Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CLIMATE MODELING”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

Causally‐Informed Deep Learning to Improve Climate Models and Projections

Abstract Climate models are essential to understand and project climate change, yet long‐standing biases and uncertainties in their projections remain. This is largely associated with the representation of subgrid‐scale processes, particularly clouds and convection. Deep learning can learn these subgrid‐scale processes from computationally expensive storm‐resolving models while retaining many features at a fraction of computational cost. Yet, climate simulations with embedded neural network parameterizations are still challenging and highly depend on the deep learning solution. This is likely associated with spurious non‐physical correlations learned by the neural networks due to the complexity of the physical dynamical system. Here, we show that the combination of causality with deep learning helps removing spurious correlations and optimizing the neural network algorithm. To resolve this, we apply a causal discovery method to unveil causal drivers in the set of input predictors of atmospheric subgrid‐scale processes of a superparameterized climate model in which deep convection is explicitly resolved. The resulting causally‐informed neural networks are coupled to the climate model, hence, replacing the superparameterization and radiation scheme. We show that the climate simulations with causally‐informed neural network parameterizations retain many convection‐related properties and accurately generate the climate of the original high‐resolution climate model, while retaining similar generalization capabilities to unseen climates compared to the non‐causal approach. The combination of causal discovery and deep learning is a new and promising approach that leads to stable and more trustworthy climate simulations and paves the way toward more physically‐based causal deep learning approaches also in other scientific disciplines.

Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences↗

Collaborative Project: Understanding Climate Model Biases in Tropical Atlantic and Their Impact on Simulations of Extreme Climate Events

Recent studies have revealed that among all the tropical oceans, the tropical Atlantic has experienced the most pronounced warming trend over the 20th century. Many extreme climate events affecting the U.S., such as hurricanes, severe precipitation and drought events, are influenced by conditions in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. It is therefore imperative to have accurate simulations of the climatic mean and variability in the Atlantic region to be able to make credible projections of future climate change affecting the U.S. and other countries adjoining the Atlantic Ocean. Unfortunately, almost all global climate models exhibit large biases in their simulations of tropical Atlantic climate. The atmospheric convection simulation errors in the Amazon region and the associated errors in the trade wind simulations are hypothesized to be a leading cause of the tropical Atlantic biases in climate models. As global climate models have resolutions that are too coarse to resolve some of the atmospheric and oceanic processes responsible for the model biases, we propose to use a high-resolution coupled regional climate model (CRCM) framework to address the tropical bias issue. We propose to combine the expertise in tropical coupled atmosphere-ocean modeling at Texas A&M University (TAMU) and the coupled land-atmosphere modeling expertise at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop a comprehensive CRCM for the Atlantic sector within a general and flexible modeling framework. The atmospheric component of the CRCM will be the NCAR WRF model and the oceanic component will be the Rutgers/UCLA ROMS. For the land component, we will use CLM modified at PNNL to include more detailed representations of vegetation and soil hydrology processes. The combined TAMU-PNNL CRCM model will be used to simulate the Atlantic climate, and the associated land-atmosphere-ocean interactions at a horizontal resolution of 9 km or finer. A particular focus of the model development effort will be to optimize the performance of WRF and ROMS over several thousand of cores by focusing on both the parallel communication libraries and the I/O interfaces, in order to achieve the sustained throughput needed to perform simulations on such fine resolution grids. The CRCM model will be developed within the framework of the Coupler (CPL7) software that is part of the NCAR Community Earth System Model (CESM). Through efforts at PNNL and within the community, WRF and CLM have already been coupled via CPL7. Using the flux coupler approach for the whole CRCM model will allow us to flexibly couple WRF, ROMS, and CLM with each model running on its own grid at different resolutions. In addition, this framework will allow us to easily port parameterizations between CESM and the CRCM, and potentially allow partial coupling between the CESM and the CRCM. TAMU and PNNL will contribute cooperatively to this research endeavor. The TAMU team led by Chang and Saravanan has considerable experience in studying atmosphere-ocean interactions within tropical Atlantic sector and will focus on modeling issues that relate to coupling WRF and ROMS. The PNNL team led by Leung has extensive expertise in atmosphere-land interaction and will be responsible for improving the land surface parameterization. Both teams will jointly work on integrating WRF-ROMS and WRF-CLM to couple WRF, ROMS, and CLM through CPL7. Montuoro of the TAMU Supercomputing Center will be responsible for improving the MPI and Parallel IO interfaces of the CRCM. Both teams will contribute to the design and execution of the proposed numerical experiments and jointly perform analysis of the numerical experiments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Emission or atmospheric processes? An attempt to attribute the source of large bias of aerosols in eastern China simulated by global climate models

Here, global climate models often underestimate aerosol loadings in China, and these biases can have significant implications for anthropogenic aerosol radiative forcing and climate effects. The biases may be caused by either the emission inventory or the treatment of aerosol processes in the models, or both, but so far no consensus has been reached. In this study, a relatively new emission inventory based on energy statistics and technology, Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China (MEIC), is used to drive the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 (CAM5) to evaluate aerosol distribution and radiative effects against observations in China. The model results are compared with the model simulations with the widely used Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5) emission inventory. We find that the new MEIC emission improves the aerosol optical depth (AOD) simulations in eastern China and explains 22–28 % of the AOD low bias simulated with the AR5 emission. However, AOD is still biased low in eastern China. Seasonal variation of the MEIC emission leads to a better agreement with the observed seasonal variation of primary aerosols than the AR5 emission, but the concentrations are still underestimated. This implies that the atmospheric loadings of primary aerosols are closely related to the emission, which may still be underestimated over eastern China. In contrast, the seasonal variations of secondary aerosols depend more on aerosol processes (e.g., gas- and aqueous-phase production from precursor gases) that are associated with meteorological conditions and to a lesser extent on the emission. It indicates that the emissions of precursor gases for the secondary aerosols alone cannot explain the low bias in the model. Aerosol secondary production processes in CAM5 should also be revisited. The simulation using MEIC estimates the annual-average aerosol direct radiative effects (ADREs) at the top of the atmosphere (TOA), at the surface, and in the atmosphere to be –5.02, –18.47, and 13.45 W m –2 , respectively, over eastern China, which are enhanced by –0.91, –3.48, and 2.57 W m –2 compared with the AR5 emission. The differences of ADREs by using MEIC and AR5 emissions are larger than the decadal changes of the modeled ADREs, indicating the uncertainty of the emission inventories. This study highlights the importance of improving both the emission and aerosol secondary production processes in modeling the atmospheric aerosols and their radiative effects. Yet, if the estimations of MEIC emissions in trace gases do not suffer similar biases to those in the AOD, our findings will help affirm a fundamental error in the conversion from precursor gases to secondary aerosols as hinted in other recent studies following different approaches.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Observational Data for Next-Generation Climate Model Evaluation: Requirements, Considerations, and Best Practices

Climate model simulations are an important source of information about our planet’s climate system and also enable informed decision-making under different future scenarios. As a new archive of results from the next generation of climate models is anticipated to become available with the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 (CMIP7), the need to develop efficient and robust methods to evaluate models is paramount. Observations are an integral part of model evaluation, providing a means to quantify and understand the degree to which climate models can faithfully reproduce Earth system processes. Such analysis is critical for constraining climate projections, identifying areas of focus for model development, and assisting analysts in deciphering the utility of models for specific applications. Observations of Earth system come from a diversity of sources, span different space–time domains, and are produced by different communities, and each dataset features different data structures and formats, metadata standards, and its own unique uncertainties. Uncertainties in an observational dataset may stem from gaps in temporal and spatial coverage, instrumentation errors, or assumptions in retrieval and processing methods. How then does one ensure that observational data are ready for use and utilized in the most appropriate way for robust, rapid, and routine climate model evaluation? The CMIP7 Model Benchmarking Task Team with input from the broader climate modeling, model evaluation, and observational data communities present a vision and considerations for best practices toward the optimal and appropriate use of observational data to support next-generation climate model evaluation.

Climate models↗

The Art and Science of Climate Model Tuning

The process of parameter estimation targeting a chosen set of observations is an essential aspect of numerical modeling. This process is usually named tuning in the climate modeling community. In climate models, the variety and complexity of physical processes involved, and their interplay through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, must be summarized in a series of approximate submodels. Most submodels depend on uncertain parameters. Tuning consists of adjusting the values of these parameters to bring the solution as a whole into line with aspects of the observed climate. Tuning is an essential aspect of climate modeling with its own scientific issues, which is probably not advertised enough outside the community of model developers. Optimization of climate models raises important questions about whether tuning methods a priori constrain the model results in unintended ways that would affect our confidence in climate projections. Here, we present the definition and rationale behind model tuning, review specific methodological aspects, and survey the diversity of tuning approaches used in current climate models. We also discuss the challenges and opportunities in applying so-called objective methods in climate model tuning. Here, we discuss how tuning methodologies may affect fundamental results of climate models, such as climate sensitivity. The article concludes with a series of recommendations to make the process of climate model tuning more transparent.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Effective radiative forcing in the aerosol–climate model CAM5.3-MARC-ARG

We quantify the effective radiative forcing (ERF) of anthropogenic aerosols modelled by the aerosol–climate model CAM5.3-MARC-ARG. CAM5.3-MARC-ARG is a new configuration of the Community Atmosphere Model version 5.3 (CAM5.3) in which the default aerosol module has been replaced by the two-Moment, Multi-Modal, Mixing-state-resolving Aerosol model for Research of Climate (MARC). CAM5.3-MARC-ARG uses the ARG aerosol-activation scheme, consistent with the default configuration of CAM5.3. We compute differences between simulations using year-1850 aerosol emissions and simulations using year-2000 aerosol emissions in order to assess the radiative effects of anthropogenic aerosols. We compare the aerosol lifetimes, aerosol column burdens, cloud properties, and radiative effects produced by CAM5.3-MARC-ARG with those produced by the default configuration of CAM5.3, which uses the modal aerosol module with three log-normal modes (MAM3), and a configuration using the modal aerosol module with seven log-normal modes (MAM7). Compared with MAM3 and MAM7, we find that MARC produces stronger cooling via the direct radiative effect, the shortwave cloud radiative effect, and the surface albedo radiative effect; similarly, MARC produces stronger warming via the longwave cloud radiative effect. Overall, MARC produces a global mean net ERF of - 1.79 ± 0.03 W m -2 , which is stronger than the global mean net ERF of - 1.57 ± 0.04 W m -2 produced by MAM3 and - 1.53 ± 0.04 W m -2 produced by MAM7. The regional distribution of ERF also differs between MARC and MAM3, largely due to differences in the regional distribution of the shortwave cloud radiative effect. We conclude that the specific representation of aerosols in global climate models, including aerosol mixing state, has important implications for climate modelling.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Surface Salinity Under Transitioning Ice Cover in the Canada Basin: Climate Model Biases Linked to Vertical Distribution of Fresh Water

Abstract The Canada Basin has exhibited a significant trend toward a fresher surface layer and thus a more stratified upper‐ocean over the past three decades. State‐of‐the‐art ice‐ocean models, by contrast, tend to simulate a surface layer that is saltier and less stratified than observed. Here, we examine decadal changes to seasonal processes that may contribute to this wide‐reaching model bias using climate model simulations from the Community Earth System Model and below‐ice observations from the Arctic Ice Dynamics Joint Experiment in 1975 and Ice Tethered Profilers in 2006–2012. In contrast to the observations, the models simulate salinity profiles that show relatively little variation between 1975 and 2012. We demonstrate that this bias can be mainly attributed to unrealistically deep vertical mixing in the model, creating a surface layer that is saltier than observed. The results provide insight for climate model improvement with broad implications for Arctic sea ice and ecosystem dynamics.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Improved Representation of Surface Spectral Emissivity in a Global Climate Model and Its Impact on Simulated Climate

Surface longwave emissivity can be less than unity and vary significantly with frequency. However, most climate models still assume a blackbody surface in the longwave (LW) radiation scheme of their atmosphere models. This study incorporates realistic surface spectral emissivity into the atmospheric component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM), version 1.1.1, and evaluates its impact on simulated climate. By ensuring consistency of the broadband surface longwave flux across different components of the CESM, the top-of-the-atmosphere (TOA) energy balance in the modified model can be attained without retuning the model. Inclusion of surface spectral emissivity, however, leads to a decrease of net upward longwave flux at the surface and a comparable increase of latent heat flux. Global-mean surface temperature difference between the modified and standard CESM simulation is 0.20 K for the fully coupled run and 0.45 K for the slab-ocean run. Noticeable surface temperature differences between the modified and standard CESM simulations are seen over the Sahara Desert and polar regions. Accordingly, the climatological mean sea ice fraction in the modified CESM simulation can be less than that in the standard CESM simulation by as much as 0.1 in some regions. When spectral emissivities of sea ice and open ocean surfaces are considered, the broadband LW sea ice emissivity feedback is estimated to be −0.003 W m −2 K −1 , assuming flat ice emissivity as sea ice emissivity, and 0.002 W m −2 K −1 , assuming coarse snow emissivity as sea ice emissivity, which are two orders of magnitude smaller than the surface albedo feedback.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Ice and Supercooled Liquid Water Distributions over the Southern Ocean based on In Situ Observations and Climate Model Simulations

Three climate models are evaluated using in situ airborne observations from the Southern Ocean Clouds, Radiation, Aerosol Transport Experimental Study (SOCRATES) campaign. The evaluation targets cloud phases, microphysical properties, thermodynamic conditions, and aerosol indirect effects from –40°C to 0°C. Compared with 580-s averaged observations (i.e., 100 km horizontal scale), the Community Atmosphere Model version 6 (CAM6) shows the most similar result for cloud phase frequency distribution and allows more liquid-containing clouds below –10°C compared with its predecessor—CAM5. The Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) underestimates (overestimates) ice phase frequencies below (above) –20°C. CAM6 and E3SM show liquid and ice water contents (i.e., LWC and IWC) similar to observations from –25°C to 0°C, but higher LWC and lower IWC than observations at lower temperatures. Simulated in-cloud RH shows higher minimum values than observations, possibly restricting ice growth during sedimentation. As number concentrations of aerosols larger than 500 nm (Na 500 ) increase, observations show increases of LWC, IWC, liquid, and ice number concentrations (N liq , N ice ). Number concentrations of aerosols larger than 100 nm (Na 100 ) only show positive correlations with LWC and N liq . From –20°C to 0°C, higher aerosol number concentrations are correlated with lower glaciation ratio and higher cloud fraction. From –40°C to –20°C, large aerosols show positive correlations with glaciation ratio. CAM6 shows small increases of LWC and N liq with Na 500 and Na 100 . E3SM shows small increases of N ice with Na 500 . Altogether, CAM6 and E3SM underestimate aerosol indirect effects on ice crystals and supercooled liquid droplets over the Southern Ocean.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Selection of Global Climate Model Data for Downscaling With Generative Machine Learning and Use in the Power Planning for Alignment of Climate and Energy Systems Project

The range of results from climate models and scenarios is important to the understanding of uncertainty in power planning analysis. A U.S. Department of Energy-funded analytic project called Power Planning for Alignment of Climate and Energy Systems is developing data and analytic methods to reflect the effects of climate change on key variables for power system planning, as part of the Grid Modernization Lab Consortium. This project will select and prepare global climate model results for use in power system planning models. A related report (Evaluation of Global Climate Models for Use in Energy Analysis) assesses the performance of various global climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 data archive for their historical skill with respect to energy system performance and for their future projections under multiple climate change scenarios. Building from that report, we describe the selection of a climate scenario (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway [SSP] 2-4.5) and five climate models: TaiESM1, EC-Earth3-CC, GFDL-CM4, EC-Earth3-Veg, and MPI-ESM1-2-HR. We describe the model selection criteria, which were based on the quality of the match between model results under historical conditions and on the representation of the range of future values for several variables. These results will be downscaled via an open-source generative machine learning method called Super-Resolution for Renewable Energy Resource Data with Climate Change Impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

The effect of geographic sampling on evaluation of extreme precipitation in high-resolution climate models

Traditional approaches for comparing global climate models and observational data products typically fail to account for the geographic location of the underlying weather station data. For modern global high-resolution models with a horizontal resolution of tens of kilometers, this is an oversight since there are likely grid cells where the physical output of a climate model is compared with a statistically interpolated quantity instead of actual measurements of the climate system. In this paper, we quantify the impact of geographic sampling on the relative performance of high-resolution climate model representations of precipitation extremes in boreal winter (December–January–February) over the contiguous United States (CONUS), comparing model output from five early submissions to the HighResMIP subproject of the CMIP6 experiment. We find that properly accounting for the geographic sampling of weather stations can significantly change the assessment of model performance. Across the models considered, failing to account for sampling impacts the different metrics (extreme bias, spatial pattern correlation, and spatial variability) in different ways (both increasing and decreasing). We argue that the geographic sampling of weather stations should be accounted for in order to yield a more straightforward and appropriate comparison between models and observational data sets, particularly for high-resolution models with a horizontal resolution of tens of kilometers. While we focus on the CONUS in this paper, our results have important implications for other global land regions where the sampling problem is more severe.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

What Drives Upper-Ocean Temperature Variability in Coupled Climate Models and Observations?

Abstract A key question in climate modeling is to what extent sea surface temperature and upper-ocean heat content are driven passively by air–sea heat fluxes, as opposed to forcing by ocean dynamics. This paper investigates the question using a climate model at different resolutions, and observations, for monthly variability. At the grid scale in a high-resolution climate model with resolved mesoscale ocean eddies, ocean dynamics (i.e., ocean heat flux convergence) dominates upper 50 m heat content variability over most of the globe. For deeper depths of integration to 400 m, the heat content variability at the grid scale is almost totally controlled by ocean heat flux convergence. However, a strong dependence on spatial scale is found—for the upper 50 m of ocean, after smoothing the data to around 7°, air–sea heat fluxes, augmented by Ekman heat transports, dominate. For deeper depths of integration to 400 m, the transition scale becomes larger and is above 10° in western boundary currents. Comparison of climate model results with observations show that the small-scale influence of ocean intrinsic variability is well captured by the high-resolution model but is missing from a comparable model with parameterized ocean-eddy effects. In the deep tropics, ocean dynamics dominates in all cases and all scales. In the subtropical gyres at large scales, air–sea heat fluxes play the biggest role. In the midlatitudes, at large scales >10°, atmosphere-driven air–sea heat fluxes and Ekman heat transport variability are the dominant processes except in the western boundary currents for the 400 m heat content.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Linking Large-Scale Double-ITCZ Bias to Local-Scale Drizzling Bias in Climate Models

Tropical precipitation in climate models presents significant biases in both the large-scale pattern (i.e., double intertropical convergence zone bias) and local-scale characteristics (i.e., drizzling bias with too frequent drizzle/convection and reduced occurrences of no and heavy precipitation). By untangling the coupled system and analyzing the biases in precipitation, cloud, and radiation, this study shows that local-scale drizzling bias in atmospheric models can lead to large-scale double-ITCZ bias in coupled models by inducing convective-regime-dependent biases in precipitation and cloud radiative effects (CRE). The double-ITCZ bias consists of a hemispherically asymmetric component that arises from the asymmetric SST bias and a nearly symmetric component that exists in atmospheric models without the SST bias. By increasing light rain but reducing heavy rain, local-scale drizzling bias induces positive (negative) precipitation bias in the moderate (strong) convective regime, leading to the nearly symmetric wet bias in atmospheric models. By affecting the cloud profile, local-scale drizzling bias induces positive (negative) CRE bias in the stratocumulus (convective) regime in atmospheric models. Because the stratocumulus (convective) region is climatologically more pronounced in the southern (northern) tropics, the CRE bias is deemed to be hemispherically asymmetric and drives warm and wet (cold and dry) biases in the southern (northern) tropics when coupled to ocean. Our results suggest that correcting local-scale drizzling bias is critical for fixing large-scale double-ITCZ bias. Finally, the drizzling and double-ITCZ biases are not alleviated in models with mesoscale (0.25°–0.5°) or even storm-resolving (~3 km) resolution, implying that either large-eddy simulation or fundamental improvement in small-scale subgrid parameterizations is needed.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Uncertainty Quantification in Climate Modeling and Projection

The projection of future climate is one of the most complex problems undertaken by the scientific community. Although scientists have been striving to better understand the physical basis of the climate system and to improve climate models, the overall uncertainty in projections of future climate has not been significantly reduced (e.g., from the IPCC AR4 to AR5). With the rapid increase of complexity in Earth system models, reducing uncertainties in climate projections becomes extremely challenging. Since uncertainties always exist in climate models, interpreting the strengths and limitations of future climate projections is key to evaluating risks, and climate change information for use in Vulnerability, Impact, and Adaptation (VIA) studies should be provided with both well-characterized and well-quantified uncertainty. The workshop reported herein aimed at providing participants, many of them from developing countries, information on strategies to quantify the uncertainty in climate model projections and assess the reliability of climate change information for decision-making. The program included a mixture of lectures on fundamental concepts in Bayesian inference and sampling, applications, and hands-on computer laboratory exercises employing software packages for Bayesian inference, Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods, and global sensitivity analyses. The lectures covered a range of scientific issues underlying the evaluation of uncertainties in climate projections, such as the effects of uncertain initial and boundary conditions, uncertain physics, and limitations of observational records. Progress in quantitatively estimating uncertainties in hydrologic, land surface, and atmospheric models at both regional and global scales was also reviewed. The application of Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) concepts to coupled climate system models is still in its infancy. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) multi-model ensemble currently represents the primary data for assessing reliability and uncertainties of climate change information. An alternative approach is to generate similar ensembles by perturbing parameters within a single-model framework. One of workshop’s objectives was to give participants a deeper understanding of these approaches within a Bayesian statistical framework. However, there remain significant challenges still to be resolved before UQ can be applied in a convincing way to climate models and their projections.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

A round Earth for climate models

Sunlight drives the Earth’s weather, climate, chemistry, and biosphere. Recent efforts to improve solar heating codes in climate models focused on more accurate treatment of the absorption spectrum or fractional clouds. A mostly forgotten assumption in climate models is that of a flat Earth atmosphere. Spherical atmospheres intercept 2.5 W·m −2 more sunlight and heat the climate by an additional 1.5 W⋅m −2 globally. Such a systematic shift, being comparable to the radiative forcing change from preindustrial to present, is likely to produce a discernible climate shift that would alter a model’s skill in simulating current climate. Regional heating errors, particularly at high latitudes, are several times larger. Unlike flat atmospheres, constituents in a spherical atmosphere, such as clouds and aerosols, alter the total amount of energy received by the Earth. To calculate the net cooling of aerosols in a spherical framework, one must count the increases in both incident and reflected sunlight, thus reducing the aerosol effect by 10 to 14% relative to using just the increase in reflected. Simple fixes to the current flat Earth climate models can correct much of this oversight, although some inconsistencies will remain.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

A Spatiotemporal-Aware Weighting Scheme for Improving Climate Model Ensemble Predictions

Multimodel ensembling has been widely used to improve climate model predictions, and the improvement strongly depends on the ensembling scheme. In this work, we propose a Bayesian neural network (BNN) ensembling method, which combines climate models within a Bayesian model averaging framework, to improve the predictive capability of model ensembles. Our proposed BNN approach calculates spatiotemporally varying model weights and biases by leveraging individual models' simulation skill, calibrates the ensemble prediction against observations by considering observation data uncertainty, and quantifies epistemic uncertainty when extrapolating to new conditions. More importantly, the BNN method provides interpretability about which climate model contributes more to the ensemble prediction at which locations and times. Thus, beyond its predictive capability, the method also brings insights and understanding of the models to guide further model and data development. In this study, we design experiments using an ensemble of CMIP6 climate model simulations to illustrate the BNN ensembling method's capability with respect to prediction accuracy, interpretability, and uncertainty quantification (UQ). We demonstrate that BNN can correctly assign larger weights to the regions and seasons where the individual model fits the observation better. Moreover, its offered interpretability is consistent with our understanding of localized climate model performance. Additionally, BNN shows an increasing uncertainty when the prediction is farther away from the period with constrained data, which appropriately reflects our trustworthiness of the models in the changing climate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

gcm_eval (Global Climate Model Evaluation) [SWR-24-37]

The interplay between energy, climate, and weather is becoming more complex as our changing climate continues to affect the weather we experience which in turn drives changes in the ever increasing share of renewable energy generation and energy demand. Energy system analyses commonly rely on meteorological inputs to estimate renewable energy generation and energy demand; however, these inputs rarely represent the estimated impacts of future climate change. Climate models and publicly available climate change datasets can be used for this purpose, but the selection of inputs from the myriad of available models and datasets is a nuanced and often subjective process. There is no single perfect climate model or dataset for all applications. In this repository, we include software and the corresponding assessments of various global climate models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), evaluating their skills with respect to the historical climate and comparing of their future projections of climate change. We focus on variables that directly affect the energy system including the representation of extreme values that can drive grid resilience events. The objective of this repository is not to recommend the best climate model and dataset for a given analysis, but instead to provide a reference to facilitate the selection of climate models and datasets in subsequent work.

Buster, Grant↗