Articles | Volume 29, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1117-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-29-1117-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
28 Feb 2025
Research article |
| 28 Feb 2025
| 28 Feb 2025
Evaluating an Earth system model from a water manager perspective
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Whiting School of Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
Ming Ge
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Jadwiga H. Richter
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Ethan D. Gutmann
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Allyson Rugg
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Cindy L. Bruyère
Cooperative Programs for the Advancement of Earth System Science (CPAESS), UCAR, Boulder, CO, USA
Sue Ellen Haupt
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Flavio Lehner
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Polar Bears International, Bozeman, MT, USA
Rachel McCrary
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Andrew J. Newman
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Andy Wood
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA
Related authors
Matthew Henry, Jim Haywood, Andy Jones, Mohit Dalvi, Alice Wells, Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, Douglas G. MacMartin, Walker Lee, and Mari R. Tye
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13369–13385, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Solar climate interventions, such as injecting sulfur in the stratosphere, may be used to offset some of the adverse impacts of global warming. We use two independently developed Earth system models to assess the uncertainties around stratospheric sulfur injections. The injection locations and amounts are optimized to maintain the same pattern of surface temperature. While both models show reduced warming, the change in rainfall patterns (even without sulfur injections) is uncertain.
Jadwiga H. Richter, Daniele Visioni, Douglas G. MacMartin, David A. Bailey, Nan Rosenbloom, Brian Dobbins, Walker R. Lee, Mari Tye, and Jean-Francois Lamarque
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8221–8243, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Solar climate intervention using stratospheric aerosol injection is a proposed method of reducing global mean temperatures to reduce the worst consequences of climate change. We present a new modeling protocol aimed at simulating a plausible deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection and reproducibility of simulations using other Earth system models: Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with stratospheric aerosol injection (ARISE-SAI).
Mari R. Tye, Katherine Dagon, Maria J. Molina, Jadwiga H. Richter, Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, and Simone Tilmes
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1233–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We examined the potential effect of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) on extreme temperature and precipitation. SAI may cause daytime temperatures to cool but nighttime to warm. Daytime cooling may occur in all seasons across the globe, with the largest decreases in summer. In contrast, nighttime warming may be greatest at high latitudes in winter. SAI may reduce the frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall. The combined changes may exacerbate drying over parts of the global south.
Jinbo Xie, Qi Tang, Michael Prather, Jadwiga Richter, and Shixuan Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 9315–9333, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9315-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9315-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Analysis of the interaction between the climate and ozone in the stratosphere is complicated by the inability of climate models to simulate the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) – an important climate mode in the stratosphere. We use a set of model simulations that realistically simulate QBO and a novel ozone diagnostic tool to separate temperature- and circulation-driven QBO impacts. These are important for diagnosing model–model differences in QBO–ozone responses for climate projections.
Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Peter Hitchcock, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zac D. Lawrence, Wuhan Ning, Philip Rupp, Zheng Wu, Hilla Afargan-Gerstman, Natalia Calvo, Álvaro de la Cámara, Martin Jucker, Gerbrand Koren, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gloria L. Manney, Marisol Osman, Masakazu Taguchi, Cory Barton, Dong-Chang Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Jeff Knight, Piero Malguzzi, Daniele Mastrangelo, Jiyoung Oh, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Isla R. Simpson, Seok-Woo Son, Damien Specq, and Tim Stockdale
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3611, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3611, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden Stratospheric Warmings (SSWs) are known to follow a sustained wave dissipation in the stratosphere, which depends on both the tropospheric and stratospheric states. However, the relative role of each state is still unclear. Using a new set of subseasonal to seasonal forecasts, we show that the stratospheric state does not drastically affect the precursors of three recent SSWs, but modulates the stratospheric wave activity, with impacts depending on SSW features.
Simon Moulds, Louise Slater, Louise Arnal, and Andrew W. Wood
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2393–2406, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2393-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2393-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Seasonal streamflow forecasts are an important component of flood risk management. Here, we train and test a machine learning model to predict the monthly maximum daily streamflow up to 4 months ahead. We train the model on precipitation and temperature forecasts to produce probabilistic hindcasts for 579 stations across the UK for the period 2004–2016. We show skilful results up to 4 months ahead in many locations, although, in general, the skill declines with increasing lead time.
Wouter J. M. Knoben, Ashwin Raman, Gaby J. Gründemann, Mukesh Kumar, Alain Pietroniro, Chaopeng Shen, Yalan Song, Cyril Thébault, Katie van Werkhoven, Andrew W. Wood, and Martyn P. Clark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2361–2375, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2361-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2361-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrologic models are needed to provide simulations of water availability, floods, and droughts. The accuracy of these simulations is often quantified with so-called performance scores. A common thought is that different models are more or less applicable to different landscapes, depending on how the model works. We show that performance scores are not helpful in distinguishing between different models and thus cannot easily be used to select an appropriate model for a specific place.
Sean P. Burns, Vincent Humphrey, Ethan D. Gutmann, Mark S. Raleigh, David R. Bowling, and Peter D. Blanken
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1755, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1755, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We compared two techniques that are affected by the amount of liquid water in a forest canopy. One technique relies on remote sensing (a pair of GPS systems) and the other uses tree motion generated by the wind. Though completely different, these two techniques show strikingly similar changes when rain falls on an evergreen forest. We combine these measurements with eddy-covariance fluxes of water vapor to provide some insight into the evaporation of canopy-intercepted precipitation.
Branko Kosović, Sukanta Basu, Jacob Berg, Larry K. Berg, Sue E. Haupt, Xiaoli G. Larsén, Joachim Peinke, Richard J. A. M. Stevens, Paul Veers, and Simon Watson
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-42, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-42, 2025
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Most human activity happens in the layer of the atmosphere which extends a few hundred meters to a couple of kilometers above the surface of the Earth. The flow in this layer is turbulent. Turbulence impacts wind power production and turbine lifespan. Optimizing wind turbine performance requires understanding how turbulence affects both wind turbine efficiency and reliability. This paper points to gaps in our knowledge that need to be addressed to effectively utilize wind resources.
Hiroaki Naoe, Jorge L. Garcia-Franco, Chang-Hyun Park, Mario Rodrigo, Froila M. Palmeiro, Federico Serva, Masakazu Taguchi, Kohei Yoshida, James A. Anstey, Javier Garcia-Serrano, Seok-Woo Son, Yoshio Kawatani, Neal Butchart, Kevin Hamilton, Chih-Chieh Chen, Anne Glanville, Tobias Kerzenmacher, Francois Lott, Clara Orbe, Scott Osprey, Mijeong Park, Jadwiga H. Richter, Stefan Versick, and Shingo Watanabe
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1148, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1148, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines links between the stratospheric Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO) and large-scale atmospheric circulations in the tropics, subtropics, and polar regions. The QBO teleconnections and their modulation by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) are investigated through a series of climate model experiments. While QBO teleconnections are qualitatively reproduced by the multi-model ensemble, they are not consistent due to modelled QBO bias and other systematic model biases.
Mozhgan A. Farahani, Andrew W. Wood, Guoqiang Tang, and Naoki Mizukami
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-38, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-38, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new strategy to calibrate large-domain land/hydrology models over diverse and extensive regions. Using SUMMA and mizuRoute models, our approach integrates catchment attributes, model parameters, and performance metrics to optimize streamflow simulations. By leveraging recent innovations in machine learning methods and concepts for hydrology, we improve calibration outcomes and enable regionalization to ungauged basins, which is valuable for national-scale water security studies.
Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zachary D. Lawrence, Amy H. Butler, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Irene Erner, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Gerbrand Koren, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Judah Cohen, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Javier García-Serrano, Neil P. Hindley, Martin Jucker, Hera Kim, Robert W. Lee, Simon H. Lee, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Inna Polichtchouk, Jian Rao, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 171–195, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-171-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Variability in the extratropical stratosphere and troposphere is coupled, and because of the longer timescales characteristic of the stratosphere, this allows for a window of opportunity for surface prediction. This paper assesses whether models used for operational prediction capture these coupling processes accurately. We find that most processes are too weak; however downward coupling from the lower stratosphere to the near surface is too strong.
Dillon Elsbury, Federico Serva, Julie M. Caron, Seung-Yoon Back, Clara Orbe, Jadwiga H. Richter, James A. Anstey, Neal Butchart, Chih-Chieh Chen, Javier García-Serrano, Anne Glanville, Yoshio Kawatani, Tobias Kerzenmacher, Francois Lott, Hiroaki Naoe, Scott Osprey, Froila M. Palmeiro, Seok-Woo Son, Masakazu Taguchi, Stefan Versick, Shingo Watanabe, and Kohei Yoshida
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3950, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3950, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), a major tropical weather pattern, is influenced by persistent El Niño or La Niña sea surface temperature conditions during winter. Using a coordinated set of climate model experiments, we find that El Niño strengthens Kelvin waves, speeding up MJO propagation, while La Niña strengthens Rossby waves, slowing it down. Better understanding these interactions between the MJO and ocean helps us better understand natural climate variability.
Nicola Maher, Adam S. Phillips, Clara Deser, Robert C. Jnglin Wills, Flavio Lehner, John Fasullo, Julie M. Caron, Lukas Brunner, and Urs Beyerle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3684, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3684, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new multi-model large ensemble archive (MMLEAv2) and introduce the newly updated Climate Variability Diagnostics Package version 6 (CVDPv6), which is designed specifically for use with large ensembles. For highly variable quantities, we demonstrate that a model might evaluate poorly or favourably compared to the single realisation of the world that the observations represent, highlighting the need for large ensembles for model evaluation.
Yoshio Kawatani, Kevin Hamilton, Shingo Watanabe, James A. Anstey, Jadwiga H. Richter, Neal Butchart, Clara Orbe, Scott M. Osprey, Hiroaki Naoe, Dillon Elsbury, Chih-Chieh Chen, Javier García-Serrano, Anne Glanville, Tobias Kerzenmacher, François Lott, Froila M. Palmerio, Mijeong Park, Federico Serva, Masakazu Taguchi, Stefan Versick, and Kohei Yoshioda
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3270, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3270, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO) of the tropical stratospheric mean winds has been relatively steady over the 7 decades it has been observed, but there are always cycle-to-cycle variations. This study used several global atmospheric models to investigate systematic modulation of the QBO by the El Niño/La Niña cycle. All models simulated shorter periods during El Niño, in agreement with observations. By contrast, the models disagreed even on the sign of the El Niño effect on QBO amplitude.
Colin M. Zarzycki, Benjamin D. Ascher, Alan M. Rhoades, and Rachel R. McCrary
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3315–3335, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3315-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3315-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We developed an automated workflow to detect rain-on-snow events, which cause flooding in the northeastern United States, in climate data. Analyzing the Susquehanna River basin, this technique identified known events affecting river flow. Comparing four gridded datasets revealed variations in event frequency and severity, driven by different snowmelt and runoff estimates. This highlights the need for accurate climate data in flood management and risk prediction for these compound extremes.
Louise Arnal, Martyn P. Clark, Alain Pietroniro, Vincent Vionnet, David R. Casson, Paul H. Whitfield, Vincent Fortin, Andrew W. Wood, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Brandi W. Newton, and Colleen Walford
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4127–4155, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4127-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4127-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting river flow months in advance is crucial for water sectors and society. In North America, snowmelt is a key driver of flow. This study presents a statistical workflow using snow data to forecast flow months ahead in North American snow-fed rivers. Variations in the river flow predictability across the continent are evident, raising concerns about future predictability in a changing (snow) climate. The reproducible workflow hosted on GitHub supports collaborative and open science.
Ross Mower, Ethan D. Gutmann, Glen E. Liston, Jessica Lundquist, and Soren Rasmussen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4135–4154, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4135-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4135-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Higher-resolution model simulations are better at capturing winter snowpack changes across space and time. However, increasing resolution also increases the computational requirements. This work provides an overview of changes made to a distributed snow-evolution modeling system (SnowModel) to allow it to leverage high-performance computing resources. Continental simulations that were previously estimated to take 120 d can now be performed in 5 h.
Ankur Dixit, Sandeep Sahany, Flavio Lehner, and Saroj Kanta Mishra
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-587, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-587, 2024
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
This study calibrates WRF-Hydro in a Himalayan basin, finding precipitation choice significantly influences results over parameter sets. Study highlights the importance of tailored calibration strategies and parameter sensitivity analyses for accurate streamflow predictions in Himalayan basins, crucial for effective water resource management.
Dominik L. Schumacher, Mariam Zachariah, Friederike Otto, Clair Barnes, Sjoukje Philip, Sarah Kew, Maja Vahlberg, Roop Singh, Dorothy Heinrich, Julie Arrighi, Maarten van Aalst, Mathias Hauser, Martin Hirschi, Verena Bessenbacher, Lukas Gudmundsson, Hiroko K. Beaudoing, Matthew Rodell, Sihan Li, Wenchang Yang, Gabriel A. Vecchi, Luke J. Harrington, Flavio Lehner, Gianpaolo Balsamo, and Sonia I. Seneviratne
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 131–154, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-131-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-131-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The 2022 summer was accompanied by widespread soil moisture deficits, including an unprecedented drought in Europe. Combining several observation-based estimates and models, we find that such an event has become at least 5 and 20 times more likely due to human-induced climate change in western Europe and the northern extratropics, respectively. Strong regional warming fuels soil desiccation; hence, projections indicate even more potent future droughts as we progress towards a 2 °C warmer world.
Guoqiang Tang, Andrew W. Wood, Andrew J. Newman, Martyn P. Clark, and Simon Michael Papalexiou
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1153–1173, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1153-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1153-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ensemble geophysical datasets are crucial for understanding uncertainties and supporting probabilistic estimation/prediction. However, open-access tools for creating these datasets are limited. We have developed the Python-based Geospatial Probabilistic Estimation Package (GPEP). Through several experiments, we demonstrate GPEP's ability to estimate precipitation, temperature, and snow water equivalent. GPEP will be a useful tool to support uncertainty analysis in Earth science applications.
Matthew Henry, Jim Haywood, Andy Jones, Mohit Dalvi, Alice Wells, Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, Douglas G. MacMartin, Walker Lee, and Mari R. Tye
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13369–13385, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Solar climate interventions, such as injecting sulfur in the stratosphere, may be used to offset some of the adverse impacts of global warming. We use two independently developed Earth system models to assess the uncertainties around stratospheric sulfur injections. The injection locations and amounts are optimized to maintain the same pattern of surface temperature. While both models show reduced warming, the change in rainfall patterns (even without sulfur injections) is uncertain.
Dylan Reynolds, Ethan Gutmann, Bert Kruyt, Michael Haugeneder, Tobias Jonas, Franziska Gerber, Michael Lehning, and Rebecca Mott
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5049–5068, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5049-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5049-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The challenge of running geophysical models is often compounded by the question of where to obtain appropriate data to give as input to a model. Here we present the HICAR model, a simplified atmospheric model capable of running at spatial resolutions of hectometers for long time series or over large domains. This makes physically consistent atmospheric data available at the spatial and temporal scales needed for some terrestrial modeling applications, for example seasonal snow forecasting.
Sue Ellen Haupt, Branko Kosović, Larry K. Berg, Colleen M. Kaul, Matthew Churchfield, Jeffrey Mirocha, Dries Allaerts, Thomas Brummet, Shannon Davis, Amy DeCastro, Susan Dettling, Caroline Draxl, David John Gagne, Patrick Hawbecker, Pankaj Jha, Timothy Juliano, William Lassman, Eliot Quon, Raj K. Rai, Michael Robinson, William Shaw, and Regis Thedin
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1251–1275, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1251-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1251-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Mesoscale to Microscale Coupling team, part of the U.S. Department of Energy Atmosphere to Electrons (A2e) initiative, has studied various important challenges related to coupling mesoscale models to microscale models. Lessons learned and discerned best practices are described in the context of the cases studied for the purpose of enabling further deployment of wind energy. It also points to code, assessment tools, and data for testing the methods.
Louise J. Slater, Louise Arnal, Marie-Amélie Boucher, Annie Y.-Y. Chang, Simon Moulds, Conor Murphy, Grey Nearing, Guy Shalev, Chaopeng Shen, Linda Speight, Gabriele Villarini, Robert L. Wilby, Andrew Wood, and Massimiliano Zappa
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1865–1889, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1865-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1865-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Hybrid forecasting systems combine data-driven methods with physics-based weather and climate models to improve the accuracy of predictions for meteorological and hydroclimatic events such as rainfall, temperature, streamflow, floods, droughts, tropical cyclones, or atmospheric rivers. We review recent developments in hybrid forecasting and outline key challenges and opportunities in the field.
Khalil Karami, Rolando Garcia, Christoph Jacobi, Jadwiga H. Richter, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3799–3818, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3799-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3799-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Alongside mitigation and adaptation efforts, stratospheric aerosol intervention (SAI) is increasingly considered a third pillar to combat dangerous climate change. We investigate the teleconnection between the quasi-biennial oscillation in the equatorial stratosphere and the Arctic stratospheric polar vortex under a warmer climate and an SAI scenario. We show that the Holton–Tan relationship weakens under both scenarios and discuss the physical mechanisms responsible for such changes.
Ewa M. Bednarz, Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, Andy Jones, James M. Haywood, Jadwiga Richter, Douglas G. MacMartin, and Peter Braesicke
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 687–709, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-687-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-687-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Building on Part 1 of this two-part study, we demonstrate the role of biases in climatological circulation and specific aspects of model microphysics in driving the differences in simulated sulfate distributions amongst three Earth system models. We then characterize the simulated changes in stratospheric and free-tropospheric temperatures, ozone, water vapor, and large-scale circulation, elucidating the role of the above aspects in the surface responses discussed in Part 1.
John T. Fasullo and Jadwiga H. Richter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 163–182, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-163-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-163-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The continued high levels of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions increase the likelihood that key climate warming thresholds will be exceeded in the coming decades. Here we examine a recently proposed geoengineering approach using two recently produced climate model experiments. We find the associated latitudinal distribution of aerosol mass to exhibit substantial uncertainty, suggesting the need for significant flexibility in the location and amount of aerosol delivery, if implemented.
Sjoukje Y. Philip, Sarah F. Kew, Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, Faron S. Anslow, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Robert Vautard, Dim Coumou, Kristie L. Ebi, Julie Arrighi, Roop Singh, Maarten van Aalst, Carolina Pereira Marghidan, Michael Wehner, Wenchang Yang, Sihan Li, Dominik L. Schumacher, Mathias Hauser, Rémy Bonnet, Linh N. Luu, Flavio Lehner, Nathan Gillett, Jordis S. Tradowsky, Gabriel A. Vecchi, Chris Rodell, Roland B. Stull, Rosie Howard, and Friederike E. L. Otto
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1689–1713, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1689-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1689-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In June 2021, the Pacific Northwest of the US and Canada saw record temperatures far exceeding those previously observed. This attribution study found such a severe heat wave would have been virtually impossible without human-induced climate change. Assuming no nonlinear interactions, such events have become at least 150 times more common, are about 2 °C hotter and will become even more common as warming continues. Therefore, adaptation and mitigation are urgently needed to prepare society.
Jadwiga H. Richter, Daniele Visioni, Douglas G. MacMartin, David A. Bailey, Nan Rosenbloom, Brian Dobbins, Walker R. Lee, Mari Tye, and Jean-Francois Lamarque
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8221–8243, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Solar climate intervention using stratospheric aerosol injection is a proposed method of reducing global mean temperatures to reduce the worst consequences of climate change. We present a new modeling protocol aimed at simulating a plausible deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection and reproducibility of simulations using other Earth system models: Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with stratospheric aerosol injection (ARISE-SAI).
Stephen G. Yeager, Nan Rosenbloom, Anne A. Glanville, Xian Wu, Isla Simpson, Hui Li, Maria J. Molina, Kristen Krumhardt, Samuel Mogen, Keith Lindsay, Danica Lombardozzi, Will Wieder, Who M. Kim, Jadwiga H. Richter, Matthew Long, Gokhan Danabasoglu, David Bailey, Marika Holland, Nicole Lovenduski, Warren G. Strand, and Teagan King
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6451–6493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system changes over a range of time and space scales, and some of these changes are predictable in advance. Short-term weather forecasts are most familiar, but recent work has shown that it is possible to generate useful predictions several seasons or even a decade in advance. This study focuses on predictions over intermediate timescales (up to 24 months in advance) and shows that there is promising potential to forecast a variety of changes in the natural environment.
Mari R. Tye, Katherine Dagon, Maria J. Molina, Jadwiga H. Richter, Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, and Simone Tilmes
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1233–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We examined the potential effect of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) on extreme temperature and precipitation. SAI may cause daytime temperatures to cool but nighttime to warm. Daytime cooling may occur in all seasons across the globe, with the largest decreases in summer. In contrast, nighttime warming may be greatest at high latitudes in winter. SAI may reduce the frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall. The combined changes may exacerbate drying over parts of the global south.
Zachary D. Lawrence, Marta Abalos, Blanca Ayarzagüena, David Barriopedro, Amy H. Butler, Natalia Calvo, Alvaro de la Cámara, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Etienne Dunn-Sigouin, Javier García-Serrano, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Neil P. Hindley, Liwei Jia, Martin Jucker, Alexey Y. Karpechko, Hera Kim, Andrea L. Lang, Simon H. Lee, Pu Lin, Marisol Osman, Froila M. Palmeiro, Judith Perlwitz, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Chen Schwartz, Seok-Woo Son, Irene Erner, Masakazu Taguchi, Nicholas L. Tyrrell, Corwin J. Wright, and Rachel W.-Y. Wu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 977–1001, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-977-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Forecast models that are used to predict weather often struggle to represent the Earth’s stratosphere. This may impact their ability to predict surface weather weeks in advance, on subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) timescales. We use data from many S2S forecast systems to characterize and compare the stratospheric biases present in such forecast models. These models have many similar stratospheric biases, but they tend to be worse in systems with low model tops located within the stratosphere.
Ulises M. Sepúlveda, Pablo A. Mendoza, Naoki Mizukami, and Andrew J. Newman
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3419–3445, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3419-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3419-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper characterizes parameter sensitivities across more than 5500 grid cells for a commonly used macroscale hydrological model, including a suite of eight performance metrics and 43 soil, vegetation and snow parameters. The results show that the model is highly overparameterized and, more importantly, help to provide guidance on the most relevant parameters for specific target processes across diverse climatic types.
Peter Hitchcock, Amy Butler, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Tim Stockdale, James Anstey, Dann Mitchell, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Tongwen Wu, Yixiong Lu, Daniele Mastrangelo, Piero Malguzzi, Hai Lin, Ryan Muncaster, Bill Merryfield, Michael Sigmond, Baoqiang Xiang, Liwei Jia, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Jiyoung Oh, Damien Specq, Isla R. Simpson, Jadwiga H. Richter, Cory Barton, Jeff Knight, Eun-Pa Lim, and Harry Hendon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5073–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes an experimental protocol focused on sudden stratospheric warmings to be carried out by subseasonal forecast modeling centers. These will allow for inter-model comparisons of these major disruptions to the stratospheric polar vortex and their impacts on the near-surface flow. The protocol will lead to new insights into the contribution of the stratosphere to subseasonal forecast skill and new approaches to the dynamical attribution of extreme events.
Adam A. Scaife, Mark P. Baldwin, Amy H. Butler, Andrew J. Charlton-Perez, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Steven C. Hardiman, Peter Haynes, Alexey Yu Karpechko, Eun-Pa Lim, Shunsuke Noguchi, Judith Perlwitz, Lorenzo Polvani, Jadwiga H. Richter, John Scinocca, Michael Sigmond, Theodore G. Shepherd, Seok-Woo Son, and David W. J. Thompson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2601–2623, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2601-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2601-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Great progress has been made in computer modelling and simulation of the whole climate system, including the stratosphere. Since the late 20th century we also gained a much clearer understanding of how the stratosphere interacts with the lower atmosphere. The latest generation of numerical prediction systems now explicitly represents the stratosphere and its interaction with surface climate, and here we review its role in long-range predictions and projections from weeks to decades ahead.
Daniele Visioni, Simone Tilmes, Charles Bardeen, Michael Mills, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, and Jadwiga H. Richter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1739–1756, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are simulated in a simplified way in climate models: in the model analyzed here, they are represented in every grid as described by three simple logarithmic distributions, mixing all different species together. The size can evolve when new particles are formed, particles merge together to create a larger one or particles are deposited to the surface. This approximation normally works fairly well. Here we show however that when large amounts of sulfate are simulated, there are problems.
Andrew J. Newman, Amanda G. Stone, Manabendra Saharia, Kathleen D. Holman, Nans Addor, and Martyn P. Clark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5603–5621, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5603-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5603-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses methods that estimate flood return periods to identify when we would obtain a large flood return estimate change if the method or input data were changed (sensitivities). We include an examination of multiple flood-generating models, which is a novel addition to the flood estimation literature. We highlight the need to select appropriate flood models for the study watershed. These results will help operational water agencies develop more robust risk assessments.
Esteban Alonso-González, Ethan Gutmann, Kristoffer Aalstad, Abbas Fayad, Marine Bouchet, and Simon Gascoin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4455–4471, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4455-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4455-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Snow water resources represent a key hydrological resource for the Mediterranean regions, where most of the precipitation falls during the winter months. This is the case for Lebanon, where snowpack represents 31 % of the spring flow. We have used models to generate snow information corrected by means of remote sensing snow cover retrievals. Our results highlight the high temporal variability in the snowpack in Lebanon and its sensitivity to further warming caused by its hypsography.
Christina Heinze-Deml, Sebastian Sippel, Angeline G. Pendergrass, Flavio Lehner, and Nicolai Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4977–4999, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4977-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4977-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Quantifying dynamical and thermodynamical components of regional precipitation change is a key challenge in climate science. We introduce a novel statistical model (Latent Linear Adjustment Autoencoder) that combines the flexibility of deep neural networks with the robustness advantages of linear regression. The method enables estimation of the contribution of a coarse-scale atmospheric circulation proxy to daily precipitation at high resolution and in a spatially coherent manner.
Folmer Krikken, Flavio Lehner, Karsten Haustein, Igor Drobyshev, and Geert Jan van Oldenborgh
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2169–2179, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2169-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2169-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we analyse the role of climate change in the forest fires that raged through large parts of Sweden in the summer of 2018 from a meteorological perspective. This is done by studying observationally constrained data and multiple climate models. We find a small reduced probability of such events, based on reanalyses, but a small increased probability due to global warming up to now and a more robust increase in the risk for such events in the future, based on climate models.
Guoqiang Tang, Martyn P. Clark, Simon Michael Papalexiou, Andrew J. Newman, Andrew W. Wood, Dominique Brunet, and Paul H. Whitfield
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 3337–3362, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-3337-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-3337-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Probabilistic estimates are useful to quantify the uncertainties in meteorological datasets. This study develops the Ensemble Meteorological Dataset for North America (EMDNA). EMDNA has 100 members with daily precipitation amount, mean daily temperature, and daily temperature range at 0.1° spatial resolution from 1979 to 2018. It is expected to be useful for hydrological and meteorological applications in North America.
Manuela I. Brunner, Eric Gilleland, and Andrew W. Wood
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 621–634, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-621-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-621-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Compound hot and dry events can lead to severe impacts whose severity may depend on their timescale and spatial extent. Here, we show that the spatial extent and timescale of compound hot–dry events are strongly related, spatial compound event extents are largest at
sub-seasonal timescales, and short events are driven more by high temperatures, while longer events are more driven by low precipitation. Future climate impact studies should therefore be performed at different timescales.
Johannes Horak, Marlis Hofer, Ethan Gutmann, Alexander Gohm, and Mathias W. Rotach
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1657–1680, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1657-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1657-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This process-based evaluation of the atmospheric model ICAR is conducted to derive recommendations to increase the likelihood of its results being correct for the right reasons. We conclude that a different diagnosis of the atmospheric background state is necessary, as well as a model top at an elevation of at least 10 km. Alternative boundary conditions at the top were not found to be effective in reducing this model top elevation. The results have wide implications for future ICAR studies.
Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, Folmer Krikken, Sophie Lewis, Nicholas J. Leach, Flavio Lehner, Kate R. Saunders, Michiel van Weele, Karsten Haustein, Sihan Li, David Wallom, Sarah Sparrow, Julie Arrighi, Roop K. Singh, Maarten K. van Aalst, Sjoukje Y. Philip, Robert Vautard, and Friederike E. L. Otto
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 941–960, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-941-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-941-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Southeastern Australia suffered from disastrous bushfires during the 2019/20 fire season, raising the question whether these have become more likely due to climate change. We found no attributable trend in extreme annual or monthly low precipitation but a clear shift towards more extreme heat. However, this shift is underestimated by the models. Analysing fire weather directly, we found that the chance has increased by at least 30 %, but due to the underestimation it could well be higher.
Rhae Sung Kim, Sujay Kumar, Carrie Vuyovich, Paul Houser, Jessica Lundquist, Lawrence Mudryk, Michael Durand, Ana Barros, Edward J. Kim, Barton A. Forman, Ethan D. Gutmann, Melissa L. Wrzesien, Camille Garnaud, Melody Sandells, Hans-Peter Marshall, Nicoleta Cristea, Justin M. Pflug, Jeremy Johnston, Yueqian Cao, David Mocko, and Shugong Wang
The Cryosphere, 15, 771–791, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
High SWE uncertainty is observed in mountainous and forested regions, highlighting the need for high-resolution snow observations in these regions. Substantial uncertainty in snow water storage in Tundra regions and the dominance of water storage in these regions points to the need for high-accuracy snow estimation. Finally, snow measurements during the melt season are most needed at high latitudes, whereas observations at near peak snow accumulations are most beneficial over the midlatitudes.
Manuela I. Brunner, Lieke A. Melsen, Andrew W. Wood, Oldrich Rakovec, Naoki Mizukami, Wouter J. M. Knoben, and Martyn P. Clark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 105–119, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-105-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-105-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Assessments of current, local, and regional flood hazards and their future changes often involve the use of hydrologic models. A reliable model ideally reproduces both local flood characteristics and regional aspects of flooding. In this paper we investigate how such characteristics are represented by hydrologic models. Our results show that both the modeling of local and regional flood characteristics are challenging, especially under changing climate conditions.
Guoqiang Tang, Martyn P. Clark, Andrew J. Newman, Andrew W. Wood, Simon Michael Papalexiou, Vincent Vionnet, and Paul H. Whitfield
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2381–2409, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2381-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2381-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Station observations are critical for hydrological and meteorological studies, but they often contain missing values and have short measurement periods. This study developed a serially complete dataset for North America (SCDNA) from 1979 to 2018 for 27 276 precipitation and temperature stations. SCDNA is built on multiple data sources and infilling/reconstruction strategies to achieve high-quality estimates which can be used for a variety of applications.
César Deschamps-Berger, Simon Gascoin, Etienne Berthier, Jeffrey Deems, Ethan Gutmann, Amaury Dehecq, David Shean, and Marie Dumont
The Cryosphere, 14, 2925–2940, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2925-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2925-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate a recent method to map snow depth based on satellite photogrammetry. We compare it with accurate airborne laser-scanning measurements in the Sierra Nevada, USA. We find that satellite data capture the relationship between snow depth and elevation at the catchment scale and also small-scale features like snow drifts and avalanche deposits. We conclude that satellite photogrammetry stands out as a convenient method to estimate the spatial distribution of snow depth in high mountains.
Cited articles
ASCE: Standard Guidelines for the Design of Urban Stormwater Systems, Standard Guidelines for Installation of Urban Stormwater Systems, and Standard Guidelines for the Operation and Maintenance of Urban Stormwater Systems, 45th edn., American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784408063, 2006.
Austin, C.: Jeanine Jones: Drought and lessons learned. Maven’s Notebook | Water News, https://mavensnotebook.com/2023/03/01/jeanine-jones-drought-and-lessons-learned/ (last access: 5 February 2023), 2023.
Bachmair, S., Stahl, K., Collins, K., Hannaford, J., Acreman, M., Svoboda, M., Knutson, C., Smith, K. H., Wall, N., Fuchs, B., Crossman, N. D., and Overton, I. C.: Drought indicators revisited: the need for a wider consideration of environment and society, WIREs Water, 3, 516–536, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1154, 2016.
Brekke, L. D.: Addressing Climate Change in Long-Term Water Resources Planning and Management: User Needs for Improving Tools and Information, Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, https://www.usbr.gov/climate/userneeds/ (last access: 20 February 2025), 2011.
Brekke, L. D., Kiang, J. E., Olsen, J. R., Pulwarty, R. S., Raff, D. A., Turnipseed, D. P., Webb, R. S., and White, K. D.: Climate change and water resources management – A federal perspective, U.S. Geological Survey, https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1331, 2009.
Bremer, L. L., Hamel, P., Ponette-González, A. G., Pompeu, P. V., Saad, S. I., and Brauman, K. A.: Who Are we Measuring and Modeling for? Supporting Multilevel Decision-Making in Watershed Management, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR02601, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026011, 2020.
Briley, L., Kelly, R., Blackmer, E. D., Troncoso, A. V., Rood, R. B., Andresen, J., and Lemos, M. C.: Increasing the Usability of Climate Models through the Use of Consumer-Report-Style Resources for Decision-Making, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E1709–E1717, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0099.1, 2020.
Brugger, J., Meadow, A., and Horangic, A.: Lessons from First-Generation Climate Science Integrators, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 355–365, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00289.1, 2016.
Brunner, M. I., Slater, L., Tallaksen, L. M., and Clark, M.: Challenges in modeling and predicting floods and droughts: A review, WIREs Water, 8, e1520, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1520, 2021.
Cantor, A., Kiparsky, M., Kennedy, R., Hubbard, S., Bales, R., Pecharroman, L. C., Guivetchi, K., McCready, C., and Darling, G.: Data for Water Decision Making: Informing the Implementation of California's Open and Transparent Water Data Act through Research and Engagement, Wheeler Water Institute, Center for Law, Energy & the Environment, UC Berkeley School of Law, Berkeley, CA, https://doi.org/10.15779/J28H01, 2018.
Chen, D., Dai, A., and Hall, A.: The Convective-To-Total Precipitation Ratio and the “Drizzling” Bias in Climate Models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD034198, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD034198, 2021.
Chen, M., Dickinson, R. E., Zeng, X., and Hahmann., A. N.: Comparison of Precipitation Observed over the Continental United States to That Simulated by a Climate Model, J. Climate, 9, 2233–2249, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<2233:COPOOT>2.0.CO;2, 1996.
Clark, M. P., Fan, Y., Lawrence, D. M., Adam, J. C., Bolster, D., Gochis, D. J., Hooper, R. P., Kumar, M., Leung, L. R., Mackay, D. S., Maxwell, R. M., Shen, C., Swenson, S. C., and Zeng, X.: Improving the representation of hydrologic processes in Earth System Models, Water Resour. Res., 51, 5929–5956, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017096, 2015.
Clifford, K. R., Travis, W. R., and Nordgren, L. T.: A climate knowledges approach to climate services, Climate Services, 18, 100155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2020.100155, 2020.
Dai, A.: Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models, J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3884.1, 2006.
Danabasoglu, G. and Lamarque, J.-F.: Building a Better Model to View Earth's Interacting Processes, Eos, 102, 2021EO155818, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EO155818, 2021.
Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J. -F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier, A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J., Garcia, R., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R., Oleson, K. W., Otto-Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S., Kampenhout, L., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C., Fischer, C., Fox-Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J., Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E., Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 12, e2019MS00191, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916, 2020.
Deser, C., Knutti, R., Solomon, S., and Phillips, A. S.: Communication of the role of natural variability in future North American climate, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 775–779, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1562, 2012.
Deser, C., Lehner, F., Rodgers, K. B., Ault, T., Delworth, T. L., DiNezio, P. N., Fiore, A., Frankignoul, C., Fyfe, J. C., Horton, D. E., Kay, J. E., Knutti, R., Lovenduski, N. S., Marotzke, J., McKinnon, K. A., Minobe, S., Randerson, J., Screen, J. A., Simpson, I. R., and Ting, M.: Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects, Nat. Clim. Chang., 10, 277–286, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0731-2, 2020.
Dilling, L., Daly, M. E., Kenney, D. A., Klein, R., Miller, K., Ray, A. J., Travis, W. R., and Wilhelmi, O.: Drought in urban water systems: Learning lessons for climate adaptive capacity, Climate Risk Management, 23, 32–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2018.11.001, 2019.
Ek, M. B.: Land Surface Hydrological Models, in: Handbook of Hydrometeorological Ensemble Forecasting, edited by: Duan, Q., Pappenberger, F., Thielen, J., Wood, A., Cloke, H. L., and Schaake, J. C., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1–42, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40457-3_24-1, 2018.
Ekström, M., Gutmann, E. D., Wilby, R. L., Tye, M. R., and Kirono, D. G. C.: Robustness of hydroclimate metrics for climate change impact research, WIREs Water, 5, e1288, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1288, 2018.
Feng, R., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Brady, E. C., and Rosenbloom, N.: Increased Climate Response and Earth System Sensitivity From CCSM4 to CESM2 in Mid-Pliocene Simulations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002033, 2020.
Fisher, R. A. and Koven, C. D.: Perspectives on the Future of Land Surface Models and the Challenges of Representing Complex Terrestrial Systems, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 12, e2018MS00145, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001453, 2020.
Gervais, M., Gyakum, J. R., Atallah, E., Tremblay, L. B., and Neale, R. B.: How Well Are the Distribution and Extreme Values of Daily Precipitation over North America Represented in the Community Climate System Model? A Comparison to Reanalysis, Satellite, and Gridded Station Data, J. Climate, 27, 5219–5239, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00320.1, 2014.
Gettelman, A. and Rood, R. B.: Usability of Climate Model Projections by Practitioners, in: Demystifying Climate Models, vol. 2, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 221–236, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48959-8_12, 2016.
Gettelman, A., Geer, A. J., Forbes, R. M., Carmichael, G. R., Feingold, G., Posselt, D. J., Stephens, G. L., van den Heever, S. C., Varble, A. C., and Zuidema, P.: The future of Earth system prediction: Advances in model-data fusion, Sci. Adv., 8, eabn3488, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn3488, 2022.
Gleason, C. J. and Smith, L. C.: Toward global mapping of river discharge using satellite images and at-many-stations hydraulic geometry, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 4788–4791, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317606111, 2014.
Haines, A. T., Finlayson, B. L., and McMahon, T. A.: A global classification of river regimes, Appl. Geogr., 8, 255–272, https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-6228(88)90035-5, 1988.
IPCC: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D. C., Tignor, M., Poloczanska, E. S., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Craig, M., Langsdorf, S., Löschke, S., Möller, V., Okem, A., and Rama, B., Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844, 2022.
Jagannathan, K., Jones, A. D., and Ray, I.: The Making of a Metric: Co-Producing Decision-Relevant Climate Science, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E1579–E1590, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0296.1, 2021.
Jones, P. W.: First- and Second-Order Conservative Remapping Schemes for Grids in Spherical Coordinates, Mon. Weather Rev., 127, 2204–2210, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1999)127<2204:FASOCR>2.0.CO;2, 1999.
Kim, Y.-H., Min, S.-K., Zhang, X., Sillmann, J., and Sandstad, M.: Evaluation of the CMIP6 multi-model ensemble for climate extreme indices, Weather and Climate Extremes, 29, 100269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2020.100269, 2020.
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C., Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E., Lawrence, P. J., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Riley, W. J., Sacks, W. J., Shi, M., Vertenstein, M., Wieder, W. R., Xu, C., Ali, A. A., Badger, A. M., Bisht, G., Broeke, M., Brunke, M. A., Burns, S. P., Buzan, J., Clark, M., Craig, A., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Fisher, J. B., Flanner, M., Fox, A. M., Gentine, P., Hoffman, F., Keppel-Aleks, G., Knox, R., Kumar, S., Lenaerts, J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W. H., Lu, Y., Pandey, A., Pelletier, J. D., Perket, J., Randerson, J. T., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B. M., Slater, A., Subin, Z. M., Tang, J., Thomas, R. Q., Val Martin, M., and Zeng, X.: The Community Land Model Version 5: Description of New Features, Benchmarking, and Impact of Forcing Uncertainty, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 4245–4287, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001583, 2019.
Lehner, F., Wood, A. W., Vano, J. A., Lawrence, D. M., Clark, M. P., and Mankin, J. S.: The potential to reduce uncertainty in regional runoff projections from climate models, Nat. Clim. Chang., 9, 926–933, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0639-x, 2019.
Lempert, R. J.: Measuring global climate risk, Nat. Clim. Chang., 11, 805–806, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01165-9, 2021.
Liang, X., Lettenmaier, D. P., Wood, E. F., and Burges, S. J.: A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 14415, https://doi.org/10.1029/94JD00483, 1994.
Livneh, B., Rosenberg, E. A., Lin, C., Nijssen, B., Mishra, V., Andreadis, K. M., Maurer, E. P., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: A Long-Term Hydrologically Based Dataset of Land Surface Fluxes and States for the Conterminous United States: Update and Extensions, J. Climate, 26, 9384–9392, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00508.1, 2013.
Lukas, J. and Payton, E.: Colorado River Basin Climate and Hydrology: State of the Science, University of Colorado Boulder, https://doi.org/10.25810/3HCV-W477, 2020.
Mach, K. J., Lemos, M. C., Meadow, A. M., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N., Arnott, J. C., Ardoin, N. M., Fieseler, C., Moss, R. H., Nichols, L., Stults, M., Vaughan, C., and Wong-Parodi, G.: Actionable knowledge and the art of engagement, Curr. Opin. Env. Sust., 42, 30–37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.01.002, 2020.
Mankin, J. S., Lehner, F., Coats, S., and McKinnon, K. A.: The Value of Initial Condition Large Ensembles to Robust Adaptation Decision-Making, Earths Future, 8, e2012EF001610, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EF001610, 2020.
McCrary, R. R., McGinnis, S., and Mearns, L. O.: Evaluation of Snow Water Equivalent in NARCCAP Simulations, Including Measures of Observational Uncertainty, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 2425–2452, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0264.1, 2017.
McCrary, R. R., Mearns, L. O., Hughes, M., Biner, S., and Bukovsky, M. S.: Projections of North American snow from NA-CORDEX and their uncertainties, with a focus on model resolution, Climatic Change, 170, 20, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03294-8, 2022.
McMillan, H. K.: A review of hydrologic signatures and their applications, WIREs Water, 8, e1499, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1499, 2021.
Meehl, G. A., Goddard, L., Murphy, J., Stouffer, R. J., Boer, G., Danabasoglu, G., Dixon, K., Giorgetta, M. A., Greene, A. M., Hawkins, E., Hegerl, G., Karoly, D., Keenlyside, N., Kimoto, M., Kirtman, B., Navarra, A., Pulwarty, R., Smith, D., Stammer, D., and Stockdale, T.: Decadal Prediction, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 1467–1485, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2778.1, 2009.
Mizukami, N., Rakovec, O., Newman, A. J., Clark, M. P., Wood, A. W., Gupta, H. V., and Kumar, R.: On the choice of calibration metrics for “high-flow” estimation using hydrologic models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2601–2614, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019, 2019.
Moise, A., Wilson, L., Grose, M., Whetton, P., Watterson, I., Bhend, J., Bathols, J., Hanson, L., Erwin, T., Bedin, T., Heady, C., and Rafter, T.: Evaluation of CMIP3 and CMIP5 models over the Australian region to inform confidence in projections, JSHESS, 65, 19–53, https://doi.org/10.22499/2.6501.004, 2015.
Mukherjee, S., Mishra, A., and Trenberth, K. E.: Climate Change and Drought: a Perspective on Drought Indices, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 4, 145–163, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0098-x, 2018.
Newman, A. J., Clark, M. P., Craig, J., Nijssen, B., Wood, A., Gutmann, E., Mizukami, N., Brekke, L., and Arnold, J. R.: Gridded Ensemble Precipitation and Temperature Estimates for the Contiguous United States, J. Hydrometeorol., 16, 2481–2500, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0026.1, 2015.
Pacchetti, M. B., Dessai, S., Bradley, S., and Stainforth, D. A.: Assessing the Quality of Regional Climate Information, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E476–E491, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0008.1, 2021.
Pardé, M.: Fleuves et Rivières, Collection Armand Collin, Section de Géographie (France), Fre No. 155, OCLC Number 20064504, 1933.
Phillips, A., Deser, C., Fasullo, J., Schneider, D. P., and Simpson, I. R.: Assessing Climate Variability and Change in Model Large Ensembles: A User's Guide to the “Climate Variability Diagnostics Package for Large Ensembles”, NCAR, https://doi.org/10.5065/H7C7-F961, 2020.
Pierce, D. W., Su, L., Cayan, D. R., Risser, M. D., Livneh, B., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: An extreme-preserving long-term gridded daily precipitation data set for the conterminous United States, J. Hydrometeorol., 1883–1895, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-20-0212.1, 2021.
Raff, D. A., Brekke, L. D., Werner, K. V., Wood, A. W., and White, K. D.: Short-Term Water Management Decisions: User Needs for Improved Climate, Weather, and Hydrologic Information, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, http://bit.ly/TJpWxK (last access: 2 January 2025), 2013.
Reba, M. L., Marks, D., Seyfried, M., Winstral, A., Kumar, M., and Flerchinger, G.: A long-term data set for hydrologic modeling in a snow-dominated mountain catchment: A 25 year data set for hydrologic modeling, Water Resour. Res., 47, W07702, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR010030, 2011.
Reclamation (Bureau of Reclamation): Technical Guidance for Incorporating Climate Change Information into Water Resources Planning Studies, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado, https://cawaterlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/WWCRATechnicalGuidance.pdf (last access: 20 February 2025), 2014.
Reclamation (Bureau of Reclamation): SECURE Water Act Section 9503(c) – Reclamation Climate Change and Water, Prepared for United States Congress, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado, https://www.usbr.gov/climate/secure/2016secure.html (last access: 20 February 2025), 2016.
Reed, K. A., Goldenson, N., Grotjahn, R., Gutowski, W. J., Jagannathan, K., Jones, A. D., Leung, L. R., McGinnis, S. A., Pryor, S. C., Srivastava, A. K., Ullrich, P. A., and Zarzycki, C. M.: Metrics as tools for bridging climate science and applications, WIREs Climate Change, 13, e799, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.799, 2022.
Regional Water Authority: Sacramento Regional Water Bank: A sustainable storage and recovery program, https://rwah2o.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/WaterBank_Insert_9-FINAL.pdf (last access: 20 February 2025), 2019.
Rodgers, K. B., Lee, S.-S., Rosenbloom, N., Timmermann, A., Danabasoglu, G., Deser, C., Edwards, J., Kim, J.-E., Simpson, I. R., Stein, K., Stuecker, M. F., Yamaguchi, R., Bódai, T., Chung, E.-S., Huang, L., Kim, W. M., Lamarque, J.-F., Lombardozzi, D. L., Wieder, W. R., and Yeager, S. G.: Ubiquity of human-induced changes in climate variability, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1393–1411, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1393-2021, 2021.
Rugg, A., Gutmann, E. D., McCrary, R. R., Lehner, F., Newman, A. J., Richter, J. H., Tye, M. R., and Wood, A. W.: Mass-Conserving Downscaling of Climate Model Precipitation over Mountainous Terrain for Water Resource Applications, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2023GL105326, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL105326, 2023.
Seaber, P. R., Kapinos, F. P., and Knapp, G. L.: Hydrologic Unit Maps, U.S. Geological Survey, https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp2294, 1987.
Sedláček, J. and Knutti, R.: Half of the world's population experience robust changes in the water cycle for a 2 °C warmer world, Environ. Res. Lett., 9, 044008, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/4/044008, 2014.
Shepherd, T. G., Boyd, E., Calel, R. A., Chapman, S. C., Dima-West, I. M., Fowler, H. J., James, R., Maraun, D., Martius, O., Senior, C. A., Sobel, A. H., Stainforth, D. A., Tett, B., Trenberth, K. E., Hurk, B. J., Watkin, N. W., Wilby, R. L., and Zenghelis, D. A.: Storylines: An alternative approach to representing uncertainty in physical aspects of climate change, Climatic Change, 151, 555–571, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2317-9, 2018.
Simpson, I. R., Lawrence, D. M., Swenson, S. C., Hannay, C., McKinnon, K. A., and Truesdale, J. E.: Improvements in Wintertime Surface Temperature Variability in the Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2) Related to the Representation of Snow Density, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 14, e2021MS002880, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002880, 2022.
Tebaldi, C. and Knutti, R.: The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 365, 2053–2075, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2076, 2007.
Tebaldi, C., Dorheim, K., Wehner, M., and Leung, R.: Extreme metrics from large ensembles: investigating the effects of ensemble size on their estimates, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1427–1501, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1427-2021, 2021.
Tye, M.: Water Availability Metrics August 2021 Workshop Report, Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/M7NXD, 2023.
Tye, M. and Ge, M.: Data for Evaluating an Earth system model from a water manager perspective, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14611111, 2025.
Underwood, E. C., Hollander, A. D., Flint, L. E., Flint, A. L., and Safford, H. D.: Climate change impacts on hydrological services in southern California, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 124019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaeb59, 2018.
Vano, J. A., Udall, B., Cayan, D. R., Overpeck, J. T., Brekke, L. D., Das, T., Hartmann, H. C., Hidalgo, H. G., Hoerling, M., McCabe, G. J., Morino, K., Webb, R. S., Werner, K., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: Understanding Uncertainties in Future Colorado River Streamflow, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 59–78, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00228.1, 2014.
Wagener, T., Reinecke, R., and Pianosi, F.: On the evaluation of climate change impact models, WIREs Climate Change, 13, e772, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.772, 2022.
Wilby, R. L., Lu, X., Watkiss, P., and Rodgers, C. A.: Towards pragmatism in climate risk analysis and adaptation, Water Policy, 23, 10–30, https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2021.232, 2021.
Wood, R. R., Lehner, F., Pendergrass, A. G., and Schlunegger, S.: Changes in precipitation variability across time scales in multiple global climate model large ensembles, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 084022, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac10dd, 2021.
Wright, D. B., Bosma, C. D., and Lopez-Cantu, T.: U.S. Hydrologic Design Standards Insufficient Due to Large Increases in Frequency of Rainfall Extremes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 8144–8153, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083235, 2019.
Yuan, H., Toth, Z., Peña, M., and Kalnay, E.: Overview of Weather and Climate Systems, in: Handbook of Hydrometeorological Ensemble Forecasting, edited by: Duan, Q., Pappenberger, F., Wood, A., Cloke, H. L., and Schaake, J. C., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 35–65, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39925-1_10, 2019.
Zhang, X., Alexander, L., Hegerl, G. C., Jones, P., Tank, A. K., Peterson, T. C., Trewin, B., and Zwiers, F. W.: Indices for monitoring changes in extremes based on daily temperature and precipitation data, WIREs Climate Change, 2, 851–870, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.147, 2011.
Short summary
There is a perceived mismatch between the spatial scales on which global climate models can produce data and those needed for water management decisions. However, poor communication of specific metrics relevant to local decisions is also a problem. We assessed the credibility of a set of water management decision metrics in the Community Earth System Model v2 (CESM2). CESM2 shows potentially greater use of its output in long-range water management decisions.
There is a perceived mismatch between the spatial scales on which global climate models can...
