3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemClimate change impact on available water resources obtained using multiple global climate and hydrology models(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2013) Hagemann, S.; Chen, C.; Clark, D.B.; Folwell, S.; Gosling, S.N.; Haddeland, I.; Hanasaki, N.; Heinke, J.; Ludwig, F.; Voss, F.; Wiltshire, A.J.Climate change is expected to alter the hydrological cycle resulting in large-scale impacts on water availability. However, future climate change impact assessments are highly uncertain. For the first time, multiple global climate (three) and hydrological models (eight) were used to systematically assess the hydrological response to climate change and project the future state of global water resources. This multi-model ensemble allows us to investigate how the hydrology models contribute to the uncertainty in projected hydrological changes compared to the climate models. Due to their systematic biases, GCM outputs cannot be used directly in hydrological impact studies, so a statistical bias correction has been applied. The results show a large spread in projected changes in water resources within the climate–hydrology modelling chain for some regions. They clearly demonstrate that climate models are not the only source of uncertainty for hydrological change, and that the spread resulting from the choice of the hydrology model is larger than the spread originating from the climate models over many areas. But there are also areas showing a robust change signal, such as at high latitudes and in some midlatitude regions, where the models agree on the sign of projected hydrological changes, indicative of higher confidence in this ensemble mean signal. In many catchments an increase of available water resources is expected but there are some severe decreases in Central and Southern Europe, the Middle East, the Mississippi River basin, southern Africa, southern China and south-eastern Australia.
- ItemComparing projections of future changes in runoff from hydrological and biome models in ISI-MIP(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2013) Davie, J.C.S.; Falloon, P.D.; Kahana, R.; Dankers, R.; Betts, R.; Portmann, F.T.; Wisser, D.; Clark, D.B.; Ito, A.; Masaki, Y.; Nishina, K.; Fekete, B.; Tessler, Z.; Wada, Y.; Liu, X.; Tang, Q.; Hagemann, S.; Stacke, T.; Pavlick, R.; Schaphoff, S.; Gosling, S.N.; Franssen, W.; Arnell, N.Future changes in runoff can have important implications for water resources and flooding. In this study, runoff projections from ISI-MIP (Inter-sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project) simulations forced with HadGEM2-ES bias-corrected climate data under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 have been analysed for differences between impact models. Projections of change from a baseline period (1981–2010) to the future (2070–2099) from 12 impacts models which contributed to the hydrological and biomes sectors of ISI-MIP were studied. The biome models differed from the hydrological models by the inclusion of CO2 impacts and most also included a dynamic vegetation distribution. The biome and hydrological models agreed on the sign of runoff change for most regions of the world. However, in West Africa, the hydrological models projected drying, and the biome models a moistening. The biome models tended to produce larger increases and smaller decreases in regionally averaged runoff than the hydrological models, although there is large inter-model spread. The timing of runoff change was similar, but there were differences in magnitude, particularly at peak runoff. The impact of vegetation distribution change was much smaller than the projected change over time, while elevated CO2 had an effect as large as the magnitude of change over time projected by some models in some regions. The effect of CO2 on runoff was not consistent across the models, with two models showing increases and two decreases. There was also more spread in projections from the runs with elevated CO2 than with constant CO2. The biome models which gave increased runoff from elevated CO2 were also those which differed most from the hydrological models. Spatially, regions with most difference between model types tended to be projected to have most effect from elevated CO2, and seasonal differences were also similar, so elevated CO2 can partly explain the differences between hydrological and biome model runoff change projections. Therefore, this shows that a range of impact models should be considered to give the full range of uncertainty in impacts studies.
- ItemA framework for the cross-sectoral integration of multi-model impact projections: Land use decisions under climate impacts uncertainties(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2015) Frieler, K.; Levermann, A.; Elliott, J.; Heinke, J.; Arneth, A.; Bierkens, M.F.P.; Ciais, P.; Clark, D.B.; Deryng, D.; Döll, P.; Falloon, P.; Fekete, B.; Folberth, C.; Friend, A.D.; Gellhorn, C.; Gosling, S.N.; Haddeland, I.; Khabarov, N.; Lomas, M.; Masaki, Y.; Nishina, K.; Neumann, K.; Oki, T.; Pavlick, R.; Ruane, A.C.; Schmid, E.; Schmitz, C.; Stacke, T.; Stehfest, E.; Tang, Q.; Wisser, D.; Huber, V.; Piontek, F.; Warszawski, L.; Schewe, J.; Lotze-Campen, H.; Schellnhuber, H.J.Climate change and its impacts already pose considerable challenges for societies that will further increase with global warming (IPCC, 2014a, b). Uncertainties of the climatic response to greenhouse gas emissions include the potential passing of large-scale tipping points (e.g. Lenton et al., 2008; Levermann et al., 2012; Schellnhuber, 2010) and changes in extreme meteorological events (Field et al., 2012) with complex impacts on societies (Hallegatte et al., 2013). Thus climate change mitigation is considered a necessary societal response for avoiding uncontrollable impacts (Conference of the Parties, 2010). On the other hand, large-scale climate change mitigation itself implies fundamental changes in, for example, the global energy system. The associated challenges come on top of others that derive from equally important ethical imperatives like the fulfilment of increasing food demand that may draw on the same resources. For example, ensuring food security for a growing population may require an expansion of cropland, thereby reducing natural carbon sinks or the area available for bio-energy production. So far, available studies addressing this problem have relied on individual impact models, ignoring uncertainty in crop model and biome model projections. Here, we propose a probabilistic decision framework that allows for an evaluation of agricultural management and mitigation options in a multi-impact-model setting. Based on simulations generated within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), we outline how cross-sectorally consistent multi-model impact simulations could be used to generate the information required for robust decision making. Using an illustrative future land use pattern, we discuss the trade-off between potential gains in crop production and associated losses in natural carbon sinks in the new multiple crop- and biome-model setting. In addition, crop and water model simulations are combined to explore irrigation increases as one possible measure of agricultural intensification that could limit the expansion of cropland required in response to climate change and growing food demand. This example shows that current impact model uncertainties pose an important challenge to long-term mitigation planning and must not be ignored in long-term strategic decision making.