[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (787)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = CMIP5

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
38 pages, 6599 KiB  
Article
Identifying Flood Source Areas and Analyzing High-Flow Extremes Under Changing Land Use, Land Cover, and Climate in the Gumara Watershed, Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia
by Haile Belay, Assefa M. Melesse, Getachew Tegegne and Habtamu Tamiru
Climate 2025, 13(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli13010007 - 1 Jan 2025
Viewed by 536
Abstract
Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) and climate increasingly influence flood occurrences in the Gumara watershed, located in the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin of Ethiopia. This study assesses how these factors impact return period-based peak floods, flood source areas, and [...] Read more.
Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) and climate increasingly influence flood occurrences in the Gumara watershed, located in the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin of Ethiopia. This study assesses how these factors impact return period-based peak floods, flood source areas, and future high-flow extremes. Merged rainfall data (1981–2019) and ensemble means of four CMIP5 and four CMIP6 models were used for historical (1981–2005), near-future (2031–2055), and far-future (2056–2080) periods under representative concentration pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) and shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5). Historical LULC data for the years 1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019 and projected LULC data under business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios for the years 2035 and 2065 were used along with rainfall data to analyze flood peaks. Flood simulation was performed using a calibrated Hydrologic Engineering Center–Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) model. The unit flood response (UFR) approach ranked eight subwatersheds (W1–W8) by their contribution to peak flood magnitude at the main outlet, while flow duration curves (FDCs) of annual maximum (AM) flow series were used to analyze changes in high-flow extremes. For the observation period, maximum peak flood values of 211.7, 278.5, 359.5, 416.7, and 452.7 m3/s were estimated for 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year return periods, respectively, under the 2019 LULC condition. During this period, subwatersheds W4 and W6 were identified as major flood contributors with high flood index values. These findings highlight the need to prioritize these subwatersheds for targeted interventions to mitigate downstream flooding. In the future period, the highest flow is expected under the SSP5-8.5 (2056–2080) climate scenario combined with the BAU-2065 land use scenario. These findings underscore the importance of strategic land management and climate adaptation measures to reduce future flood risks. The methodology developed in this study, particularly the application of RF-MERGE data in flood studies, offers valuable insights into the existing knowledge base on flood modeling. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location map of the study area. (<b>a</b>) Location map of the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin within the 12 river basins of Ethiopia. (<b>b</b>) Location map of the upstream Gumara watershed (bounded by a red rectangle) within the Lake Tana subbasin, and (<b>c</b>) Detailed map showing the rainfall and streamflow gauging stations, stream network, climate model grid (25 km × 25 km), and grid center for the NASA dataset, and elevation map of the upstream (flood source area) part of the Gumara watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Elevation, (<b>b</b>) slope, (<b>c</b>) hydrologic soil groups (HSGs), and (<b>d</b>–<b>k</b>) historical and projected land use and land cover maps of the Gumara watershed for the historical (1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019) and future years (2035 and 2065) under the business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Methodological framework of the study. In the figure, boxes highlighted with grey color represent the main processing algorithm, tool, and hydrological model used in the study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Observed ground-based rainfall and discharge data from 1981 to 2019 for the Gumara watershed. (<b>a</b>) Double mass curve analysis, (<b>b</b>) mean annual rainfall of each ground-based rainfall station, (<b>c</b>) mean monthly rainfall, and (<b>d</b>) mean monthly discharge.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of daily observed rainfall data from RF-MERGE and historical CMIP5 and CMIP6 models for the period 1981–2005.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>A 30 m spatial resolution gridded runoff curve numbers for the historical years (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and future scenarios (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>). The gray shaded areas that bound in the figure illustrate the gradient orientation of the runoff curve number, with maximum values along the north and south directions and minimum values in the middle of the watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Historical (1981–2005) and projected (2031–2080) mean monthly rainfall (mm/month) of the Gumara watershed, estimated from RF-MERGE data and multi-model ensemble means from CMIP5 and CMIP6.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial distribution of mean annual rainfall (MARF) in the historical (1981–2005) and two future periods, near-future (2031–2056) and far-future (2056–2080), under different climate scenarios. In the figures, different color gradients show the distribution of rainfall in the study area, where the dark blue color grade shows areas that receive the highest mean annual rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Temporal variation of the long-term annual maximum (AM) 1-day rainfall series from RF-MERGE estimates (1981–2019) and (<b>b</b>) depth–duration–frequency (DDF) curve developed from RF-MERGE rainfall. In panel (<b>a</b>), the red line illustrates the increasing linear trend of annual maximum 1-day rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Box plot of historical (1981–2005) and projected (2031–2080) annual maximum (AM) 1-day rainfall, represented in different color. The plot summarizes the minimum, first quartile (Q1), median, third quartile (Q3), and maximum values of the rainfall data. The blue dashed lines indicate the full range of data (minimum and maximum values) across the study periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Percentage coverage of land use and land cover (LULC) classes of the Gumara watershed. (<b>a</b>) Historical years (1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019) and (<b>b</b>) future years (2035 and 2065) under the business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Delineated subwatershed’s area, centroids, and stream network of the Gumara watershed as delineated in the HEC-HMS model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Model sensitivity analysis for the runoff curve number (CN) from 13 August to 31 August 2010.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Observed and simulated discharge for selected events: (<b>a</b>) Event 1 (calibration), from 1 July to 31 August 1996; (<b>b</b>) Event 2 (calibration), from 5 July to 31 July 2008; (<b>c</b>) Event 3 (validation), from 2 August to 27 August 2014.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>(<b>a</b>) Comparison of simulated peak discharge (Q) under various land use conditions across different return periods and (<b>b</b>) comparison of simulated runoff volume (V) under various land use conditions across different return periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Computed flood index (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>f</mi> <mi>i</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>) values estimated using the Unit Flood Response (UFR) approach for a 50-year return period peak discharge under different LULC conditions: (<b>a</b>) LULC-1985, (<b>b</b>) LULC-2000, (<b>c</b>) LULC-2010, and (<b>d</b>) LULC-2019. The blue color gradient represents flood index levels across subwatersheds, with the darkest blue indicating subwatersheds with the highest runoff potential.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Comparison between historical and future annual maximum 1-day flow duration curves. (<b>a</b>) Future climate combined with the BAU land use scenario and (<b>b</b>) future climate combined with the GOV land use scenario.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 9911 KiB  
Article
Evolution and Future Challenges of Hydrological Elements in the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area: A Study on the Impact of Climate Change and Land Use Based on the Soil and Water Assessment Tool for the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area Model
by Ziwen Yin, Yan Liu, Zhenjiang Si, Longfei Wang, Tienan Li and Yan Meng
Sustainability 2025, 17(1), 239; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010239 - 31 Dec 2024
Viewed by 408
Abstract
In this study, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was first initialized for the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area (QLS). We aimed to assess the impacts of climate and land use (LULC) changes between 1980 and 2020 on several hydrological parameters in the [...] Read more.
In this study, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was first initialized for the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area (QLS). We aimed to assess the impacts of climate and land use (LULC) changes between 1980 and 2020 on several hydrological parameters in the QLS, including actual evapotranspiration (ET), soil water (SW), soil recharge to groundwater (PERC), surface runoff (SURQ), groundwater runoff (GWQ), and lateral runoff (LATQ). We predicted the trends in hydrological factors from 2021 to 2050. Based on the S1 scenario, the precipitation and the paddy field area decreased by 42.28 mm and 1717.65 km2, respectively; hydrological factors increased by 91.53, 104.28, 50.66, 21.86, 55.93, and 0.79 mm, respectively, in the QLS. Climate changes contributed 6.10%, −7.58%, −54.11%, 26.90%, −121.17%, and −31.66% to changes in hydrological factors, respectively; LULC changes contributed −2.19%, 3.63%, 11.61%, −2.93%, 25.89%, and 16.86%, respectively; and irrigation water volume changes contributed 96.09%, 103.95%, 142.50%, 76.03%, 195.28%, and 114.80%, respectively. Irrigation and water intake were the main factors affecting the changes in hydrological elements. This was followed by climatic changes and LULC. In natural development scenarios, the QLS is anticipated to face challenges, including increased actual ET, reduced seepage and groundwater contribution, and declining groundwater levels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Air, Climate Change and Sustainability)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Digital elevation map (DEM); (<b>b</b>) Soil type map.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Research framework.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) RSR, KGE, NSE, and PBIAS values in different scenarios; (<b>b</b>) Comparison of simulated and mod ET values in sub-substrates 21, 81, and 118.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Land use and land cover map of the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area in (<b>a</b>) 2000, (<b>b</b>) 2010, (<b>c</b>) 2020, and (<b>d</b>) 2050.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Land use transfer matrix.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Annual average precipitation in the Qinglongshan Irrigation Area; (<b>b</b>) Annual average values of hydrological elements in the S1 scenario.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Annual values of hydrological elements in the S2 scenario; (<b>b</b>) Regression analysis between paddy field area ratio and hydrological elements in the S1 scenario.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) Five-year average values of hydrological elements in the S3 scenario; (<b>b</b>) Regression analysis between decreasing water volume and hydrological elements in the S1 scenario.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Monthly average values and changes in hydrological elements in different future scenarios; (<b>b</b>) Annual average changes in hydrological elements in the S4 scenario.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The spatial changes in ET and SURQ under different scenarios in the future.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 4834 KiB  
Article
Intensified Drought Threatens Future Food Security in Major Food-Producing Countries
by Zihao Liu, Aifeng Lv and Taohui Li
Atmosphere 2025, 16(1), 34; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16010034 - 31 Dec 2024
Viewed by 931
Abstract
Drought is one of the most severe natural disasters globally, with its frequency and intensity escalating due to climate change, posing significant threats to agricultural production. This is particularly critical in major food-producing regions, where drought profoundly impacts crop yields. Such impacts can [...] Read more.
Drought is one of the most severe natural disasters globally, with its frequency and intensity escalating due to climate change, posing significant threats to agricultural production. This is particularly critical in major food-producing regions, where drought profoundly impacts crop yields. Such impacts can trigger food crises in affected regions and disrupt global food trade patterns, thereby posing substantial risks to global food security. Based on historical data, this study examines the yield response characteristics of key crops—maize, rice, soybean, spring wheat, and winter wheat—under drought conditions during their growth cycles, highlighting variations in drought sensitivity among major food-producing countries. The findings reveal that maize and soybean yield in China, the United States, and Brazil are among the most sensitive and severely affected by drought. Furthermore, using precipitation simulation data from CMIP6 climate models, the study evaluates drought trends and associated crop yield risks under different future emission scenarios. Results indicate that under high-emission scenarios, crops face heightened drought risks during their growth cycles, with China and the United States particularly vulnerable to yield reductions. Additionally, employing copula functions, the study analyzes the probability of simultaneous drought occurrences across multiple countries, shedding light on the evolving trends of multicountry drought events in major food-producing regions. These findings provide a scientific basis for assessing global food security risks and offer policy recommendations to address uncertainties in food supply under climate change. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Climate Change and Regional Sustainability in Arid Lands)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Drought sensitivity of major food-producing countries ((<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>): maize; (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>): rice; (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>): soybean; (<b>d1</b>–<b>d4</b>): spring wheat; (<b>e1</b>–<b>e4</b>): winter wheat).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Impact of drought on crop yields in major food-producing countries ((<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>): maize; (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>): rice; (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>): soybean; (<b>d1</b>–<b>d4</b>): spring wheat; (<b>e1</b>–<b>e4</b>): winter wheat).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Drought trends during crop growth cycle under different future scenarios ((<b>a</b>): 2017–2064; (<b>b</b>): 2017–2100; soy: soybean; s-w: spring wheat; w-w: winter wheat).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Drought-induced yield loss risks for major food-producing countries under different future scenarios ((<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>): maize; (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>): rice; (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>): soybean; (<b>d1</b>–<b>d4</b>): spring wheat; (<b>e1</b>–<b>e4</b>): winter wheat).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Changes in the probability of simultaneous droughts in major food-producing countries under different future scenarios ((<b>a1</b>–<b>a5</b>): maize; (<b>b1</b>–<b>b5</b>): rice; (<b>c1</b>–<b>c5</b>): soybean; (<b>d1</b>–<b>d5</b>): spring wheat; (<b>e1</b>–<b>e5</b>): winter wheat).</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 12676 KiB  
Article
Assessing NOAA/GFDL Models Performance for South American Seasonal Climate: Insights from CMIP6 Historical Runs and Future Projections
by Marília Harumi Shimizu, Juliana Aparecida Anochi and Diego Jatobá Santos
Climate 2025, 13(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli13010004 - 28 Dec 2024
Viewed by 461
Abstract
Climate prediction is of fundamental importance to various sectors of society and the economy, as it can predict the likelihood of droughts or excessive rainfall in vulnerable regions. Climate models are useful tools in producing reliable climate forecasts, which have become increasingly vital [...] Read more.
Climate prediction is of fundamental importance to various sectors of society and the economy, as it can predict the likelihood of droughts or excessive rainfall in vulnerable regions. Climate models are useful tools in producing reliable climate forecasts, which have become increasingly vital due to the rising impacts of climate change. As global temperatures rise, changes in precipitation patterns are expected, increasing the importance of reliable seasonal forecasts to support planning and adaptation efforts. In this study, we evaluated the performance of NOAA/GFDL models from CMIP6 simulations in representing the climate of South America under three configurations: atmosphere-only, coupled ocean-atmosphere, and Earth system. Our analysis revealed that all three configurations successfully captured key climatic features, such as the South Atlantic Convergence Zone (SACZ), the Bolivian High, and the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). However, coupled models exhibited larger errors and lower correlation (below 0.6), particularly over the ocean and the South American Monsoon System, which indicates a poor representation of precipitation compared with atmospheric models. The coupled models also overestimated upward motion linked to the southern Hadley cell during austral summer and underestimated it during winter, whereas the atmosphere-only models more accurately simulated the Walker circulation, showing stronger vertical motion around the Amazon. In contrast, the coupled models simulated stronger upward motion over Northeast Brazil, which is inconsistent with reanalysis data. Moreover, we provided insights into how model biases may evolve under climate change scenarios. Future climate projections for the mid-century period (2030–2060) under the SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios indicate significant changes in the global energy balance, with an increase of up to 0.9 W/m2. Additionally, the projections reveal significant warming and drying in most of the continent, particularly during the austral spring, accompanied by increases in sensible heat flux and decreases in latent heat flux. These findings highlight the risk of severe and prolonged droughts in some regions and intensified rainfall in others. By identifying and quantifying the biases inherent in climate models, this study provides insights to enhance seasonal forecasts in South America, ultimately supporting strategic planning, impact assessments, and adaptation strategies in vulnerable regions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climate Dynamics and Modelling)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Taylor diagrams of seasonal mean precipitation and 2 m temperature for the South America domain. Statistics were evaluated for the data over (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) both ocean and land and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) ocean-only. Each model is represented by numbers 1 to 4, while the mean ensemble is represented by the number 5. The reference data are GPCP precipitation and ERA5 1.5 m temperature. Taylor diagrams summarize model performance by showing the correlation (angle), the standardized standard deviation (radial distance), and the centered Root Mean Square Difference (RMSD, represented by gray solid lines) between simulated and observed values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Portrait diagram display of relative error measures of NOAA/GFDL models performance for the South American domain. The relative errors in the reference data were based on seasonal climatology (1981–2010). Rows and columns represent individual variables and models, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Seasonal precipitation (mm/day) for observations (GPCP, first column) and differences between NOAA/GFDL models and GPCP (i.e., NOAA/GFDL minus GPCP, subsequent columns). Stippling represents areas where the differences are significant at a 95% confidence level according to Student’s <span class="html-italic">t</span>-test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Seasonal differences of 2 m temperature (°C) between NOAA/GFDL models and ERA5 (i.e., NOAA/GFDL minus ERA5). Stippling represents areas where the differences are significant at a 95% confidence level according to Student’s <span class="html-italic">t</span>-test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Seasonal streamlines (m/s) at 200 hPa from ERA5 and NOAA/GFDL models.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Zonal mean (80° W–40° W) vertical velocity (Pa/s) for austral summer (DJF) and winter (JJA) from ERA5 and NOAA/GFDL models.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Meridional mean (0–10°S) vertical velocity (Pa/s) for austral summer (DJF) and winter (JJA) from ERA5 and NOAA/GFDL models.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Seasonal differences of precipitation (mm/day) between Future projections (2030–2060) and Historical runs (1981–2010), i.e., Future minus Historical, for CM4 -H and ESM4 models under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios. Stippling represents areas where the differences are significant at a 95% confidence level according to Student’s <span class="html-italic">t</span>-test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Seasonal differences of 2 m temperature (°C) between Future projections (2030–2060) and Historical runs (1981–2010), i.e., Future minus Historical, for CM4-H and ESM4 models under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios. Stippling represents areas where the differences are significant at a 95% confidence level according to Student’s <span class="html-italic">t</span>-test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Zonal mean (80° W–40° W) vertical velocity (Pa/s) for austral summer (DJF) and winter (JJA) from CM4-H and ESM4 models for the future period (2030–2060) under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Meridional mean (0–10° S) vertical velocity (Pa/s) for austral summer (DJF) and winter (JJA) from CM4-H and ESM4 models for the future period (2030–2060) under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios.</p>
Full article ">
31 pages, 8902 KiB  
Article
Assessment of Observed and Projected Extreme Droughts in Perú—Case Study: Candarave, Tacna
by Ana Cruz-Baltuano, Raúl Huarahuara-Toma, Arlette Silva-Borda, Samuel Chucuya, Pablo Franco-León, Germán Huayna, Lía Ramos-Fernández and Edwin Pino-Vargas
Atmosphere 2025, 16(1), 18; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16010018 - 27 Dec 2024
Viewed by 395
Abstract
Droughts have always been one of the most dangerous hazards for civilizations, especially when they impact the headwaters of a watershed, as their effects can spread downstream. In this context, observed droughts (1981–2015) and projected droughts (2016–2100) were assessed in Candarave, the headwaters [...] Read more.
Droughts have always been one of the most dangerous hazards for civilizations, especially when they impact the headwaters of a watershed, as their effects can spread downstream. In this context, observed droughts (1981–2015) and projected droughts (2016–2100) were assessed in Candarave, the headwaters of the Locumba basin. Regarding observed droughts, SPI-3 and SPEI-3 detected seven extreme droughts (1983, 1992, 1996, 1998, 2010, 2011, and 2012), with the most intense occurring in 1992 and 1998. SPI-6 and SPEI-6 identified the same extreme drought events, highlighting 1992 as the most intense. Additionally, it was concluded that the VCI also detected the droughts identified by the SPEI; however, a more detailed analysis of its use is necessary due to the limited availability of suitable satellite images in the area. On the other hand, a high-resolution dataset of climate models from the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) under the SSP3-7.0 scenario was used to project future droughts. Of the models in that dataset, CanESM5, IPSL–CM6A–LR, and UKESM1–0–LL did not perform well in the study area. SPI and SPEI projected more than ten episodes of extreme drought, indicating that extreme droughts will become more frequent, severe, and intense in the last 30 years of this century. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location and climate classification of Candarave.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Average maximum temperature, minimum temperature, and rainfall in Aricota.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Homogeneous drought regions in Peru based on the SPI. Source: [<a href="#B19-atmosphere-16-00018" class="html-bibr">19</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Flowchart of the methodology followed in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Grouping of virtual weather stations according to climatic zone and altitude.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Results roadmap.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Correlation between gridded datasets and observed precipitation data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Double mass curves: (<b>a</b>) Aricota and Cairani Weather Stations; (<b>b</b>) Vilacota and Titijones Weather Stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Total annual rainfall series at Titijones Weather Station showing a changing point (step) in 1996.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Rainfall series at Titijones Weather Station showing homogeneity of the data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Taylor diagram for precipitation variable: (<b>a</b>) Aricota Weather Station; (<b>b</b>) Cairani Weather Station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Taylor diagram for maximum temperature variable: (<b>a</b>) Aricota Weather Station; (<b>b</b>) Cairani Weather Station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Taylor diagram for minimum temperature variable: (<b>a</b>) Aricota Weather Station; (<b>b</b>) Cairani Weather Station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Observed droughts in Aricota. (<b>a</b>) SPI-3; (<b>b</b>) SPEI-3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Spatial variability of the extreme drought that occurred in 1992.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Observed droughts in Aricota. (<b>a</b>) SPI-6; (<b>b</b>) SPEI-6.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>VCI-1 for 1996.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Projected droughts in Aricota. (<b>a</b>) SPI-3; (<b>b</b>) SPEI-3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18 Cont.
<p>Projected droughts in Aricota. (<b>a</b>) SPI-3; (<b>b</b>) SPEI-3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Spatial variability of the most extreme projected drought in 2081.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Projected droughts in Aricota. (<b>a</b>) SPI-6; (<b>b</b>) SPEI-6.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 10059 KiB  
Article
Predicting the Spatiotemporal Evolution Characteristics of Future Agricultural Water Demand in the Yellow River Basin Under Climate-Change Conditions
by Jianguo Xin, Yue Xin, Huiming Wu and Shuai Zhou
Water 2025, 17(1), 31; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17010031 - 26 Dec 2024
Viewed by 312
Abstract
The Yellow River Basin is an important grain-production base in China, playing a crucial role in the country’s agricultural production and overall national economy and social development. However, due to the impact of climate change, China’s food security is facing challenges. Therefore, this [...] Read more.
The Yellow River Basin is an important grain-production base in China, playing a crucial role in the country’s agricultural production and overall national economy and social development. However, due to the impact of climate change, China’s food security is facing challenges. Therefore, this article takes the Yellow River Basin as an example to reveal the temporal and spatial evolution patterns of the main crop yields in the basin. Based on a coupled statistical downscaling model (SDSM) and ten General Circulation Models (GCMs) from CMIP5, it estimates the future temporal and spatial evolution characteristics of rainfall and evaporation in the basin. Furthermore, a distributed crop-growth model (AquaCrop) is constructed to reveal the temporal and spatial evolution patterns of agricultural irrigation water requirements from a future perspective, clarifying the impact of multi-source uncertainty on the prediction uncertainty of agricultural irrigation water needs. The results indicate that the ten climate models constructed in this study can be effectively applied to the Yellow River Basin, and their ability to capture light-rain events is superior to that of moderate- and heavy-rain events. The simulation accuracy of the AquaCrop model significantly improves with an increase in precipitation frequency. The agricultural irrigation water demand in the middle and upper reaches of the basin is greater than that in the lower reaches, and the uncertainties from GCMs and RCPs have a significant impact on the uncertainty of agricultural irrigation water demand. The research results provide important references for formulating agricultural development plans for irrigation areas under climate-change conditions and for developing response measures for irrigation areas to cope with climate change. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Research flow chart of the study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Elevation change in the basin and spatial distribution map of meteorological and hydrological stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Adaptability evaluation of monthly precipitation, average minimum temperature, and maximum temperature of 10 GCMs in the Yellow River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Adaptability evaluation of monthly precipitation, average minimum temperature, and maximum temperature of 10 GCMs in the Yellow River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Time history evolution of annual precipitation and potential evaporation under different GCMs and RCPs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Time history variation of grain yield of major crops in the Yellow River Basin (The dashed line represents the trend line).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Trends in the Planting Area of Major Food Crops from 2000 to 2017 (The dashed line represents the trend line).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial distribution characteristics of grain yield of major crops in the YRB.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>Spatial distribution characteristics of grain yield of major crops in the YRB.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Time evolution of agricultural water demand in the Yellow River Basin during 1970–2016 (The dashed line represents the trend line).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution characteristics of agricultural water demand in the Yellow River Basin during historical periods (1970–2016).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Time history evolution of agricultural water demand in the Yellow River Basin in the future period (2020–2100).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Spatial distribution characteristics of agricultural water demand in the Yellow River Basin in the future period (2020–2100).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>Spatial distribution characteristics of agricultural water demand in the Yellow River Basin in the future period (2020–2100).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Impact of Uncertainty in GCMs and RCPs on Agricultural Water Demand in the Upper, Middle, and Lower Reaches of the Yellow River Basin.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 6868 KiB  
Article
Characterizing Droughts During the Rice Growth Period in Northeast China Based on Daily SPEI Under Climate Change
by Tangzhe Nie, Xiu Liu, Peng Chen, Lili Jiang, Zhongyi Sun, Shuai Yin, Tianyi Wang, Tiecheng Li and Chong Du
Plants 2025, 14(1), 30; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14010030 - 25 Dec 2024
Viewed by 284
Abstract
In agricultural production, droughts occurring during the crucial growth periods of crops hinder crop development, while the daily-scale standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI) can be applied to accurately identify the drought characteristics. In this study, we used the statistical downscaling method [...] Read more.
In agricultural production, droughts occurring during the crucial growth periods of crops hinder crop development, while the daily-scale standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI) can be applied to accurately identify the drought characteristics. In this study, we used the statistical downscaling method to obtain the daily precipitation (Pr), maximum air temperature (Tmax) and minimum air temperature (Tmin) during the rice growing season in Heilongjiang Province from 2015 to 2100 under the SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 in CMIP6, to study the spatial and temporal characteristics of drought during the rice growing season in cold region and the effect of climate change on drought characteristics. The potential evapotranspiration (PET0) was calculated using the regression correction method of the Hargreaves formula recommended by the FAO, and the daily SPEI was calculated to quantitatively identify the drought classification. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyze the correlation between the meteorological factors (Pr, Tmax, Tmin), PET0 and SPEI. The results showed that: (1) Under 3 SSP scenarios, Pr showed an increasing trend from the northwest to the southeast, Tmax showed an increasing trend from the northeast to the southwest, and higher Tmin was mainly distributed in the east and west regions. (2) PET0 indicated an overall interannual rise in the three future SSP scenarios, with higher values mainly distributed in the central and western regions. The mean daily PET0 values ranged from 4.8 to 6.0 mm/d. (3) Under SSP1-2.6, rice mainly experienced mild drought and moderate drought (−0.5 ≥ SPEI > −1.5). The predominant drought classifications experienced were mild, moderate, and severe drought under SSP2-4.5 and SSP8.5 (−0.5 ≥ SPEI > −2.0). (4) The tillering stage experienced the highest drought frequency and drought intensity, with the longest drought lasting 24 days. However, the heading flower stage had the lowest drought frequency and drought intensity. The drought barycenter was mainly in Tieli and Suihua. (5) The PET0 was most affected by the Tmax, while the SPEI was most affected by the Pr. This study offers a scientific and rational foundation for understanding the drought sensitivity of rice in Northeast China, as well as a rationale for the optimal scheduling of water resources in agriculture in the future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Strategies to Improve Water-Use Efficiency in Plant Production)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Trends of <span class="html-italic">P<sub>r</sub></span> (<b>a1</b>–<b>a3</b>), <span class="html-italic">T<sub>max</sub></span> (<b>b1</b>–<b>b3</b>) and <span class="html-italic">T<sub>min</sub></span> (<b>c1</b>–<b>c3</b>) under SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 during each growth period of rice from 2015 to 2100. <span class="html-italic">P<sub>r</sub></span>, <span class="html-italic">T<sub>max</sub></span> and <span class="html-italic">T<sub>min</sub></span> represent precipitation, maximum air temperature and minimum air temperature, respectively. The 2030s, 2060s and 2090s represent the period of 2015–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, respectively. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively. In the box-plot, the red line, the black square and the diamond represent the median, the mean and the outliers, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatiotemporal distribution of <span class="html-italic">PET<sub>0</sub></span> under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>) during the rice growth period from 2015 to 2100. The 2030s, 2060s and 2090s represent the period of 2015–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, respectively. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively. In the box-plot, the red line, the black square and the diamond represent the median, the mean and the outliers, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Changing trend in <span class="html-italic">SPEI</span> and Mann-Kendall mutation analysis under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>,<b>a2</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>b1</b>,<b>b2</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>c1</b>,<b>c2</b>) during the rice growth period from 2015 to 2100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Distribution of <span class="html-italic">P<sub>ij</sub></span> under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>) during the rice growth period from 2015 to 2100. The 2030s, 2060s and 2090s represent the period of 2015–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, respectively. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively. In the box-plot, the red line, the black square and the diamond represent the median, the mean and the outliers, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Distribution of <span class="html-italic">D<sub>u</sub></span> under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>) during the rice growth period from 2015 to 2100. The 2030s, 2060s and 2090s represent the period of 2015–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, respectively. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively. In the box-plot, the red line, the black square and the diamond represent the median, the mean and the outliers, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Distribution of <span class="html-italic">IN</span> under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>) during the rice growth period from 2015 to 2100. The 2030s, 2060s and 2090s represent the period of 2015–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, respectively. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively. In the box-plot, the red line, the black square and the diamond represent the median, the mean and the outliers, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The trajectory of the drought barycenter under SSP1-2.6 (<b>a1</b>–<b>f1</b>), SSP2-4.5 (<b>a2</b>–<b>f2</b>) and SSP5-8.5 (<b>a3</b>–<b>f3</b>) during each growth period of rice from 2015 to 2100. A, B, C, D, E and F represent the returning green stage, tillering stage, jointing booting stage, heading flower stage, milk stage and yellow ripening stage of rice, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Overview of the study area.</p>
Full article ">
11 pages, 3676 KiB  
Article
Critical Role of Area Weighting on Estimated Long-Term Global Warming and Heat Wave Trends
by Seon-Dae Ju, Won-Jun Choi and Hwan-Jin Song
AppliedMath 2024, 4(4), 1618-1628; https://doi.org/10.3390/appliedmath4040086 - 23 Dec 2024
Viewed by 629
Abstract
Regular longitude-latitude grids are commonly used in reanalysis and climate prediction model datasets. However, this approach can disproportionately represent high-latitude regions if simple averaging is applied, leading to overestimation of their contribution. To explore the impact of Earth’s curvature on global warming and [...] Read more.
Regular longitude-latitude grids are commonly used in reanalysis and climate prediction model datasets. However, this approach can disproportionately represent high-latitude regions if simple averaging is applied, leading to overestimation of their contribution. To explore the impact of Earth’s curvature on global warming and heat wave frequency, this study analyzed 450 years of surface temperature data (1850–2300) from a climate prediction model. When area weighting was applied, the global average temperature for the 1850–2300 period was found to be 8.2 °C warmer than in the unweighted case, due to the reduced influence of colder temperatures in high latitudes. Conversely, the global warming trend for the weighted case was 0.276 °C per decade, compared to 0.330 °C per decade for the unweighted case, reflecting a moderation of the polar amplification trend. While unweighted models projected a 317% increase in the frequency of global heat waves above 35 °C by 2300 compared to 1850, the weighted models suggested this frequency might be overestimated by up to 5.4%, particularly due to reduced weighting for subtropical deserts relative to tropical regions. These findings underscore the importance of accounting for Earth’s curvature in climate models to enhance the accuracy of climate change projections. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Global distribution of mean temperature in 1850 from the MRI-ESM-2.0 historical simulation. Temperature differences compared to 1850 for (<b>b</b>) 2000, (<b>c</b>) 2150, and (<b>d</b>) 2300, as simulated by the MRI-ESM2.0 (Japan) historical and SSP5-8.5 experiments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Time series of global average temperature from 1850 to 2300, showing cases with and without area weighting for the Earth’s curvature effects. Linear trends over 450 years for both cases are also indicated. (<b>b</b>) Time series showing the temperature difference between the cases with and without area weighting.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Global distribution of the frequency of days with daily maximum temperatures exceeding 35 °C in 1850. Temperature differences compared to 1850 for (<b>b</b>) 2000, (<b>c</b>) 2150, and (<b>d</b>) 2300.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Time series of the frequency of days with maximum temperatures exceeding specified criteria (y-axis) for (<b>a</b>) the weighted and (<b>b</b>) the unweighted cases with the Earth’s curvature effect. (<b>c</b>) Time series showing the frequency difference for both cases (<b>d</b>) same as (<b>c</b>), but for a 450-year (1850–2300) average.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 4378 KiB  
Article
Increasing Socioeconomic Exposure to Compound Dry and Hot Events Under a Warming Climate in the Yangtze River Basin
by Jiexiang Zhang, Xuejun Zhang, Juan Lyu, Yanping Qu and Guoyong Leng
Sustainability 2024, 16(24), 11264; https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411264 - 22 Dec 2024
Viewed by 578
Abstract
Investigating changes in compound dry and hot events (CDHEs) and evaluating the associated socioeconomic exposure under climate change are critical for developing effective climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies. However, the socioeconomic exposure and the contributions of various driving factors to socioeconomic exposure [...] Read more.
Investigating changes in compound dry and hot events (CDHEs) and evaluating the associated socioeconomic exposure under climate change are critical for developing effective climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies. However, the socioeconomic exposure and the contributions of various driving factors to socioeconomic exposure under different warming levels remain poorly understood. Using the latest climate experiments from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), this study assessed future changes in the frequency and socioeconomic exposure of CDHEs and explored the contributing drivers in the Yangtze River Basin (YRB) under 1.5 °C, 2.0 °C, and 3.0 °C global warming scenarios. Results indicate that the occurrences of CDHEs are projected to increase by 2.9, 3.9, and 4.8 times in a 1.5 °C, 2.0 °C, and 3.0 °C warmer world, respectively, compared to the present period (1985–2014). Population exposure to CDHEs increases significantly, with the greatest magnitude occurring at the 2 °C warming scenario. GDP exposure is expected to intensify continuously as the global average temperature rises, with the area experiencing significant increases continuously expanding. Climate change is the dominant driver of total projected changes in population exposure to CDHEs, accounting for approximately 105.6% at 1.5 °C, 110.3% at 2.0 °C, and 141.0% at 3.0 °C. At 1.5 °C, 2.0 °C, and 3.0 °C warming levels, changes in GDP exposure are primarily driven by the synergistic interaction between climate and GDP, accounting for 50.7%, 62.0%, and 64.8%, respectively. These findings provide valuable insights for climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of the Yangtze River Basin in China (as shown in the map in the upper right corner). The rivers (blue lines), topographical elevation, and administrative divisions (black lines) within the Yangtze River Basin are depicted.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Changes in (<b>a</b>) temperature (°C) and (<b>b</b>) precipitation (%) in YRB under 2 °C warming.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Changes (%) in occurrences of individual and joint extremes under 2 °C warming. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) Changes in individual extremes under 2 °C warming. (<b>c</b>) Changes in joint extremes under 2 °C warming. Light gray colors indicate grids without extreme events in the reference period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Projected changes in the occurrence of CDHEs from the present period to scenarios of 1.5 °C, 2 °C, and 3 °C warming. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Spatial distribution of projected changes in occurrence frequency. (<b>d</b>) Changes in regional occurrences. Error bars represent model ensemble spreads (25th and 75th percentiles), indicating projection uncertainty. Light gray colors indicate grids with no extreme events in the reference period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Projected changes in population exposure from the present period to scenarios of 1.5 °C, 2 °C, and 3 °C warming. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Spatial distribution of changes of population exposure. (<b>d</b>) Changes in regional occurrences. Error bars represent model ensemble spreads (25th and 75th percentiles), indicating projection uncertainty. Light gray colors indicate grids with no extreme events in the reference period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Projected changes in GDP exposure from the present period to scenarios of 1.5 °C, 2 °C, and 3 °C warming. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Spatial distribution of changes of GDP exposure. (<b>d</b>) Changes in regional occurrences. Error bars represent model ensemble spreads (25th and 75th percentiles), indicating projection uncertainty. Light gray colors indicate grids with no extreme events in the reference period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Different driving factors of changes in population exposure under different warming levels. Error bars represent model ensemble spreads (25th and 75th percentiles), indicating projection uncertainty.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Different driving factors of changes in GDP exposure under different warming levels. Error bars represent model ensemble spreads (25th and 75th percentiles), indicating projection uncertainty.</p>
Full article ">
29 pages, 17376 KiB  
Article
Analysis of Future Drought Risk and Wheat Meteorological Disaster in Ningxia (Northwest China) Based on CMIP6 and SPEI
by Xinlong Li, Junli Tan, Xina Wang, Qian Shang, Hao Li and Xuefang Li
Agronomy 2024, 14(12), 3051; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14123051 - 20 Dec 2024
Viewed by 415
Abstract
In arid areas, droughts caused by climate change seriously impact wheat production. Therefore, research on spatial and temporal variability of dry and hot wind events and drought risk under different development patterns of future climate can provide a reference for wheat cultivation planning [...] Read more.
In arid areas, droughts caused by climate change seriously impact wheat production. Therefore, research on spatial and temporal variability of dry and hot wind events and drought risk under different development patterns of future climate can provide a reference for wheat cultivation planning in the study area. Based on meteorological data under three scenarios of the CMIP6 (Sixth International Coupled Model Comparison Program) shared socio-economic path (SSP), we introduced wheat dry hot wind discrimination criteria and calculated the Standardized Precipitation–Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI). Future temperature changes within the Ningxia Province were consistent, increasing at a rate of 0.037, 0.15 and 0.45 °C·(10 a−1) under SSP126, 245 and 585 scenarios, respectively. Simultaneously, average annual precipitation would increase by 17.77, 38.73 and 32.12 mm, respectively. Dry hot wind frequency differed spatially, being higher in northern Ningxia and western Ningxia, and lower in southern Ningxia and eastern Ningxia. During the wheat growing period, there is an obvious increasing drought risk trend under the SSP585 model in May, and the possibility of drought risk in the middle period was highest under the SSP126 model. In June, SPEI was generally higher than in May, and the risk of alternating drought and flood was greater under the SSP585 model, while near-medium drought risk was lower under the SSP126 and SSP245 models. The influence of DHW (dry and hot wind) on wheat yield will increase with the increase of warming level. However, when DHW occurs, effective irrigation can mitigate the harm. Irrigation water can be sourced from various channels, including rainfall, diversion, and groundwater. These results provide scientific reference for sustainable agricultural production, drought risk and wheat meteorological disaster forecast in inland arid areas affected by climate change. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographical location, agro-ecological area distribution and DEM elevation of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Monthly average temperature, precipitation and evaporation of each test site in the study area under SSP126, 245 and 585 models. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2 Cont.
<p>Monthly average temperature, precipitation and evaporation of each test site in the study area under SSP126, 245 and 585 models. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Future DHW days during wheat growth period under SSP126, 245 and 585 models were studied at 12 representative test sites. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Future DHW days during wheat growth period under SSP126, 245 and 585 models were studied at 12 representative test sites. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The variation trend of future DHW days in wheat growing period under SSP126, 245 and 585 models at each test site. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The variation trend of future DHW days in wheat growing period under SSP126, 245 and 585 models in the study area. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) represent the short-, medium- and long-term DHW average annual number of days under SSP126 model; (<b>D</b>–<b>F</b>) are under SSP245 model; (<b>G</b>–<b>I</b>) are under SSP585 model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changes of SPEI index in May under three future climate models. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively. The above, middle and below figures show the changes of SPEI values in May, June and July, respectively. The blue, green and red lines represent the changes of the SPEI index under SSP126, SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Changes of SPEI index in June under three future climate models. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively. The above, middle and below figures show the changes of SPEI values in May, June and July, respectively. The blue, green and red lines represent the changes of the SPEI index under SSP126, SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Changes of SPEI index in July under three future climate models. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>L</b>) represent 12 test sites in Guyuan, Haiyuan, Huianbao, Huinong, Litong, Shizuishan, Tongxin, Xiji, Yanchi, Yinchuan, Zhongning and Zhongwei, respectively. The above, middle and below figures show the changes of SPEI values in May, June and July, respectively. The blue, green and red lines represent the changes of the SPEI index under SSP126, SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The SPEI index of May in the near to mid future under three climate change models in the study area. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- to middle- and long-term under the SSP126 model; (<b>D</b>–<b>F</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- and long-term under the SSP245 model, respectively; and (<b>G</b>–<b>I</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index under the SSP585 model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The SPEI index of June in the near- to mid-future under three climate change models in the study area. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- to middle- and long-term under the SSP126 model; (<b>D</b>–<b>F</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- and long-term under the SSP245 model, respectively; and (<b>G</b>–<b>I</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index under the SSP585 model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The SPEI index of July in the near- to mid-future under three climate change models in the study area. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- to middle- and long-term under the SSP126 model; (<b>D</b>–<b>F</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index in the near- and long-term under the SSP245 model, respectively; and (<b>G</b>–<b>I</b>) represent the average annual distribution of SPEI index under the SSP585 model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Pearson correlation analysis of SPEI index in May, June and July, DHW quantity in wheat growth period and four simulation results of wheat. Note: (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) represent the three development modes of SSP126, 245 and 585. * and ** indicating significant differences at the <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 and <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01 levels, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>SPEI classification frequency. Note: SPEI ≤ −2.00 extreme drought, −1.50 &lt; SPEI ≤ −2.00 severe drought, −1.00 &lt; SPEI ≤ −1.50 moderate drought, −0.50 &lt; SPEI ≤ −1.00 mild drought, −0.50 ≤ SPEI ≤ 0.50 normal, 0.50 &lt; SPEI ≤ 1.00 wet, 1.00 &lt; SPEI ≤ 1.50 moderately wet, SPEI &gt; 1.50 Extremely wet.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 21085 KiB  
Article
Evaluation and Projection of Global Burned Area Based on Global Climate Models and Satellite Fire Product
by Xueyan Wang, Zhenhua Di, Wenjuan Zhang, Shenglei Zhang, Huiying Sun, Xinling Tian, Hao Meng and Xurui Wang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(24), 4751; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16244751 - 20 Dec 2024
Viewed by 404
Abstract
Fire plays a critical role in both the formation and degradation of ecosystems; however, there are still significant uncertainties in the estimation of burned areas (BAs). This study systematically evaluated the performance of ten global climate models (GCMs) in simulating global and regional [...] Read more.
Fire plays a critical role in both the formation and degradation of ecosystems; however, there are still significant uncertainties in the estimation of burned areas (BAs). This study systematically evaluated the performance of ten global climate models (GCMs) in simulating global and regional BA during a historical period (1997–2014) using the Global Fire Emissions Database version 4.1s (GFED4s) satellite fire product. Then, six of the best models were combined using Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) to predict future BA under three Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). The results show that the NorESM2-LM model excelled in simulating both global annual and monthly BA among the GCMs. GFDL-ESM4 and UKESM1-0-LL of the GCMs had the highest Pearson’s correlation coefficient (PCC), but they also exhibited the most significant overestimation of monthly BA variations. The BA fraction (BAF) for GCMs was over 90% for small fires (<1%). For small fires (2~10%), GFDL-ESM4(j) and UKESM1-0-LL(k) outperformed the other models. For medium fires (10–50%), CESM2-WACCM-FV2(e) was closest to GFED4s. There were large biases for all models for large fires (>50%). After evaluation and screening, six models (CESM2-WACCM-FV2, NorESM2-LM, CMCC-ESM2, CMCC-CM2-SR5, GFDL-ESM4, and UKESM1-0-LL) were selected for weighting in an optimal ensemble simulation using BMA. Based on the optimal ensemble, future projections indicated a continuous upward trend across all three SSPs from 2015 to 2100, except for a slight decrease in SSP126 between 2071 and 2100. It was found that as the emission scenarios intensify, the area experiencing a significant increase in BA will expand considerably in the future, with a generally high level of reliability in these projections across most regions. This study is crucial for understanding the impact of climate change on wildfires and for informing fire management policies in fire-prone areas in the future. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>The fourteen global regional divisions based on GFED4s.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial distribution of the differences between the simulated and referred annual BA fractions (BAFs) from 1997 to 2014.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Scatterplots of the linear relationship between the simulated and observed BAFs. The red lines represent the regression lines.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Heatmap of statistical indicators of RMSE, ME, and PCC for the ten models for the globe and its 14 subregions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Monthly average variations in BAFs for ten models and GFED4s for the globe and its 14 subregions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Taylor diagrams for the BAFs of fire seasons simulated by ten models in the 14 regions, where the reference data are GFED4s.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Rank diagram of BA simulation capability on the monthly scale for all models for the globe and its 14 subregions: R1-R14 represent the regions of BONA, TENA, CEAM, NHSA, SHSA, EURO, MIDE, NHAF, SHAF, BOAS, CEAS, SEAS, EQAS, and AUSTR6, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Weighting pie chart for the selected models based on monthly GFED4s BA dataset and BMA method: (f) CECC-ESM2, (j) GFDL-ESM4, (g) CMCC-CM2-SR5, (e) CESM2-WACCM-FV2, (h) NorESM2-LM, and (k) UKESM1-0-LL.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Taylor diagram of BA metrics for the ten models and BMA model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Spatial distribution comparisons of monthly BA between BMA model and GFED4s.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Bar charts of monthly BA across different regions for the BMA model and GFED4s, where R1-R14 represent the regions of BONA, TENA, CEAM, NHSA, SHSA, EURO, MIDE, NHAF, SHAF, BOAS, CEAS, SEAS, EQAS, and AUSTR6, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Comparison of annual BA simulations in 2022 between six selected GCMs and BMA models from 2018 to 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The annual changes in BA under three scenarios (SSP126, SSP370, and SSP585) for the future from 2015 to 2100, including the near (2015 to 2040), mid (2041 to 2070), and long (2071 to 2100) terms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Spatial distributions of annual BA change trends across different periods under three future scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Spatial distribution of SN for the uncertainty analysis of global BA simulation under three future scenarios, where blue indicates uncertainty and red indicates reliability. White represents the missing value.</p>
Full article ">
32 pages, 10269 KiB  
Article
Impact of Ridge Tillage and Mulching on Water Dynamics of Summer Maize Fields Under Climate Change in the Semi-Arid Region of Northwestern Liaoning, China
by Yao Li, Wanting Zhang, Mengxi Bai, Jiayu Wu, Chenmengyuan Zhu and Yujuan Fu
Agronomy 2024, 14(12), 3032; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14123032 - 19 Dec 2024
Viewed by 376
Abstract
The ridge–furrow plastic mulching technique has been widely applied due to its benefits of increasing temperature, conserving moisture, reducing evaporation, and boosting yields. Hydrus-2D is a computer model designed to simulate the two-dimensional movement of water in soil characterized by a low cost [...] Read more.
The ridge–furrow plastic mulching technique has been widely applied due to its benefits of increasing temperature, conserving moisture, reducing evaporation, and boosting yields. Hydrus-2D is a computer model designed to simulate the two-dimensional movement of water in soil characterized by a low cost and high flexibility compared to field experiments. This study, based on field experiment data from Jianping County, Liaoning Province, China, during 2017–2018, developed Hydrus-2D models for two distinct field management practices: non-mulched flat cultivation (NM-FC) and mulched ridge tillage (M-RT). Furthermore, it simulated the dynamic changes in farmland water variations during the summer maize growth period (2021–2100) under climate change scenarios, specifically medium and high emission pathways (SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5), based on the FGOALS-g3 model, which exhibits the highest similarity to the climate pattern of Jianping County in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) global climate models and the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). The results showed that in the future FGOALS-g3 model, net radiation exhibited a significant upward trend under the SSP2-4.5 scenario (Z = 2.38), while the average air temperature showed a highly significant increase under both SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, with Z-values of 6.48 and 8.90, respectively. The Hydrus-2D model demonstrated high simulation accuracy in both NM-FC and M-RT treatments (R2 ranging from 0.86 to 0.96, with RMSE not exceeding 0.011), accurately simulating the dynamic changes in soil water content (SWC) under future climate change. Compared to NM-FC, M-RT reduced evaporation, increased transpiration, and effectively decreased the leakage caused by increased future precipitation, resulting in a 0.04 and 0.01 cm3/cm3 increase in surface and deep soil SWC, respectively, during the summer maize growing season, significantly improving water use efficiency. Moreover, M-RT treatment reduced the impact coefficients of climate change on various water balance parameters, stabilizing changes in these parameters and SWC under future climate conditions. This study demonstrates the significant advantages of M-RT in coping with climate change, providing key scientific evidence for future agricultural water resource management. These findings offer valuable insights for policymakers and farmers, particularly in developing adaptive land management and irrigation strategies, helping to improve water use efficiency and promote sustainable agricultural practices. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Tillage Methods to Improve the Yield and Quality of Crops)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Overview map of the study area’s geographic location.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic diagram of the field experiment. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of boundary conditions and finite element mesh division. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Changes in future meteorological data under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 emission scenarios for the FGOALS-g3 model. Notes: <span class="html-italic">Tair</span>, <span class="html-italic">PRE</span>, <span class="html-italic">RH</span>, and <span class="html-italic">Rn</span> represent daily mean temperature, precipitation, daily mean relative humidity, and net radiation, respectively. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Measured and simulated soil water content values at different soil depths for each treatment in 2017 and 2018. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Measured and simulated soil water content values at different soil depths for each treatment in 2017 and 2018. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changes in water balance under future climate conditions for the NM-FC and M-RT treatments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Changes in water balance under future climate conditions for the NM-FC and M-RT treatments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Changes in water balance under future climate conditions for the NM-FC and M-RT treatments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Changes in SWC at various depths under future climate conditions for the NM-FC and M-RT treatments. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>Changes in SWC at various depths under future climate conditions for the NM-FC and M-RT treatments. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Path analysis between future meteorological variables and various factors of farmland water balance. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively. Tair, <span class="html-italic">PRE</span>, <span class="html-italic">RH,</span> and <span class="html-italic">Rn</span> represent daily mean temperature, precipitation, daily mean relative humidity, and net radiation, respectively. The symbols *, **, and *** indicate the significance levels of one factor’s effect on another, where * represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 (statistically significant), ** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01 (highly significant), and *** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.001 (extremely significant).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>Path analysis between future meteorological variables and various factors of farmland water balance. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively. Tair, <span class="html-italic">PRE</span>, <span class="html-italic">RH,</span> and <span class="html-italic">Rn</span> represent daily mean temperature, precipitation, daily mean relative humidity, and net radiation, respectively. The symbols *, **, and *** indicate the significance levels of one factor’s effect on another, where * represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 (statistically significant), ** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01 (highly significant), and *** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.001 (extremely significant).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>Path analysis between future meteorological variables and various factors of farmland water balance. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage. SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 represent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2–4.5 (medium forcing scenario) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 5–8.5 (high forcing scenario), respectively. Tair, <span class="html-italic">PRE</span>, <span class="html-italic">RH,</span> and <span class="html-italic">Rn</span> represent daily mean temperature, precipitation, daily mean relative humidity, and net radiation, respectively. The symbols *, **, and *** indicate the significance levels of one factor’s effect on another, where * represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 (statistically significant), ** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01 (highly significant), and *** represents <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.001 (extremely significant).</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Measured and simulated soil water content values at different soil depths for each treatment in 2017 and 2018. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1 Cont.
<p>Measured and simulated soil water content values at different soil depths for each treatment in 2017 and 2018. Note: NM-FC represents non-mulched flat cultivation, while M-RT represents mulched ridge tillage.</p>
Full article ">
29 pages, 3942 KiB  
Article
Evidence and Explanation for the 2023 Global Warming Anomaly
by Roger N. Jones
Atmosphere 2024, 15(12), 1507; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121507 - 17 Dec 2024
Viewed by 2715
Abstract
In 2023, the rapid increase in global temperature of around 0.25 °C caught the scientific community by surprise. Its cause has been investigated largely by exploring variations on a long-term trend, with little success. Building on previous work, this paper proposes an alternative [...] Read more.
In 2023, the rapid increase in global temperature of around 0.25 °C caught the scientific community by surprise. Its cause has been investigated largely by exploring variations on a long-term trend, with little success. Building on previous work, this paper proposes an alternative explanation—on decadal timescales, observed temperature shows a complex, nonlinear response to forcing, stepping through a series of steady-state regimes. The 2023 event is nominated as the latest in the sequence. Step changes in historical and modeled global mean surface temperatures (GMSTs) were detected using the bivariate test. Each time series was then separated into gradual (trends) and rapid components (shifts) and tested using probative criteria. For sea surface, global and land surface temperatures from the NOAA Global Surface Temperature Dataset V6.0 1880–2022, the rapid component of total warming was 94% of 0.72 °C, 78% of 1.16 °C and 74% of 1.93 °C, respectively. These changes are too large to support the gradual warming hypothesis. The recent warming was initiated in March 2023 by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the southern hemisphere, followed by an El Niño signal further north. Global temperatures followed, then land. A preceding regime shift in 2014 and subsequent steady-state 2015–2022 was also initiated and sustained by SSTs. Analysis of the top 100 m annual average ocean temperature from 1955 shows that it forms distinct regimes, providing a substantial ‘heat bank’ that sustains the changes overhead. Regime shifts are also produced by climate models. Archived data show these shifts emerged with coupling of the ocean and atmosphere. Comparing shifts and trends with equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in an ensemble of 94 CMIP5 RCP4.5 models 2006–2095 showed that shifts had 2.9 times the influence on ECS than trends. Factors affecting this relationship include ocean structure, initialization times, physical parameters and model skill. Single model runs with skill ≥75 showed that shifts were 6.0 times more influential than trends. These findings show that the dominant warming mechanism is the sudden release of heat from the ocean rather than gradual warming in the atmosphere. The model ensemble predicted all regime changes since the 1970s within ±1 year, including 2023. The next shift is projected for 2036, but current emissions are tracking higher than projected by RCP4.5. Understanding what these changes mean for the estimation of current and future climate risks is an urgent task. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Climatology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>GMST 1880–2023 from NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6.0, showing internal trends between shifts detected by the bivariate test (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01). Gradual change is a measure of total internal trends and rapid change total shifts measured between the end of one trend and start of the next. Also shown are the proportions of gradual and rapid change making up total warming to 2022 in °C and percent, and the rate of change for each in °C/yr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>SST 1880–2023 from NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6.0, showing internal trends between shifts detected by the bivariate test (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01). Gradual change is a measure of total internal trends and rapid change total shifts measured between the end of one trend and start of the next. Also shown are the proportions of gradual and rapid change making up total warming to 2022 in °C and percent, and the rate of change for each in °C/yr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>LST 1880–2023 from NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6.0, showing internal trends between shifts detected by the bivariate test (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01). Gradual change is a measure of total internal trends and rapid change total shifts measured between the end of one trend and start of the next. Also shown are the proportions of gradual and rapid change making up total warming to 2022 in °C and percent, and the rate of change for each in °C/yr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Monthly anomalies January 2015 to July 2024 from a 1850–1899 baseline of NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6.0, comparing (<b>a</b>) SST and GMST and (<b>b</b>) SST and LST. Horizontal lines mark the 2016 El Niño peak.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Monthly anomalies January 2015 to July 2024 from a 1850–1899 baseline of NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6.0, comparing (<b>a</b>) SST and GMST and (<b>b</b>) SST and LST. Horizontal lines mark the 2016 El Niño peak.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Monthly anomalies January 2015 to July 2024 from a 1850–1899 baseline of NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6, comparing NH and SH SST.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Monthly anomalies January 1998 to January 2016 from a 1850–1899 baseline of NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6, comparing (<b>a</b>) SST and GMST and (<b>b</b>) SST and LST.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Monthly anomalies January 1998 to January 2016 from a 1850–1899 baseline of NOAA Global Surface Temperature v6, comparing NH and SH SST.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Upper ocean temperatures for the top 100 m from the US National Oceanographic Data Center showing internal trends between shifts detected by the bivariate test (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Regression relationships between equilibrium climate sensitivity in 94 models of a CMIP5 4.5 model ensemble and (<b>a</b>) total steps (equivalent to total warming), (<b>b</b>) total shifts, (<b>c</b>) total internal trends and (<b>d</b>) total shift and trends in a multiple regression for the period 2006–2095. Also shown are the 95% confidence intervals for the mean (black dots) and individual members (black dashes).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Shifts from a CMIP5 climate model ensemble (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 107), driven by historical emissions 1861–2005 and RCP4.5 emissions 2006–2100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Schematic outline of heat flows as a result of forcing from anthropogenic greenhouse gases under the (<b>a</b>) model of gradual warming, where some heat warms the atmosphere, adds to land and snow-ice sinks and subsequently the ocean, limited by ocean heat uptake efficiency; and (<b>b</b>) model of rapid warming, where all heat not taken up by land and snow-ice sinks heats the upper ocean, which gradually warms the deep ocean while the upper ocean–atmosphere maintains steady-state regimes that warm episodically. Note that the ocean–land distribution is to scale.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>GMST from three GCM runs from the late 1990s; (<b>a</b>) CCMA CGCM1, (<b>b</b>) MPI ECHAM3 and (<b>c</b>) HadCM3. Calculated from data archived by the author (see <a href="#app1-atmosphere-15-01507" class="html-app">Supplementary Materials</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12 Cont.
<p>GMST from three GCM runs from the late 1990s; (<b>a</b>) CCMA CGCM1, (<b>b</b>) MPI ECHAM3 and (<b>c</b>) HadCM3. Calculated from data archived by the author (see <a href="#app1-atmosphere-15-01507" class="html-app">Supplementary Materials</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Uncertainty analyses of the results informing <a href="#atmosphere-15-01507-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a> for GMST showing (<b>a</b>) the uncertainties associated with the results of the bivariate test on step changes, (<b>b</b>) the uncertainties associated with internal trends between changes points detected by the bivariate test and (<b>c</b>) cumulative trend-like warming as in (<b>b</b>) as a series of segmented trends with shifts removed.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1 Cont.
<p>Uncertainty analyses of the results informing <a href="#atmosphere-15-01507-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a> for GMST showing (<b>a</b>) the uncertainties associated with the results of the bivariate test on step changes, (<b>b</b>) the uncertainties associated with internal trends between changes points detected by the bivariate test and (<b>c</b>) cumulative trend-like warming as in (<b>b</b>) as a series of segmented trends with shifts removed.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Regime shifts (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.01) for the NOAA Global Surface Temperature Dataset V6.0 to 2023, where red denotes warming and blue cooling, not showing the 2023 shift. The tropics (Trop) are 20° S–20° S, the extratropics (ExTr) 20–90°, and the other zonal bands are all at 30° intervals.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Shift/total warming ratios for regions in <a href="#atmosphere-15-01507-f0A2" class="html-fig">Figure A2</a> as a proportion of global surface area, where GMST is red, LST is green, and SST is blue.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 5097 KiB  
Data Descriptor
Teal-WCA: A Climate Services Platform for Planning Solar Photovoltaic and Wind Energy Resources in West and Central Africa in the Context of Climate Change
by Salomon Obahoundje, Arona Diedhiou, Alberto Troccoli, Penny Boorman, Taofic Abdel Fabrice Alabi, Sandrine Anquetin, Louise Crochemore, Wanignon Ferdinand Fassinou, Benoit Hingray, Daouda Koné, Chérif Mamadou and Fatogoma Sorho
Data 2024, 9(12), 148; https://doi.org/10.3390/data9120148 - 10 Dec 2024
Viewed by 755
Abstract
To address the growing electricity demand driven by population growth and economic development while mitigating climate change, West and Central African countries are increasingly prioritizing renewable energy as part of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). This study evaluates the implications of climate change [...] Read more.
To address the growing electricity demand driven by population growth and economic development while mitigating climate change, West and Central African countries are increasingly prioritizing renewable energy as part of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). This study evaluates the implications of climate change on renewable energy potential using ten downscaled and bias-adjusted CMIP6 models (CDFt method). Key climate variables—temperature, solar radiation, and wind speed—were analyzed and integrated into the Teal-WCA platform to aid in energy resource planning. Projected temperature increases of 0.5–2.7 °C (2040–2069) and 0.7–5.2 °C (2070–2099) relative to 1985–2014 underscore the need for strategies to manage the rising demand for cooling. Solar radiation reductions (~15 W/m2) may lower photovoltaic (PV) efficiency by 1–8.75%, particularly in high-emission scenarios, requiring a focus on system optimization and diversification. Conversely, wind speeds are expected to increase, especially in coastal regions, enhancing wind power potential by 12–50% across most countries and by 25–100% in coastal nations. These findings highlight the necessity of integrating climate-resilient energy policies that leverage wind energy growth while mitigating challenges posed by reduced solar radiation. By providing a nuanced understanding of the renewable energy potential under changing climatic conditions, this study offers actionable insights for sustainable energy planning in West and Central Africa. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>West and Central Africa region locations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>A standard wind power curve for a turbine hub at 100 m height.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Metric scores between the CMIP6 ensemble mean (EnsM) and ERA5 (1979–2014) for the WAF region. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) and (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) present the Pearson correlations for the raw data and adjusted data, respectively, compared to ERA5.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Same as <a href="#data-09-00148-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>, but for the CAF region.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Summary of climate variables at the monthly scale for the EnsM of WAF and CAF countries. GHI (W/m<sup>2</sup>), TA (°C), and WS (m/s) are, respectively, solar radiation, temperature, and wind speed. The historical run (HIST) is for 1985–2014, while the projections (SP1-2.6, SP2-4.5, and SP5-8.5) are for the near (2040–2069) and far (2070–2099) futures.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changes in climate variables over the projection periods 2040–2069 and 2070–2099 relative to the reference period 1985–2014 at a seasonal scale. GHI (W/m<sup>2</sup>), TA (°C), and WS (m/s) are, respectively, solar radiation, temperature, and wind speed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Same as <a href="#data-09-00148-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>, but at an annual scale. GHI (W/m<sup>2</sup>), TA (°C), and WS (m/s) are, respectively, solar radiation, temperature, and wind speed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Same as <a href="#data-09-00148-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>, but for the solar power density (SPV_CFR in W/m<sup>2</sup>) and onshore wind power capacity factor (WON_CFR, unitless).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Changes in energy potential over the projection periods 2040–2069 and 2070–2099 relative to the reference period 1985–2014 at the seasonal scale. WON_CFR and SPV_CFR are, respectively, the onshore wind capacity factor and the solar power density potential.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Same as <a href="#data-09-00148-f007" class="html-fig">Figure 7</a>, but for an annual time scale.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Bias between the CMIP6 ensemble mean (EnsM) and ERA5 (1979–2014) for WAF. GHI (W/m<sup>2</sup>), TA (°C), and WS (m/s) are, respectively, solar radiation, temperature, and wind speed.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Bias between the CMIP6 ensemble mean (EnsM) and ERA5 (1979–2014) for CAF. GHI (W/m<sup>2</sup>), TA (°C), and WS (m/s) are, respectively, solar radiation, temperature, and wind speed.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 3388 KiB  
Article
Forecasting of Grasslands Distribution on Mount Zireia Using Ecological Niche Modeling and Future Climatic Scenarios
by Maria Karatassiou, Afroditi Stergiou, Dimitrios Chouvardas, Mohamed Tarhouni and Athanasios Ragkos
Land 2024, 13(12), 2126; https://doi.org/10.3390/land13122126 - 8 Dec 2024
Viewed by 583
Abstract
Grassland ecosystems cover a high percentage of the terrestrial habitats of Earth and support the livelihood and well-being of at least one-fifth of the human population. Climate change and human activities are causing increasing pressure on arid and semi-arid regions. Land use/cover change [...] Read more.
Grassland ecosystems cover a high percentage of the terrestrial habitats of Earth and support the livelihood and well-being of at least one-fifth of the human population. Climate change and human activities are causing increasing pressure on arid and semi-arid regions. Land use/cover change significantly affects the function and distribution of grasslands, showing diverse patterns across space and time. The study investigated the spatial distribution of grasslands of Mount Zireia (Peloponnesus, Greece) using MaxEnt modeling based on CMIP6 models (CNRM-CM6 and CCMCC-ESM2) and two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP 245 and SSP 585) covering the period of 1970–2100. The results from the current (1970–2000) and several future periods (2020–2100) revealed that the MaxEnt model provided highly accurate forecasts. The grassland distribution was found to be significantly impacted by climate change, with impacts varying by period, scenario, and climate model used. In particular, the CNRM-CM6-1 model forecasts a substantial increase in grasslands at higher elevations up to 2100 m asl. The research emphasizes the importance of exploring the combined impacts of climate change and grazing intensity on land use and cover changes in mountainous grasslands. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographical location of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Area Under the Curve (AUC) value for the historical data, period 1970–2000.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The relative predictive power for grasslands of the thirty study environmental variables is based on the Jackknife values of regularized training gain in the MaxEnt model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Potential changes in the grasslands’ areas according to the suitability classes for the climate models CCNRM-CM6-1 and CMCC-ESM2 and SSP245 (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) and SSP585 (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) scenarios, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Potential spatial distribution of grasslands for the climate models CNRM-CM6-1 (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) and CCMCC-ESM-2 (<b>f</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>i</b>) under the SSP245 scenario for current (<b>a</b>) and future periods from 2020 up to 2100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Potential spatial distribution of grasslands for the climate models CNRM-CM6-1 (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) and CCMCC-ESM-2 (<b>f</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>i</b>) under the SSP585 scenario for current (<b>a</b>) and future periods from 2020 to 2100.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Forecasted current and future areas of grasslands on Mt Zireia by the CNRM-CM6-1 climate model and scenarios in the four elevation zones for current and future periods 2021–2040 and 2081–2100.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop