The impact of forest cover decrease on the wind regime changes for the territory of Ukraine based on data of the global numerical experiment LUMIP
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24028/gj.v45i5.289106Keywords:
LUMIP, Global Climate Model, forest cover, wind speed, deforestationAbstract
The article analyses and estimates the influence of partial deforestation on wind regime based on the global numerical experiment Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP). This experiment is one of the components of the global project Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP 6). LUMIP aims to evaluate changes in climate characteristics and biogeochemical cycles due to partial global deforestation withsubsequent grassland establishment. A given period of retrospective modelling is divided into two subperiods. The first covers a time frame of 1850—1899 and a so-called subperiod with a minimum anthropogenic influence. During these modelled 50 years, the partial forest cover shrinkagewas conducted with a trend of 1 % per year the nodes where the forest cover exceeded 30 %. In the second subperiod (1900—1929), the forest cover was stable. Our previous papers concerned the influence of partial deforestation on the radiation, temperature, and moisture regimes in Ukraine. The present paper continues the analysis and is dedicated to the impact of partial deforestation on changes in the mean monthly wind surface speed based on data from available Global Climate Models (GCMs).Deforestation caused quantitative changes in wind speed during all months of the year for all GCMs used in the research, however, with a different sensitivity. Maximum changes were obtained from the model with the biggest step in forest cover shrinkage among all GCMs, approximately 1.6 % a node. It should be emphasized that the biggest changes occurredin the nodes where the forest was substituted with grassland. The obtained correlations of the deforestation and mean monthly wind speed were moderately or highly negative for all seasons. The maximum wind speed and the highest changes are during the winter. In January, for example,the maximum changes can reach up to 0.3 m/s per 10 years. During spring and autumn, such tendencies generallyvary up to 0.1—0.2 m/s per 10 years. The differences in wind speed between the subperiod of stable forest cover and the partial deforestation are up to 1.2 m/s at a particular grid point on the territory of Ukraine.
References
Stepanenko, S.M., & Polevoy, A.M. (2018). Climatic risks of functioning of branches of the economy of Ukraine in the conditions of climate chan¬ge. Odesa: TES, 548 p. (in Ukrainian).
Lipinskyy, V., Dyachuk, V., & Babichenko, V. (Eds.). (2003). Climate of Ukraine. Kyiv: Rayevskyy Publishing, 343 p. (in Ukrainian).
Malytska, L.V. (2017). Discomfort of weather conditions during winter period in Ukraine. Ukrainian Hydrometeorological Journal, 20, 26—36. https://doi.org/10.31481/uhmj.20.2017.03 (in Ukrainian).
Mishchenko, Z.A., & Liashenko, G.V. (2007). Mic¬ro¬climatology: Tutorial. Odesa, 336 p. (in Ukrainian).
Oshurok, D.O. (2020). Windenergy resources in Ukraine under the current climatic conditions. Candidate’s thesis. Kyiv: Ukrainian Hydrometeorological Institute of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine and NASU, 203 p. (in Ukrainian).
Oshurok, D.O., & Skrynyk, O.Y. (2019). Correction of wind speed data according to the open terrain conditions. Hidrolohiia, hidrokhimiia i hidroekolohiia, (4), 131—139. https://doi.org/ 10.17721/2306-5680.2019.4.11 (in Ukrainian).
Pysarenko, L.A., & Krakovska, S.V. (2021a). Impact of deforestation on radiative and thermal regimes of the territory of Ukraine on the base of global climate models data. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 43(3), 135—160. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.v43i3.236385 (in Ukrainian).
Pysarenko, L.A., & Krakovska, S.V. (2021б). Impact of deforestation on moisture evaporation from soil and canopy for the territory of Ukraine based on data of numerical experiment LUMIP. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 43(6), 221—247. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.v43i6.251564 (in Ukrainian).
Pysarenko, L.A., & Krakovska, S.V. (2022). The influence of partial deforestation on moisture regime: sums of precipitation and total soil moisture content for the territory of Ukraine based on data of numerical experiment LUMIP. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 44(4), 124—145. https://doi.org/10.24028/gj.v44i4.264844 (in Uk¬rainian).
Popova, L.O., Ivus, H.P., & Semerhei-Chumachenko, A.B. (2018). Change in wind speed and direction over Odesa region. Proc. of the third international conference for young scientist son modern hydro meteorology: topical issues and the solutions, 21—23 March 2018, Odesa, Ukraine (pp. 183—184).
Lipinsky, V.M., Osadchyy, V.I., Babichenko, V.M. (Eds.). (2006). Natural Meteorological Pheno¬me¬na on the Territory of Ukraine for the Last Twen¬ty Years (1986—2005). Kyiv: Nika-Center, 312 p.
Shevchenko, O.G., & Snizhko, S.I. (2018). Big city wind regime. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko Nati¬onal University of Kyiv, Geography, (3), 13—20. http://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2721. 2018. 72.3.
Barry, R., & Hall-McKim, E.A. (2014). Essentials of the Earth’s Climate System. Cambridge Univer. Press, 274 p.
Bonan, G.B. (2008). Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests. Science, 320, 1444—1449. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121.
Bonan, G.B., Pollard, D., & Thompson, S.L. (1992). Effects of boreal forest vegetation on global climate. Nature, 359, 716—718. https://doi.org/10. 1038/359716a0.
Boysen, L., Brovkin, V., & Pongratz, J. (2018). Climatic effects of idealized deforestation experiments in Earth System Models. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 20. Retrieved from https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2018/EGU2018-12079.pdf
Boysen, L., Brovkin, V., Pongratz, J., Lawrence, D., Lawrence, P., Vuichard, N., Peylin, Ph., Liddicoat, S., Hajima, T., Zhang, Y., Rocher, M., Delire, Ch., Séférian, R., Arora, V.K., Nieradzik, L., Anthoni, P., Thiery, W., Laguë, M., Lawrence, D., & Lo, M.-H. (2020). Global climate response to idealized deforestation in CMIP6 models. Biogeosciences, 17, 5615—5638. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5615-2020.
Brovkin, V., Boysen, L., Pongratz, J., Vuichard, N., Peylin, P., & Lawrence, D. (2020). Model intercomparison of idealized global deforestation experiments. EGU General Assembly, Online, 4—8 May. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-10295.
Boucher, O., Denvil, S., Levavasseur, G., Cozic, A., Caubel, A., Foujols, M.-A., Meurdesoif, Y.n, Cadule, P., Devilliers, M., Ghattas, J., Lebas, N., Lurton, T., Mellul, L., Musat, I., Mignot, J., & Cheruy, Fr. (2018). IPSL IPSL-CM6A-LR model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1534.
CMIP Phase 6 (CMIP6). (2023). Retrieved from https://www.wcrp-climate.org/wgcm-cmip/wgcm-cmip6.
Danabasoglu, G. (2019). NCAR CESM2 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.7627.
ESGF: WCRP Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. (2023). Retrieved from https://esgfnode.llnl.gov/search/cmip6/.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G.A., Senior, C.A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R.J., & Taylor, K.E. (2016). Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geoscientific Model Development, 9, 1937—1958. https://doi.org/10. 5194/gmd-9-1937-2016.
Huang, B., Hu, X., Fuglstad, G.-A., Zhou, X., Zhao, W., & Cherubini, F. (2020). Predominant regional biophysical cooling from recent land cover changes in Europe. Nature Communications, 11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14890-0.
IPCC. Climate change. (2014). Synthesis report. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf.
IPCC. Frequently Asked Questions. (2022а). Retrieved from: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/SR15_FAQ_Low_Res.pdf.
IPCC. Sixth Assessment Report Working Group 1: The Physical Science Basis. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/.
IPCC. Sixth Assessment Report Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022а). Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_FullReport.pdf.
IPCC. Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation. (2011). Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/renewable-energy-sources-and-climate-change-mitigation/.
IPCC Working Group I (WGI): Sixth Assessment Report. IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas. (2022б). Retrieved from https://interactive-atlas.ipcc.ch/.
Lawrence, D.M., Hurtt, G.C., Arneth, A., Brov¬kin, V., Calvin, K.V., Jones, A.D., Jones, C.D., Lawrence, P.J., deNoblet-Ducoudré, N., Pongratz, J., Seneviratne, S.I., & Shevliakova, E. (2016). The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) contribution to CMIP6: rationale and experimental design. Geoscientific Model Development, 9, 2973—2998. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2973-2016.
Karamushka, V., Boychenko, S., Kuchma, T., & Zabarna, O. (2022). Trends in the Environmental Conditions, Climate Change and Human Health in the Southern Region of Ukraine. Sustainability, 14(9), 5664. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095664.
Sanderson, M., Santini, M., Valentini, R., & Pope, E. (2012). Relationships between forests and weather. EC Directorate General of the Environment 13th January 2012. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/pdf/EU_Forests_annex1.pdf.
Seferian, R. (2018). CNRM-CERFACS CNRM-ESM2-1 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1391.
Shevchenko, O., Snizhko, S., & Matviienko, M. (2019). Human-biometeorological assessment of Kharkiv (Ukraine) in the summer season. Hrvatski Meteorološki Časopis, 54(54/55), 43— 54. https://doi.org/10.37982/hmc.54.55.1.4.
Sospedra-Alfonso, R., Lee, W., Merryfield, W.J., Swart, C.N., Cole, J.N.S., Kharin, V.V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J.F., Gillett, N.P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J.R., Jiao, Y., Lee, W.G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O, Seiler, Ch., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Solheim, L., vonSalzen, K., Yang, D., Winter, B., & Sigmond, M. (2019). CCCma CanESM5 model output prepared for CMIP6 DCPP. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1306.
Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Ellis, R., Kelley, D., Mulcahy, J., Sellar, A., Walton, J., & Jones, C. (2019). MOHC UKESM1.0-LL model output preparedfor CMIP6 CMIP historical. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6113.
Thom, D., Rammer, W., & Seidl, R. (2017). The impact of future forest dynamics on climate: interactive effects of changing vegetation and disturbance regimes. Ecological Monographs, 87(4), 665—684. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm. 1272.
The World Climate Research Programme. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.wcrp-climate.org/about-wcrp/wcrp-overview.
Wu, T., Chu, M., Dong, M., Fang, Y., Jie, W., Li, J.L., Weiping, L., Qianxia, S., Xueli, X., Yan, J., Zhang, F., Zhang, J., Zhang, L., & Zhang, Y. (2018). BCC BCC-CSM2MR model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical. Earth System Grid Federation. https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.2948.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 L.A. Pysarenko, S.V. Krakowska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
