CMIP5 and CMIP6: contrasting perspectives on Nigeria's climate transformation

被引:0
|
作者
Tanimu, Bashir [1 ,2 ]
Hamed, Mohammed Magdy [3 ]
Bello, Al-Amin Danladi [1 ]
Abdullahi, Sule Argungu [1 ]
Ajibike, Morufu A. [1 ]
Yaseen, Zaher Mundher [4 ]
Alasow, Ahmed Abdiaziz [5 ,8 ]
Muhammad, Mohd Khairul Idlan bin [2 ]
Shahid, Shamsuddin [6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Ahmadu Bello Univ, Dept Water Resources & Environm Engn, Zaria, Nigeria
[2] Univ Teknol Malaysia UTM, Fac Civil Engn, Dept Water & Environm Engn, Skudia 81310, Johor, Malaysia
[3] Arab Acad Sci Technol & Maritime Transport AASTMT, Coll Engn & Technol, Construct & Bldg Engn Dept, B 2401 Smart Village, Giza 12577, Egypt
[4] King Fahd Univ Petr & Minerals, Civil & Environm Engn Dept, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
[5] Jamhuriya Univ Sci & Technol JUST, Fac Engn, Dept Civil Engn, Mogadishu, Somalia
[6] Natl Ctr Meteorol, Reg Climate Change Ctr, POB 1358,Al Warood Dist,Prince Majid Rd, Jeddah 21431, Saudi Arabia
[7] Al Ayen Univ, Sci Res Ctr, Environm & Atmospher Sci Res Grp, Thi Qar 64001, Nasiriyah, Iraq
[8] Univ Putra Malaysia UPM, Fac Environm Forestry & Environm, Dept Environm Sci, Selangor 43400, Malaysia
关键词
MODEL EVALUATION; PRECIPITATION; PERFORMANCE; IMPACT; ENSEMBLE; EXTREMES; GCMS;
D O I
10.1007/s00704-024-05272-3
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
This study extensively compares CMIP5 and CMIP6 models in simulating historical and projected annual and seasonal climate variability over Nigeria. Thirteen Global Climate Models (GCMs) from both CMIPs were considered and compared for two future projections of the radiative concentration pathways (RCP 4.5 and 8.5) and that of shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP2-4.5 and 5-8.5). This study delves deeper into climate modeling than any previous CMIP model performance comparison by analyzing the CMIP's mean and median multimodel ensemble (MME), projection uncertainties, and spatial climate variability. The results indicated that CMIP6 models and their MMEs exhibited higher Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) than CMIP5 models for rainfall, maximum temperature (Tmax), and minimum temperature (Tmin), indicating an improvement in CMIP6 models compared to their predecessors. CMIP6 models cluster closely, reflecting consensus, while CMIP5 models widely disperse, leading to bias and high-centered root-mean-square difference values, indicating inconsistency. The spatial pattern of CMIP6 MME simulation closely aligns with reference data, showing improved rainfall and temperature estimate reliability. RCP-4.5 and RCP-8.5 projected a Tmax rise of 1.8 degrees C and 4.12 degrees C, while SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 projected a rise of 3.2 degrees C and 1.12 degrees C by 2100. Tmin rises are projected 2.1 degrees C and 3.9 degrees C for RCP-4.5 and RCP-8.5, and 2.3 degrees C and 3.8 degrees C for SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5. In the case of rainfall, CMIP5 MME projected a decrease in rainfall by -10% and - 12% for RCP-4.5 and RCP-8.5, while CMIP6 MME projected an increase by 16% and 23% for SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] On the increased climate sensitivity in the EC-Earth model from CMIP5 to CMIP6
    Wyser, Klaus
    van Noije, Twan
    Yang, Shuting
    von Hardenberg, Jost
    O'Donnell, Declan
    Doscher, Ralf
    GEOSCIENTIFIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT, 2020, 13 (08) : 3465 - 3474
  • [22] Wind energy resource over Europe under CMIP6 future climate projections: What changes from CMIP5 to CMIP6
    Carvalho, D.
    Rocha, A.
    Costoya, X.
    DeCastro, M.
    Gomez-Gesteira, M.
    RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2021, 151
  • [23] Simulations of ENSO Phase-Locking in CMIP5 and CMIP6
    Chen, Han-Ching
    Jin, Fei-Fei
    JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2021, 34 (12) : 5135 - 5149
  • [24] On the spring stratospheric final warming in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models
    Hu, Jinggao
    Liu, Zexuan
    Xu, Haiming
    Ren, Rongcai
    Jin, Dachao
    SCIENCE CHINA-EARTH SCIENCES, 2023, 66 (01) : 129 - 145
  • [25] Comparison of trends in the Hadley circulation between CMIP6 and CMIP5
    Xia, Yan
    Hu, Yongyun
    Liu, Jiping
    SCIENCE BULLETIN, 2020, 65 (19) : 1667 - 1674
  • [26] On the spring stratospheric final warming in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models
    Jinggao HU
    Zexuan LIU
    Haiming XU
    Rongcai REN
    Dachao JIN
    Science China(Earth Sciences), 2023, 66 (01) : 129 - 145
  • [27] On the spring stratospheric final warming in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models
    Jinggao Hu
    Zexuan Liu
    Haiming Xu
    Rongcai Ren
    Dachao Jin
    Science China Earth Sciences, 2023, 66 : 129 - 145
  • [28] Decomposing Temperature Extremes Errors in CMIP5 and CMIP6 Models
    Di Luca, Alejandro
    Pitman, Andrew J.
    de Elia, Ramon
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 47 (14)
  • [29] Model uncertainties in climate change impacts on Sahel precipitation in ensembles of CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations
    Monerie, Paul-Arthur
    Wainwright, Caroline M.
    Sidibe, Moussa
    Akinsanola, Akintomide Afolayan
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2020, 55 (5-6) : 1385 - 1401
  • [30] Climate hazard indices projections based on CORDEX-CORE, CMIP5 and CMIP6 ensemble
    Erika Coppola
    Francesca Raffaele
    Filippo Giorgi
    Graziano Giuliani
    Gao Xuejie
    James M. Ciarlo
    Taleena Rae Sines
    José Abraham Torres-Alavez
    Sushant Das
    Fabio di Sante
    Emanuela Pichelli
    Russell Glazer
    Sebastian Karl Müller
    Sabina Abba Omar
    Moetasim Ashfaq
    Melissa Bukovsky
    E.-S. Im
    Daniela Jacob
    Claas Teichmann
    Armelle Remedio
    Thomas Remke
    Arne Kriegsmann
    Katharina Bülow
    Torsten Weber
    Lars Buntemeyer
    Kevin Sieck
    Diana Rechid
    Climate Dynamics, 2021, 57 : 1293 - 1383