Filters

2012 - 20142

More filters

2019 - 20202
Reset filters

Settings

Author: Heinke, J. × Subject: evapotranspiration ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    On the importance of cascading moisture recycling in South America
    (München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2014) Zemp, D.C.; Schleussner, C.-F.; Barbosa, H.M.J.; van der Ent, R.J.; Donges, J.F.; Heinke, J.; Sampaio, G.; Rammig, A.
    Continental moisture recycling is a crucial process of the South American climate system. In particular, evapotranspiration from the Amazon basin contributes substantially to precipitation regionally as well as over other remote regions such as the La Plata basin. Here we present an in-depth analysis of South American moisture recycling mechanisms. In particular, we quantify the importance of cascading moisture recycling (CMR), which describes moisture transport between two locations on the continent that involves re-evaporation cycles along the way. Using an Eulerian atmospheric moisture tracking model forced by a combination of several historical climate data sets, we were able to construct a complex network of moisture recycling for South America. Our results show that CMR contributes about 9–10% to the total precipitation over South America and 17–18% over the La Plata basin. CMR increases the fraction of total precipitation over the La Plata basin that originates from the Amazon basin from 18–23 to 24–29% during the wet season. We also show that the south-western part of the Amazon basin is not only a direct source of rainfall over the La Plata basin, but also a key intermediary region that distributes moisture originating from the entire Amazon basin towards the La Plata basin during the wet season. Our results suggest that land use change in this region might have a stronger impact on downwind rainfall than previously thought. Using complex network analysis techniques, we find the eastern side of the sub-tropical Andes to be a key region where CMR pathways are channeled. This study offers a better understanding of the interactions between the vegetation and the atmosphere on the water cycle, which is needed in a context of land use and climate change in South America.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effects of climate model radiation, humidity and wind estimates on hydrological simulations
    (Chichester : John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2012) Haddeland, I.; Heinke, J.; Voß, F.; Eisner, S.; Chen, C.; Hagemann, S.; Ludwig, F.
    Due to biases in the output of climate models, a bias correction is often needed to make the output suitable for use in hydrological simulations. In most cases only the temperature and precipitation values are bias corrected. However, often there are also biases in other variables such as radiation, humidity and wind speed. In this study we tested to what extent it is also needed to bias correct these variables. Responses to radiation, humidity and wind estimates from two climate models for four large-scale hydrological models are analysed. For the period 1971-2000 these hydrological simulations are compared to simulations using meteorological data based on observations and reanalysis; i.e. the baseline simulation. In both forcing datasets originating from climate models precipitation and temperature are bias corrected to the baseline forcing dataset. Hence, it is only effects of radiation, humidity and wind estimates that are tested here. The direct use of climate model outputs result in substantial different evapotranspiration and runoff estimates, when compared to the baseline simulations. A simple bias correction method is implemented and tested by rerunning the hydrological models using bias corrected radiation, humidity and wind values. The results indicate that bias correction can successfully be used to match the baseline simulations. Finally, historical (1971-2000) and future (2071-2100) model simulations resulting from using bias corrected forcings are compared to the results using non-bias corrected forcings. The relative changes in simulated evapotranspiration and runoff are relatively similar for the bias corrected and non bias corrected hydrological projections, although the absolute evapotranspiration and runoff numbers are often very different. The simulated relative and absolute differences when using bias corrected and non bias corrected climate model radiation, humidity and wind values are, however, smaller than literature reported differences resulting from using bias corrected and non bias corrected climate model precipitation and temperature values.