/longitude box extending from 10–30W and
60–70N) revealed that the model ensemble average exhibited considerable warming
in the last decades of the 20th century and into the 21st,
but the warming rate was half of the warming rate that actually occurred. If
the CMIP5 ensemble average warming is used as an indicator of the forced
(anthropogenic) warming trend, then about half of the recent observed
/climatology/iceland/climate-report/
m
J
M5 [C°] -3
obs. [C°] -4
nce 1
re 5. Comp
26); an int
temperatu
this system
y gridded v
picion abo
-Jökulsá w
similar dif
han observ
h elevation
ces the effe
months No
ly only on
high the tem
n band wi
refore be s
onthly tem
an Feb Ma
.2 -3.1 -3.
.3 -4.1 -3.
.1 1.0 0.6
arison of m
erpolation
re is shown
atic differe
alues, see T
ut the qual
atershed; b
ference wa
ations for t
gradient fo
/media/ces/2010_017.pdf
have repeatedly occurred over the last millennium. The seismicity is a result of plate
spreading at the Mid-Atlantic rift, which crosses Iceland from SW to NE. The rift runs along
Reykjanes Peninsula (RP in Figure 1) towards the Hengill region (within the grey box of
Figure 1), where the rifting is shifted ~100 km eastward along the South Iceland Seismic
Zone (SISZ), a left-lateral shear zone
/media/vedurstofan/utgafa/skyrslur/2010/2010_012rs.pdf
on the homogenised ERA-40 / ERA-Interim
data, are shown in Figure 3. As found in earlier studies (e.g., Serreze, Box, Barry, & Walsh,
1993; Serreze, Carse, Barry, & Rogers, 1997), the Icelandic Low is the dominant feature of the
seasonal low-level circulation across the northern North Atlantic. It is situated southwest of Ice-
land, downstream of a well-developed mean upper-level trough during
/media/vedurstofan/utgafa/skyrslur/2015/VI_2015_005.pdf
planning
The set of seven questions is presented below in the text box. The synthesis of the discussion
is however not purely organized in seven steps, as many issues re-appeared in the answering
of different questions. Furthermore, various questions, notably no.1 and 2 require in fact joint
consideration or stepwise answering, implying that the questions should be several times
revisited
/media/vedurstofan/NONAM_1st_workshop_summary_v3.pdf
ea
th
,
th
e
m
et
ho
d
u
se
d
at
th
is
st
ag
e
fo
r
th
es
e
st
ak
eh
o
ld
er
typ
es
is
sp
ec
ied
.Sh
oul
d
ther
e
be
tw
o
o
r
mor
e
model
sbein
g
develope
d
in
th
e
process
,the
n
th
e
typ
e
o
fmode
lt
o
whic
h
th
e
metho
d
wa
s
applie
d
is
show
n
in
parentheses
.O
T
re
fe
rs
to
th
e
co
m
po
si
tio
n
o
ft
he
o
rg
an
iz
in
g
te
am
.
Fo
r
o
rg
an
iz
in
g
te
am
in
vo
lve
m
en
t
in
di
ffe
re
n
t
pa
rt
/media/loftslag/Hare-2011-ParticipatoryModelling.pdf
than can be expected to originate from the cauldrons, three to four times the wa-
ter equivalent of the accumulation of snow over the watershed of the cauldrons. It has
been estimated that flow from the cauldrons, in addition to the jökulhlaups, could be
2–5 m3 s 1 at maximum (Vatnaskil, 2005). It is possible that part of the sulfate-rich
groundwater from the glacier comes from the cauldrons
/media/vedurstofan/utgafa/skyrslur/2009/VI_2009_006_tt.pdf
scenario
development, with an example from Brazil
Kasper Kok *
Land Dynamics, Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
1. Introduction
The world is undergoing rapid changes while globalising
constantly, which gives the consideration of the future new
urgency and importance. Scenario development has emerged as a
key method when taking
/media/loftslag/Kok_JGEC658_2009.pdf
equations are valid only if the following conditions are
met: (1) the uncertainties have Gaussian (normal) distribu-
tions; (2) the uncertainties for non-linear models are relatively
small: the standard deviation divided by the mean value is less
than 0.3; and (3) the uncertainties have no significant
covariance.
The error propagation equations for the most common oper-
ators can be seen in Box 1
/media/loftslag/Refsgaard_etal-2007-Uncertainty-EMS.pdf
), and the National Energy
Authority (Orkustofnun).
3 Model terrain and surface type
The HARMONIE model dominant surface type and terrain elevation are shown in Figures 1
and 2, respectively. Surface type is specified in SURFEX by the global land surface database
ECOCLIMAP-I (Champeaux et al., 2005). Within each grid box, ground coverage is represented
by fractions of one for each category of surface type
/media/vedurstofan/utgafa/skyrslur/2014/VI_2014_005.pdf