Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract The future rainfall series used to drive hydrological models in most climate change impact studies is informed by global climate models (GCMs). This paper compares future runoff projections in ∼11 000 0.25° grid cells across Australia from a daily rainfall–runoff model driven with future daily rainfall series obtained using three simple scaling methods, informed by 14 GCMs. In the constant scaling and daily scaling methods, the historical daily rainfall series is scaled by the relative difference between GCM simulations for the future and historical climates. The constant scaling method scales all the daily rainfall by the same factor, and the daily scaling method takes into account changes in the daily rainfall distribution by scaling the different daily rainfall amounts differently. In the daily translation method, the GCM future daily rainfall series is translated to a 0.25° gridcell rainfall series using the relationship established between the historical GCM-scale rainfall and 0.25° gridcell rainfall data. The daily scaling and daily translation methods generally give higher extreme and annual runoff than the constant scaling method because they take into account the increase in extreme daily rainfall (which generates significant runoff) simulated by the large majority of the GCMs. However, the difference between the mean annual runoff simulated with future daily rainfall series obtained using the constant versus daily scaling methods is generally less than 5%, which is relatively smaller than the range of runoff results from the different GCMs of 30%–40%.
Mpelasoka et al. (Tue,) studied this question.