CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 184Climate variability and modelsMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsClimate Change and Environmental Impact

Projected changes of extreme weather events in the eastern United States based on a high resolution climate modeling system

Open access
Gao, Y, Fu, J S, Drake, J B, Liu, Y, Lamarque, J-F·2012·Environmental Research Letters
DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044025
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study is the first evaluation of dynamical downscaling using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model on a 4 km × 4 km high resolution scale in the eastern US driven by the new Community Earth System Model version 1.0 (CESM v1.0). First we examined the global and regional climate model results, and corrected an inconsistency in skin temperature during the downscaling process by modifying the land/sea mask. In comparison with observations, WRF shows statistically significant improvement over CESM in reproducing extreme weather events, with improvement for heat wave frequency estimation as high as 98%. The fossil fuel intensive scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 was used to study a possible future mid-century climate extreme in 2057–9. Both the heat waves and the extreme precipitation in 2057–9 are more severe than the present climate in the Eastern US. The Northeastern US shows large increases in both heat wave intensity (3.05 °C higher) and annual extreme precipitation (107.3 mm more per year).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044025

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. IPCC 2007 Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ed S Solomon, D Qin, M Manning, M Marquis, K Averyt, M Tignor, H L Miller and Z Chen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
  2. Caldwell P, Chin H-N S, Bader D C and Bala G 2009 Evaluation of a WRF dynamical downscaling simulation over California Clim. Change 95 499-521 · DOI
  3. Fowler H J, Blenkinsop S and Tebaldi C 2007 Linking climate change modelling to impacts studies: recent advances in downscaling techniques for hydrological modelling Int. J. Climatol. 27 1547-78 · DOI
  4. Diaz-Nieto J and Wilby R L 2005 A comparison of statistical downscaling and climate change factor methods: impacts on low flows in the River Thames, United Kingdom Clim. Change 69 245-68 · DOI
  5. Giorgi F 1990 Simulation of regional climate using a limited area model nested in a general circulation model J. Clim. 3 941-63 · DOI
  6. Giorgi F, Shields Brodeur C and Bates G T 1994 Regional climate change scenarios over the United States produced with a nested Regional Climate Model J. Clim. 7 375-99 · DOI
  7. Leung L R, Wigmosta M S, Ghan S J, Epstein D J and Vail L W 1996 Application of a subgrid orographic precipitation/surface hydrology scheme to a mountain watershed J. Geophys. Res. 101 12803-17 · DOI
  8. Bell J L, Sloan L C and Snyder M A 2004 Regional changes in extreme climatic events: a future climate scenario J. Clim. 17 81-7 · DOI
  9. Salathé E P, Steed R, Mass C F and Zahn P H 2008 A high-resolution climate model for the U.S. Pacific Northwest: mesoscale feedbacks and local responses to climate change J. Clim. 21 5708-26 · DOI
  10. Pan L-L, Chen S-H, Cayan D, Lin M-Y, Hart Q, Zhang M-H, Liu Y and Wang J 2011 Influences of climate change on California and Nevada regions revealed by a high-resolution dynamical downscaling study Clim. Dyn. 37 2005-20 · DOI
  11. Qian Y, Ghan S J and Leung L R 2010 Downscaling hydroclimatic changes over the western US based on CAM subgrid scheme and WRF regional climate simulations Int. J. Climatol. 30 675-93 · DOI
  12. Neale R B, Richter J H and Jochum M 2008 The impact of convection on ENSO: from a delayed oscillator to a series of events J. Clim. 21 5904-24 · DOI
  13. Moss R H et al 2010 The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment Nature 463 747-56 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Whitman S, Good G, Donoghue E R, Benbow N, Shou W and Mou S 1997 Mortality in Chicago attributed to the July 1995 heat wave Am. J. Public Health 87 1515-8 · DOI
  15. Ganguly A R, Steinhaeuser K, Erickson D J, Branstetter M, Parish E S, Singh N, Drake J B and Buja L 2009 Higher trends but larger uncertainty and geographic variability in 21st century temperature and heat waves Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106 15555-9 · DOI
  16. Meehl G A et al 2011 Climate system response to external forcings and climate change projections in CCSM4 J. Clim. 25 3661-83 · DOI
  17. Thornton P E, Doney S C, Lindsay K, Moore J K, Mahowald N, Randerson J T, Fung I, Lamarque J F, Feddema J J and Lee Y H 2009 Carbon-nitrogen interactions regulate climate-carbon cycle feedbacks: results from an atmosphere-ocean general circulation model Biogeosciences 6 2099-120 · DOI
  18. Bitz C M, Shell K M, Gent P R, Bailey D A, Danabasoglu G, Armour K C, Holland M M and Kiehl J T 2011 Climate sensitivity of the community climate system model, version 4 J. Clim. 25 3053-70 · DOI
  19. Smith R D, Dukowicz J K and Malone R C 1992 Parallel ocean general circulation modeling Physica D 60 38-61 · DOI
  20. Holland M M, Bailey D A, Briegleb B P, Light B and Hunke E 2011 Improved sea ice shortwave radiation physics in CCSM4: the impact of melt ponds and aerosols on Arctic sea ice J. Clim. 25 1413-30 · DOI
  21. Skamarock W C and Klemp J B 2008 A time-split nonhydrostatic atmospheric model for weather research and forecasting applications J. Comput. Phys. 227 3465-85 · DOI
  22. Kain J S 2004 The Kain-Fritsch convective parameterization: an update J. Appl. Meteorol. 43 170-81 · DOI
  23. Lam Y F, Fu J S, Wu S and Mickley L J 2011 Impacts of future climate change and effects of biogenic emissions on surface ozone and particulate matter concentrations in the United States Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11 4789-806 · DOI
  24. Wong D C, Pleim J, Mathur R, Binkowski F, Otte T, Gilliam R, Pouliot G, Xiu A, Young J O and Kang D 2012 WRF-CMAQ two-way coupled system with aerosol feedback: software development and preliminary results Geosci. Model Dev. 5 299-312 · DOI
  25. Janjić Z I 1990 The step-mountain coordinate: physical package Mon. Weather Rev. 118 1429-43 · DOI
  26. Mellor G L and Yamada T 1982 Development of a turbulence closure-model for geophysical fluid problems Rev. Geophys. 20 851-75 · DOI
  27. Chen F and Dudhia J 2001 Coupling an advanced land surface-hydrology model with the Penn State-NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: model implementation and sensitivity Mon. Weather Rev. 129 569-85 · DOI
  28. Lo J C-F, Yang Z-L and Pielke R A Sr 2008 Assessment of three dynamical climate downscaling methods using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model J. Geophys. Res. 113 D09112 · DOI
  29. Iacono M J, Delamere J S, Mlawer E J, Shephard M W, Clough S A and Collins W D 2008 Radiative forcing by long-lived greenhouse gases: calculations with the AER radiative transfer models J. Geophys. Res. 113 D13103 · DOI
  30. Morcrette J J, Barker H W, Cole J N S, Iacono M J and Pincus R 2008 Impact of a new radiation package, McRad, in the ECMWF integrated forecasting system Mon. Weather Rev. 136 4773-98 · DOI
  31. Deng A and Stauffer D R 2006 On improving 4-km mesoscale model simulations J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 45 361-81 · DOI
  32. Meehl G A, Tebaldi C, Walton G, Easterling D and McDaniel L 2009 Relative increase of record high maximum temperatures compared to record low minimum temperatures in the U.S Geophys. Res. Lett. 36 L23701 · DOI
  33. Riahi K, Grübler A and Nakicenovic N 2007 Scenarios of long-term socio-economic and environmental development under climate stabilization Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74 887-935 · DOI
  34. Soares P M, Cardoso R, Miranda P A, Medeiros J, Belo-Pereira M and Espirito-Santo F 2012 WRF high resolution dynamical downscaling of ERA-Interim for Portugal Clim. Dyn. 39 2497-522 · DOI
  35. Zhang Y, Duliere V, Mote P W and Salathe E P 2009 Evaluation of WRF and HadRM mesoscale climate simulations over the U.S. Pacific Northwest J. Clim. 22 5511-26 · DOI
  36. Nakicenovic N and Swart R 2000 Special Report on Emissions Scenarios: A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
  37. Karl T R and Knight R W 1997 The 1995 Chicago heat wave: how likely is a recurrence? Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 78 1107-19 · DOI
  38. Huth R, Kysely J and Pokorna L 2000 GCM simulation of heat waves, dry spells, and their relationships to circulation Clim. Change 46 29-60 · DOI
  39. Salinger M J and Griffiths G M 2001 Trends in New Zealand daily temperature and rainfall extremes Int. J. Climatol. 21 1437-52 · DOI
  40. Diffenbaugh N S, Bell J L and Sloan L C 2006 Simulated changes in extreme temperature and precipitation events at 6 ka Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 236 151-68 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, Y., Fu, J. S., Drake, J. B., Liu, Y., & Lamarque, J.-F.
Affiliations
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
Corresponding author
Fu, J S
ORCID
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Publisher
IOP Publishing
Published
2012-11-06
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
044025
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044025
OpenAlex
W2035338344
Cited by
184
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Environmental Research Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DEAC05- 00OR22725, 00OR22725)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (AC05-00OR22725, DE--AC05--00OR22725, DE-AC05?, 00OR22725)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (5 U01 EH000405, DE-AC05-, DE-AC05-00OR22725)
  • Office of Science (DEAC05- 00OR22725, AC05-00OR22725)
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (AC05-00OR22725, DE-AC05-00OR22725)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Environmental Impact
Keywords
extreme weather events, dynamical downscaling, WRF model, high-resolution climate modeling, heat waves, heavy rainfall, climate change projections, RCP8.5, land-sea mask, eastern United States, northeastern United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review