Evaluation of the Mountain Hydroclimate across the Western United States in Dynamically Downscaled Climate Models

Abstract This study evaluates the ability of 15 CMIP6 global climate models (GCMs), dynamically downscaled to a 9-km grid, to effectively simulate the observed regional hydroclimate across the complex terrain of the western United States. The evaluation focuses on orographic precipitation, surface temperature, and snow water equivalent (SWE), evaluated over a 33-yr period (1981–2014) using gridded gauge- and station-based datasets and a snowpack reanalysis product. Additional comparisons are made against two ERA5-driven climate reconstructions: one at 9-km resolution, with the same physical choices, and one at 4-km resolution. The latter better captures the terrain and orographic processes and uses different physics. Model performance is evaluated in four geographic regions, and mountains are contrasted against the surrounding plains. The evaluation is challenged by the fact that gridded observational estimates of climate parameters in complex terrain have a poorly quantified uncertainty related to measurement and/or representativeness issues. The ensemble mean of the downscaled GCMs overestimates cold-season precipitation, its orographic enhancement, and peak SWE in the mountains. Its diurnal temperature cycle and its mountain–plain temperature contrast are suppressed, compared to observations: its temperature estimates err toward the mean on both sides of both distributions. But the same applies to the identically downscaled (9 km) ERA5, indicating that these biases are due to model physics, not a misrepresentation of the climate system. The 4-km ERA5-based reconstruction has smaller biases in terms of precipitation and temperature, especially over mountains, but underestimates SWE. Model performance differs between mountains and plains, and the differences vary by region. Significance Statement In the western United States, much of the precipitation contributing to streamflow falls over mountains. In addition, the mountain snowpack seasonally stores water for consumptive use in the warm season. Amid growing concerns about changing water availability associated with the changing hydrometeorological patterns in a warming climate, it is essential to evaluate how well climate models capture precipitation and the snowpack across the headwater regions. Dynamically downscaled CMIP6 models, on average, capture the historical climate quite well, but uncertainty remains about how well they capture key climate parameters over the mountains. This uncertainty is due, in part, to the paucity of measurements in the mountains. Here, we demonstrate that dynamic downscaling to finer grid resolutions reduces this uncertainty.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Hydrometeorology
Published
2024-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm-d-24-0063.1
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Climate variability and models
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.70

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of the Mountain Hydroclimate across the Western United States in Dynamically Downscaled Climate Models

Bart Geerts, Stefan Rahimi, Bryan N. Shuman, Pramod Adhikari et al.
6 citations
Journal of Hydrometeorology
Climate variability and models
1.70
article

Evaluation of the Mountain Hydroclimate across the Western United States in Dynamically Downscaled Climate Models

Bart Geerts, Stefan Rahimi, Bryan N. Shuman, Pramod Adhikari, Keston W. Smith, Timothy L. Schneider
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Abstract This study evaluates the ability of 15 CMIP6 global climate models (GCMs), dynamically downscaled to a 9-km grid, to effectively simulate the observed regional hydroclimate across the complex terrain of the western United States. The evaluation focuses on orographic precipitation, surface temperature, and snow water equivalent (SWE), evaluated over a 33-yr period (1981–2014) using gridded gauge- and station-based datasets and a snowpack reanalysis product. Additional comparisons are made against two ERA5-driven climate reconstructions: one at 9-km resolution, with the same physical choices, and one at 4-km resolution. The latter better captures the terrain and orographic processes and uses different physics. Model performance is evaluated in four geographic regions, and mountains are contrasted against the surrounding plains. The evaluation is challenged by the fact that gridded observational estimates of climate parameters in complex terrain have a poorly quantified uncertainty related to measurement and/or representativeness issues. The ensemble mean of the downscaled GCMs overestimates cold-season precipitation, its orographic enhancement, and peak SWE in the mountains. Its diurnal temperature cycle and its mountain–plain temperature contrast are suppressed, compared to observations: its temperature estimates err toward the mean on both sides of both distributions. But the same applies to the identically downscaled (9 km) ERA5, indicating that these biases are due to model physics, not a misrepresentation of the climate system. The 4-km ERA5-based reconstruction has smaller biases in terms of precipitation and temperature, especially over mountains, but underestimates SWE. Model performance differs between mountains and plains, and the differences vary by region. Significance Statement In the western United States, much of the precipitation contributing to streamflow falls over mountains. In addition, the mountain snowpack seasonally stores water for consumptive use in the warm season. Amid growing concerns about changing water availability associated with the changing hydrometeorological patterns in a warming climate, it is essential to evaluate how well climate models capture precipitation and the snowpack across the headwater regions. Dynamically downscaled CMIP6 models, on average, capture the historical climate quite well, but uncertainty remains about how well they capture key climate parameters over the mountains. This uncertainty is due, in part, to the paucity of measurements in the mountains. Here, we demonstrate that dynamic downscaling to finer grid resolutions reduces this uncertainty.

Journal of HydrometeorologyVol. 25(12)
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US), University of Wyoming (US)
National Science Foundation
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Climate variability and models
1.70
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.