Climate model uncertainty versus conceptual geological uncertainty in hydrological modeling

Citations of this article
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.


Projections of climate change impact are associated with a cascade of uncertainties including in CO2 emission scenarios, climate models, downscaling and impact models. The relative importance of the individual uncertainty sources is expected to depend on several factors including the quantity that is projected. In the present study the impacts of climate model uncertainty and geological model uncertainty on hydraulic head, stream flow, travel time and capture zones are evaluated. Six versions of a physically based and distributed hydrological model, each containing a unique interpretation of the geological structure of the model area, are forced by 11 climate model projections. Each projection of future climate is a result of a GCM-RCM model combination (from the ENSEMBLES project) forced by the same CO2 scenario (A1B). The changes from the reference period (1991-2010) to the future period (2081-2100) in projected hydrological variables are evaluated and the effects of geological model and climate model uncertainties are quantified. The results show that uncertainty propagation is context-dependent. While the geological conceptualization is the dominating uncertainty source for projection of travel time and capture zones, the uncertainty due to the climate models is more important for groundwater hydraulic heads and stream flow.




Sonnenborg, T. O., Seifert, D., & Refsgaard, J. C. (2015). Climate model uncertainty versus conceptual geological uncertainty in hydrological modeling. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 19(9), 3891–3901.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free