An improved standardization procedure to remove systematic low frequency variability biases in GCM simulations

Water Resources Research

Volumn 48, Issue 12, 2012, Pages

  Mehrotra, Rajeshwar ^a   Sharma, Ashish ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATMOSPHERIC VARIABLES; BIAS CORRECTION; CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT; DIRECT USE; DOWN-SCALING; GENERAL CIRCULATION MODEL; HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCE; LOW FREQUENCY VARIABILITY; LOW-ORDER MOMENTS; MULTIPLE TIMESCALES; REANALYSIS; REGIONAL SCALE; SYSTEMATIC BIAS; TIME-SCALES;

CLIMATE CHANGE; ITERATIVE METHODS;

WATER RESOURCES;

ATMOSPHERIC MODELING; CLIMATE CHANGE; CLIMATE EFFECT; DATA INTERPRETATION; GENERAL CIRCULATION MODEL; PERSISTENCE; REGIONAL CLIMATE; STANDARDIZATION; TIMESCALE; WATER RESOURCE;

EID: 84871386211     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: 19447973     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2012WR012446     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bates, B. C., Z. W. Kundzewicz, S. Wu, and J. P. Palutikof (eds.) (2008), Climate Change and Water, Tech. paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 210 pp., Geneva, Switzerland.
2. Cayan, D. R., E. P. Maurer, M. D. Dettinger, M. Tyree, and K. Hayhoe (2008), Climate change scenarios for the California region, Clim. Change, 87(1), 21-42, doi:10.1007/s10584-007-9377-6.
3. Charles, S. P., B. C. Bates, and J. P. Hughes (1999), A spatio-temporal model for downscaling precipitation occurrence and amounts, J. Geo-phys. Res., 104(D24), 31,657-31,669.
4. Chiew, F. H. S., and T. A. McMahon (2002), Modelling the impacts of climate change on Australian streamflow, Hydrol. Processes, 16(6), 1235-1245. (Pubitemid 34265009)
5. Evans, J. P., B. S. Ronald, and J. O. Robert (2004), Middle East climate simulation and dominant precipitation processes, J. Climatol., 24, 1671-1694. (Pubitemid 39587923)
6. Fowler, H. J., S. Blenkinsop, and C. Tebaldi (2007), Linking climate change modelling to impacts studies: Recent advances in downscaling techniques for hydrological modeling, Int. J. Climatol., 27(12), 1547-1578. (Pubitemid 47604181)
7. Ines, A. V. M., and J. W. Hansen (2006), Bias correction of daily GCM rainfall for crop simulation studies, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 138, 44-53. (Pubitemid 44188956)
8. International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007), Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Rep. of the IPCC edited by S. Solomon, et al., 996 pp., Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
9. Johnson, F., and A. Sharma (2011), Accounting for interannual variability: A comparison of options for water resources climate change impact assessments, Water Resour. Res., 47, W04508, doi:10.1029/2010WR009272.
10. Johnson, F., and A. Sharma (2012), A nesting model for bias correction of variability at multiple time scales in general circulation model precipitation simulations, Water Resour. Res., 48, W01504, doi:10.1029/2011 WR010464.
11. Li, H., J. Sheffield, and E. F. Wood (2010), Bias correction of monthly precipitation and temperature fields from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AR4 models using equidistant quantile matching, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D10101, doi:10.1029/2009JD012882.
12. Liang, X. Z., K. E. Kunkel, G. A. Meehl, R. G. Jones, and J. X. L. Wang (2008), Regional climate models downscaling analysis of general circulation models present climate biases propagation into future change projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L08709, doi:10.1029/2007GL032849.
13. Lin, J. L. (2007), Interdecadal variability of ENSO in 21 IPCC AR4 coupled GCMs, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L12702, doi:10.1029/2006GL028937. (Pubitemid 351193206)
14. Maurer, E. P., and H. G. Hidalgo (2008), Utility of daily vs. monthly large-scale climate data: An intercomparison of two statistical downscaling methods, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12(2), 551-563.
15. Milly, P. C. D., J. Betancourt, M. Falkenmark, R. M. Hirsch, Z. W. Kundze-wicz, D. P. Lettenmaier, and R. J. Stouffer (2008), Stationarity is dead: Whither water management?, Science, 319, 573-574. (Pubitemid 351197047)
16. Mpelasoka, F. S., and F. H. S. Chiew (2009), Influence of rainfall scenario construction methods on runoff projections, J. Hydrometeorol., 10, 1168-1183.
17. Piani, C., J. O. Haerter, and E. Coppola (2010), Statistical bias correction for daily precipitation in regional climate models over Europe, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 99, 187-192, doi:10.1007/s00704-009-0134-9.
18. Solomon, S., et al. (2007), Technical summary, in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by S. Solomon et al., 92 pp., Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
19. Vicuna, S., P. E. Murer, B. Joyce, J. A. Dracup, and D. Purkey (2007), The sensitivity of California water resources to climate change scenarios, J. A. Water Resour. Assoc., 43, 482-499.
20. Wilby, R. L., S. P. Charles, E. Zorita, B. Timbal, P. Whetton, and L. O. Mearns (2004), Guidelines for Use of Climate Scenarios Developed From Statistical Downscaling Methods, IPCC Task Group on Scenarios for Climate Impact Assess., Geneva, Switzerland, 27 pp.
21. Wood, A. W., L. R. Leung, V. Sridhar, and D. P. Lettenmaier (2004), Hydrologic implications of dynamical and statistical approaches to downscaling climate model outputs, Clim. Change, 62, 189-216. (Pubitemid 38300001)