On the contribution of statistical bias correction to the uncertainty in the projected hydrological cycle

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the contribution of statistical bias correction to the uncertainty in the projected hydrological cycle

AU - Chen, C.

AU - Härter, Jan Olaf Mirko

AU - Hagemann, S.

AU - Piani, C.

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Global hydrological modeling is affected by three sources of uncertainty: (i) the choice of the global climate model (GCM) used to provide meteorological forcing data; (ii) the choice of future greenhouse gas concentration scenario; and (iii) the choice of the decade used to derive the bias correction parameters. We present a comparative analysis of these uncertainties and compare them to the inter-annual variability. The analysis focuses on discharge, integrated runoff and total precipitation over ten large catchments, representative of different climatic areas of the globe. Results are similar for all catchments, all hydrological variables and throughout the year with few exceptions. We find that the choice of different decadal periods over which to derive the bias correction parameters is a source of comparatively minor uncertainty, while other sources play larger and similarly significant roles. This is true for both the means and the extremes of the studied hydrological variables.

AB - Global hydrological modeling is affected by three sources of uncertainty: (i) the choice of the global climate model (GCM) used to provide meteorological forcing data; (ii) the choice of future greenhouse gas concentration scenario; and (iii) the choice of the decade used to derive the bias correction parameters. We present a comparative analysis of these uncertainties and compare them to the inter-annual variability. The analysis focuses on discharge, integrated runoff and total precipitation over ten large catchments, representative of different climatic areas of the globe. Results are similar for all catchments, all hydrological variables and throughout the year with few exceptions. We find that the choice of different decadal periods over which to derive the bias correction parameters is a source of comparatively minor uncertainty, while other sources play larger and similarly significant roles. This is true for both the means and the extremes of the studied hydrological variables.

U2 - 10.1029/2011GL049318

DO - 10.1029/2011GL049318

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0094-8276

VL - 38

SP - L20403

JO - Geophysical Research Letters

JF - Geophysical Research Letters

ER -