ALBERT

Description: The building permission process is to a large extent an analogue process where much information is handled in paper format or as pdf files. With the ongoing digitalisation in society, there is a potential to automate this process by integrating Building Information Models (BIM) of planned buildings and geospatial data to check if a building conforms to the building permission regulations. In this study, an inventory of which regulations in the (Swedish) detailed development plans that can be automatically checked or supported by 3D visualisation was conducted. Then, two of these regulations, the building height and the building footprint area, were studied in detail to find to which extent they can be automatically checked by integration of BIM and geospatial data. In addition, a feasibility study of one visual criterion was conducted. One concern when automating the building permission process is the variability of content within the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) data model. Variations in modelling methods and model content leads to differences in IFC models’ content and structure; these differences complicate automated processes. To facilitate automated processes, requirements on the production of IFC models for building permission applications could be defined in the form of model view definitions or delivery specifications.

Description: As global warming is proceeding due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations, the Earth system moves towards climate states that challenge adaptation. Past Earth system states are offering possible modelling systems for the global warming of the coming decades. These include the climate of the mid-Pliocene (∼ 3 Ma), the last interglacial (∼ 129–116 ka) and the mid-Holocene (∼ 6 ka). The simulations for these past warm periods are the key experiments in the Paleoclimate Model Intercomparison Project (PMIP) phase 4, contributing to phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Paleoclimate modelling has long been regarded as a robust out-of-sample test bed of the climate models used to project future climate changes. Here, we document the model setup for PMIP4 experiments with EC-Earth3-LR and present the large-scale features from the simulations for the mid-Holocene, the last interglacial and the mid-Pliocene. Using the pre-industrial climate as a reference state, we show global temperature changes, large-scale Hadley circulation and Walker circulation, polar warming, global monsoons and the climate variability modes – El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). EC-Earth3-LR simulates reasonable climate responses during past warm periods, as shown in the other PMIP4-CMIP6 model ensemble. The systematic comparison of these climate changes in past three warm periods in an individual model demonstrates the model's ability to capture the climate response under different climate forcings, providing potential implications for confidence in future projections with the EC-Earth model.

Description: Glacier mass balance is heavily influenced by climate, with responses of individual glaciers to various climate parameters varying greatly. In northern Sweden, Rabots Glaciär’s mass balance has decreased since it started being monitored in 1982. To relate Rabots Glaciär’s mass balance to changes in climate, the sensitivity to a range of parameters is computed. Through linear regression of mass balance with temperature, precipitation, humidity, wind speed and incoming radiation the climate sensitivity is established and projections for future summer mass balance are made. Summer mass balance is primarily sensitive to temperature at −0.31 m w.e. per °C change, while winter mass balance is mainly sensitive to precipitation at 0.94 m w.e. per % change. An estimate using summer temperature sensitivity projects a dramatic decrease in summer mass balance to −3.89 m w.e. for the 2091–2100 period under climate scenario RCP8.5. With large increases in temperature anticipated for the next century, more complex modelling studies of the relationship between climate and glacier mass balance is key to understanding the future development of Rabots Glaciär.

Description: The incorporation of water isotopologues into the hydrology of general circulation models (GCMs) facilitates the comparison between modeled and measured proxy data in paleoclimate archives. However, the variability and drivers of measured and modeled water isotopologues, as well as the diversity of their representation in different models, are not well constrained. Improving our understanding of this variability in past and present climates will help to better constrain future climate change projections and decrease their range of uncertainty. Speleothems are a precisely datable terrestrial paleoclimate archives and provide well-preserved (semi-)continuous multivariate isotope time series in the lower latitudes and mid-latitudes and are therefore well suited to assess climate and isotope variability on decadal and longer timescales. However, the relationships of speleothem oxygen and carbon isotopes to climate variables are influenced by site-specific parameters, and their comparison to GCMs is not always straightforward. Here we compare speleothem oxygen and carbon isotopic signatures from the Speleothem Isotopes Synthesis and Analysis database version 2 (SISALv2) to the output of five different water-isotope-enabled GCMs (ECHAM5-wiso, GISS-E2-R, iCESM, iHadCM3, and isoGSM) over the last millennium (850–1850 CE). We systematically evaluate differences and commonalities between the standardized model simulation outputs. The goal is to distinguish climatic drivers of variability for modeled isotopes and compare them to those of measured isotopes. We find strong regional differences in the oxygen isotope signatures between models that can partly be attributed to differences in modeled surface temperature. At low latitudes, precipitation amount is the dominant driver for stable water isotope variability; however, at cave locations the agreement between modeled temperature variability is higher than for precipitation variability. While modeled isotopic signatures at cave locations exhibited extreme events coinciding with changes in volcanic and solar forcing, such fingerprints are not apparent in the speleothem isotopes. This may be attributed to the lower temporal resolution of speleothem records compared to the events that are to be detected. Using spectral analysis, we can show that all models underestimate decadal and longer variability compared to speleothems (albeit to varying extents). We found that no model excels in all analyzed comparisons, although some perform better than the others in either mean or variability. Therefore, we advise a multi-model approach whenever comparing proxy data to modeled data. Considering karst and cave internal processes, e.g., through isotope-enabled karst models, may alter the variability in speleothem isotopes and play an important role in determining the most appropriate model. By exploring new ways of analyzing the relationship between the oxygen and carbon isotopes, their variability, and co-variability across timescales, we provide methods that may serve as a baseline for future studies with different models using, e.g., different isotopes, different climate archives, or different time periods.

Description: The incorporation of water isotopologues into the hydrology of general circulation models (GCMs) facilitates the comparison between modeled and measured proxy data in paleoclimate archives. However, the variability and drivers of measured and modeled water isotopologues, as well as the diversity of their representation in different models, are not well constrained. Improving our understanding of this variability in past and present climates will help to better constrain future climate change projections and decrease their range of uncertainty. Speleothems are a precisely datable terrestrial paleoclimate archives and provide well-preserved (semi-)continuous multivariate isotope time series in the lower latitudes and mid-latitudes and are therefore well suited to assess climate and isotope variability on decadal and longer timescales. However, the relationships of speleothem oxygen and carbon isotopes to climate variables are influenced by site-specific parameters, and their comparison to GCMs is not always straightforward. Here we compare speleothem oxygen and carbon isotopic signatures from the Speleothem Isotopes Synthesis and Analysis database version 2 (SISALv2) to the output of five different water-isotope-enabled GCMs (ECHAM5-wiso, GISSE2-R, iCESM, iHadCM3, and isoGSM) over the last millennium (850–1850 CE). We systematically evaluate differences and commonalities between the standardized model simulation outputs. The goal is to distinguish climatic drivers of variability for modeled isotopes and compare them to those of measured isotopes. We find strong regional differences in the oxygen isotope signatures between models that can partly be attributed to differences in modeled surface temperature. At low latitudes, precipitation amount is the dominant driver for stable water isotope variability; however, at cave locations the agreement between modeled temperature variability is higher than for precipitation variability. While modeled isotopic signatures at cave locations exhibited extreme events coinciding with changes in volcanic and solar forcing, such fingerprints are not apparent in the speleothem isotopes. This may be attributed to the lower temporal resolution of speleothem records compared to the events that are to be detected. Using spectral analysis, we can show that all models underestimate decadal and longer variability compared to speleothems (albeit to varying extents). We found that no model excels in all analyzed comparisons, although some perform better than the others in either mean or variability. Therefore, we advise a multi-model approach whenever comparing proxy data to modeled data. Considering karst and cave internal processes, e.g., through isotope-enabled karst models, may alter the variability in speleothem isotopes and play an important role in determining the most appropriate model. By exploring new ways of analyzing the relationship between the oxygen and carbon isotopes, their variability, and co-variability across timescales, we provide methods that may serve as a baseline for future studies with different models using, e.g., different isotopes, different climate archives, or different time periods.