 future: WRF Past Top 10 6 7 8 9 10 Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precipitation 1 2 3 FUTURE TR 6 PAST 7 5.1 Maximum gridpoint precipitation 4 9.3 8 125 Total precipitation/24h (mm, shaded) 5 207 9 Future Top 10 10 Total precipitation/24h (mm, shaded)

2. Extreme event composites as model initial conditions Past Top 10 2 3 1 7 6 1km WRF simulation from PAST events composite 4 5 Composite Top 9 10 PAST events 8 Create WRF initial, boundary conditions from composite fields 10 1km WRF simulation from FUTURE events composite Future Top 10 3 1 4 5 2 Composite Top 10 8 events 9 FUTURE 6 7 Create 10 WRF initial, boundary conditions from composite fields

2. Extreme event composites as model initial conditions 1.3-km WRF simulation from PAST events composite 24-h total precip (mm) 24-h total precip (mm) 1.3-km WRF simulation from FUTURE events composite GFDL ts COMPOSITES Whole domain Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 4.7 109 FUTURE 10.0 165 Increase in future intensity, precipitation maxima; trends in composite results agree with averages of top 10 past, future individual events For this particular region/driving model, 1 composite-initialized model run yields similar qualitative results as 10 individual model runs: implications for resource-limited user groups? Caveat! Success of method largely dependent on signal strength in event composites (timing of extreme events, over-smoothing of initial fields may be problematic*) * WRF-CCSM composite runs not as successful

3. Climate Perturbation / Pseudo-Global- Warming / Delta Method Experiment * Assuming same synoptic forcing, what would an observed extreme event of the past look like with modified thermodynamics as specified by various future climate projections? Using extreme event composites, difference past and future files to define future climate anomaly for T, RH Add changes to original WRF input files; run model Using NARCCAP GFDL Composite files: Compute ΔT comp, ΔRH comp between future, past at each gridpoint, vertical level 24h total precip (mm) for Big Thompson event in GFDL-TS Future ΔT ΔRH Level (pres) 1000mb ΔT (future -past) ΔRH (future -past) Add perturbations to WRF input files; run model on perturbed data 50mb Surface *Methodology similar to Schär et al. (1996), Hara et al. (2008), Kawase et al. (2008), Hill and Lackmann (2011), and Rasmussen et al. (2011)

Big Thompson (1976) and Fort Collins (1997) Floods: Climate Perturbed Run Big Thompson Control 24h total precip (mm) Big Thompson GFDLts Future 24h total precip (mm) Ft. Collins Control 24h total precip (mm) Ft. Collins GFDLts Future 24h total precip (mm) Observed event location shifts north; magnitude of overall maxima similar Should future climate signal be derived from shifts in uniform seasonal averages, gridpoint-based shifts on extreme-producing days only, other? Proof of concept stage: value likely lies in ability to perturb environment across wide spectrum of climate change scenarios

Comparison of three approaches with 50-km NARCCAP data Compare 3 approaches, NARCCAP: How do 50-km, 1.3-km simulations compare? What value is being added (if any?) Do we see the same qualitative trends? NARCCAP (GFDL-ts) Top events composite: PAST Intensity decrease NARCCAP (GFDL-ts) Top events composite: FUTURE NARCCAP (50km) 1. Individual simulations NARCCAP (50km) Future (red) Past (black) Domain-wide averages of top 10 vs. top 10 runs Future (red) Past (black) 1. Top 10 Individual Event WRF Simulation Average: PAST Intensity increase 1. Top 10 Individual Event WRF Simulation Average: FUTURE 2. Composite approach 3. Climate perturbation method Domain-wide averages of composite runs Domain-wide averages of CTRL, Future BT run 2. WRF s PAST events composite 2. WRF s Future events composite Future (red) GFDLts Perturbed Future (red) Intensity increase Past (black) CTRL (black)

Surprise findings? What happens to surface hail? Example of average accumulated surface graupel/hail fields in Top 10 past vs. Top 10 future individual cases Event-total (24-h) hail at the surface: Past (Average of top 10 1-km simulations from WRF- CCSM) Event-total (24-h) hail at the surface: Future (Average of top 10 1-km simulations from WRF- CCSM) Trend persists across *all* simulations: individual top events, compositebased, delta-method, *and* with GFDL-ts and WRF-CCSM Until you change the microphysics scheme Importance of model microphysics with increased downscaling!

Comparison of GFDL-ts, WRF-CCSM results GFDL-Timeslices WRF-CCSM Avg difference (Future Past) of Top 10 events: GFDL-Timeslices (red/orange = drier in future; blue/green = wetter in future) Avg difference (Future Past) of Top 10 events: WRF-CCSM (red/orange = drier in future; blue/green = wetter in future) NARCCAP (50 km) GFDL-Timeslice WRF-1km (from GFDL-Timeslice) NARCCAP (50 km) WRF-CCSM WRF-1km (from WRF-CCSM) Summary by region: WRF 1-km Top 10 events from GFDL-ts: Elevation analysis: Max Precip (Top 10 event averages) Summary by region: WRF 1-km Top 10 events from WRF-CCSM: Elevation analysis: Max Precip (Top 10 event averages) GFDL- Timeslices Target Region Only (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Max precip Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Max precip TR-averages of top 10 vs. top 10 runs Future (red) WRF- CCSM Target Region Only (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Maximu m precip Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Maximu m precip TR-averages of top 10 vs. top 10 runs Future (red) PAST 16.3 117 5.1 125 FUT 18.0 131 9.3 207 Past (black) PAST 13.3 74 6.1 101 FUT 10.1 79 4.0 103 Past (black)

Preliminary conclusions 1. High-resolution simulations offer insight into past, future extreme events: spatial/temporal detail, assessment of storm-scale physical processes 2. Preliminary results (GFDL-timeslices, WRF-CCSM) suggest: more intense precipitation extremes in future, particularly ~5000 9000ft (both models) changes in hail amount at surface due to sub-cloud melting (both models) GFDL-ts wetter overall (past and future) than WRF-CCSM WRF-CCSM may have diurnal precip, QC issues: has several days with 10 20 mm of precip reported, composites problematic 3. Value over RCM likely depends on objective (and geographic region, computing capabilities ) Over whole domain, average precip amounts may be similar but spatial pattern of changes reversed in high-res vs. RCM Ongoing work to establish why pattern reversal results; also differences in high- vs. low-elevation locations 4. Comparison of model methodologies underway: Composite approach may offer shortcut around individual simulations in some cases; strengths, weaknesses of all approaches to be analyzed further 5. Need (at least) one more set of NARCCAP simulations for downscaling (all methods) 50km vs. 1km? Objective?

Acknowledgments US Bureau of Reclamation: Dave Raff, John England, Chuck Hennig, Levi Brekke, Victoria Sankovich, Jade Soddell, Subhrendu Gangopandyah UCAR/CLIVAR/PACE program NARCCAP Project (NCAR) NCAR, National Science Foundation for WRF, NCL, wrfhelp Unidata (UCAR) for IDV, GEMPAK NOAA ESRL High-Performance Computing System Western Water Assessment (WWA) Contact: Kelly Mahoney kelly.mahoney@noaa.gov

Extra slides

Case selection: Comparing NARCCAP extreme cases to extreme precipitation climatology Case selection quality control: Regional climate model (GFDL) extreme event composites Precipitation (mm/day): Top 20 th century events NARR Analysis (composites of observed extreme events from 1979-2008) Precipitation (mm/day) Surface winds and moisture convergence Compare RCM s extreme event characteristics to observed extreme events (NARR) Moist, easterly (upslope) flow dominant weather pattern in both observations and models; large scale weather matches overall Precipitation (mm/day): Top 21 st century events

Preliminary Results: Analysis of Top 10 past events vs. Top 10 future individual events Does elevation of heaviest precipitation change from past to future? Future (red) Past (black) Domain-wide Intense precip in future simulations increases up to 9000ft (~2700m) More cases, regions to be examined Shifts in this elevation range relevant to water resource management concerns, flood/dam safety!

Comparison of three approaches with 50-km NARCCAP data Compare 3 approaches, NARCCAP: How do 50-km, 1.3-km simulations compare? What value is being added (if any?) Do we see the same qualitative trends? NARCCAP (GFDL-ts) Top events composite: PAST NARCCAP (GFDL-ts) Top events composite: FUTURE Intensity decrease 1. Top 10 Individual Event WRF Simulation Average: PAST 1. Top 10 Individual Event WRF Simulation Average: FUTURE 2. WRF s PAST events composite 2. WRF s Future events composite Intensity increase Intensity increase

Surprise findings? What happens to surface hail? Example of average accumulated surface graupel/hail fields in Top 10 past vs. Top 10 future individual cases Event-total (24-h) hail at the surface: Past (Average of top 10 1-km simulations from WRF- CCSM) Event-total (24-h) hail at the surface: Future (Average of top 10 1-km simulations from WRF- CCSM) Average freezing level height: Past Average freezing level height: Future

Comparison of GFDL-ts, WRF-CCSM results GFDL-Timeslices WRF-CCSM Avg difference (Future Past) of Top 10 events: GFDL-Timeslices (red/orange = drier in future; blue/green = wetter in future) Avg difference (Future Past) of Top 10 events: WRF-CCSM (red/orange = drier in future; blue/green = wetter in future) NARCCAP (50 km) GFDL-Timeslice WRF-1km (from GFDL-Timeslice) NARCCAP (50 km) WRF-CCSM WRF-1km (from WRF-CCSM) Summary by region: WRF 1-km Top 10 events from GFDL-ts: Elevation analysis (Top 10 event averages) Summary by region: WRF 1-km Top 10 events from WRF-CCSM: Elevation analysis (Top 10 event averages) GFDL- Timeslices Target Region Only (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Max precip Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Max precip Domain-wide averages of top 10 Future (red) vs. top 10 runs WRF- CCSM Target Region Only (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Maximu m precip Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precip Maximu m precip Domain-wide averages of top 10 Future (red) vs. top 10 runs PAST 16.3 117 5.1 125 PAST 13.3 74 6.1 101 FUT 18.0 131 9.3 207 Past (black) FUT 10.1 79 4.0 103 Past (black)

Comparison of three approaches with one another 1.Individual simulations: Top 10 past vs. top 10 future Top 10 vs. Top 10 avgs Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 5.1 125 FUTURE 9.3 207 2. Composite approach GFDL-ts COMPOSITES Whole domain Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 4.7 109 FUTURE 10.0 165 3. Climate perturbation/ delta method Big Thompson experiment Whole domain Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST(CTRL) 6.9 209 FUTURE 7.0 187 Future (red) Domain-wide averages of top 10 vs. top 10 runs Future (red) Domain-wide averages of composite runs CTRL (black) Perturbed Future (red) Domain-wide averages of Big Thompson runs Past (black) Past (black)

Comparison of three approaches with 50-km NARCCAP data Compare 3 approaches NARCCAP: How does 50-km data compare to highres WRF simulations? What value is being added (if any?) in the detail? Do we see the same qualitative trends? NARCCAP (50km) NARCCAP (50km) Top 10 vs. Top 10 avgs Whole NARCCAP domain (50km) (Average of all 10 cases) Future (red) Average precipitation Past (black) Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 7.8 139 FUTURE 9.6 174 1. Individual simulations 2. Composite approach 3. Climate perturbation/ delta method Top 10 vs. Top 10 avgs Whole domain (Average of all 10 cases) GFDL ts COMPOSITES Whole domain BT run Whole domain Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 5.1 125 FUTURE 9.3 207 Average precipitatio n Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST 4.7 109 FUTURE 10.0 165 Average precipitation Maximum gridpoint precipitation PAST (CTRL) 6.9 209 FUTURE 7.0 187

Data details NARCCAP: North American Region Climate Change Assessment Program Uses large scale forcing from 20th century and 21st century climate change (SRES A2) AOGCM experiments to force high resolution regional climate models. http://www.narccap.ucar.edu/ GFDL-AM2 (timeslice) Observed SST/Sea-ice/GHG forcing for 20 th C Anomalous SST/Sea-ice/GHG from SRES A2 in 21 st C run Run atmosphere-only model at high res with prescribed BC (no regional model used) WRF-CCSM Update WRF-CCSM detailsc Examine daily average (12UTC-12UTC) Precipitation from NARCCAP: 20th century (1968-2000) 21st century (2038-2070) Warm season (June-July-August)

GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average): 2m-Temp Past Future Difference (ΔT) GFDLts WRF- CCSM

Plot using narccap instead make sure this isn t a WRF interpolation thing! GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average at F00): 2m-MIXR Past Future Difference (ΔT) GFDLts WRF- CCSM

GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average at F00): 2m-MIXR Past Future Difference (ΔT) These are top 30 do top 10 w/ same color scale as with wrf GFDLts WRF- CCSM

GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average): Precip (from WRF) Past Future Difference (ΔT) GFDLts WRF- CCSM

GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average): Precip (from NARCCAP) Past Future Difference (ΔT) These are top 30 do top 10 w/ same color scale as with wrf GFDLts WRF- CCSM

GFDL-ts vs. WRF-CCSM (top 10 case average): Precipitable Water Add same thing for PW, CAPE

Targeted Composite Technique Target region (TR): Colorado Front Range 38.5N-41.5N, 106.5W-105W Identify model grid points in TR Sort all Daily Prec values from JJA in TR Find top 30 Prec values from unique events Average prec, sfc hum, sfc winds and other fields (when avail) from each event Colorado

Mean Summer (JJA) Precip 1968-2000 GFDL-AM2 HADCM3-HRM3 GFDL-RCM3 CGCM3-RCM3

WRF vs. GFDL Topography

To delete

Big Thompson Climate Perturbed Run Big Thompson Control Simulated radar reflectivity (dbz) Big Thompson GFDLts Future Simulated radar reflectivity (dbz)

How can Reclamation use these results? Feedback from USBR water resources managers: Want to understand elevation threshold of extreme precipitation: Present precipitation-elevation thresholds? Future changes? Help generate future-climate scenarios for emergency preparedness exercises Incorporate results into dam safety evaluations, USBR Early Warning System operations, community/risk analysis, floodplain re-mapping Challenges: Adapting findings from atmospheric science/wrf framework to hydrologic/water management framework Language/jargon, units, technology, time Early Warning System (USBR) gauge station Collaborative field learning Olympus Dam, Estes Park, CO

2024 © sciencedocbox.com Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Feedback