EGU22-12312, updated on 28 Mar 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu22-12312
EGU General Assembly 2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Snow Cover Analysis of Turkey comparing to Historical Climate Scenarios of CMIP5 and CMIP6 protocols

Aleyna Nur Aksu1, Ipeknur Hazar2, Bahattin Can Dursun3, Buket Yogun4, and Elcin Tan5
Aleyna Nur Aksu et al.
  • 1Istanbul Technical University, Aeronautics and Astronautics, Meteorological Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (aksual18@itu.edu.tr)
  • 2Istanbul Technical University, Aeronautics and Astronautics, Meteorological Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (hazar18@itu.edu.tr)
  • 3Istanbul Technical University, Aeronautics and Astronautics, Meteorological Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (dursunbah18@itu.edu.tr)
  • 4Istanbul Technical University, Aeronautics and Astronautics, Meteorological Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (yogun18@itu.edu.tr)
  • 5Istanbul Technical University, Aeronautics and Astronautics, Meteorological Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (elcin.tan@itu.edu.tr)

Profound changes have been observed in the precipitation pattern of Turkey due to climate change during the last decade. This variation in precipitation pattern affects the amount of snow cover and the temporal and spatial distribution of snow. In addition, significant variability was observed in the initial time of snowmelt that water resources, especially groundwater, might be adversely affected. On the other hand, this adverse effect in snow cover is also crucial for Turkey's winter sports tourism. For this reason, the study aims to analyze the historical simulation results of climate models (MIROC5 and MIROC6; CanESM2 and CanESM5; and GISS-E2-H and GISS-E2-1-H) based on CMIP5 and CMIP6 protocols depending on snow cover variables and compare the consistency of these models with observations. Probability distribution functions of surface snow area fraction and snowfall flux variables over ten-year periods were analyzed. In addition, the frost days index (ECAFD), Ice days index (ECAID), and very cold days (ECATX10P) index were also analyzed. As a preliminary result, it was found that the snow cover values of the CMIP6 protocol climate models were more consistent with the observations.

How to cite: Aksu, A. N., Hazar, I., Dursun, B. C., Yogun, B., and Tan, E.: Snow Cover Analysis of Turkey comparing to Historical Climate Scenarios of CMIP5 and CMIP6 protocols, EGU General Assembly 2022, Vienna, Austria, 23–27 May 2022, EGU22-12312, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu22-12312, 2022.

Displays

Display file