No abstract

Abstract. Despite considerable progress in recent years, output of both global and regional circulation models is still afflicted with biases to a degree that precludes its direct use, especially in climate change impact studies. This is well known, and to overcome this problem, bias correction (BC; i.e. the correction of model output towards observations in a post-processing step) has now become a standard procedure in climate change impact studies. In this paper we argue that BC is currently often used in an invalid way: it is added to the GCM/RCM model chain without sufficient proof that the consistency of the latter (i.e. the agreement between model dynamics/model output and our judgement) as well as the generality of its applicability increases. BC methods often impair the advantages of circulation models by altering spatiotemporal field consistency, relations among variables and by violating conservation principles. Currently used BC methods largely neglect feedback mechanisms, and it is unclear whether they are time-invariant under climate change conditions. Applying BC increases agreement of climate model output with observations in hindcasts and hence narrows the uncertainty range of simulations and predictions without, however, providing a satisfactory physical justification. This is in most cases not transparent to the end user. We argue that this hides rather than reduces uncertainty, which may lead to avoidable forejudging of end users and decision makers.We present here a brief overview of state-of-the-art bias correction methods, discuss the related assumptions and implications, draw conclusions on the validity of bias correction and propose ways to cope with biased output of circulation models in the short term and how to reduce the bias in the long term. The most promising strategy for improved future global and regional circulation model simulations is the increase in model resolution to the convection-permitting scale in combination with ensemble predictions based on sophisticated approaches for ensemble perturbation.With this article, we advocate communicating the entire uncertainty range associated with climate change predictions openly and hope to stimulate a lively discussion on bias correction among the atmospheric and hydrological community and end users of climate change impact studies.

Despite considerable progress in recent years, output of both Global and Regional Circulation Models is still afflicted with biases to a degree that precludes its direct use, especially in climate change impact studies. This is well known, and to overcome this problem bias correction (BC), i.e. the correction of model output towards observations in a post processing step for its subsequent application in climate change impact studies has now become a standard procedure. In this paper we argue that bias correction, which has a considerable influence on the results of impact studies, is not a valid procedure in the way it is currently used: it impairs the advantages of Circulation Models which are based on established physical laws by altering spatiotemporal field consistency, relations among variables and by violating conservation principles. Bias correction largely neglects feedback mechanisms and it is unclear whether bias correction methods are time-invariant under climate change conditions. Applying bias correction increases agreement of Climate Model output with observations in hind casts and hence narrows the uncertainty range of simulations and predictions without, however, providing a satisfactory physical justification. This is in most cases not transparent to the end user. We argue that this masks rather than reduces uncertainty, which may lead to avoidable forejudging of end users and decision makers.

We present here a brief overview of state-of-the-art bias correction methods, discuss the related assumptions and implications, draw conclusions on the validity of bias correction and propose ways to cope with biased output of Circulation Models in the short term and how to reduce the bias in the long term. The most promising strategy for improved future Global and Regional Circulation Model simulations is the increase in model resolution to the convection-permitting scale in combination with ensemble predictions based on sophisticated approaches for ensemble perturbation.

With this article, we advocate communicating the entire uncertainty range associated with climate change predictions openly and hope to stimulate a lively discussion on bias correction among the atmospheric and hydrological community and end users of climate change impact studies

Abstract.The organization of drainage basins shows some reproducible phenomena, as exemplified by self-similar fractal river network structures and typical scaling laws, and these have been related to energetic optimization principles, such as minimization of stream power, minimum energy expenditure or maximum "access". Here we describe the organization and dynamics of drainage systems using thermodynamics, focusing on the generation, dissipation and transfer of free energy associated with river flow and sediment transport. We argue that the organization of drainage basins reflects the fundamental tendency of natural systems to deplete driving gradients as fast as possible through the maximization of free energy generation, thereby accelerating the dynamics of the system. This effectively results in the maximization of sediment export to deplete topographic gradients as fast as possible and potentially involves large-scale feedbacks to continental uplift. We illustrate this thermodynamic description with a set of three highly simplified models related to water and sediment flow and describe the mechanisms and feedbacks involved in the evolution and dynamics of the associated structures. We close by discussing how this thermodynamic perspective is consistent with previous approaches and the implications that such a thermodynamic description has for the understanding and prediction of subgrid scale organization of drainage systems and preferential flow structures in general.

Abstract. According to Dooge (1986) intermediate-scale catchments are systems of organized complexity, being too organized and yet too small to be characterized on a statistical/conceptual basis, but too large and too heterogeneous to be characterized in a deterministic manner. A key requirement for building structurally adequate models precisely for this intermediate scale is a better understanding of how different forms of spatial organization affect storage and release of water and energy. Here, we propose that a combination of the concept of hydrological response units (HRUs) and thermodynamics offers several helpful and partly novel perspectives for gaining this improved understanding. Our key idea is to define functional similarity based on similarity of the terrestrial controls of gradients and resistance terms controlling the land surface energy balance, rainfall runoff transformation, and groundwater storage and release. This might imply that functional similarity with respect to these specific forms of water release emerges at different scales, namely the small field scale, the hillslope, and the catchment scale. We thus propose three different types of "functional units" -specialized HRUs, so to speak -which behave similarly with respect to one specific form of water release and with a characteristic extent equal to one of those three scale levels. We furthermore discuss an experimental strategy based on exemplary learning and replicate experiments to identify and delineate these functional units, and as a promising strategy for characterizing the interplay and organization of water and energy fluxes across scales. We believe the thermodynamic perspective to be well suited to unmask equifinality as inherent in the equations governing water, momentum, and energy fluxes: this is because several combinations of gradients and resistance terms yield the same mass or energy flux and the terrestrial controls of gradients and resistance terms are largely independent. We propose that structurally adequate models at this scale should consequently disentangle driving gradients and resistance terms, because this optionally allows Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. E. Zehe et al.: HESS Opinions: Thermodynamic reinterpretation of the HRU conceptequifinality to be partly reduced by including available observations, e.g., on driving gradients. Most importantly, the thermodynamic perspective yields an energy-centered perspective on rainfall-runoff transformation and evapotranspiration, including fundamental limits for energy fluxes associated with these processes. This might additionally reduce equifinality and opens up opportunities for testing thermodynamic optimality principles within independent predictions of rainfall-runoff or land surface energy exchange. This is pivotal to finding out whether or not spatial organization in catchments is in accordance with a fundamental organizing principle.