Advertisement

Climate Dynamics

, Volume 54, Issue 1–2, pp 173–189 | Cite as

Added value of very high resolution climate simulations over South Korea using WRF modeling system

  • Liying Qiu
  • Eun-Soon ImEmail author
  • Jina Hur
  • Kyo-Moon Shim
Article

Abstract

This study investigates the added value of very high resolution in long-term climate simulations over South Korea using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. A one-way double-nested modeling system consisting of a mother domain (20-km resolution) and nested domain (5-km resolution) is customized for simulating the distinct climatological patterns in Korea, where the region-specific climate is largely influenced by the area’s complex geographical features. The ERA-Interim reanalysis data are used for the initial and boundary conditions, and the simulation spans the period from December 1, 1985 to December 31, 2005 (20-year analysis period with 1-month spin-up). Simulations from both the mother and the nested domain show reasonable performance in capturing the general characteristics of summer temperature and precipitation in terms of temporally and spatially averaged quantities. However, the added value from the nested domain with its higher resolution is apparently found in the reproduction of the intensity and frequency of extreme events and in the physical realism related to the partitioning of convective and large-scale precipitation. The nested domain not only better resolves the sharp gradients of temperature variation over short distances but also substantially reduces the systematic cold bias seen in temperature extremes produced by the mother domain. Furthermore, the nested domain is better able to simulate the upper tail of precipitation distributions and thus of extreme events. The higher resolution also improves the simulation of partitioning between convective and large-scale precipitation, leading to a plausible relationship between extreme precipitation and temperature and showing good agreement with in situ observation. Given the different behaviors of convective and large-scale precipitation in response to temperature changes, their realistic partitioning in the model has important potential for enhancing the reliability of precipitation projection under global warming.

Keywords

Added value Regional climate simulation High resolution Climate extremes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Im E.-S. and Qiu L. were supported by the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) grant funded by the Ministry of Environment (Grant RE201901084). Hur J. and Shim K.-M. were partly supported by “Research Program for Agricultural Science & Technology Development (Project no. PJ01185802)”, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea.

Supplementary material

382_2019_4992_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2054 kb)

References

  1. Berg P, Moseley C, Haerter JO (2013) Strong increase in convective precipitation in response to higher temperatures. Nat Geosci 6:181–185Google Scholar
  2. Chen F, 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 129:569–585Google Scholar
  3. Collins M, AchutaRao K, Ashok K et al (2013) Observational challenges in evaluating climate models. Nat Clim Change 3:940–941Google Scholar
  4. Coppola E, Sobolowski S, Pichelli E et al (2018) A first-of-its-kind multi-model convection permitting ensemble for investigating convective phenomena over Europe and the Mediterranean. Clim Dyn.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4521-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dee DP, Uppala SM, Simmons AJ et al (2011) The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q J R Meteorol Soc 137:553–597Google Scholar
  6. Denis B, Laprise R, Caya D, Côté J (2002) Downscaling ability of one-way nested regional climate models: the Big-Brother experiment. Clim Dyn 18:627–646Google Scholar
  7. Denis B, Laprise R, Caya D (2003) Sensitivity of a regional climate model to the resolution of the lateral boundary conditions. Clim Dyn 20:107–126Google Scholar
  8. Dimitrijevic M, Laprise R (2005) Validation of the nesting technique in a RCM and sensitivity tests to the resolution of the lateral boundary conditions during summer. Clim Dyn 25:555–580Google Scholar
  9. Fantini A, Raffaele F, Torma C et al (2018) Assessment of multiple daily precipitation statistics in ERA-Interim driven Med-CORDEX and EURO-CORDEX experiments against high resolution observations. Clim Dyn 51:877–900Google Scholar
  10. Fosser G, Khodayar S, Berg P (2014) Benefit of convection permitting climate model simulations in the representation of convective precipitation. Clim Dyn 44:45–60Google Scholar
  11. Gao X, Xu Y, Zhao Z, Pal JS, Giorgi F (2006) On the role of resolution and topography in the simulation of East Asia precipitation. Theor Appl Climatol 86:173–185Google Scholar
  12. Giorgi F (2019) Thirty years of regional climate modeling: where are we and where are we going next? J Geophys Res Atmos 124:5696–5723Google Scholar
  13. Giorgi F, Lionello P (2008) Climate change projections for the Mediterranean region. Glob Planet Change 63:90–104Google Scholar
  14. Gomes JL, Chou SC (2010) Dependence of partitioning of model implicit and explicit precipitation on horizontal resolution. Meteorol Atmos Phys 106:1–18Google Scholar
  15. Hardwick Jones R, Westra S, Sharma A (2010) Observed relationships between extreme sub-daily precipitation, surface temperature, and relative humidity. Geophys Res Lett 37:L22805Google Scholar
  16. Hong SY, Dudhia J, Chen SH (2004) A revised approach to ice microphysical processes for the bulk parameterization of clouds and precipitation. Mon Weather Rev 132:103–120Google Scholar
  17. Hong SY, Noh Y, Dudhia J (2006) A new vertical diffusion package with an explicit treatment of entrainment processes. Mon Weather Rev 134:2318–2341Google Scholar
  18. Hong SY, Moon NK, Lim KSS, Kim JW (2010) Future climate change scenarios over Korea using a multi-nested downscaling system: a pilot study. Asia Pac J Atmos Sci 46:425–435Google Scholar
  19. Iacono MJ, Delamere JS, Mlawer EJ, Shephard MW, Clough SA, Collins WD (2008) Radiative forcing by long-lived greenhouse gases: calculations with the AER radiative transfer models. J Geophys Res 113:D13103Google Scholar
  20. Im ES, Ahn JB (2011) On the elevation dependency of present-day climate and future change over Korea from a high resolution regional climate simulation. J Meteorol Soc Jpn 89:89–100Google Scholar
  21. Im ES, Eltahir EAB (2018) Simulation of the diurnal variation of rainfall over the western Maritime Continent using a regional climate model. Clim Dyn 51:73–88Google Scholar
  22. Im ES, Park EH, Kwon WT, Giorgi F (2006) Present climate simulation over Korea with a regional climate model using a one-way double-nested system. Theor Appl Climatol 86:187–200Google Scholar
  23. Im ES, Kwon WT, Ahn JB, Giorgi F (2007) Multi-decadal scenario simulation over Korea using a one-way double-nested regional climate model system. Part 1: recent climate simulation (1971–2000). Clim Dyn 28:759–780Google Scholar
  24. Im ES, Ahn JB, Kwon WT, Giorgi F (2008a) Multi-decadal scenario simulation over Korea using a one-way double-nested regional climate model system. Part 2: future climate projection (2021–2050). Clim Dyn 30:239–254Google Scholar
  25. Im ES, Ahn JB, Remedio AR, Kwon WT (2008b) Sensitivity of the regional climate of East/Southeast Asia to convective parameterizations in the RegCM3 modelling system. Part 1: focus on the Korean peninsula. Int J Climatol 28:1861–1877Google Scholar
  26. Im ES, Coppola E, Giorgi F, Bi X (2010) Validation of a high-resolution regional climate model for the alpine region and effects of a subgrid-scale topography and land use representation. J Clim 23:1854–1873Google Scholar
  27. Im ES, Ahn JB, Jo SR (2015) Regional climate projection over South Korea simulated by the HadGEM2-AO and WRF model chain under RCP emission scenarios. Clim Res 63:249–266Google Scholar
  28. Jiménez PA, Dudhia J, González-Rouco JF, Navarro J, Montávez JP, García-Bustamante E (2012) A revised scheme for the WRF surface layer formulation. Mon Weather Rev 140:898–918Google Scholar
  29. Jin EK, Choi I, Kim S, Han J (2016) Impact of model resolution on the simulation of diurnal variations of precipitation over East Asia. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:1652–1670Google Scholar
  30. Kain JS, Weiss SJ, Bright DR et al (2008) Some practical considerations regarding horizontal resolution in the first generation of operational convection-allowing NWP. Weather Forecast 23:931–952Google Scholar
  31. Karmacharya J, Jones R, Moufouma-Okia W, New M (2017) Evaluation of the added value of a high-resolution regional climate model simulation of the South Asian summer monsoon climatology. Int J Climatol 37:3630–3643Google Scholar
  32. Kendon EJ, Roberts NM, Fowler HJ, Roberts MJ, Chan SC, Senior CA (2014) Heavier summer downpours with climate change revealed by weather forecast resolution model. Nat Clim Change 4:570–576Google Scholar
  33. Kim G, Cha DH, Park C et al (2018) Future changes in extreme precipitation indices over Korea. Int J Climatol 38:e862–e874Google Scholar
  34. Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) (2017) Annual report 2017. http://www.kma.go.kr/download_01/Annual_Report_2017.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2019
  35. Kummerow C, Hong Y, Olson WS et al (2001) The evolution of the Goddard profiling algorithm (GPROF) for rainfall estimation from passive microwave sensors. J Appl Meteor 40:1801–1840Google Scholar
  36. Kyselý J, Kim J (2009) Mortality during heat waves in South Korea, 1991 to 2005: how exceptional was the 1994 heat wave? Clim Res 38:105–116Google Scholar
  37. Lee JW, Hong SY (2014) Potential for added value to downscaled climate extremes over Korea by increased resolution of a regional climate model. Theor Appl Climatol 117:667–677Google Scholar
  38. Lee J, Shin HH, Hong SY, Jiménez PA, Dudhia J, Hong J (2014a) Impacts of subgrid-scale orography parameterization on simulated surface layer wind and monsoonal precipitation in the high-resolution WRF model. J Geophys Res Atmos 120:644–653Google Scholar
  39. Lee JW, Hong SY, Chang EC, Suh MS, Kang HS (2014b) Assessment of future climate change over East Asia due to the RCP scenarios downscaled by GRIMs-RMP. Clim Dyn 42:733–747Google Scholar
  40. Lee JW, Hong SY, Kim JEE, Yoshimura K, Ham S, Joh M (2015) Development and implementation of river-routing process module in a regional climate model and its evaluation in Korean river basins. J Geophys Res Atmos 120:4613–4629Google Scholar
  41. Lee D, Min SK, Jin J et al (2017) Thermodynamic and dynamic contributions to future changes in summer precipitation over Northeast Asia and Korea: a multi-RCM study. Clim Dyn 49:4121–4139Google Scholar
  42. Lee MH, Im ES, Bae DH (2019a) A comparative assessment of climate change impacts on drought over Korea based on multiple climate projections and multiple drought indices. Clim Dyn.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4588-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lee MH, Lu M, Im ES, Bae DH (2019b) Added value of dynamical downscaling for hydrological projections in the Chungju Basin, Korea. Int J Climatol 39:516–531Google Scholar
  44. Lu D, Yang Y, Fu Y (2016) Interannual variability of summer monsoon convective and stratiform precipitations in East Asia during 1998–2013. Int J Climatol 36:3507–3520Google Scholar
  45. Ma LM, Tan ZM (2009) Improving the behavior of the cumulus parameterization for tropical cyclone prediction: convection trigger. Atmos Res 92:190–211Google Scholar
  46. Maraun D, Wetterhall F, Chandler RE et al (2010) Precipitation downscaling under climate change: recent developments to bridge the gap between dynamical models and the end user. Rev Geophys 48:RG3003Google Scholar
  47. Mendoza PA, Mizukami N, Ikeda K et al (2016) Effects of different regional climate model resolution and forcing scales on projected hydrologic changes. J Hydrol 541:1003–1019Google Scholar
  48. O’gorman PA, Schneider T (2009) Scaling of precipitation extremes over a wide range of climates simulated with an idealized GCM. J Clim 22:5676–5685Google Scholar
  49. Oh SG, Suh MS (2018) Changes in seasonal and diurnal precipitation types during summer over South Korea in the late twenty-first century (2081–2100) projected by the RegCM4.0 based on four RCP scenarios. Clim Dyn 51:3042–3060Google Scholar
  50. Oh SG, Suh MS, Lee YS et al (2016) Projections of high resolution climate changes for South Korea using multiple-regional climate models based on four RCP scenarios. Part 2: precipitation. Asia Pac J Atmos Sci 52:171–189Google Scholar
  51. Park IH, Min SK (2017) Role of convective precipitation in the relationship between subdaily extreme precipitation and temperature. J Clim 30:9527–9537Google Scholar
  52. Park C, Min SK (2018) Multi-RCM near-term projections of summer climate extremes over East Asia. Clim Dyn.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4425-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prabhakara C, Iacovazzi R Jr, Yoo JM, Weinman JA (2002) TRMM precipitation radar and microwave imager observations of convective and stratiform rain over land and their theoretical implications. J Meteorol Soc Jpn 80:1183–1197Google Scholar
  54. Prein AF, Langhans W, Fosser G et al (2015) A review on regional convection-permitting climate modeling: demonstrations, prospects, and challenges. Rev Geophys 53:323–361Google Scholar
  55. Rasmussen R, Liu C, Ikeda K et al (2011) High-resolution coupled climate runoff simulations of seasonal snowfall over Colorado: a process study of current and warmer climate. J Clim 24:3015–3048Google Scholar
  56. Rauscher SA, Coppola E, Piani C, Giorgi F (2010) Resolution effects on regional climate model simulations of seasonal precipitation over Europe. Clim Dyn 35:685–711Google Scholar
  57. Scalzitti J, Strong C, Kochanski AK (2016) A 26 year high-resolution dynamical downscaling over the wasatch mountains: synoptic effects on winter precipitation performance. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:3224–3240Google Scholar
  58. Sharma A, Huang HP (2012) Regional climate simulation for Arizona: impact of resolution on precipitation. Adv Meteorol 2012:1–13Google Scholar
  59. Shin DW, Cocke S (2013) Alternative ways to evaluate a seasonal dynamical downscaling system. J Geophys Res Atmos 118:13443–13448Google Scholar
  60. Skamarock WC, Klemp JB, Dudhia J et al (2008) A description of the advanced research WRF version 3. NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475_STR 113Google Scholar
  61. Suh MS, Oh SG, Lee YS et al (2016) Projections of high resolution climate changes for South Korea using multiple-regional climate models based on four RCP scenarios. Part 1: surface air temperature. Asia Pac J Atmos Sci 52:151–169Google Scholar
  62. Torma C, Giorgi F, Coppola E (2015) Added value of regional climate modeling over areas characterized by complex terrain—precipitation over the Alps. J Geophys Res Atmos 120:3957–3972Google Scholar
  63. Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) (2011) TRMM microwave imager precipitation profile L3 1 month 0.5 degree × 0.5 degree, version 7. In: NASA’s Precip. Process. Cent. http://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/datacollection/TRMM_3A12_V7.shtml. Accessed 18 Nov 2018
  64. Uwe Schulzweida (2018) CDO user guide (version 1.9.3).  https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2558193
  65. Yang S, Smith EA (2008) Convective–stratiform precipitation variability at seasonal scale from 8 yr of TRMM observations: implications for multiple modes of diurnal variability. J Clim 21:4087–4114Google Scholar
  66. Yao J, Zhou T, Guo Z, Chen X, Zou L, Sun Y (2017) Improved performance of high-resolution atmospheric models in simulating the East Asian summer monsoon rain belt. J Clim 30:8825–8840Google Scholar
  67. Yu X, Lee TY (2011) Role of convective parameterization in simulations of heavy precipitation systems at grey-zone resolutions—case studies. Asia Pac J Atmos Sci 47:99–112Google Scholar
  68. Zhao T, Fu C (2006) Comparison of products from ERA-40, NCEP-2, and CRU with station data for summer precipitation over China. Adv Atmos Sci 23:593–604Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringThe Hong Kong University of Science and TechnologyKowloonChina
  2. 2.Division of Environment and SustainabilityThe Hong Kong University of Science and TechnologyKowloonChina
  3. 3.National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development AdministrationWanju-gunSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations