Articles | Volume 25, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-273-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-273-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
18 Jan 2021
Research article |
| 18 Jan 2021
| 18 Jan 2021
Identifying robust bias adjustment methods for European extreme precipitation in a multi-model pseudo-reality setting
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Peter Thejll
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Peter Berg
Hydrology Research Unit, Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Norrköping, Sweden
Fredrik Boberg
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Ole Bøssing Christensen
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Bo Christiansen
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Physics of Ice, Climate and Earth, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, Bergen, Norway
Marianne Sloth Madsen
Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark
Christian Steger
Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach, Germany
Related authors
Ralf Döscher, Mario Acosta, Andrea Alessandri, Peter Anthoni, Thomas Arsouze, Tommi Bergman, Raffaele Bernardello, Souhail Boussetta, Louis-Philippe Caron, Glenn Carver, Miguel Castrillo, Franco Catalano, Ivana Cvijanovic, Paolo Davini, Evelien Dekker, Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, David Docquier, Pablo Echevarria, Uwe Fladrich, Ramon Fuentes-Franco, Matthias Gröger, Jost v. Hardenberg, Jenny Hieronymus, M. Pasha Karami, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Torben Koenigk, Risto Makkonen, François Massonnet, Martin Ménégoz, Paul A. Miller, Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Lars Nieradzik, Twan van Noije, Paul Nolan, Declan O'Donnell, Pirkka Ollinaho, Gijs van den Oord, Pablo Ortega, Oriol Tintó Prims, Arthur Ramos, Thomas Reerink, Clement Rousset, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Philippe Le Sager, Torben Schmith, Roland Schrödner, Federico Serva, Valentina Sicardi, Marianne Sloth Madsen, Benjamin Smith, Tian Tian, Etienne Tourigny, Petteri Uotila, Martin Vancoppenolle, Shiyu Wang, David Wårlind, Ulrika Willén, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, and Qiong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system model EC-Earth3 is documented here. Key performance metrics show physical behavior and biases well within the frame known from recent models. With improved physical and dynamic features, new ESM components, community tools, and largely improved physical performance compared to the CMIP5 version, EC-Earth3 represents a clear step forward for the only European community ESM. We demonstrate here that EC-Earth3 is suited for a range of tasks in CMIP6 and beyond.
Heiko Goelzer, Constantijn J. Berends, Fredrik Boberg, Gael Durand, Tamsin Edwards, Xavier Fettweis, Fabien Gillet-Chaulet, Quentin Glaude, Philippe Huybrechts, Sébastien Le clec'h, Ruth Mottram, Brice Noël, Martin Olesen, Charlotte Rahlves, Jeremy Rohmer, Michiel van den Broeke, and Roderik S. W. van de Wal
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3098, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3098, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for The Cryosphere (TC).
Short summary
Short summary
We present an ensemble of ice sheet model projections for the Greenland ice sheet. The focus is on providing projections that improve our understanding of the range future sea-level rise and the inherent uncertainties over the next 100 to 300 years. Compared to earlier work we more fully account for some of the uncertainties in sea-level projections. We include a wider range of climate model output, more climate change scenarios and we extend projections schematically up to year 2300.
Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, Jenni Kontkanen, Irina Sandu, Mario Acosta, Mohammed Hussam Al Turjmam, Ivan Alsina-Ferrer, Miguel Andrés-Martínez, Leo Arriola, Marvin Axness, Marc Batlle Martín, Peter Bauer, Tobias Becker, Daniel Beltrán, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Sebastien Cabaniols, Silvia Caprioli, Miguel Castrillo, Aparna Chandrasekar, Suvarchal Cheedela, Victor Correal, Emanuele Danovaro, Paolo Davini, Jussi Enkovaara, Claudia Frauen, Barbara Früh, Aina Gaya Àvila, Paolo Ghinassi, Rohit Ghosh, Supriyo Ghosh, Iker González, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Ioan Hadade, Christopher Haine, Carl Hartick, Utz-Uwe Haus, Shane Hearne, Heikki Järvinen, Bernat Jiménez, Amal John, Marlin Juchem, Thomas Jung, Jessica Kegel, Matthias Kelbling, Kai Keller, Bruno Kinoshita, Theresa Kiszler, Daniel Klocke, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Joonas Kolstela, Luis Kornblueh, Sergey Kosukhin, Aleksander Lacima-Nadolnik, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, Jonni Lehtiranta, Tuomas Lunttila, Anna Luoma, Pekka Manninen, Alexey Medvedev, Sebastian Milinski, Ali Omar Abdelazim Mohammed, Sebastian Müller, Devaraju Naryanappa, Natalia Nazarova, Sami Niemelä, Bimochan Niraula, Henrik Nortamo, Aleksi Nummelin, Matteo Nurisso, Pablo Ortega, Stella Paronuzzi, Xabier Pedruzo Bagazgoitia, Charles Pelletier, Carlos Peña, Suraj Polade, Himansu Pradhan, Rommel Quintanilla, Tiago Quintino, Thomas Rackow, Jouni Räisänen, Maqsood Mubarak Rajput, René Redler, Balthasar Reuter, Nuno Rocha Monteiro, Francesc Roura-Adserias, Silva Ruppert, Susan Sayed, Reiner Schnur, Tanvi Sharma, Dmitry Sidorenko, Outi Sievi-Korte, Albert Soret, Christian Steger, Bjorn Stevens, Jan Streffing, Jaleena Sunny, Luiggi Tenorio, Stephan Thober, Ulf Tigerstedt, Oriol Tinto, Juha Tonttila, Heikki Tuomenvirta, Lauri Tuppi, Ginka Van Thielen, Emanuele Vitali, Jost von Hardenberg, Ingo Wagner, Nils Wedi, Jan Wehner, Sven Willner, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, Florian Ziemen, and Janos Zimmermann
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Climate Change Adaptation Digital Twin (Climate DT) pioneers the operationalisation of climate projections. The system produces global simulations with local granularity for adaptation decision-making. Applications are embedded to generate tailored indicators. A unified workflow orchestrates all components in several supercomputers. Data management ensures consistency and streaming enables real-time use. It is a complementary innovation to initiatives like CMIP, CORDEX, and climate services.
Johanne Kristine Haandbæk Øelund, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Rune Magnus Koktvedgaard Zeitzen, Henrik Vedel, and Henrik Feddersen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3173, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3173, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores how a powerful storm like Anatol, which hit Denmark in 1999, could change in a warmer future climate. Using a weather model, the storm was simulated under future temperature conditions. Results show stronger winds affecting larger areas for longer periods. A new index was introduced to measure storm severity. The findings highlight the growing risks to infrastructure and the need for better storm preparedness.
Christian Pfister, Stefan Brönnimann, Laurent Litzenburger, Peter Thejll, Andres Altwegg, Rudolf Brázdil, Andrea Kiss, Erich Landsteiner, Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, and Thomas Pliemon
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3242, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3242, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Climate of the Past (CP).
Short summary
Short summary
Narrative historical records of wine production in Central Europe date back to 1200. A study of taxes paid to authorities in the French-Luxembourg Moselle region, Germany, and the Swiss Plateau over the last few centuries shows that wine yields provide indirect indications of summer temperatures when the impact of heavy frosts is taken into account. This enables climate reconstructions based on tree rings to be refined and confirmed. Occasionally, poor harvests gave rise to witch hunts.
Sofie Hedetoft, Olivia Bang Brinck, Ruth Mottram, Andrea M. U. Gierisch, Steffen Malskær Olsen, Martin Olesen, Nicolaj Hansen, Anders Anker Bjørk, Erik Loebel, Anne Solgaard, and Peter Thejll
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1907, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1907, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Iceberg mélange is the jumble of icebergs in front of some glaciers that calve into the sea. Some studies suggest mélange might help to control the retreat of glaciers. We studied 3 glaciers in NW Greenland where we used GPS sensors and satellites to track ice movement. We found that glaciers push forward and calve all year, including when mélange and landfast sea ice are present, suggesting mélange is not important in supporting glaciers, but may influence the seasonal calving cycle.
Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, Bo Christiansen, Lea Schneider, and Peter Thejll
Clim. Past, 21, 327–342, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-21-327-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-21-327-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We study the climatic signal, with a focus on volcanic-induced shocks, in two long annual records of wine production quantity (spanning 1444–1786) from present-day Luxembourg, close to the northern limit of viticulture in Europe. Highly significant wine production declines are found during years following major volcanic events. Furthermore, warmer and drier climate conditions favoured wine production, with spring and summer conditions being the most important ones.
Peter Berg, Thomas Bosshard, Denica Bozhinova, Lars Bärring, Joakim Löw, Carolina Nilsson, Gustav Strandberg, Johan Södling, Johan Thuresson, Renate Wilcke, and Wei Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8173–8179, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
When bias adjusting climate model data using quantile mapping, one needs to prescribe what to do at the tails of the distribution, where a larger data range is likely encountered outside of the calibration period. The end result is highly dependent on the method used. We show that, to avoid discontinuities in the time series, one needs to exclude data in the calibration range to also activate the extrapolation functionality in that time period.
Sanne B. M. Veldhuijsen, Willem Jan van de Berg, Peter Kuipers Munneke, Nicolaj Hansen, Fredrik Boberg, Christoph Kittel, Charles Amory, and Michiel R. van den Broeke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2855, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2855, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Perennial firn aquifers (PFAs), year-round bodies of liquid water within firn, can potentially impact ice-shelf and ice-sheet stability. We developed a fast XGBoost firn emulator to predict 21st-century distribution of PFAs in Antarctica for 12 climatic forcings datasets. Our findings suggest that under low emission scenarios, PFAs remain confined to the Antarctic Peninsula. However, under a high-emission scenario, PFAs are projected to expand to a region in West Antarctica and East Antarctica.
Nicolaj Hansen, Andrew Orr, Xun Zou, Fredrik Boberg, Thomas J. Bracegirdle, Ella Gilbert, Peter L. Langen, Matthew A. Lazzara, Ruth Mottram, Tony Phillips, Ruth Price, Sebastian B. Simonsen, and Stuart Webster
The Cryosphere, 18, 2897–2916, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2897-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2897-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated a melt event over the Ross Ice Shelf. We use regional climate models and a firn model to simulate the melt and compare the results with satellite data. We find that the firn model aligned well with observed melt days in certain parts of the ice shelf. The firn model had challenges accurately simulating the melt extent in the western sector. We identified potential reasons for these discrepancies, pointing to limitations in the models related to representing the cloud properties.
Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, Bo Christiansen, Jan Esper, Heli Huhtamaa, Lotta Leijonhufvud, Christian Pfister, Andrea Seim, Martin Karl Skoglund, and Peter Thejll
Clim. Past, 19, 2463–2491, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-2463-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-2463-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We study the climate signal in long harvest series from across Europe between the 16th and 18th centuries. The climate–harvest yield relationship is found to be relatively weak but regionally consistent and similar in strength and sign to modern climate–harvest yield relationships. The strongest climate–harvest yield patterns are a significant summer soil moisture signal in Sweden, a winter temperature and precipitation signal in Switzerland, and spring temperature signals in Spain.
Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5605–5625, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrological models projecting the impact of changing climate carry a lot of uncertainty. Thus, these models usually have a multitude of simulations using different future climate data. This study used the subjective opinion of experts to assess which climate and hydrological models are the most likely to correctly predict climate impacts, thereby easing the computational burden. The experts could select more likely hydrological models, while the climate models were deemed equally probable.
Peter Berg, Thomas Bosshard, Wei Yang, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6165–6180, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6165-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6165-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
When performing impact analyses with climate models, one is often confronted with the issue that the models have significant bias. Commonly, the modelled climatological temperature deviates from the observed climate by a few degrees or it rains excessively in the model. MIdAS employs a novel statistical model to translate the model climatology toward that observed using novel methodologies and modern tools. The coding platform allows opportunities to develop methods for high-resolution models.
Ralf Döscher, Mario Acosta, Andrea Alessandri, Peter Anthoni, Thomas Arsouze, Tommi Bergman, Raffaele Bernardello, Souhail Boussetta, Louis-Philippe Caron, Glenn Carver, Miguel Castrillo, Franco Catalano, Ivana Cvijanovic, Paolo Davini, Evelien Dekker, Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, David Docquier, Pablo Echevarria, Uwe Fladrich, Ramon Fuentes-Franco, Matthias Gröger, Jost v. Hardenberg, Jenny Hieronymus, M. Pasha Karami, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Torben Koenigk, Risto Makkonen, François Massonnet, Martin Ménégoz, Paul A. Miller, Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Lars Nieradzik, Twan van Noije, Paul Nolan, Declan O'Donnell, Pirkka Ollinaho, Gijs van den Oord, Pablo Ortega, Oriol Tintó Prims, Arthur Ramos, Thomas Reerink, Clement Rousset, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Philippe Le Sager, Torben Schmith, Roland Schrödner, Federico Serva, Valentina Sicardi, Marianne Sloth Madsen, Benjamin Smith, Tian Tian, Etienne Tourigny, Petteri Uotila, Martin Vancoppenolle, Shiyu Wang, David Wårlind, Ulrika Willén, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, and Qiong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system model EC-Earth3 is documented here. Key performance metrics show physical behavior and biases well within the frame known from recent models. With improved physical and dynamic features, new ESM components, community tools, and largely improved physical performance compared to the CMIP5 version, EC-Earth3 represents a clear step forward for the only European community ESM. We demonstrate here that EC-Earth3 is suited for a range of tasks in CMIP6 and beyond.
H. E. Markus Meier, Madline Kniebusch, Christian Dieterich, Matthias Gröger, Eduardo Zorita, Ragnar Elmgren, Kai Myrberg, Markus P. Ahola, Alena Bartosova, Erik Bonsdorff, Florian Börgel, Rene Capell, Ida Carlén, Thomas Carlund, Jacob Carstensen, Ole B. Christensen, Volker Dierschke, Claudia Frauen, Morten Frederiksen, Elie Gaget, Anders Galatius, Jari J. Haapala, Antti Halkka, Gustaf Hugelius, Birgit Hünicke, Jaak Jaagus, Mart Jüssi, Jukka Käyhkö, Nina Kirchner, Erik Kjellström, Karol Kulinski, Andreas Lehmann, Göran Lindström, Wilhelm May, Paul A. Miller, Volker Mohrholz, Bärbel Müller-Karulis, Diego Pavón-Jordán, Markus Quante, Marcus Reckermann, Anna Rutgersson, Oleg P. Savchuk, Martin Stendel, Laura Tuomi, Markku Viitasalo, Ralf Weisse, and Wenyan Zhang
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 457–593, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-457-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-457-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Based on the Baltic Earth Assessment Reports of this thematic issue in Earth System Dynamics and recent peer-reviewed literature, current knowledge about the effects of global warming on past and future changes in the climate of the Baltic Sea region is summarised and assessed. The study is an update of the Second Assessment of Climate Change (BACC II) published in 2015 and focuses on the atmosphere, land, cryosphere, ocean, sediments, and the terrestrial and marine biosphere.
Erika Médus, Emma D. Thomassen, Danijel Belušić, Petter Lind, Peter Berg, Jens H. Christensen, Ole B. Christensen, Andreas Dobler, Erik Kjellström, Jonas Olsson, and Wei Yang
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 693–711, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-693-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-693-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate the skill of a regional climate model, HARMONIE-Climate, to capture the present-day characteristics of heavy precipitation in the Nordic region and investigate the added value provided by a convection-permitting model version. The higher model resolution improves the representation of hourly heavy- and extreme-precipitation events and their diurnal cycle. The results indicate the benefits of convection-permitting models for constructing climate change projections over the region.
Nicolaj Hansen, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Fredrik Boberg, Christoph Kittel, Andrew Orr, Niels Souverijns, J. Melchior van Wessem, and Ruth Mottram
The Cryosphere, 16, 711–718, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-711-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-711-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the impact of different ice masks when modelling surface mass balance over Antarctica. We used ice masks and data from five of the most used regional climate models and a common mask. We see large disagreement between the ice masks, which has a large impact on the surface mass balance, especially around the Antarctic Peninsula and some of the largest glaciers. We suggest a solution for creating a new, up-to-date, high-resolution ice mask that can be used in Antarctic modelling.
H. E. Markus Meier, Christian Dieterich, Matthias Gröger, Cyril Dutheil, Florian Börgel, Kseniia Safonova, Ole B. Christensen, and Erik Kjellström
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 159–199, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-159-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-159-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In addition to environmental pressures such as eutrophication, overfishing and contaminants, climate change is believed to have an important impact on the marine environment in the future, and marine management should consider the related risks. Hence, we have compared and assessed available scenario simulations for the Baltic Sea and found considerable uncertainties of the projections caused by the underlying assumptions and model biases, in particular for the water and biogeochemical cycles.
Ole Bøssing Christensen, Erik Kjellström, Christian Dieterich, Matthias Gröger, and Hans Eberhard Markus Meier
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 133–157, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-133-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-133-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Baltic Sea Region is very sensitive to climate change, whose impacts could easily exacerbate biodiversity stress from society and eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. Therefore, there has been a focus on estimations of future climate change and its impacts in recent research. Models show a strong warming, in particular in the north in winter. Precipitation is projected to increase in the whole region apart from the south during summer. New results improve estimates of future climate change.
Fredrik Boberg, Ruth Mottram, Nicolaj Hansen, Shuting Yang, and Peter L. Langen
The Cryosphere, 16, 17–33, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-17-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-17-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Using the regional climate model HIRHAM5, we compare two versions (v2 and v3) of the global climate model EC-Earth for the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets. We are interested in the surface mass balance of the ice sheets due to its importance when making estimates of future sea level rise. We find that the end-of-century change in the surface mass balance for Antarctica is 420 Gt yr−1 (v2) and 80 Gt yr−1 (v3), and for Greenland it is −290 Gt yr−1 (v2) and −1640 Gt yr−1 (v3).
Nicolaj Hansen, Peter L. Langen, Fredrik Boberg, Rene Forsberg, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Peter Thejll, Baptiste Vandecrux, and Ruth Mottram
The Cryosphere, 15, 4315–4333, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-4315-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-4315-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have used computer models to estimate the Antarctic surface mass balance (SMB) from 1980 to 2017. Our estimates lies between 2473.5 ± 114.4 Gt per year and 2564.8 ± 113.7 Gt per year. To evaluate our models, we compared the modelled snow temperatures and densities to in situ measurements. We also investigated the spatial distribution of the SMB. It is very important to have estimates of the Antarctic SMB because then it is easier to understand global sea level changes.
Bo Christiansen
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 28, 409–422, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-28-409-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-28-409-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In geophysics we often need to analyse large samples of high-dimensional fields. Fortunately but counterintuitively, such high dimensionality can be a blessing, and we demonstrate how this allows simple analytical results to be derived. These results include estimates of correlations between sample members and how the sample mean depends on the sample size. We show that the properties of high dimensionality with success can be applied to climate fields, such as those from ensemble modelling.
Ruth Mottram, Nicolaj Hansen, Christoph Kittel, J. Melchior van Wessem, Cécile Agosta, Charles Amory, Fredrik Boberg, Willem Jan van de Berg, Xavier Fettweis, Alexandra Gossart, Nicole P. M. van Lipzig, Erik van Meijgaard, Andrew Orr, Tony Phillips, Stuart Webster, Sebastian B. Simonsen, and Niels Souverijns
The Cryosphere, 15, 3751–3784, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3751-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3751-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We compare the calculated surface mass budget (SMB) of Antarctica in five different regional climate models. On average ~ 2000 Gt of snow accumulates annually, but different models vary by ~ 10 %, a difference equivalent to ± 0.5 mm of global sea level rise. All models reproduce observed weather, but there are large differences in regional patterns of snowfall, especially in areas with very few observations, giving greater uncertainty in Antarctic mass budget than previously identified.
Silje Lund Sørland, Roman Brogli, Praveen Kumar Pothapakula, Emmanuele Russo, Jonas Van de Walle, Bodo Ahrens, Ivonne Anders, Edoardo Bucchignani, Edouard L. Davin, Marie-Estelle Demory, Alessandro Dosio, Hendrik Feldmann, Barbara Früh, Beate Geyer, Klaus Keuler, Donghyun Lee, Delei Li, Nicole P. M. van Lipzig, Seung-Ki Min, Hans-Jürgen Panitz, Burkhardt Rockel, Christoph Schär, Christian Steger, and Wim Thiery
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5125–5154, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5125-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5125-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We review the contribution from the CLM-Community to regional climate projections following the CORDEX framework over Europe, South Asia, East Asia, Australasia, and Africa. How the model configuration, horizontal and vertical resolutions, and choice of driving data influence the model results for the five domains is assessed, with the purpose of aiding the planning and design of regional climate simulations in the future.
Katja Weigel, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Kemisola Adeniyi, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Peter Berg, Louis-Philippe Caron, Irene Cionni, Susanna Corti, Niels Drost, Alasdair Hunter, Llorenç Lledó, Christian Wilhelm Mohr, Aytaç Paçal, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Valeriu Predoi, Marit Sandstad, Jana Sillmann, Andreas Sterl, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents new diagnostics for the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 on the hydrological cycle, extreme events, impact assessment, regional evaluations, and ensemble member selection. The ESMValTool v2.0 diagnostics are developed by a large community of scientists aiming to facilitate the evaluation and comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with a focus on the ESMs participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).
Jonas Olsson, Peter Berg, and Remco van de Beek
Adv. Sci. Res., 18, 59–64, https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-18-59-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-18-59-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have developed a tool to visualize rainfall observations, based on a combination of meteorological stations and weather radars, over Sweden in near real-time. By accumulating the rainfall in time (1–12 h) and space (hydrological basins), the tool is designed mainly for hydrological applications, e.g. to support flood forecasters and to facilitate post-event analyses. Despite evident uncertainties, different users have confirmed an added value of the tool in case studies.
Peter Berg, Fredrik Almén, and Denica Bozhinova
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 1531–1545, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-1531-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-1531-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
HydroGFD3.0 (Hydrological Global Forcing Data) is a data set of daily precipitation and temperature intended for use in hydrological modelling. The method uses different observational data sources to correct the variables from a model estimation of precipitation and temperature. An openly available data set covers the years 1979–2019, and times after this are available by request.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Trang Van Pham, Christian Steger, Burkhardt Rockel, Klaus Keuler, Ingo Kirchner, Mariano Mertens, Daniel Rieger, Günther Zängl, and Barbara Früh
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 985–1005, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A new regional climate model was prepared based on a weather forecast model. Slow processes of the climate system such as ocean state development and greenhouse gas emissions were implemented. A model infrastructure and evaluation tools were also prepared to facilitate long-term simulations and model evalution. The first ICON-CLM results were close to observations and comparable to those from COSMO-CLM, the recommended model being used at the Deutscher Wetterdienst and CLM Community.
Aslak Grinsted and Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen
Ocean Sci., 17, 181–186, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-181-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-181-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
As we warm our planet, oceans expand, ice on land melts, and sea levels rise. On century timescales, we find that the sea level response to warming can be characterized by a single metric: the transient sea level sensitivity. Historical sea level exhibits substantially higher sensitivity than model-based estimates of future climates in authoritative climate assessments, implying recent projections could well underestimate the likely sea level rise by the end of this century.
Fredrik Boberg, Ruth Mottram, Nicolaj Hansen, Shuting Yang, and Peter L. Langen
The Cryosphere Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-331, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-331, 2020
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
Using the regional climate model HIRHAM5, we compare two versions (v2 and v3) of the global climate model EC-Earth for the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets. We are interested in the surface mass balance of the ice sheets due to its importance when making estimates of the future sea level rise. We find that the end-of-century change of the surface mass balance for Antarctica is +150 Gt yr−1 (v2) and −710 Gt yr−1 (v3) and for Greenland the numbers are −210 Gt yr−1 (v2) and −1150 Gt yr−1 (v3).
Marie-Estelle Demory, Ségolène Berthou, Jesús Fernández, Silje L. Sørland, Roman Brogli, Malcolm J. Roberts, Urs Beyerle, Jon Seddon, Rein Haarsma, Christoph Schär, Erasmo Buonomo, Ole B. Christensen, James M. Ciarlo ̀, Rowan Fealy, Grigory Nikulin, Daniele Peano, Dian Putrasahan, Christopher D. Roberts, Retish Senan, Christian Steger, Claas Teichmann, and Robert Vautard
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5485–5506, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5485-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5485-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Now that global climate models (GCMs) can run at similar resolutions to regional climate models (RCMs), one may wonder whether GCMs and RCMs provide similar regional climate information. We perform an evaluation for daily precipitation distribution in PRIMAVERA GCMs (25–50 km resolution) and CORDEX RCMs (12–50 km resolution) over Europe. We show that PRIMAVERA and CORDEX simulate similar distributions. Considering both datasets at such a resolution results in large benefits for impact studies.
Cited articles
Aalbers, E. E., Lenderink, G., van Meijgaard, E., and van den Hurk, B. J. J. M.: Local-scale changes in mean and heavy precipitation in Western Europe, climate change or internal variability?, Clim. Dynam., 50, 4745–4766, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3901-9, 2018.
Arakawa, A.: The Cumulus Parameterization Problem: Past, Present, and Future, J. Climate, 17, 2493–2525, 2004.
Berg, P., Feldmann, H., and Panitz, H.-J.: Bias correction of high resolution regional climate model data, J. Hydrol., 448–449, 80–92, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.04.026, 2012.
Berg, P., Christensen, O. B., Klehmet, K., Lenderink, G., Olsson, J., Teichmann, C., and Yang, W.: Summertime precipitation extremes in a EURO-CORDEX 0.11∘ ensemble at an hourly resolution, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 957–971, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-957-2019, 2019.
Boberg, F. and Christensen, J. H.: Overestimation of Mediterranean summer temperature projections due to model deficiencies, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 433–436, https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE1454, 2012.
Buser, C., Künsch, H., and Schär, C.: Bayesian multi-model projections of climate: generalization and application to ENSEMBLES results, Clim. Res., 44, 227–241, https://doi.org/10.3354/cr00895, 2010.
Cannon, A. J.: Multivariate quantile mapping bias correction: an N-dimensional probability density function transform for climate model simulations of multiple variables, Clim. Dynam., 50, 31–49, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3580-6, 2018.
Cannon, A. J., Sobie, S. R., and Murdock, T. Q.: Bias Correction of GCM Precipitation by Quantile Mapping: How Well Do Methods Preserve Changes in Quantiles and Extremes?, J. Climate, 28, 6938–6959, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00754.1, 2015.
Chen, J., Brissette, F. P., and Lucas-Picher, P.: Assessing the limits of
bias-correcting climate model outputs for climate change impact studies, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 1123–1136, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022635, 2015.
Christensen, J. H. and Boberg, F.: Temperature dependent climate projection
deficiencies in CMIP5 models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, 24705, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053650, 2012.
Christensen, J. H. and Christensen, O. B.: A summary of the PRUDENCE model projections of changes in European climate by the end of this century, Climatic Change, 81, 7–30, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9210-7, 2007.
Coles, S.: An introduction to statistical modeling of extreme values, Springer, London, UK, 2001.
Collins, M., Chandler, R. E., Cox, P. M., Huthnance, J. M., Rougier, J., and
Stephenson, D. B.: Quantifying future climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 403–409, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1414, 2012.
DeGaetano, A. T. and Castellano, C. M.: Future projections of extreme precipitation intensity-duration-frequency curves for climate adaptation planning in New York State, Clim. Serv., 5, 23–35, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2017.03.003, 2017.
Eggert, B., Berg, P., Haerter, J. O., Jacob, D., and Moseley, C.: Temporal and spatial scaling impacts on extreme precipitation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 5957–5971, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-5957-2015, 2015.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016.
Gleckler, P. J., Taylor, K. E., and Doutriaux, C.: Performance metrics for climate models, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D06104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008972, 2008.
Gudmundsson, L., Bremnes, J. B., Haugen, J. E., and Engen-Skaugen, T.: Technical Note: Downscaling RCM precipitation to the station scale using statistical transformations – a comparison of methods, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3383–3390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3383-2012, 2012.
Gutiérrez, J. M., Maraun, D., Widmann, M., Huth, R., Hertig, E., Benestad, R., Roessler, O., Wibig, J., Wilcke, R., Kotlarski, S., San Martín, D., Herrera, S., Bedia, J., Casanueva, A., Manzanas, R., Iturbide, M., Vrac, M., Dubrovsky, M., Ribalaygua, J., Pórtoles, J., Räty, O., Räisänen, J., Hingray, B., Raynaud, D., Casado, M. J., Ramos, P., Zerenner, T., Turco, M., Bosshard, T., Štěpánek, P., Bartholy, J., Pongracz, R., Keller, D. E., Fischer, A. M., Cardoso, R. M., Soares, P. M. M., Czernecki, B., and Pagé, C.: An intercomparison of a large ensemble of statistical downscaling methods over Europe: Results from the VALUE perfect predictor cross-validation experiment, Int. J. Climatol., 39, 3750–3785, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5462, 2019.
Haerter, J. O., Hagemann, S., Moseley, C., and Piani, C.: Climate model bias correction and the role of timescales, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 1065–1079, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1065-2011, 2011.
Haerter, J. O., Eggert, B., Moseley, C., Piani, C., and Berg, P.: Statistical
precipitation bias correction of gridded model data using point measurements, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 1919–1929, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063188, 2015.
Hanel, M. and Buishand, T. A.: On the value of hourly precipitation extremes in regional climate model simulations, J. Hydrol., 393, 265–273,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.08.024, 2010.
Haylock, M. R., Hofstra, N., Klein Tank, A. M. G., Klok, E. J., Jones, P. D., and New, M.: A European daily high-resolution gridded data set of surface temperature and precipitation for 1950–2006, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D20119, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010201, 2008.
Hosking, J. R. M. and Wallis, J. R.: Parameter and Quantile Estimation for the Generalized Pareto Distribution, Technometrics, 29, 339, https://doi.org/10.2307/1269343, 1987.
Hui, Y., Chen, J., Xu, C., Xiong, L., and Chen, H.: Bias nonstationarity of global climate model outputs: The role of internal climate variability and climate model sensitivity, Int. J. Climatol., 39, 2278–2294, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5950, 2019.
Jacob, D., Petersen, J., Eggert, B., Alias, A., Christensen, O. B., Bouwer, L. M., Braun, A., Colette, A., Déqué, M., Georgievski, G., Georgopoulou, E., Gobiet, A., Menut, L., Nikulin, G., Haensler, A., Hempelmann, N., Jones, C., Keuler, K., Kovats, S., Kröner, N., Kotlarski, S., Kriegsmann, A., Martin, E., van Meijgaard, E., Moseley, C., Pfeifer, S.,
Preuschmann, S., Radermacher, C., Radtke, K., Rechid, D., Rounsevell, M., Samuelsson, P., Somot, S., Soussana, J.-F., Teichmann, C., Valentini, R., Vautard, R., Weber, B., and Yiou, P.: EURO-CORDEX: new high-resolution climate change projections for European impact research, Reg. Environ. Change, 14, 563–578, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0499-2, 2014.
Kallache, M., Vrac, M., Naveau, P., and Michelangeli, P.-A.: Nonstationary
probabilistic downscaling of extreme precipitation, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D05113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014892, 2011.
Kendon, E. J., Roberts, N. M., Fowler, H. J., Roberts, M. J., Chan, S. C., and Senior, C. A.: Heavier summer downpours with climate change revealed by weather forecast resolution model, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 570–576, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2258, 2014.
Kendon, E. J., Ban, N., Roberts, N. M., Fowler, H. J., Roberts, M. J., Chan, S. C., Evans, J. P., Fosser, G., and Wilkinson, J. M.: Do Convection-Permitting Regional Climate Models Improve Projections of Future Precipitation Change?, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 79–93,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-0004.1, 2017.
Kerkhoff, C., Künsch, H. R., and Schär, C.: Assessment of Bias Assumptions for Climate Models, J. Climate, 27, 6799–6818, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00716.1, 2014.
Klemeš, V.: Operational testing of hydrological simulation models, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 31, 13–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626668609491024, 1986.
Laflamme, E. M., Linder, E., and Pan, Y.: Statistical downscaling of regional climate model output to achieve projections of precipitation extremes, Weather Clim. Extrem., 12, 15–23, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2015.12.001, 2016.
Lenderink, G., Belušić, D., Fowler, H. J., Kjellström, E., Lind, P., van Meijgaard, E., van Ulft, B., and de Vries, H.: Systematic increases in the thermodynamic response of hourly precipitation extremes in an idealized warming experiment with a convection-permitting climate model, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 074012, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab214a, 2019.
Li, J., Evans, J., Johnson, F., and Sharma, A.: A comparison of methods for estimating climate change impact on design rainfall using a high-resolution RCM, J. Hydrol., 547, 413–427, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.019, 2017a.
Li, J., Johnson, F., Evans, J., and Sharma, A.: A comparison of methods to estimate future sub-daily design rainfall, Adv. Water Resour., 110, 215–227,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2017.10.020, 2017b.
Li, J., Sharma, A., Evans, J., and Johnson, F.: Addressing the mischaracterization of extreme rainfall in regional climate model simulations–A synoptic pattern based bias correction approach, J. Hydrol., 556, 901–912, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.04.070, 2018.
Madsen, M. S., Langen, P. L., Boberg, F., and Christensen, J. H.: Inflated Uncertainty in Multimodel-Based Regional Climate Projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 2017GL075627, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075627, 2017.
Maraun, D.: Nonstationarities of regional climate model biases in European seasonal mean temperature and precipitation sums, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L06706, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051210, 2012.
Maraun, D.: Bias Correction, Quantile Mapping, and Downscaling: Revisiting the Inflation Issue, J. Climate, 26, 2137–2143, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00821.1, 2013.
Maraun, D.: Bias Correcting Climate Change Simulations – a Critical Review,
Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 2, 211–220, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0050-x, 2016.
Maraun, D. and Widmann, M.: The representation of location by a regional climate model in complex terrain, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3449–3456, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-3449-2015, 2015.
Maraun, D., Shepherd, T. G., Widmann, M., Zappa, G., Walton, D., Gutiérrez, J. M., Hagemann, S., Richter, I., Soares, P. M. M., Hall, A., and Mearns, L. O.: Towards process-informed bias correction of climate change simulations, Nat. Clim. Change, 7, 764–773, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3418, 2017.
Maurer, E. P., Das, T., and Cayan, D. R.: Errors in climate model daily precipitation and temperature output: time invariance and implications for bias correction, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 2147–2159, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-2147-2013, 2013.
McSweeney, C. F., Jones, R. G., Lee, R. W., and Rowell, D. P.: Selecting CMIP5 GCMs for downscaling over multiple regions, Clim. Dynam., 44, 3237–3260, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2418-8, 2015.
Mehrotra, R., Johnson, F., and Sharma, A.: A software toolkit for correcting systematic biases in climate model simulations, Environ. Model. Softw., 104, 130–152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.02.010, 2018.
Olsson, J., Berg, P., and Kawamura, A.: Impact of RCM Spatial Resolution on the Reproduction of Local, Subdaily Precipitation, J. Hydrometeorol., 16, 534–547, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-14-0007.1, 2015.
Overeem, A., Buishand, A., and Holleman, I.: Rainfall depth-duration-frequency curves and their uncertainties, J. Hydrol., 348, 124–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.09.044, 2008.
Pfahl, S., O'Gorman, P. A., and Fischer, E. M.: Understanding the regional pattern of projected future changes in extreme precipitation, Nat. Clim. Change, 7, 423–427, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3287, 2017.
Piani, C., Haerter, J. O., and Coppola, E.: Statistical bias correction for daily precipitation in regional climate models over Europe, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 99, 187–192, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-009-0134-9, 2010.
Prein, A. F., Langhans, W., Fosser, G., Ferrone, A., Ban, N., Goergen, K., Keller, M., Tölle, M., Gutjahr, O., Feser, F., Brisson, E., Kollet, S., Schmidli, J., Lipzig, N. P. M., and Leung, R.: A review on regional convection-permitting climate modeling: Demonstrations, prospects, and challenges, Rev. Geophys., 53, 323–361, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014RG000475, 2015.
Räisänen, J. and Räty, O.: Projections of daily mean temperature
variability in the future: cross-validation tests with ENSEMBLES regional climate simulations, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1553–1568, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1515-9, 2013.
Räty, O., Räisänen, J., and Ylhäisi, J. S.: Evaluation of delta change and bias correction methods for future daily precipitation: intermodel cross-validation using ENSEMBLES simulations, Clim. Dynam., 42, 2287–2303, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2130-8, 2014.
Refsgaard, J. C., Madsen, H., Andréassian, V., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., Davidson, T. A., Drews, M., Hamilton, D. P., Jeppesen, E., Kjellström, E., Olesen, J. E., Sonnenborg, T. O., Trolle, D., Willems, P., and Christensen, J. H.: A framework for testing the ability of models to project climate change and its impacts, Climatic Change, 122, 271–282,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0990-2, 2014.
Rowell, D. P.: An Observational Constraint on CMIP5 Projections of the East African Long Rains and Southern Indian Ocean Warming, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 6050–6058, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082847, 2019.
Sunyer, M., Luchner, J., Onof, C., Madsen, H., and Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K.: Assessing the importance of spatio-temporal RCM resolution when estimating sub-daily extreme precipitation under current and future climate conditions, Int. J. Climatol., 37, 688–705, 2017.
Sunyer, M. A., Gregersen, I. B., Rosbjerg, D., Madsen, H., Luchner, J., and
Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K.: Comparison of different statistical downscaling methods to estimate changes in hourly extreme precipitation using RCM projections from ENSEMBLES, Int. J. Climatol., 35, 2528–2539, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4138, 2015.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012.
Themeßl, M. J., Gobiet, A., and Leuprecht, A.: Empirical-statistical downscaling and error correction of daily precipitation from regional climate models, Int. J. Climatol., 31, 1530–1544, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2168, 2011.
Themeßl, M. J., Gobiet, A., and Heinrich, G.: Empirical-statistical downscaling and error correction of regional climate models and its impact on the climate change signal, Climatic Change, 112, 449–468, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0224-4, 2012.
Trenberth, K. E., Dai, A., Rasmussen, R. M., and Parsons, D. B.: The Changing Character of Precipitation, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 84, 1205–1218, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-84-9-1205, 2003.
Van Schaeybroeck, B. and Vannitsem, S.: Assessment of calibration assumptions under strong climate changes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 1314–1322, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL067721, 2016.
Velázquez, J. A., Troin, M., Caya, D., and Brissette, F.: Evaluating the
Time-Invariance Hypothesis of Climate Model Bias Correction: Implications for Hydrological Impact Studies, J. Hydrometeorol., 16, 2013–2026, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-14-0159.1, 2015.
Short summary
European extreme precipitation is expected to change in the future; this is based on climate model projections. But, since climate models have errors, projections are uncertain. We study this uncertainty in the projections by comparing results from an ensemble of 19 climate models. Results can be used to give improved estimates of future extreme precipitation for Europe.
European extreme precipitation is expected to change in the future; this is based on climate...
