Comparison of CMIP3 and CMIP5 projected hydrologic conditions over the Upper Colorado River Basin. (19th January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ayers, Jessica; Ficklin, Darren L.; Stewart, Iris T.; Strunk, Meredith
• Is Part Of: International journal of climatology. Volume 36:Number 11(2016)
• Page Start: 3807
• Page End: 3818
• Publication Date: 2016-01-19
• Subjects: CMIP3 -- CMIP5 -- SWAT -- Colorado River -- snowmelt -- climate change; Climatology -- Periodicals; Climat -- Périodiques; Climatologie -- Périodiques; 551.605
• DOI: 10.1002/joc.4594
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0899-8418

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This work presents updated hydrologic projections for the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB) using downscaled (approximately 12 km) General Circulation Model (GCM) output from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project – Phase 5 (CMIP5) with a comparison to CMIP3 GCMs. We use the Soil and Water Assessment Tool model to simulate the impacts of end‐of‐century climate change on the UCRB using 21 CMIP5 and 18 CMIP3 GCMs, collected into one CMIP5 ensemble and one CMIP3 ensemble, respectively. Previous CMIP3 studies have identified a drier climate for the UCRB because of projected increases in temperature and decreases/little change in precipitation. Hydrologic simulations from CMIP5 inputs suggest wetter conditions than simulations based on CMIP3 inputs, yet drier conditions than the historical climate. Both ensembles lead to timing shifts in peak streamflow during the snowmelt season from changes in snowmelt, but the higher CMIP5 projected precipitation leads to, on average, peak streamflows 200–300 m 3 s −1 larger (25–40% difference) than the CMIP3 projections. This difference is largely generated in the northern UCRB region, where CMIP5 simulations project much more significant increases in streamflow than CMIP3. This increase is largely due to an overall larger rise in precipitation in the CMIP5 ensemble (57% of the total UCRB area) compared to the CMIP3 ensemble (5%). Even with projected increases in precipitation, snowmelt is projected to decrease dramatically throughout the UCRB for both ensembles. The increases in precipitation and decreases in snowmelt leads to significant differences in hydrologic flux components between the CMIP3 and CMIP5 ensembles, such as end‐of‐century rises in soil water content and evapotranspiration in the CMIP5 ensemble compared to the CMIP3 ensemble. The difference between the dry CMIP3 and the somewhat wetter CMIP5 projections may be critical for water management in the already over‐allocated UCRB.