A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Hydrologic Model Evaluation and Assessment of Projected Climate Change Impacts Using Bias-Corrected Stream Flows
Hydrologic models driven by downscaled meteorologic data from general circulation models (GCM) should be evaluated using long-term simulations over a historical period. However, simulations driven by GCM data cannot be directly evaluated using observed flows, and the confidence in the results can be relatively low. The objectives of this paper were to bias correct simulated stream flows from calibrated hydrologic models for two basins in New Jersey, USA, and evaluate model performance in comparison to uncorrected simulations. Then, we used stream flow bias correction and flow duration curves (FDCs) to evaluate and assess simulations driven by statistically downscaled GCMs for the historical period and the future time slices 2041–2070 and 2071–2099. Bias correction of stream flow from simulations increased confidence in the performance of two previously calibrated hydrologic models. Results indicated there was no difference in projected FDCs for uncorrected and bias-corrected flows in one basin, while this was not the case in the second basin. This result provided greater confidence in projected stream flow changes in the former basin and implied more uncertainty in projected stream flows in the latter. Applications in water resources can use the methods described to evaluate the performance of GCM-driven simulations and assess the potential impacts of climate change with an appropriate level of confidence in the model results.
Hydrologic Model Evaluation and Assessment of Projected Climate Change Impacts Using Bias-Corrected Stream Flows
Hydrologic models driven by downscaled meteorologic data from general circulation models (GCM) should be evaluated using long-term simulations over a historical period. However, simulations driven by GCM data cannot be directly evaluated using observed flows, and the confidence in the results can be relatively low. The objectives of this paper were to bias correct simulated stream flows from calibrated hydrologic models for two basins in New Jersey, USA, and evaluate model performance in comparison to uncorrected simulations. Then, we used stream flow bias correction and flow duration curves (FDCs) to evaluate and assess simulations driven by statistically downscaled GCMs for the historical period and the future time slices 2041–2070 and 2071–2099. Bias correction of stream flow from simulations increased confidence in the performance of two previously calibrated hydrologic models. Results indicated there was no difference in projected FDCs for uncorrected and bias-corrected flows in one basin, while this was not the case in the second basin. This result provided greater confidence in projected stream flow changes in the former basin and implied more uncertainty in projected stream flows in the latter. Applications in water resources can use the methods described to evaluate the performance of GCM-driven simulations and assess the potential impacts of climate change with an appropriate level of confidence in the model results.
Hydrologic Model Evaluation and Assessment of Projected Climate Change Impacts Using Bias-Corrected Stream Flows
Joseph A. Daraio (author)
2020
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
Hydrologic Assessment of Regional Climate Change Impacts in Large Heterogeneous River Basins
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1999
Assessing hydrologic response to climate change of a stream watershed using SLURP hydrological model
| Springer Verlag | 2010
Reservoir performance under uncertainty in hydrologic impacts of climate change
| British Library Online Contents | 2010
Regional hydrologic mapping of flows in stream networks
| Online Contents | 2009