English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

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

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons37120

Chen,  C.
The Land in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society;
Terrestrial Hydrology, The Land in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons37169

Haerter,  J.
The Land in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons37170

Hagemann,  S.
The Land in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society;
Terrestrial Hydrology, The Land in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Chen, C., Haerter, J., Hagemann, S., & Piani, C. (2011). On the contribution of statistical bias correction to the uncertainty in the projected hydrological cycle. Geophysical Research Letters, 38: L20403. doi:10.1029/2011GL049318.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0012-3047-E
Abstract
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. Citation: Chen, C., J. O. Haerter, S. Hagemann, and C. Piani (2011), On the contribution of statistical bias correction to the uncertainty in the projected hydrological cycle