Precipitation intercomparison of a set of satellite- and raingauge-derived datasets, ERA Interim reanalysis, and a single WRF regional climate simulation over Europe and the North Atlantic

Abstract

The study presents a precipitation intercomparison based on two satellite-derived datasets (TRMM 3B42, CMORPH), four raingauge-based datasets (GPCC, E-OBS, Willmott & Matsuura, CRU), ERA Interim reanalysis (ERAInt), and a single climate simulation using the WRF model. The comparison was performed for a domain encompassing parts of Europe and the North Atlantic over the 11-year period of 2000–2010. The four raingauge-based datasets are similar to the TRMM dataset with biases over Europe ranging from –7 % to +4 %. The spread among the raingauge-based datasets is relatively small over most of Europe, although areas with greater uncertainty (more than 30 %) exist, especially near the Alps and other mountainous regions. There are distinct differences between the datasets over the European land area and the Atlantic Ocean in comparison to the TRMM dataset. ERAInt has a small dry bias over the land; the WRF simulation has a large wet bias (+30 %), whereas CMORPH is characterized by a large and spatially consistent dry bias (–21 %). Over the ocean, both ERAInt and CMORPH have a small wet bias (+8 %) while the wet bias in WRF is significantly larger (+47 %). ERAInt has the highest frequency of low-intensity precipitation while the frequency of high-intensity precipitation is the lowest due to its lower native resolution. Both satellite-derived datasets have more low-intensity precipitation over the ocean than over the land, while the frequency of higher-intensity precipitation is similar or larger over the land. This result is likely related to orography, which triggers more intense convective precipitation, while the Atlantic Ocean is characterized by more homogenous large-scale precipitation systems which are associated with larger areas of lower intensity precipitation. However, this is not observed in ERAInt and WRF, indicating the insufficient representation of convective processes in the models. Finally, the Fraction Skill Score confirmed that both models perform better over the Atlantic Ocean with ERAInt outperforming the WRF at low thresholds and WRF outperforming ERAInt at higher thresholds. The diurnal cycle is simulated better in the WRF simulation than in ERAInt, although WRF could not reproduce well the amplitude of the diurnal cycle. While the evaluation of the WRF model confirms earlier findings related to the model’s wet bias over European land, the applied satellite-derived precipitation datasets revealed differences between the land and ocean areas along with uncertainties in the observation datasets.