Evaluating local climate in global storm-resolving models with the Köppen-Geiger classification

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: van Heerwaarden, Chiel C., Veerman, Menno A., Benedict, Imme, Brunner, Lukas, Dolores-Tesillos, Edgar, Dutra, Emanuel, Fischer, Erich, Lee, Junhong, Martius, Olivia, Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Xabier, Proske, Ulrike, Warnau, Sarah N., Willie, Jonathan D., Hohenegger, Cathy
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2026
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866908997908430848
author van Heerwaarden, Chiel C.
Veerman, Menno A.
Benedict, Imme
Brunner, Lukas
Dolores-Tesillos, Edgar
Dutra, Emanuel
Fischer, Erich
Lee, Junhong
Martius, Olivia
Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Xabier
Proske, Ulrike
Warnau, Sarah N.
Willie, Jonathan D.
Hohenegger, Cathy
author_facet van Heerwaarden, Chiel C.
Veerman, Menno A.
Benedict, Imme
Brunner, Lukas
Dolores-Tesillos, Edgar
Dutra, Emanuel
Fischer, Erich
Lee, Junhong
Martius, Olivia
Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Xabier
Proske, Ulrike
Warnau, Sarah N.
Willie, Jonathan D.
Hohenegger, Cathy
contents Global storm-resolving models aspire to become digital twins of the Earth, delivering information at the local scale at which humans experience climate. We evaluated how well two such models, ICON and IFS-FESOM, reproduce the climate as classified by the Köppen-Geiger system, using 30-year (2020-2049) simulations from the nextGEMS project at 9~km global resolution under SSP3-7.0 scenario. Both models capture the global distribution of the five main climate categories, encouraging given the infancy of storm-resolving climate modelling. Substantial regional biases nonetheless remain. Both underestimate tropical rainforest (Af) extent due to insufficient dry-month precipitation in Amazonia and equatorial Africa. ICON almost eliminates hot arid desert (BWh) across Australia through excessive precipitation, while IFS-FESOM reproduces it well. The two models show opposing biases along the temperate--continental boundary: IFS-FESOM winters are too cold in western Europe, ICON winters too warm. Substituting observed temperature or precipitation into the model fields reveals that precipitation errors dominate misclassification, while temperature biases play a secondary role confined to mid-latitude climate zone boundaries. Under climate change, the two models and CMIP6 projections agree on the direction of climate zone shifts: expansion of tropical savanna and hot desert at the expense of subarctic, tundra, and ice cap zones. However, inter-model differences in present-day climate exceed the 30-year climate change signal for many zones, calling for caution in regional projections and adaptation planning. Our results expose where local-scale climate representation still falls short of the digital twin ambition, while confirming that storm-resolving models already perform well across many regions. We propose Köppen-Geiger classification as a standard diagnostic to help track further progress.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_25447
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Evaluating local climate in global storm-resolving models with the Köppen-Geiger classification
van Heerwaarden, Chiel C.
Veerman, Menno A.
Benedict, Imme
Brunner, Lukas
Dolores-Tesillos, Edgar
Dutra, Emanuel
Fischer, Erich
Lee, Junhong
Martius, Olivia
Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Xabier
Proske, Ulrike
Warnau, Sarah N.
Willie, Jonathan D.
Hohenegger, Cathy
Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics
Global storm-resolving models aspire to become digital twins of the Earth, delivering information at the local scale at which humans experience climate. We evaluated how well two such models, ICON and IFS-FESOM, reproduce the climate as classified by the Köppen-Geiger system, using 30-year (2020-2049) simulations from the nextGEMS project at 9~km global resolution under SSP3-7.0 scenario. Both models capture the global distribution of the five main climate categories, encouraging given the infancy of storm-resolving climate modelling. Substantial regional biases nonetheless remain. Both underestimate tropical rainforest (Af) extent due to insufficient dry-month precipitation in Amazonia and equatorial Africa. ICON almost eliminates hot arid desert (BWh) across Australia through excessive precipitation, while IFS-FESOM reproduces it well. The two models show opposing biases along the temperate--continental boundary: IFS-FESOM winters are too cold in western Europe, ICON winters too warm. Substituting observed temperature or precipitation into the model fields reveals that precipitation errors dominate misclassification, while temperature biases play a secondary role confined to mid-latitude climate zone boundaries. Under climate change, the two models and CMIP6 projections agree on the direction of climate zone shifts: expansion of tropical savanna and hot desert at the expense of subarctic, tundra, and ice cap zones. However, inter-model differences in present-day climate exceed the 30-year climate change signal for many zones, calling for caution in regional projections and adaptation planning. Our results expose where local-scale climate representation still falls short of the digital twin ambition, while confirming that storm-resolving models already perform well across many regions. We propose Köppen-Geiger classification as a standard diagnostic to help track further progress.
title Evaluating local climate in global storm-resolving models with the Köppen-Geiger classification
topic Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.25447