Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Dr. Monia Santini University of Tuscia and CMCC CMCC Annual Meeting

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Dr. Monia Santini University of Tuscia and CMCC CMCC Annual Meeting"— Presentation transcript:

1 Ensemble Forecasting from LPJ simulations over the Mediterranean basin: Preliminary Results
Dr. Monia Santini University of Tuscia and CMCC CMCC Annual Meeting Marina di Ugento (LE) June 9th-11st, 2010 1

2 Aim To analyze uncertainties in projections of Med-basin natural vegetation trends for the 21st century from the DGVM-LPJ, based on future global and regional climate simulations, on model parameterization and formulations.

3 Ensemble Forecasting (Araujo and New, 2007) “…each individual outlook to the future in a scenario-study will not necessarily contain the most likely prospects, but, as a whole, the simulations provide the bandwidth of possible changes.” (Dammers, 2000). Initial condition perturbation The ensemble spread gives information about the prediction errors

4 LPJ inputs/outputs Spatialized inputs Soil: texture
Climate: monthly temperature, precipitation, cloud coverage, number of wet days Aggregated inputs CO2 concentration Average grid-cell basis outputs: Monthly: carbon and water fluxes Annually: carbon pools , fire return period, and competition among 9 Plant Functional Types (PFTs) + barren areas

5 Sources of LPJ uncertainties
Model inputs: future climate projections Representation of driving processes and/or model formulation Parameters within the model (e.g. Zaehle et al ; Anav, 2009) regarding soil and/or PFTs

6 Sources of LPJ uncertainties
Future climate projections A1B

7 Sources of LPJ uncertainties
Model formulation Daily precipitation generation: Interpolation from monthly data Random generation from precipitation amount and number of wet days DAY OF MONTH PRECIPITATION (mm) Monthly precipitation =256 mm Number of wet days = 12 Monthly precipitation next month =20mm

8 Sources of LPJ uncertainties
PFT parameters TNE = Temperate Needleleaved Evergreen TBE = Temperate Broadleaved Evergreen TBS = Temperate Broadleaved Summergreen BNE = Boreal Needleleaved Evergreen C3 = C3 grass

9 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) 0.0083333° (≈1 km)
LPJ soil parameterization COARSE MEDIUM COARSE MEDIUM FINE COARSE FINE MEDIUM FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE NONVERTISOL FINE VERTISOL ORGANIC (Harmonized Soil World Database; IIASA, 2009)

10 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) CMCC grid

11 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) ENEA grid

12 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) CNRS-IPSL grid

13 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) METEOFRANCE grid (regular)

14 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) METEOFRANCE grid (irregular)

15 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) MPI grid

16 Input data processing Soil (HSWD) ° (≈1 km)  ° (≈10 km) Climate interpolated to aggregated soil grid (natural neighbouring) CO2-5 years interpolated to 1 year IMAGE Team, 2001

17 LPJ simulation protocol
Perform 24 separated runs of LPJ Spin-up period of 1000 years (from 971 to 1970) Transient simulation from 1971 to 2050

18 Whole-domain climate input anomalies
‘Temperature’ anomaly YEARS ANOMALY Relative to (all model average) ‘Number of wet days’ anomaly YEARS ANOMALY

19 LPJ outputs For each grid cell LPJ produces annual values for:
Plant Functional Types Vegetation carbon Soil carbon Litter carbon Carbon loss by fires Fire return period ...and monthly values for: Net Primary Production Heterotrophic Respiration Run-off Evaporation Interception Transpiration Soil moisture (2 layers) NEE Blue water fluxes White water fluxes (unproductive) Green water fluxes (productive)

20 PFT percent distribution
TEMPERATE NEEDLELEAVED EVERGREEN 2000

21 PFT percent distribution
TEMPERATE NEEDLELEAVED EVERGREEN 2000 2050

22 PFT percent distribution
C3 PERENNIAL GRASS 2000

23 PFT percent distribution
C3 PERENNIAL GRASS 2050 2000

24 Litter C - aggregated average
gC/m2 YEARS YEARS

25 Soil C - aggregated average
gC/m2 YEARS YEARS

26 Vegetation C - aggregated average
gC/m2 YEARS YEARS

27 C loss by fires - aggregated average
gC/m2 YEARS YEARS

28 Fire probability - aggregated average
YEARS YEARS

29 Spatial “litter C” anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

30 Spatial “soil C” anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

31 Spatial “vegetation C” anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

32 Spatial “C loss by fires” anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

33 Spatial yearly Blue Water anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

34 Spatial yearly Green Water anomalies
minus , whole ensemble average

35 Spatial yearly NPP anomalies
gC/m2 minus , whole ensemble average

36 First conclusions At aggregated level, different ensemble members have a variable influence in function of the considered model output. At spatialized level: two different behaviors between N and S Med-basin for C-related fields Med-surrounding areas the most critical in terms of water resources and fires

37 in progress and future work
Validation (last decade) at eddy sites (other EU-projects)

38 in progress and future work
Forcing with land use change simulations to separate natural vegetation from croplands focusing on fires Input to Historical analysis of LUC Land use change scenarios from coupled Input to Climate projections drive Input to LPJ model result LU/LC maps: URBAN CROPLAND detail from FORESTLAND/GRASSLAND detail from LPJ model RUI = Rural-Urban Interface Carbon loss by fires Fire return interval Output for Impacts at the RUI

39 in progress and future work
Ensemble updating using other GCMs-RCMs and/or emission scenarios (e.g. AR4 and AR5) e.g. COSMO-CLM domain (14 km res.) Temporal coverage

40 in progress and future work
Forcing with land use change simulations to separate natural vegetation from croplands focusing on White, Green & Blue water fluxes in SSA WGB = White Green Blue SSA = Sub-Saharian Africa CLIMAFRICA

41 Thank you!


Download ppt "Dr. Monia Santini University of Tuscia and CMCC CMCC Annual Meeting"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google