Show simple item record

contributor authorHaddeland, Ingjerd
contributor authorClark, Douglas B.
contributor authorFranssen, Wietse
contributor authorLudwig, Fulco
contributor authorVoß, Frank
contributor authorArnell, Nigel W.
contributor authorBertrand, Nathalie
contributor authorBest, Martin
contributor authorFolwell, Sonja
contributor authorGerten, Dieter
contributor authorGomes, Sandra
contributor authorGosling, Simon N.
contributor authorHagemann, Stefan
contributor authorHanasaki, Naota
contributor authorHarding, Richard
contributor authorHeinke, Jens
contributor authorKabat, Pavel
contributor authorKoirala, Sujan
contributor authorOki, Taikan
contributor authorPolcher, Jan
contributor authorStacke, Tobias
contributor authorViterbo, Pedro
contributor authorWeedon, Graham P.
contributor authorYeh, Pat
date accessioned2017-06-09T16:40:32Z
date available2017-06-09T16:40:32Z
date copyright2011/10/01
date issued2011
identifier issn1525-755X
identifier otherams-72012.pdf
identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4213969
description abstractix land surface models and five global hydrological models participate in a model intercomparison project [Water Model Intercomparison Project (WaterMIP)], which for the first time compares simulation results of these different classes of models in a consistent way. In this paper, the simulation setup is described and aspects of the multimodel global terrestrial water balance are presented. All models were run at 0.5° spatial resolution for the global land areas for a 15-yr period (1985?99) using a newly developed global meteorological dataset. Simulated global terrestrial evapotranspiration, excluding Greenland and Antarctica, ranges from 415 to 586 mm yr?1 (from 60 000 to 85 000 km3 yr?1), and simulated runoff ranges from 290 to 457 mm yr?1 (from 42 000 to 66 000 km3 yr?1). Both the mean and median runoff fractions for the land surface models are lower than those of the global hydrological models, although the range is wider. Significant simulation differences between land surface and global hydrological models are found to be caused by the snow scheme employed. The physically based energy balance approach used by land surface models generally results in lower snow water equivalent values than the conceptual degree-day approach used by global hydrological models. Some differences in simulated runoff and evapotranspiration are explained by model parameterizations, although the processes included and parameterizations used are not distinct to either land surface models or global hydrological models. The results show that differences between models are a major source of uncertainty. Climate change impact studies thus need to use not only multiple climate models but also some other measure of uncertainty (e.g., multiple impact models).
publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
titleMultimodel Estimate of the Global Terrestrial Water Balance: Setup and First Results
typeJournal Paper
journal volume12
journal issue5
journal titleJournal of Hydrometeorology
identifier doi10.1175/2011JHM1324.1
journal fristpage869
journal lastpage884
treeJournal of Hydrometeorology:;2011:;Volume( 012 ):;issue: 005
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record