Radic and colleague Regine Hock of the University of Alaska used temperature and
precipitation projections from 10 global climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for their research.
Not exact matches
The difference among the recharge
projections from the 11 global change models reflects the difference in future regional
precipitation that the models project, the authors write.
The changes shown in these maps compare an average of the model
projections to the average temperature and
precipitation benchmarks observed
from 1971 - 2000.
Stalagmites and stalactites — the stony
projections that grow
from the cave floor and ceiling, respectively — carry a record of
precipitation because they grow as a result of dripping water.
Global climate
projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, showing temperature and
precipitation trends for two different future scenarios, as described in the Climate chapter of this assessment (IPCC 2014a).
[Response: As stated in my article,
precipitation changes used in the
projections are taken
from a high - resolution atmospheric model.
Figure: Early (JJ) and late (AS) summer temperature (K) and
precipitation (%) climatology difference -LRB-[1981 - 2010] minus [1950 - 1980]-RRB-
from observed North American Land Data Assimilation System (top panel) and Climate
Projection Center (bottom panel).
For regional climate predictability, the added value of RCMs should come
from better resolving the relationship between mean (temperature) trends and key indicators that are supposedly better represented in the high resolution
projections utilizing additional local information, such as temperature or
precipitation extremes.
Hagos, S. M., et al., 2016: A
projection of changes in landfalling atmospheric river frequency and extreme
precipitation over western North America
from the Large Ensemble CESM simulations.
The widespread trend of increasing heavy downpours is expected to continue, with
precipitation becoming less frequent but more intense.13, 14,15,16 The patterns of the projected changes of
precipitation do not contain the spatial details that characterize observed
precipitation, especially in mountainous terrain, because the
projections are averages
from multiple models and because the effective resolution of global climate models is roughly 100 - 200 miles.
Boberg, F., P. Berg, P. Thejll, W. J. Gutowski, and J. H. Christensen, 2009: Improved confidence in climate change
projections of
precipitation evaluated using daily statistics
from the PRUDENCE ensemble.
Obviously, climate models whose hindcasts differ in sign
from what is observed (Zhang et al., 2007), or which indicate that human influences are indistinguishable
from natural changes (Sarojini et al., 2012) possess no skill in identifying a human - induced climate signal on observed
precipitation across the U.S. and therefore should not be used to make future
projections.
We are beginning to sound like a broken record here, but again, it is impossible to present reliable future
projections for
precipitations changes across the U.S. (seasonal or annual)
from a collection of climate models which largely can not even get the sign (much less the magnitude) of the observed changes correct.
Using output
from Global Climate Models participating in the Fifth Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, PCIC has applied a statistical downscaling method called BCSD to create a set of downscaled climate
projections of
precipitation, minimum temperature and maximum temperature.
9.3.1 Global Mean Response 9.3.1.1 1 % / yr CO2 increase (CMIP2) experiments 9.3.1.2
Projections of future climate
from forcing scenario experiments (IS92a) 9.3.1.3 Marker scenario experiments (SRES) 9.3.2 Patterns of Future Climate Change 9.3.2.1 Summary 9.3.3 Range of Temperature Response to SRES Emission Scenarios 9.3.3.1 Implications for temperature of stabilisation of greenhouse gases 9.3.4 Factors that Contribute to the Response 9.3.4.1 Climate sensitivity 9.3.4.2 The role of climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2
Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 Conclusions
From the quotes available it appears she said an increase in heavy
precipitation events and persistent storm tracks further south is consistent with global warming
projections — not that global warming would cause the jet stream to «get stuck.»
For JJA, the uncertainty in the
projections mostly originates
from differences in modelled
precipitation changes.
The median changes in temperature and
precipitation for December, January and February (DJF) and June, July and August (JJA), averaged over the period 2070 — 2099, were calculated
from the high - end and non-high-end
projections together with the maximum range
from each group of models.
Figure 1 shows the 2007 IPCC Report model
projections of changes in
precipitation for the decade
from 2090 — 2099 compared to the pattern for 1980 — 1999.
Climate change
projections predict increases in
precipitation and air temperature for northern Europe, with the greatest temperature increase during winter and the greatest
precipitation increase
from April to September.