Lessons from inter-comparison of decadal climate simulations and observations for the Midwest U.S. and Great Lakes region

Even with advances in climate modeling, meteorological impact assessment remains elusive, and decision-makers are forced to operate with potentially malinformed predictions. In this article, we investigate the dependence of the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model simulated precipitation and temperature at 12- and 4-km horizontal resolutions and compare it with 32-km NARR data and 1/16th-degree gridded observations for the Midwest U.S. and Great Lakes region from 1991 to 2000. We used daily climatology, inter-annual variability, percentile, and dry days as metrics for inter-comparison for precipitation. We also calculated the summer and winter daily seasonal minimum, maximum, and average temperature to delineate the temperature trends. Results showed that NARR data is a useful precipitation product for mean warm season and summer climatological studies, but performs extremely poorly for winter and cold seasons for this region. WRF model simulations at 12- and 4-km horizontal resolutions were able to capture the lake-effect precipitation successfully when driven by observed lake surface temperatures. Simulations at 4-km showed negative bias in capturing precipitation without convective parameterization but captured the number of dry days and 99^th percentile precipitation extremes well. Overall, our study cautions against hastily pushing for increasingly higher resolution in climate studies, and highlights the need for the careful selection of large-scale boundary forcing data.