Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

A Comparison of Statistical and Model-Based Downscaling Techniques for Estimating Local Climate Variations

John W. Kidson National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., Wellington, New Zealand

Search for other papers by John W. Kidson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
and
Craig S. Thompson National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., Wellington, New Zealand

Search for other papers by Craig S. Thompson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Apr 1998
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1998)011<0735:ACOSAM>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
735–753
Restricted access

Abstract

The respective merits of statistical and regional modeling techniques for downscaling GCM predictions have been evaluated over New Zealand, a small mountainous country surrounded by ocean. The boundary conditions were supplied from twice-daily European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts analyses at 2.5° resolution for the period 1980–94, which were taken as the output of a “perfect” climate model. Daily and monthly estimates of minimum and maximum temperature and precipitation from both techniques were validated against readings from a network of 78 climate stations.

The statistical estimates were made by a screening regression technique using the EOFs of the regional height fields at 1000 and 500 hPa, and local variables derived from these fields, as predictors. The model interpolations made use of the RAMS model developed at Colorado State University running at 50-km resolution for 1990–94 only. The model values at the nearest grid point to each station were rescaled using a simple linear regression to give the best fit to the station values.

The results show both methods to have comparable skill in estimating daily and monthly station anomalies of temperatures and rainfall. Statistical estimates of monthly departures were better obtained directly from monthly mean forcing than from a combination of daily estimates; however, daily values are needed if one wishes to estimate variability.

While there are good physical grounds for using the modeling technique to estimate the likely effects of climate change, the statistical technique requires considerably less computational effort and may be preferred for many applications.

Corresponding author address: Dr. John W. Kidson, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., 301 Evans Bay Parade, Greta Point, P.O. Box 14-901 Kilbirnie, Wellington, New Zealand.

Abstract

The respective merits of statistical and regional modeling techniques for downscaling GCM predictions have been evaluated over New Zealand, a small mountainous country surrounded by ocean. The boundary conditions were supplied from twice-daily European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts analyses at 2.5° resolution for the period 1980–94, which were taken as the output of a “perfect” climate model. Daily and monthly estimates of minimum and maximum temperature and precipitation from both techniques were validated against readings from a network of 78 climate stations.

The statistical estimates were made by a screening regression technique using the EOFs of the regional height fields at 1000 and 500 hPa, and local variables derived from these fields, as predictors. The model interpolations made use of the RAMS model developed at Colorado State University running at 50-km resolution for 1990–94 only. The model values at the nearest grid point to each station were rescaled using a simple linear regression to give the best fit to the station values.

The results show both methods to have comparable skill in estimating daily and monthly station anomalies of temperatures and rainfall. Statistical estimates of monthly departures were better obtained directly from monthly mean forcing than from a combination of daily estimates; however, daily values are needed if one wishes to estimate variability.

While there are good physical grounds for using the modeling technique to estimate the likely effects of climate change, the statistical technique requires considerably less computational effort and may be preferred for many applications.

Corresponding author address: Dr. John W. Kidson, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., 301 Evans Bay Parade, Greta Point, P.O. Box 14-901 Kilbirnie, Wellington, New Zealand.

Save
Cover Journal of Climate
Journal of Climate

  • Bardossy, A., and E. J. Plate, 1992: Space-time models for daily rainfall using atmospheric circulation patterns. Water Resour. Res.,28, 1247–1259.

  • Bates, G. T., S. W. Hostetler, and F. Giorgi, 1995: Two-year simulation of the Great Lakes region with a coupled modeling system. Mon. Wea. Rev.,123, 687–701.

  • Copeland, J. H., R. A. Pielke, and T. G. F. Kittel, 1996: Potential climatic impacts of vegetation change: A regional modeling study. J. Geophys. Res.,101 (D3), 7409–7418.

  • Cressman, G. P., 1959: An operational objective analysis system. Mon. Wea. Rev.,87, 367–374.

  • Dorman, J. L., and P. J. Sellers, 1989: A global climatology of albedo, roughness length and stomatal resistance for atmospheric general circulation models as represented by the Simple Biosphere Model (SiB). J. Appl. Meteor.,28, 833–855.

  • Draper, N. R., and Smith, H., 1981: Applied Regression Analysis. 2d ed. Wiley, 709 pp.

  • Giorgi, F., and L. O. Mearns, 1991: Approaches to the simulation of regional climate change. Rev. Geophys.,29, 191–216.

  • ——, C. Shields Brodeur, and G. T. Bates, 1994: Regional climate change scenarios over the United States produced with a nested regional climate model: Spatial and seasonal characteristics. J. Climate,7, 375–399.

  • Glahn, H. R., 1985: Yes, precipitation forecasts have improved. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,66, 820–830.

  • Hewitson, B., 1994: Regional climate in the GISS general circulation model: Air surface temperature. J. Climate,7, 283–303.

  • ——, 1997: GCM derived climate change impacts on regional climate variability. Preprints, Fifth Int. Conf. on Southern Hemisphere Meteorology and Oceanography, Pretoria, South Africa, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 24–26.

  • Hirakuchi, H., and F. Giorgi, 1995: Multi-year present day and 2 × CO2 simulations of monsoon climate over eastern Asia and Japan with a regional climate model nested in a general circulation model. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 21105–21126.

  • IPCC, 1995: Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change.Cambridge University Press, 572 pp.

  • IRI, 1995: International Forum on Forecasting El Niño: Launching an international research institute. Executive Summary, NOAA, 65 pp. [Available from NOAA Office of Global Programs, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1225, Silver Spring, MD 20910.].

  • Jones, R. G., J. M. Murphy, and M. Nouger, 1995: Simulation of climate change over Europe using a nested regional climate model. Part I: Assessment of control climate, including sensitivity to location of lateral boundaries. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,121, 1413–1449.

  • ——, ——, ——, and A. B. Keen, 1997: Simulation of climate change over Europe using a nested regional climate model. Part II: Comparison of driving and regional model responses to a doubling of carbon dioxide concentration. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,123, 265–292.

  • Karl, T. R., W.-C. Wang, M. E. Schlesinger, and R. W. Knight, 1990: A method of relating general circulation model simulated climate to the observed local climate. Part I: Seasonal statistics. J. Climate,3, 1053–1079.

  • Katz, R. W., and J. G. Acero, 1994: Sensitivity analysis of extreme precipitation events. Int. J. Climatol.,14, 985–999.

  • Kida, H., T. Koide, H. Sasaki, and M. Chiba, 1991: A new approach to coupling a limited area model with a GCM for regional climate simulation. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan,69, 723–728.

  • Kidson, J. W., 1997: The utility of surface and upper air data in synoptic climatological specification of surface climatic variables. Int. J. Climatol.,17, 399–414.

  • Kim, J. W., J.-T. Chang, N. L. Baker, D. S. Wilks, and W. L. Gates 1984: The statistical problem of climate inversion: Determination of the relationship between local and large-scale climate. Mon. Wea. Rev.,112, 2069–2077.

  • Klein, W. H., 1982: Statistical weather forecasting on different time scales. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,63, 170–177.

  • ——, and H. Bloom, 1989: An operational system for specifying monthly precipitation amounts over the United States from the field of concurrent 700-mb heights. Wea. Forecasting,4, 51–60.

  • Kowalcyk, E. A., J. R. Garratt, and P. B. Krummel, 1991: A soil-canopy scheme for use in a numerical model of the atmosphere—1D stand-alone model. CSIRO Div. of Atmos. Res. Tech. Paper 23, 56 pp. [Available from CSIRO, Division of Atmospheric Research, Private Bag 1, Mordialloc, Victoria 3195, Australia.].

  • Maunder, W. J., 1971: The Climate of New Zealand—Physical and dynamical features. World Survey of Climatology, Vol. 13, Climates of Australia and New Zealand, J. Genhlli, Ed., Elsevier, 213–227.

  • McNally, A. P., and M. Vesperini, 1996: Variational analysis of humidity information from TOVS radiances. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,122, 1521–1544.

  • Mearns, L. O., R. W. Katz, and S. H. Schneider, 1984: Extreme high-temperature events: Changes in their probabilities with changes in mean temperature. J. Climate Appl. Meteor.,23, 1601–1613.

  • Mitchell, J. F. B., C. A. Wilson, and W. M. Cunnington, 1987: On CO2 climate sensitivity and model dependence of results. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,113, 293–322.

  • Phillips, N. A., 1990: Dispersion Processes in Large-Scale Weather Prediction. WMO, 126 pp.

  • Pielke, R. A., and Coauthors, 1992: A comprehensive meteorological modeling system—RAMS. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,49, 69–91.

  • ——, T. J. Lee, J. H. Copeland, J. L. Eastman, C. L. Ziegler, and C. A. Finley, 1997: Use of USGS-provided data to improve weather and climate simulations. Ecol. Appl.,7, 3–21.

  • Podzun, R., A. Cress, D. Majewski, and V. Renner, 1995: Simulation of European climate with a limited area model. Part II: AGCM boundary conditions. Contrib. Atmos. Phys.,68, 205–226.

  • Renwick, J. A., J. J. Katzfey, K. C. Nguyen, and J. L. McGregor, 1998: Regional model simulations of New Zealand climate. J. Geophys. Res., in press.

  • Revell, M. J., M. R. Sinclair, and D. S. Wratt, 1995: The storm of November 1994—Numerical simulation of a heavy rain event over the Southern Alps of New Zealand, using the RAMS model at very high resolution. Preprints, Workshop of GEWEX Cloud System Study Working Group 3, New York, NY, Goddard Inst. for Space Studies, 47–51.

  • Reynolds, R. W., 1988: A real-time global sea surface temperature analysis. J. Climate,1, 75–86.

  • Richman, M. B., 1986: Rotation of principal components. J. Climate,6, 293–336.

  • Sasaki, H., H. Kida, T. Koide, and M. Chiba, 1995: The performance of long term integrations of a limited area model with the spectral boundary coupling method. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan,73, 165–181.

  • Semazzi, F. H. M., N.-H. Lin, Y.-L. Lin, and F. Giorgi, 1993: A nested model study of the Sahelian climate response to sea-surface temperature anomalies. Geophys. Res. Lett.,20, 2879–2900.

  • Sinclair, M. R., 1994: A diagnostic model for estimating orographic precipitation. J. Appl. Meteor.,33, 1163–1175.

  • Sturman, A. P., and N. J. Tapper, 1996: The Weather and Climate of Australia and New Zealand. Oxford University Press, 476 pp.

  • Trenberth, K. E., and J. G. Olson, 1988: An evaluation and intercomparison of global analyses from the National Meteorological Center and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,69, 1047–1057.

  • ——, and D. J. Shea, 1997: Atmospheric circulation changes and links to changes in rainfall and drought. Preprints, 13th Conf. on Hydrology, Long Beach, CA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., J14–J17.

  • von Storch, H., E. Zorita, and U. Cubasch, 1993: Downscaling of climate change estimates to regional scales: An application to winter rainfall in the Iberian Peninsula. J. Climate,6, 1161–1171.

  • Walko, R. L., W. R. Cotton, M. P. Meyers, and J. Y. Harrington, 1995a: New RAMS cloud microphysics parameterization. Part I: The single-moment scheme. Atmos. Res.,38, 29–62.

  • ——, C. J. Tremback, R. F. A. Hertenstein, 1995b: RAMS, The Regional Atmospheric Modeling System. Version 3b, users guide. Aster Division, Mission Res. Corp.

  • Wallace, J. M., S. Tibaldi, and A. J. Simmons, 1983: Reduction of systematic forecast errors in the ECMWF model through the introduction of an envelope orography. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,109, 683–717.

  • Wilks, D. S., 1992: Adapting stochastic weather generation algorithms for climate change studies. Climate Change,22, 67–84.

  • Wilson, L. L., D. P. Lettenmaier, and E. Skyllingstad, 1992: A hierarchical stochastic model of large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns and multiple station daily precipitation. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 2791–2809.

  • WMO, 1983: Guide to Climatological Practices. 2d ed. WMO.

  • Zheng, X., and R. E Basher, 1996: Spatial model of New Zealand temperature normals. Int. J. Climatol.,16, 307–319.

  • Zorita, E., J. P. Hughes, D. P., Lettenmaier, and H. von Storch, 1995: Stochastic characterization of regional circulation patterns for climate model diagnosis and estimation of local precipitation. J. Climate,8, 1023–1042.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1455 899 49
PDF Downloads 316 94 9