4.6 Article

Simulation of the climatic effects of land use/land cover changes in eastern China using multi-model ensembles

Journal

GLOBAL AND PLANETARY CHANGE
Volume 154, Issue -, Pages 1-9

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.05.003

Keywords

Land use change; Eastern China; Multi-model ensemble; WRF; RegCM3; RIEMS

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41601045, 31570632, 41571094, 31570473, 91425304, 41471171, 41271066]
  2. IGSNRR [2015RC101]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human activities have caused substantial land use/cover change (LUCC) in China, especially in northeast China, the Loess Plateau and southern China. Three high-resolution regional climate models were used to simulate the impacts of LUCC on climate through one control experiment and three land use change experiments from 1980 to 2000. The results showed that multi-regional climate model ensemble simulations (the arithmetic ensemble mean (AEM) and Bayesian model averaging (BMA)) provide more accurate results than a single model in over 70% grid cells of study regions. Uncertainty was reduced when using the two ensemble methods. The results of the AEM and BMA ensembles showed that the temperatures decreased by 0.2-0.4 degrees C in northeast China, the Yangtze river valley and the north of the Loess Plateau, and by 0.6-1.0 degrees C in the south of the Loess Plateau in spring, autumn and winter. The AEM precipitations changed by - 40-40 min in in spring and winter, and by - 100-100 mm in summer and autumn, while the BMA precipitations changed by - 20-20 tom in spring, autumn and winter, and by - 50-50 mm in summer. The seasonal precipitation decreased in northeast China and the Yangtze river valley, and increased in the Loess Plateau in most grid cells of study regions. Winter and spring precipitation decreased more in the Yangtze river valley and the Loess Plateau than in northeast China.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available