Annex Document

Climate and Climate Change

in Ecuador: An Overview

Erin Burke, Department of Earth and Space Sciences

Naomi Goldenson, Department of Atmospheric Sciences
Twila Moon, Department of Earth and Space Sciences
Stephen Po-Chedley, Department of Atmospheric Sciences
I. Historical Climate Background......................................................................... 3
A. Climate in the Tropics................................................................................... 2
1. Seasonal Cycle near the Equator ............................................................. 2
2. El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) ....................................................... 3
i. Predicting ENSO........................................................................................ 4
B. Climate in Ecuador ......................................................................................... 5
1. Overview of Ecuador’s Climatology ........................................................ 5
i. Temperature in Ecuador ......................................................................... 6
ii. Precipitation in Ecuador ...................................................................... 10
iii. ENSO in Ecuador .................................................................................. 11
2. Regional Climates within Ecuador ........................................................ 18
C. Changing Glaciers ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
1. Andean Glaciers ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2. Ecuador’s Glaciers.................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
i. Glaciers and Water Supply ................................................................... 25
II. Understanding Climate Models and Uncertainty....................................... 26
A. General Circulation Models (GCMs).......................................................... 26
3. Climate Model Predictive Skill................................................................ 27
i. Temperature............................................................................................ 28
ii. Precipitation ........................................................................................... 30
B. Downscaling Climate Models for Regional Climates............................. 32
1. Dynamical Downscaling .......................................................................... 33
2. Statistical Downscaling............................................................................ 33
3. Glacier Models Coupled with GCMs ...................................................... 33
III. Future Climate Predictions for Ecuador..................................................... 33
A. Future Temperature and Variability ........................................................ 35
1. Predicting Future Temperature.............................................................. 35
2. The Future of Frost in Ecuador .............................................................. 41
B. Future Precipitation and Variability ......................................................... 42
1. Model Skill in Replicating Past Precipitation....................................... 42
2. Changes in Precipitation due to Climate Change............................... 44
C. Temperature and Precipitation Predictability from ENSO ................... 47
IV. References ........................................................................................................ 54

2
I. Historical Climate Background
A. Climate in the Tropics
1. Seasonal Cycle near the Equator

Ecuador’s equatorial position dictates the basic climate of the country,

though the varied topography does create different regional climatology
(see Section IB). With fairly constant daily solar radiation, there is
generally no temperature seasonality in tropical nations (located roughly
between 30ºN and 30ºS, though regional variation in temperature may
result (especially from ocean influences). Instead of seasonal shifts, large
temperature changes may be observed in the diurnal cycle. High-altitude
regions of Ecuador may see differences in day and night temperatures
that exceed 20°C.

Precipitation in Ecuador, as with other tropical nations, is much more

varied than temperature both regionally and seasonally. We see
pronounced regional differences within our study group, the high Andes.
Eastern slope precipitation is impacted by perennially wet easterly trade
winds that travel from the Amazon basin and tropical Atlantic. Slopes in
the northwest are influenced by the Intertropical Convergence Zone,
which brings moisture from the eastern Pacific. This moisture is forced
upward by increasing elevations, creating precipitation. In contrast,
southwestern slopes are primarily influenced by the Humboldt Current,
which brings air north along South America’s western coast. This is a
dry, cool airmass, which keeps the southwestern slopes especially dry
(except during El Niño events). As a result of these difference
precipitation sources, the east side of the Andes has lower maximum
annual precipitation (400-800 m) than the west slope (2000-2500 m)
[Buytaert et al., 2006].

2. El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO)

The Southern Oscillation is a global atmospheric oscillation that directly

links to El Niño and La Niña, two climate states that affect ocean and
atmosphere behavior in the Pacific. El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO)
is characterized by two prominent phases of ocean temperature
anomalies. Warm events, or El Niño events, are associated with sea
surface temperature (SST) anomalies more than 0.5°C above normal
across the central tropical Pacific, while La Niña is associated with
anomalies 0.5°C below normal. During El Niño, warm waters along the
coasts of Peru and Ecuador interrupt the upwelling of deep, cold ocean
water. In general, El Niño events increase the likelihood of the following
conditions:
• Western Pacific drought
• Increased precipitation for the equatorial coast of South America
• Increased storm and hurricane activity in the central Pacific

3
The El Niño events of 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 were particularly strong
in regards to impacts for Ecuador. La Niña conditions have occurred less
often over the past 35 years than El Niño conditions (Figure 1), and
generally do not have as significant effect for equatorial South America
(though effects elsewhere may be notable).

Figure 1: Multivariate ENSO index shows El Niño (red) and La Niña (blue) phases.
Six variables are used to determine the index: sea level pressure, east-west and
north-south components of the surface wind, sea surface temperature, surface air
temperature, and total amount of cloudiness. [Source: Climate Diagnostics Center,
NOAA/CIRES, http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd]

The range of impacts on Ecuador and the Ecuadorian Andes from ENSO is
not well-understood. One recent study suggests that the influence of
ENSO on the Ecuadorian Andes is limited, with significant precipitation
influence ending at the western edge of the mountains (Figure 2) [Rossel
and Cadier, 2009]. On the other hand, researchers examining glacier
behavior on Antisana Volcano in the northern Ecuadorian Andes found a
connection between El Niño /La Niña phases and glacier mass balance
(see section IC) [Francou, et al., 2004]. Discrepancies such as these point
toward the wide range of scientific opinion in regards to ENSO and its
Ecuadorian impacts. Nevertheless, ENSO is likely to remain an important
factor in Ecuador’s climate as the global climate changes.

i. Predicting ENSO

Through the use of both coupled ocean/atmosphere models and

statistical models, ENSO conditions are predictable on a 3-12 month
timescale. A comprehensive list of ENSO forecast sources is available
from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
(via http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/forecasts.html), with various
forecasts available in Spanish and English.

4
Figure 2: Boundaries of strong (>40%) significant (>20%) ENSO influences on annual
rainfalls in northwestern South America [Rossel and Cadier, 2009].

B. Climate in Ecuador
1. Overview of Ecuador’s Climatology


To understand the implications of climate change on Ecuador, it is useful

to have an understanding of both current and historical climate trends.
We will focus on measures of temperature and precipitation, followed by
some discussion of the role of ENSO.

Gridded temperature and precipitation data were made available by

Willmott, Matsuura, and collaborators at the University of Delaware

5
(hereafter referred to as UDel data) . These gridded data were produced
1

by spatially interpolating temperature and precipitation observations

collected by several sources from land weather station across the globe23
We extract temperature and precipitation data from the UDel data set
over a grid box which corresponds to the common grid box for model
output used in Section III (Figure 3).

i. Temperature in Ecuador


The UDel data is only available over land, whereas the model outputs may
incorporate some fraction of output over the ocean. This potential
source of bias will be discussed in Section IIA. Maps of the average
temperature and precipitation over the whole time series are shown in
Figure 4 and Figure 5.

Figure 3: The grid box used to extract UDel data (only sub-grid boxes over land were
used).

1
The data is provided in ASCII format from the University of Delaware:
http://climate.geog.udel.edu/~climate/. We were provided with a gridded netCDF format version by
University of Washington graduate student Rob Nicholas.
2
Version 2.01 of the 1900 – 2008 temperature product; Matsuura and Willmott, 2009.
3
Version 2.01 of the 1900 – 2008 precipitation product; Matsuura and Willmott, 2009.
6
Figure 4: Temperature from the UDel dataset averaged over the entire time series
(1900-2008). Grey line delineates the coast, and dark black contours delineates
topography. Blue stars show the locations of selected weather stations. Scale in oC.

Figure 5. Precipitation from the UDel dataset, as in Figure 4. Scale in mm/day.

7
Figure 6: Monthly temperature data (UDel), showing a linear warming trend over the
last century of about 0.1o/decade.

A warming trend emerges from the background variability in the

temperature data for the time series (1900-2008) (Figure 6). After
subtracting the trend, we can look at the probability distribution of
temperature anomalies about the mean (Figure 7). This will serve as our
base distribution to compare future temperature predictions in Section
III. It is also instructive to see the temperature probability distribution
for each season (Figure 8).

The seasonal cycle of temperature is plotted in Figure 9. As mentioned in

section IA, the diurnal (day-night) temperature range is bigger than the
difference in mean temperature across the seasons.

8
Figure 7: The frequency of months at, above, or below the mean temperature
(normalized to 0oC to emphasize deviation from the mean) for the grid box.

Figure 8: As in Figure 7, divided up by season. Note how the distribution differs for
each season.

9
Figure 9: Historical seasonal cycle of monthly mean temperature, which varies by
only a few degrees due to proximity to the equator.

ii. Precipitation in Ecuador

The precipitation time series for 1900-2008 is plotted in Figure 10 and

the seasonal cycle is displayed by Figures 11 and 12. The variation
between seasons is much more substantial in precipitation than
temperature.

Figure 10: The historical precipitation record (UDel) for 1900-2008 shows no clear
trend.

10
Figure 11: The seasonal cycle of precipitation for the entire grid box. The wettest
month is March and the driest is August.

Figure 12: Pie chart showing how precipitation is distributed by season.

iii. ENSO in Ecuador

ENSO is a major source of natural variability in Ecuador. The extent to

which ENSO is responsible for temperature and precipitation extremes
will be investigated in this section. We correlate indices that measure the
strength of ENSO with the historical temperature and precipitation
record. The ENSO indices that we use are sea surface temperature (SST)

11
anomalies, based on the regions of the tropical Pacific shown in Figure
13, and accessed from the National Weather Service4.

Figure 13 The sea surface temperature indices of ENSO that we consider are based
on the areas of ocean shown in the map. Niño1+2 is best correlated with
precipitation in Ecuador. (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/indices/oceanic-
indices-map.gif)

It results that the SST indices for the combined region of Niño1+2
correlate the best with precipitation anomalies, unsurprising since the
Niño1+2 regions are just off the coast of Ecuador. The correlations are
significant (to 95% confidence) in the months in which precipitation is
greatest (November-May) and the correlation is strongest (and not well
correlated or significant in the other months – June to October).

The SST index that best predicts ENSO, however, is Niño 3.4. Because
Niño 3.4 is removed from the Ecuadorian coast, it is clear that Ecuadorian
precipitation and temperature anomalies are not influencing the SST
index, so it better isolates the extent to which anomalies in Ecuador are
related to ENSO. The results of the correlations with each of the SST
indices are presented in Table 1.

The time series plots of Niño 3.4 anomalies and monthly temperature
anomalies are shown in Figure 14Error! Reference source not found..
Precipitation anomalies are compared with Niño 3.4 in Figure 15. The
best-correlated month (April), which is also one of the rainiest months, is
shown by itself in Figure 16Error! Reference source not found.. This
suggests that based on historical data, and baring any drastic change in
the state of ENSO in the future, indices of the strength of ENSO do a good
job of indicating when precipitation in the rainy months is particularly
high.

4
http//www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/
12
Table 1: Correlations of SST index anomalies with monthly precipitation anomalies
from UDel data. Correlations that are significant to the 95% level are in bold.

Mont Niño 1+2 Niño 3 Niño 4 Niño 3.4

h
Jan 0.2748 0.1403 -0.0890 0.0301
Feb 0.4134 0.2448 -0.0470 0.1188
Mar 0.6011 0.4780 0.0284 0.2919
Apr 0.7385 0.6460 0.2683 0.4978
May 0.5039 0.3657 0.1741 0.3055
Jun 0.2530 0.1462 0.0471 0.0525
Jul 0.0351 0.0182 -0.0510 -0.0438
Aug -0.1180 -0.0734 -0.0519 -0.0782
Sep -0.0144 -0.0899 -0.0822 -0.0934
Oct -0.0132 -0.0153 -0.0702 -0.0516
Nov 0.5156 0.4685 0.1914 0.3735
Dec 0.6389 0.5402 0.2409 0.4320

Figure 14: Time series of the relative NINO 3.4 anomaly and the relative surface
temperature anomaly averaged over all of Ecuador.

Figure 15: Time series of the relative NINO 3.4 anomaly and the relative precipitation
anomaly averaged over all of Ecuador.

13
 Precipitation and SST Anomalies for April
6
Precip Anomalies
5 Niño 3.4 Anomalies

3
Anomaly
2

−1

−2

−3
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year

Figure 16: Time series of precipitation anomalies from UDel data – April only,
compared with SST anomalies of Niño1+2 indices.

The monthly correlations in Table 1, are illustrated graphically in Figure

17, for the Niño3.4 index, which best represents ENSO. Also shown are
the monthly correlations of ENSO with temperature, which are notably
stronger (Figure 18). These correlations are for the entire box, covering
most of Ecuador, from which we extracted data.

Figure 17: Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the precipitation anomaly averaged over all of Ecuador. Values that are
statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.
14
Figure 18: Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the temperature anomaly averaged over all of Ecuador. Values that are
statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.

The discussion in Section IA2 indicates that the influence of ENSO should
be looked at spatially (Figure 2). Below we compare the correlation
between ENSO, precipitation, and temperature for the coast and for the
sierra. For precipitation (Figure 19 and Figure 21) the correlations
improve slightly for the coast and deteriorate for the sierra region. For
temperature (Figure 20 and Figure 22) the correlations do not change
(r<0.05) for the coast and decrease for the sierra.

The monthly correlations for ENSO and precipitation and ENSO and
temperature are shown in Figures 19-20 for Ecuador’s coast.

15
Figure 19: Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the precipitation anomaly averaged over the coastal region. Values that
are statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.

Figure 20: Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the temperature anomaly averaged over the coastal region. Values that
are statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.

16
The monthly correlations for ENSO and precipitation and ENSO and
temperature are shown in Figures 21-22 for the Sierra.

Figure 21. Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the precipitation anomaly averaged over the sierra region. Values that
are statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.

Figure 22. Bar graph showing the correlation coefficient between the NINO 3.4 index
anomaly and the temperature anomaly averaged over the sierra region. Values that
are statistically significant to 95% are denoted with * and values that are statistically
significant to 99% are denoted with **.

17
2. Regional Climates within Ecuador

The climate of Ecuador varies regionally due to altitudinal and coastal

effects. The mainland of Ecuador can be divided into three climatic
regimes, including the Amazon Rainforest (east of the Andes Mountains),
the cordillera and highlands of the Andes (running North-South along the
center of the country), and the Pacific Coast (west of the Andes
Mountains) (Figure 23).

One generalization that can be made of equatorial climates is that they

do not have a seasonal cycle akin to higher latitudes. Instead, the tropical
climate of Ecuador can be characterized by a wet season and a dry
season, though each season varies by geographical location.

Four weather stations have been picked out as representations of the

different climates in Ecuador (Figure 24): Quito, in the north, represents
the sierra of the Andes; Puyo, in the southeast, is representative of the
climate in the Amazon Rainforest; Guayaquil, in the southwest,
represents coastal climate; and San Cristóbal is an island in the
Galapagos Archipelago (not a focus of this work).

Figure 23. Map of Ecuador. (Geographic Guide)

18
Figure 24. Mean annual temperature cycle for Quito (Sierra), Guayaquil (Coast), Puyo
(Amazon), and San Cristóbal (Pacific Island) prior to 2000. [Bermeo et al., 2000]

Figure 25. Time series is an example of the diurnal temperature cycle in Quito and
Guayaquil, Ecuador (from April 23 through April 24, 2010). Relative to the annual
cycle, the changes in temperature in the diurnal cycle are much larger. (Weather
Underground).

The mean monthly temperature in all regions is relatively constant

compared to the diurnal cycle (Figures 24, 25), differing by only a few
degrees throughout the year. Even though some regions are cooler (e.g.
the highlands around Quito) and others warmer (e.g. the coast near
Guayaquil), the seasonal differences at each location are not large. The
annual precipitation cycle, on the other hand, varies more distinctly both
temporally and spatially (Figure 26).

19
Figure 26. Mean annual precipitation cycle for Quito (Sierra), Quayquil (Coast), Puyo
(Amazon), and San Cristóbal (Pacific Island) prior to 2000. [Bermeo et al., 2000]

The
precipitation
cycle
for
different
regions
of
Ecuador
is
identified
in
Table
2

C. Changing Glaciers
1. Andean Glaciers

The Andes hold more than 99% of all tropical glaciers, with Peru holding
~70% of those and the other significant glaciers locations being primarily
in Ecuador and Bolivia. With icemelting throughout the year,
communities throughout the Andes rely on glaciers for some or all of
their seasonal water supplies (especially during dry seasons). The future
of Andean glaciers, however, is not bright. Evidence for past, present,
and future loss of glaciers throughout the Andes is present through
direct observations of mass balance [e.g., Francou et al., 2003; Soruco, et
al., 2009] and indirect indications from studies examining related factors,
. In the coastal region, most of the rainfall is along the northern portion
of the country (Figure 26). Along the Andes, rainfall becomes scarcer with
altitude [Bermeo et al., 2000]. The Amazon has permanent rainfall
throughout the year and is Ecuador’s rainiest region.

Table 2. Rainy seasons and peak rainfall months for different regions of Ecuador.
[Bermeo et al. 2000].

Region Rainy Season Peak Dry Season

Coastal December - May February-March June - December
Sierra October - May October, April June - September
Amazon Throughout NA NA

20
C. Changing Glaciers
1. Andean Glaciers

The Andes hold more than 99% of all tropical glaciers, with Peru holding
~70% of those and the other significant glaciers locations being primarily
in Ecuador and Bolivia. With icemelting throughout the year,
communities throughout the Andes rely on glaciers for some or all of
their seasonal water supplies (especially during dry seasons). The future
of Andean glaciers, however, is not bright. Evidence for past, present,
and future loss of glaciers throughout the Andes is present through
direct observations of mass balance [e.g., Francou et al., 2003; Soruco, et
al., 2009] and indirect indications from studies examining related factors,

Figure 26. Figure demonstrates the topography and rainfall throughout Ecuador.
There is relatively little precipitation along the Sierra and southern coast, but more
rainfall in the Amazon and along the northern coast. (Ecominga, 2010).

such as atmospheric warming [Bradley et al., 2009]. While many elements

can influence glacier retreat (including slope aspect, humidity,
precipitation, temperature, and wind patterns) an examination of studies
throughout Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador indicate a consistent regional
retreat of glaciers during the 20th century and into the 21st (Figure 28)
[Vuille, et al., 2008]. Climate projections do not provide any indication
that this trend will stop over the next several decades.

2. Ecuador’s Glaciers

Roughly speaking, Ecuador’s mountains and, thus, its glaciers, lie within
two mountain ranges, the Cordillera Occidental (more western peaks) and
the Cordillera Oriental (more eastern peaks, bordering the Amazon).
Glaciers in the Cordillera Oriental are found at lower elevation because of
21
the high peaks on which they sit and the high precipitation brought in
from the Amazon basin and tropical Atlantic. Ecuador’s glaciers have
already seen important changes that are linked to climate change.
Cotacachi, Corazon, and Sincholagua peaks, in the Cordillera Occidental,
completely lost their permanent ice in the last 10-15 years, while the
higher peaks of the Cordillera Oriental (Chimborazi, Cayambe, Antisana,
and Cotopaxi) are continuing to experience ice retreat (Figure 29).

Figure 27: Change in length and surface area of 10 tropical Andean glaciers from
Ecuador (Antisana 15a and 15b), Peru (Yanamarey, Broggi, Pastoruri, Uruashraju,
Gajap) and Bolivia (Zongo, Charquini, Chacaltaya) between 1930 and 2005. [Vuille, et
al., 2008]

22
Figure 28: Satellite image showing Quito (red star) and Antisana Volcano, Cayambe
Volcano, and Cotopaxi Volcano (blue circles). [Image source: Google Earth]

Ecuador’s glaciers are uniquely sensitive to climate because of their

equatorial geography. With no seasonal temperature cycle, there are no
distinct seasons for accumulation or ablation of ice - gain and loss of ice
can happen at any time of year. Thus, the 0°C isotherm, which
determines where precipitation falls as snow (above the isotherm) or rain
(below the isotherm), is constantly moving and is particularly sensitive to
temperature change [Favier et al., 2004]. The temperature increases that
Ecuador has seen over the last several decades and the many El Niño
events during the last half-century have both acted to decrease ice mass
throughout Ecuador.

The best-studied glacier in Ecuador is the Antisana Glacier 15 (Figure 30),

sitting at 4800-5760 m elevation on Antisana Volcano located 50 km
southeast of Quito. Antisana Glacier 15, with an area of roughly 1 km2 is
a reasonable representative for other small glaciers throughout the
Andes. The surface area and volume of Antisana Glacier 15 had declined
by more than 30% since 1956, with an increasing rate of loss in the most
recent decades (with 8% of area lost during 1996-98) [Francou et al.,
2000]. Photogrammetry research on Cotopaxi Volcano also showed a 30%
area loss for the volcano ice cap between 1976 and 1997 [Jordan et al.,
2005]. These results from Ecuador are in agreement with glacier studies
throughout the Andes showing an acceleration of glacier ice loss since
the 1970s, as outlined in the above section.
23
Figure 29 The two glaciers of Antisana Glacier 15, with location of the main
equipment installed on or near the glacier. Inset shows location of Antisana within
Ecuador. Dashed line separates glacier tongues 15a and 15b and solid triangle shows
Antisana Volcano summit (5760m). [Francou, et al., 2004]

Research on Antisana Glacier 15 suggests that ENSO does have a

significant affect on glacier mass balance, with La Niña events favoring a
positive or neutral glacier mass balance and El Niño conditions favoring a
negative mass balance (Figure 31) [Vuille et al., 2003; Francou et al.,
2004]. The different climate effects of these ENSO phases helps to
explain the impact ENSO plays in glacier mass balance:

El Niño
o With El Niño events, the Andes are likely to experience warm
and dry anomalies
 Higher air temperatures favor rainfall over snowfall
 Glacier albedo (the amount of radiation reflected) is
decreased and the ice absorbs more radiation
 Generally low wind speeds, which encourage melting
 Less cloud cover, which allows for higher incoming
radiation

La Niña
o The Andes experience cold and wet weather during La Niña
events.
 Cold temperatures encourage snowfall over rainfall
 Increased snowfall helps to maintain high albedo,
reflecting more radiation
24
  Generally higher wind speed that help reduce melting

Thus, the hydrologic and temperature effects of ENSO act to increase or

decrease glacier mass balance. Antisana glacier mass balance changes
are also most variable during February-May, which is consistent with the
delayed ENSO signal that is recorded in the Andes [Francou et al., 2004].

Figure 30 Antizana mass balance anomalies (mm water equivalent) in the ablation
zone stratified by ENSO events. Individual monthly measurements (small circles),
the mean (large circles), and +/- 1 standard deviation are indicated (vertical bars) for
El Niño (solid circles) and La Niña events (open circles). [Francou, et al., 2004]

Given Antisana’s glacier sensitivity to El Niño , tropical Pacific sea surface

temperature is clearly one of the more important variables for
determining future glacier mass balance. If temperature and
precipitation remain linked to sea surface temperature, this provides
further reason to expect a continued decline in glacier mass: all climate
models examined by Paeth et al. [2008] predict eastern tropical Pacific
warming on the order of 5 °C by 2100.

i. Glaciers and Water Supply

Water supply in several areas of Ecuador is linked to glacial runoff.

Unfortunately, sorting out a precise impact of glacial melt on water
supply in Ecuador is difficult because there is little current understanding
of the connection between water output from glaciers, regional
hydrology, and water supply for the end-user. For example, estimates of
water use from Quito are inconsistent, and it is not clear what portions
come from ice melt versus other precipitation or runoff. A brief survey
of sources produces the following array of estimates:

- “Roughly 50% of Quito’s water comes from Antisana glacier.”

[Wehner, 2002]

25
 - “ "In 20 to 30 years we will have a problem with the potable water
supply," says Bolivar Caceres, a glaciologist with the hydrology and
meteorology institute. As the glaciers recede, he says, there will be
less water for Quito, where 70 percent of the water comes from
surrounding ice caps.“ [Bartolone, 2006]
- About 10 per cent of the water supply to Quito, the capital of
Ecuador, is also estimated to come from surrounding ice caps.”
[Painter, 2007]

Without data for glacier-sourced water usage, it will be difficult for

communities of all sizes in Ecuador to plan for future water security. In
the case of Quito, the majority of the city’s water supply comes from the
paramo, with three water supply locations that all pull from glaciated
peaks: the Cunuyacta river in the Cayambe-Coca reserve, reservoirs on
the slopes of the Antisana Volcano and the Rio Pita from Cotopaxi and
Sincholagua volcanoes [Buytaert et al., 2006]. Unfortunately, science does
not currently understand how glacier loss and climate change will affect
the hydrology of the paramo. Ecuador is also lacking the monitoring
tools needed to correctly assess changes in glacial water discharge.
Sorting out the issue of glacier water supply is a clear need in light of the
significant changes expected for Ecuador’s glaciers and deserving of
increased scientific research.

II. Understanding Climate Models and Uncertainty

A. General Circulation Models (GCMs)

Climate scientists use General Circulation Models (GCMs) to predict

future climate trends. The system is forced by the fluid dynamics of
large-scale atmospheric and oceanic motions, and parameterizations of
the radiation balance. The latest models use parameterizations of many
other aspects of the Earth system, from clouds to sea ice to the land
surface. In the IPCC Forth Assessment Report (AR4) there are 25
different models from 18 different groups worldwide (see Figure 31).
These model output data are archived by the World Climate Research
Programme's (WCRP's) Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3
(CMIP3) multi-model dataset.

26
Figure 31 Models included in the IPCC AR4, and their IDs with the Coupled Model
Intercomparison Project.

The GCMs simulate atmospheric dynamics and other processes by

dividing the globe into a finite number of discrete grid boxes horizontally
and vertically, where each box interacts with its neighbors. The
computational resources that are available limit the size of the grid. The
AR4 IPCC models use grid boxes of order 5 degrees in size. One of the
improvements for the Fifth Assessment Report will be a finer-resolution
grid. One of the side effects of a large grid box in a GCM is that
topography is not properly resolved. This means that the true effects of
the topography on atmospheric circulation are not accounted for.
Additionally, the output does not have the resolution to distinguish
temperature differences between the mountains and the coast.

3. Climate Model Predictive Skill

Climate model predictive skill for future climates depends on the area
over which the projection is being made and the variable in question.
Global circulation models can replicate historical temperature trends, but
precipitation is not as easily represented. Even though climate models are
able to replicate historical climates, there are still large uncertainties in
predicting future climate conditions both because the future
anthropogenic influence is unknown and because it is unclear how large
climate feedbacks will be (a climate feedback is something that enhances
or diminishes an effect of climate change).

27
i. Climate Model Predictive Skill for Temperature

Global climate models have been able to reproduce historical 20th century
temperature trends when known climate forcings or influences are taken
into account (Figure 32). While this report does not attempt to
demonstrate good agreement between historical Ecuadorian temperature
trends and climate model predictions, the mean model bias for surface-
air temperature in this region of South America is typically less than 2oC
on land (Figure 33). Temperature biases may be a result of issues such as
ocean contamination in land dominated grid boxes or altitudinal effects
(flattening a grid box when there is topography). Despite temperature
biases, the temperature trend (temperature change over time) is expected
to be representative of future climates, even if the predicted trend is not
well constrained (Figure 34).

Figure 32. Comparison of observed continental- and global-scale changes in surface

temperature with results simulated by climate models using natural and
anthropogenic forcings. Decadal averages of observations are shown for the period
1906 to 2005 (black line) plotted against the centre of the decade and relative to the
corresponding average for 1901–1950. Lines are dashed where spatial coverage is
less than 50%. Blue shaded bands show the 5–95% range for 19 simulations from five
climate models using only the natural forcings due to solar activity and volcanoes.
Red shaded bands show the 5–95% range for 58 simulations from 14 climate models
using both natural and anthropogenic forcings. [IPCC, 2007]

28
Figure 33. MMD ensemble annual mean surface air temperatures in South America
compared with observations. a) observations from the HadCRUT2v data set (Jones et
al., 2001); b) mean of the 21 MMD models; c) difference between the multi-model
mean and the Had- CRUT2v data [IPCC, 2007].

29
Figure 34. Temperature anomalies with respect to 1901 to 1950 for the Amazon
region of South America for 1906 to 2005 (black line) and as simulated (red
envelope) by MMD models incorporating known forcings; and as projected for 2001
to 2100 by MMD models for the A1B scenario (orange envelope). The bars at the end
of the orange envelope represent the range of projected changes for 2091 to 2100 for
the B1 scenario (blue), the A1B scenario (orange) and the A2 scenario (red). The black
line is dashed where observations are present for less than 50% of the area in the
decade concerned [IPCC, 2007].

ii. Climate Model Predictive Skill for Precipitation

Although GCMs are able to represent temperature trends, climate models

tend to have much larger biases for precipitation (Figure 35). While
temperature biases can be several degrees, it is not uncommon for
precipitation biases to be off by a factor of two (in other words, climate
models for Ecuador can double precipitation). Section B1 discusses the
specific challenges in replicating precipitation in Ecuador.

30
Figure 35. MMD ensemble annual mean precipitaition in South America compared
with observations. a) Observations (CMAP) are an update of Xie and Arkin (1997).
Units mm/day); b) mean of the 21 MMD models; c) difference between the multi-
model mean and the CMAP data [IPCC, 2007].

Although climate models often misrepresent the seasonal cycle for

precipitation and the amount of rainfall, the majority of climate models
used in the IPCC Assessment (>75%) predict an increase in rainfall for
Ecuador (Figure 36). Even though there is general agreement on the sign
of the precipitation change in future climates, much work needs to be
done to determine the magnitude of the change and to downscale the
precipitation response regionally.

31
Figure 36. Temperature and precipitation changes over Central and South America
from the MMD-A1B simulations. Top row: Annual mean, DJF and JJA temperature
change between 1980 to 1999 and 2080 to 2099, averaged over 21 models. Middle
row: same as top, but for fractional change in precipitation. Bottom row: number of
models out of 21 that project increases in precipitation [IPCC, 2007].

B. Downscaling Climate Models for Regional Climates

For reasons described in the previous section, general circulation models

best describe fluid dynamics of the atmosphere at scales that are
continental in scale. Such global models generally have spatial resolution
of a few hundred kilometers, requiring sub-scale processes to be
parameterized. It is common sentiment in the climate science community
to doubt regional-scale climate simulations by GCMs because of these
parameterizations [Widmann et al, 2003; Wilby & Wigley, 1997]. Often,
smaller-scale processes are also the least understood, such as cloud and
water vapor feedbacks [Wilby & Wigley, 1997]. Downscaling techniques
are commonly employed as a means to analyze climate change
experiments and seasonal forecasts at a higher resolution than GCM
output. Two downscaling techniques have emerged in the past couple of
decades: dynamical and statistical downscaling. In the following sections,
we’ll explore the benefits, downsides, and applications of both
approaches.

32
1. Dynamical Downscaling

Dynamical downscaling derives smaller-scale information by using

regional climate models (RCMs) driven by boundary conditions prescribed
by a GCM [UNFCCC, 2010]. This process assumes that regional climates
are largely a function of the large-scale atmospheric state [Giorgi et al,
2001]. Sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and lateral boundary conditions
(e.g. surface pressures, atmospheric winds, temperatures, humidities) are
saved from GCM integrations and then used to drive RCMs at smaller
resolutions (50-100 km) [Murphy, 1999]. Different research groups have
made use of dynamical downscaling [Giorgi et al. 1993; Giorgi et al. 1994;
Jones et al. 1995, 1997; Hirakuchi and Giorgi, 1995; Giorgi and Marinucci,
1996] for different parts of the world. In these studies, distributions of
temperature and precipitation contain a significant signal at smaller
scales than the original GCM resolution, but the large-scale circulation
follows that of the driving model. These results suggest that the RCM
acts as a physically based interpolator of the GCM output [Murphy, 1999].

2. Statistical Downscaling

Statistical downscaling derives statistical relationships between small-

scale information (e.g. point station data) and larger scale variables
derived from a GCM using one of a variety of methods [UNFCCC, 2010].
This approach assumes that the atmospheric circulation produced by a
GCM is more likely to be reliable than the distribution of climate fields at
the surface, due to the parameterizations of small-scale physical
processes (radiative transfer, cloud formation, turbulence) mentioned
earlier [Murphy, 1999].

Statistical downscaling can be performed with different methods that can

each be approached with varying degrees of complexity. Regression
methods involve establishing relationships between sub-grid scale
parameters and grid-scale [Wilby & Wigley, 1997] predictor variables.
Weather pattern based methods involve linking observational station data
to a given weather classification scheme through statistical relationships.
These weather based methods are appealing due to their strong
foundation on physical relationships between small-scale weather and
large-scale circulation patterns.
3. Glacier Models Coupled with GCMs


It is clear that modeling a sub-grid cell size physical process with climate
data projected at a much larger grid scale imparts some level of
uncertainty. Glaciers are much smaller than typical GCM-model output,
and as a result are difficult to model under future global warming
scenarios. Because of this size discrepancy, modeling future glacier
response to climate generally involves running a glacier model with
downscaled GCM output (Reichert et al, 2002). Simulating glacier
behavior can be done with a range of complexities that incorporate a
range of details about climate interactions and glacier dynamics. These
33
models can range from the very simple (e.g. Roe & O’Neal, 2009;
Oerlemans, 2005) to the very complicated (e.g. GLIMMER, SICOPOLIS).

Modeling tropical glaciers is different than simulating those found in the

midlatitudes. Glaciers found in the tropics exist because temperature
decreases with altitude; they are often located at such high elevations
that do not experience summertime air temperatures above 0°C. It is
important to remember that it is heat, not air temperature, that causes
melting. Models that simulate midlatitude glaciers can often use
temperature as a perfectly adequate proxy for heat. However, since
limited portions of tropical glaciers extend to low altitudes with
temperatures above 0°C, the energy balance must be incorporated. For the
portion of the glacier above the 0° isotherm, terms in the energy budget
start to become major influences (Figure 38). These terms are sensitive to
air temperature, atmospheric humidity, cloudiness, and wind; and affect
the amount of solar radiation available for ablation. Depending on these
conditions, the glacier surface can warm to 0°C and melt (with a smaller
amount of ice sublimating). Clearly, it is difficult to project the
dependencies of the glacier system response to changes in climate while
accounting for every process in a model.

As mentioned earlier horizontal temperature variations in the tropics are

small above a short layer near the Earth’s surface, due to the weak
influence of the Coriolis. Other meteorological variables (e.g.
precipitation, humidity, cloudiness) don’t exhibit such a horizontal
homogeneity as air temperature. Because of this, a widespread,
synchronous retreat of tropical glaciers gives reason to believe
temperature is playing a direct role.

Figure 38: A schematic of the energy budget for glaciers. While many of these terms
are not discussed, the take-home message is the complexity of the picture
(http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/glaciers/EnergyBudget.html)

34
III. Future Climate Predictions for Ecuador
A. Future Temperature and Variability
1. Predicting Future Temperature

To determine temperature trends in Ecuador, historical data was

constrained for the land surface falling between 5o S and the equator and
77.5o W and 82.5o W to fit within a grid box that was interpolated to be
common from all 19 of the climate models used in this report. This
historical data contain 100 surface points per one model grid box, with
69 of these points being land points (sea surface points are omitted). The
69 historical land grid boxes were averaged together to form a historical
grid box that could be compared to the model grid box during the 1980 –
2000 period. For future scenarios, the climate models (See Table 3 for
GCMs used in this report) were run off each model’s native grid spacing,
but constrained to the grid boxes from 5o S to the equator and 77.5o W to
82.5o W. The future scenarios are average monthly values for the periods
between 2040 to 2060 and 2080 to 2100 for 19 global climate models.
This method was used both for precipitation and temperature. It should
be noted that while the historical data is for surface points only, the
global climate model data includes sea surface points, which may add
biases for temperature and precipitation.

In cases where distinctions were made between the coast and the Andes,
the coast was defined as areas west of 79o W longitude and the sierra was
defined as 77o W to 77.5o W longitude.

35
Table 3 The IPCC model output used in the analysis of future trends.

Model Originating Group(s) Country Abbreviation

1 Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research Norway bccr_bcm2_0
2 Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling Canada cccma_cgcm3_1
& Analysis
3 Météo-France / Centre National de France cnrm_cm3
Recherches Météorologiques
4 CSIRO Atmospheric Research Australia csiro_mk3_0
5 CSIRO Atmospheric Research Australia csiro_mk3_5
6 US Dept. of Commerce / NOAA / US gfdl_cm2_0
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory
7 US Dept. of Commerce / NOAA / US gfdl_cm2_1
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory
8 NASA / Goddard Institute for Space US giss_model_e_r
Studies
9 Instituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Italy ingv_echam4
Vulcanologia
10 Institute for Numerical Mathematics Russia inmcm3_0
11 Institut Pierre Simon Laplace France ipsl_cm4
12 Center for Climate System Research Japan miroc3_2_medres
(The University of Tokyo), National
Institute for Environmental Studies, and
Frontier Research Center for Global
Change (JAMSTEC)
13 Meteorological Institute of the Germany miub_echo_g
University of Bonn, Meteorological /Korea
Research Institute of KMA, and Model
and Data group
14 Max Planck Institute for Meteorology Germany mpi_echam5
15 Meteorological Research Institute Japan mri_cgcm2_3_2a
16 National Center for Atmospheric US ncar_ccsm3_0
Research
17 National Center for Atmospheric US ncar_pcm1
Research
18 Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction UK ukmo_hadcm3
and Research / Met Office
19 Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction UK ukmo_hadgem1
and Research / Met Office

Combining the temperature trend predictions from 19 different models,

we assume that the temporal and spatial variability of temperature will
remain the same for future scenarios (following Battisti and Naylor’s
assumptions regarding temperature variability). The climate model data
used in this report comes from 19 climate models (see Table 3) and the
A2 scenario.

To determine the future warming for Ecuador, the warming trend was
calculated from the difference between the average of the historical
36
scenario for each climate model (1980 – 2000) and the future scenario for
each model (2030 – 2050 and 2080 – 2100) (Figure 39 and Figure ).

Figure 39:. Linear trend for our Ecuador GCM grid cell during the period from 1990 –
2040 for each model used in this report. The mean trend is 0.23oC decade-1.

Figure 40: Linear trend for our Ecuador GCM grid cell during the period from 1990 –
2090 for each model used in this report. The mean trend is 0.31oC decade-1.

The probability distribution function from data (1900 – 2008) was then
37
shifted by the calculated model temperature change (for both 2030 –
2050 and 2080 – 2100). All 19 model probability distribution functions
were averaged to produce future probability distribution functions (Figure
and Figure ). The total warming from all models were averaged together
and this value was added to the historical temperature data for each
spatial point (ignoring lapse rate changes) (Figure 37 and Figure 38).
Probability Distribution of Temperature: 2040
35
Historical
Model
30

25

20

15

10

0
18 20 22 24 26 28 30
o
C
Figure 41: Probability distribution functions for monthly historical de-trended
Ecuadorian temperatures (1900 – 2008) about a mean value of 22.8oC and the shifted
probability distribution function for the future climate (2030 – 2050).

Probability Distribution of Temperature: 2090

35
historical
model
30

25

20

15

10

0
18 20 22 24 26 28 30
o
C
Figure 42. Probability distribution functions for monthly historical de-trended
Ecuadorian temperatures (1900 – 2008, blue) about a mean value of 22.8oC and the
shifted probability distribution function for the future climate (2080 – 2100, red).

38
Figure 37. Historical spatial temperature distribution (1980 – 2000 – left figure) and
the shifted spatial temperature distribution with the mean temperature increase from
model output added to each grid box (1.13oC) for 2030 – 2050 (right figure).

Figure 38. Historical spatial temperature distribution (1980 – 2000 – left figure) and
the shifted spatial temperature distribution with the mean temperature increase from
model output added to each grid box (3.13oC) for 2080 – 2100 (right figure).

Similarly, this approach was taken for each seasonal cycle. In this case
the seasons were averaged (December – February, March – May, June –
August, September – November) and the probability distribution function
was calculated for the historical data for each season. The model
calculated change for each season was then used to shift the probability
distribution function. The shifted probability distribution functions were
then averaged together to form the future seasonal scenarios (Figure 39
and Figure 40).

39
 Temperature PDF by Season: 2040
March − May June − Aug

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
20 25 30 20 25 30

Sept − Nov Dec − Feb

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
20 25 30 20 25 30

Figure 39. Probability distribution functions for monthly historical de-trended

Ecuadorian temperatures for each season (1900 – 2008, blue) and the shifted
probability distribution function for the future climate (2020 – 2050, red).

Temperature PDF by Season: 2090

March − May June − Aug

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
20 25 30 20 25 30

Sept − Nov Dec − Feb

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
20 25 30 20 25 30

Figure 40. Probability distribution functions for monthly historical de-trended

Ecuadorian temperatures for each season (1900 – 2008, blue) and the shifted
probability distribution function for the future climate (2080 – 2100, red).

Future temperature trends are summarized in

along with historical temperature trends for reference.

40
Table 4 Historic and future temperature trends for Ecuador.

Period Ecuador Average Coast Sierra

1900-1950 0.18oC decade-1 0.18oC decade-1 0.18oC decade-1
1950-2008 0.08oC decade-1 0.04oC decade-1 0.10oC decade-1
1900-2008 0.10oC decade-1 0.09oC decade-1 0.10oC decade-1
1990-2040 0.22oC decade-1 (Projected)
1990-2090 0.31oC decade-1 (Projected)

Note in Table 4 that temperature trends are typically greater in the sierra
than along the coast (historically). This phenomenon of greater warming
at altitude is predicted into the future.

Figure 47. Global warming in the American Cordillera. Projected changes in mean
annual free-air temperatures between (1990 to 1999) and (2090 to 2099) along a
transect from Alaska (68°N) to southern Chile (50°S), following the axis of the
American Cordillera mountain chain. Results are the mean of eight different general
circulation models used in the 4th assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) (15), using CO2 levels from scenario A2 in (16). Black triangles
denote the highest mountains at each latitude; areas blocked in white have no data
(surface or below in the models). [Bradley et al, 2006].

2. The Future of Frost in Ecuador

Unfortunately, the instances of frost were not taken directly from general
circulation model output for this report and the future of frost incidences
in Ecuador is uncertain. Radiative cooling at night causes the majority of
frost in the Andes (Trognitz) and in some studies frost in the Andes was
associated with freezing air temperatures only 22% of the time [Villegas,
1991]. Since direct station data was not analyzed on a daily basis, frost
trends are not directly measured in this report.
41
For radiative cooling to occur to this degree, clear-sky conditions must
exist. Again, this report did not look directly at the cloud-fraction from
climate model predictions, but there is a useful analog between
precipitation and cloud cover. Richards and Arkin (1980) showed that for
large-scale (several degrees latitude) gridboxes precipitation and cloud-
cover are well correlated (r>0.8 in many cases). With our expectation for
increased rainfall throughout the year (Section III B), this suggests that
there will be increased cloudiness and more insolation to reduce the
number of frost days. Further, correlating temperature anomalies and
precipitation anomalies since 1950 show statistically significant and
positive correlations for April, May, June, and July (p<0.05). This is
further anecdotal evidence that less frost should be expected in the
future, since precipitation is expected to increase. Importantly, though,
monthly temperature anomalies are not a good representation of the
daily diurnal cycle, especially on regional scales.

Contradicting this semi-empirical estimate of future frost in Ecuador is a

study of the Montaro Basin in the central Andes of Peru. In this region of
Peru (~10o – 13o S) frost days have been increasing with a trend of 2.8 –
14.8 frost days decade-1 depending on location (p<0.05). While the
Montaro Basin is more than 5o south of Ecuador, the study demonstrates
that increasing temperature does not mean a decrease in the number of
frost days. Frost is an important variable for many crops and work
should be done to understand past and future trends for frost days in the
highlands of Ecuador.

B. Future Precipitation and Variability

1. Model Skill in Replicating Past Precipitation

Model biases in precipitation can be quite large. Although some climate

models over or under predict temperature by several degrees (<1%
deviation from the mean temperature), precipitation in some models can
over or under predict monthly precipitation by as much as a factor of
four. Unlike temperature, the direction of the precipitation trend is not
robust across all models and the seasonal cycle of precipitation is often
not well represented.

Analyses of precipitation was initiated by plotting the mean model

precipitation for each month for 1950 to 2000 on the same axes as the
historical data for that period (Figure 41).

42
Figure 41. Figure shows the average annual precipitation cycle for both historical
data and each model over the period from 1950 – 2000.

We then calculated the root-mean-square (rms) error and the correlation

value for the historical data and each set of model data, eliminating
models with an rms error value above 3 and a correlation below 0.7. Our
rms error criterion eliminates models that over or underestimate
precipitation, while our correlation cut-off eliminates models that are
phase-shifted from historical data. Three models met these threshold
values (ECHAM5/MPI-OM, MRI-CGCM2.3.2, and UKMO-HadCM3) (Figure
42).

43
Figure 42. Figure shows the average annual precipitation cycle for both historical
data and the best fit models (r > 0.7, rms error < 3) over the period from 1950 –
2000.

2. Changes in Precipitation due to Climate Change

Using only the three models selected in the previous section, we plot
probability distribution functions for precipitation based on predicted
shifts between 1990 and 2040 and between 1990 and 2090. In 2040, the
magnitude of the increase in mean precipitation will be much smaller
than the range in precipitation due to inter-annual variability (Figure ). By
2090, the predicted increase in precipitation is more substantial (Figure ).

44
Figure 50: Probability distribution functions for monthly historical Ecuadorian
precipitation (1900 – 2008) and the shifted probability distribution function for the
future climate (average for 2030 – 2050).

Figure 51: Probability distribution functions for monthly historical Ecuadorian

precipitation (1900 – 2008) and the shifted probability distribution function for the
future climate (average for 2080-2100).

As with the annual trend, the seasonal shifts in precipitation expected by

2040 are small compared to the inter-annual variability. However, shifts
of up to 16% (for Dec-Feb) are not insignificant. There is not a notable
shift in the seasonal cycle. By 2090, precipitation is predicted to increase
substantially more during Dec-May, than the other months. June-August
is the season where-in differences between the models are the most clear:

45
one model predicts a doubling of precipitation, while the other two do
not. Such discrepancies serve as a reminder not to over-interpret these
results.

Figure 52: As in Figure , by season.

Figure 53: As in Figure , by season.

46
In summary, the predicted shifts in temperature and precipitation by
2040 and 2090 are compiled in Table 5.

Table 5 Average temperature and precipitation shifts by seasonal and annual

average.

Temperature Temperature Precipitation Precipitation

increase increase increase by increase by
2040-1990 2090-1990 2040 2090
compared to compared to
1990 1990
December – 1.1oC 3.0 C
o
16.4% 49.0%
February
March – 1.1oC 3.1oC 9.1% 32.2%
May
June – 1.2oC 3.3oC 4.9% 49.6%
August
September 1.1oC 3.2oC 3.9% 22.4%
- November
Annual 1.1oC 3.1oC 9.3% 35.2%

C. Historic Temperature and Precipitation Predictability from

ENSO

From the discussion regarding correlations between the large-scale ENSO

indices with temperature and precipitation (Section IB1iii), we expect
some effect of El Niño (positive ENSO indices) and La Niña (negative ENSO
indices) on those climate variables in Ecuador. In this section, we will
express projected future increases in temperature and precipitation in
terms of the strength of the El Niño event that would be required to
produce those values in the current climate.

Using linear relationships between temperature and precipitation

anomalies and ENSO anomaly, we can express the future climate’s
temperature and precipitation changes in terms of ENSO anomalies. This
relationship can then be used to compare the future climate to past El
Niño events that have impacts that are well understood. Specifically, we
begin by expressing the 2040 and 2090 temperature increases in terms of
ENSO anomalies (Figure 43 and Figure 44).

47
Figure 43. Figure shows the 2040 temperature increases expressed in terms of an
ENSO anomaly (NINO 3.4) for each month. The error is shaded red and is derived
from the fit error between historical temperature anomalies and ENSO anomalies.
The standard deviations for the mean ENSO state are also plotted for reference.

Figure 44. Figure shows the 2090 temperature increases expressed in terms of an
ENSO anomaly (NINO 3.4) for each month. The error is shaded red and is derived
from the fit error between historical temperature anomalies and ENSO anomalies.
The standard deviations for the mean ENSO state are also plotted for reference.

From Figure 43 and Figure 44, temperature is expected to be similar to a

+1σ anomaly in ENSO by 2040 and greater than a +2σ anomaly by 2090
(in terms of temperature only). Future expectations for precipitation can

48
similarly be explored in terms of ENSO state (Figure 45 and Figure 46).

Figure 45 Figure shows the 2040 precipitation changes expressed in terms of an

ENSO anomaly (NINO 3.4) for each month. The error is shaded red and is derived
from the fit error between historical precipitation anomalies and ENSO anomalies.
The standard deviations for the mean ENSO state are also plotted for reference. Only
months denoted with * have a statistically significant relationship between ENSO
anomaly and precipitation anomaly (p<0.05).

Figure 46: Figure shows the 2090 precipitation changes expressed in terms of an
ENSO anomaly (NINO 3.4) for each month. The error is shaded red and is derived
from the fit error between historical precipitation anomalies and ENSO anomalies.
The standard deviations for the mean ENSO state are also plotted for reference. Only
months denoted with * have a statistically significant relationship between ENSO
anomaly and precipitation anomaly (p<0.05).

For precipitation, the increases in precipitation are not as dramatic as the

increases in temperature when expressed in terms of ENSO anomalies.

49
Further, the correlations are not high enough to make a confident
comparison between future climate and ENSO anomaly for every month.

With this in mind, it is possible to look at the temperature, precipitation,

and ENSO index anomalies for some of the larger El Niño events (ie 1982-
1983 and 1997-1998, which were 1.5σ to 3σ above the average ENSO
state). Even though projections for precipitation increases are large in
some months (as much as 163% for 2040 and 486% for 2090 for June and
July) peak rains (in March) are only expected to increase by 14% in 2040
and 30% in 2090. While this is substantial, past El Niño events have
doubled the cumulative March rainfall. In Figure 47 and Figure 48 past El
Niño events are compared with the predicted precipitation in the future.

Figure 47. Plot shows the historical precipitation for two large ENSO anomalies, the
mean historical precipitation cycle, and the predicted precipitation for the 2040
climate.

50
Figure 48. Plot shows the historical precipitation for two large ENSO anomalies, the
mean historical precipitation cycle, and the predicted precipitation for the 2090
climate.

Similarly, the 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 El Niño events can be compared

with the future in terms of temperature (Figure and Figure 49). Unlike
precipitation, the future temperature change is expected to be larger than
the changes associated with large El Niño events.

Figure 60: Plot shows the historical temperature for two large ENSO anomalies, the
mean historical temperature cycle, and the predicted temperature for the 2040
climate.

51
Figure 49:. Plot shows the historical temperature for two large ENSO anomalies, the
mean historical temperature cycle, and the predicted temperature for the 2090
climate.

As a final comparison, the actual ENSO indices for the 1997-1998 and
1982-1983 El Niño are compared with expectations for future
precipitation and temperature (expressed in terms of ENSO anomalies).

Figure 50: Future precipitation changes expressed in terms of ENSO anomalies

(months that have a statistically significant correlation between precipitation
anomaly and ENSO anomaly are denoted with *). The 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 ENSO
anomalies are more than one standard deviation above the mean ENSO state, but the
future climate is typically not expected to change by this magnitude. Error bars have
been omitted, but are available in Figure 45 and Figure 46.

52
Figure 51. Future temperature changes expressed in terms of ENSO anomalies
(months that have a statistically significant correlation between precipitation
anomaly and ENSO anomaly are denoted with *). By 2040 the temperature changes
are comparable to a one standard deviation increase in ENSO state and by 2090 the
typical climate (in terms of temperature) will be greater than the large El Niño events
of 1982-1983 and 1997-1998. Error bars have been omitted, but are available in
Figure 43 and Figure 44.

To summarize the analogy between El Niño and the future climate of

Ecuador:
• By 2040 the temperature change will approach that experienced
during El Niño years (temperature change will be larger than the
temperature increase experienced for a +1σ increase in ENSO).
• By 2090 the temperature will be greater than the temperature
experienced during large El Niño events such as the 1982-1983 El
Niño and the 1997-1998 El Niño.
• Precipitation changes are not expected to be negligible, but are not
as large as strong El Niño years.
• The relationship between ENSO and precipitation only exists in the
rainy seasons March – May and November – December. During
other months, the relationship between ENSO and precipitation
anomalies is not clear.
• Even though precipitation changes are not of the same magnitude
as strong El Niño years, the changes are still large relative to the
natural variability for most months (an average shift of +0.5σ by
2040).

53
IV. References
Bartolone, P. (2006). When the water runs out, Salon, Web, April 20, 2010,
< http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/04/07/ecuador2>

Battisti, D.S., and Naylor, R. L. (2009), Historical Warnings of Future

Food Insecurity with Unprecedented Seasonal Heat, Science, 323,
doi: 10.1126/science.1164363

Bermeo, A., Cáeres-Silva, L., and Saari, P. (2000), eds., Climate Change,
National Communication: Republic of Ecuador.

Bradley, Raymond S., Vuille, Mathias, Diaz, Henry F., and Vergara, Walter
(2006), CLIMATE CHANGE: Threats to Water Supplies in the Tropical
Andes, Science, 312 (5781), doi: 10.1126/science.1128087.

Bradley R., F. Keimig, H. Diaz, and D. Hardy (2009). Recent changes in

freezing level heights in the Tropics with implications for the
deglacierization of high mountain regions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36 (17),
doi: 10.1029/2009GL037712.

Buytaert W., R. Celleri, B. De Bievre, F. Cisneros, G. Wyseure, J. Deckers,

and R. Hofstede (2006). Human impact on the hydrology of the Andean
paramos, Earth-Sci. Rev., 79 (1-2), doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2006.06.002.

Ecominga Foundation (2010), Web, 30 May 2010,

<http://www.ecominga.net/indexOld.htm>

Favier V., P. Wagnon, J. Chazarin, L. Maisincho, and A. Coudrain (2004).

One-year measurements of surface heat budget on the ablation zone of
Antizana Glacier 15, Ecuadorian Andes, J. Geophys. Res., 109 (D18), doi:
10.1029/2003JD004359.

Francou B., E. Ramirez, B. Caceres, and J. Mendoza (2000). Glacier

evolution in the tropical Andes during the last decades of the 20th
century: Chacaltaya, Bolivia, and Antizana, Ecuador, Ambio, 29 (7), 416-
422.

Francou B., M. Vuille, V. Favier, and B. Caceres (2004). New evidence for an
ENSO impact on low-latitude glaciers: Antizana 15, Andes of Ecuador, 0
degrees 28 ' S, J. Geophys. Res., 109 (D18), doi: 10.1029/2003JD004484.

Francou B., M. Vuille, P. Wagnon, J. Mendoza, and J. Sicart (2003). Tropical

climate change recorded by a glacier in the central Andes during the last
decades of the twentieth century: Chacaltaya, Bolivia, 16 degrees S, J.
Geophys. Res., 108 (D5), doi: 10.1029/2002JD002959.

54
Geographic Guide (2010), Ecuador Map, Geographic Guide, Web, 30 May
2010, <http://www.geographicguide.net/america/ecuador.htm>

Giorgi, F., G. T. Bates, and S. Nieman, 1993: The multiyear surface

climatology of a regional atmospheric model over the western
United States. J. Climate, 6, 75–95.

Giorgi, F., C. Brodeur, and G. T. Bates, 1994: Regional climate change

scenarios over the United States produced with a nested regional
climate model. J. Climate, 7, 375–399.

Giorgi, F., and M. R. Marinucci, 1996: Improvements in the simulation

of surface climatology over the European region with a nested
modelling system. Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 273–276.

Giorgi, F., B. Hewitson, J. Christensen, M. Hulme, H. Von Storch, P.

Whetton, R. Jones, L. Mearns, and C. Fu. (2001). Regional climate
information — Evaluation and projections. In Climate Change 2001. The
Scientific Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J.T.
Houghton, Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P.J. van der Linden, X. Dai, K.
Maskell, and C.A. Johnson (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK, pp. 583-638.

Hirakuchi, H., and F. Giorgi, 1995: Multiyear present-day and 2xCO2

simulations of monsoon climate over eastern Asia and Japan with a
regional climate model nested in a general circulation model. J. Geophys.
Res., 100, 21 105–21 125.

IPCC (2007), Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.

Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M.
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)].
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York,
NY, USA.

Jones, R. G., J. M. Murphy, and M. Noguer, 1995: Simulation of climate

change over Europe using a nested regional climate model. I: Assessment
of control climate, including sensitivity to location of lateral boundaries.
Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 121, 1413–1449.

Jones, R. G., and A. B. Keen, 1997: Simulation of climate change over

Europe using a nested regional climate model. II: Comparison of driving
and regional model responses to a doubling of carbon dioxide. Quart. J.
Roy. Meteor. Soc., 123, 265–292.

Jordan E., L. Ungerechts, B. Caceres, A. Penafiel, and B. Francou (2005),.

Estimation by photogrammetry of the glacier recession on the Cotopaxi
Volcano (Ecuador) between 1956 and 1997, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 50 (6), 949-

55
961.

Murphy, J., 1999: An evaluation of statistical and dynamical techniques

for downscaling local climate. J. Climate, 12, 2256–2284.

Oerlemans, J. (2005). Extracting a climate signal from 169 glacier records.

Science, 308(5722), 675–677.

Paeth H., A. Scholten, P. Friederichs, and A. Hense (2008). Uncertainties in

climate change prediction: El Niño -Southern Oscillation and monsoons,
Global Planet. Change, 60 (3-4), doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2007.03.002.

Painter, J. (2007). Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided

world, Human Development Report 2007/2008, Human Development
Report Office, 21 pp.

Reichert, B.K., L. Bengtsson and J. Oerlemans. (2002) . Recent glacier

retreat exceeds internal variability. J. Climate, 15(21), 3069–3081.

Richards, R. and Arkin, P. (1980), On the Relationship between Satellite-

Observed Cloud Cover and Precipitation, Monthly Weather Review, 109.

Roe, G.H. and M.A. O’Neal, (2009). The response of glaciers to intrinsic
climate variability: observations and models of late Holocene variations.
J. Glaciology, 55, 839-854.

Rossel F. and E. Cadier (2009). El Niño and prediction of anomalous

monthly rainfalls in Ecuador. Hydrol. Process, 23 (22), doi:
10.1002/hyp.7401.

Soruco A., C. Vincent, B. Francou, and J. Gonzalez (2009). Glacier decline

between 1963 and 2006 in the Cordillera Real, Bolivia, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
36 (3), doi: 10.1029/2008GL036238.

Trognitz, B. R., Prospects of Breeding Quinoa for Tolerance to Abiotic

Stress, Food Reviews International, 19, doi: 10.1081/FRI-
12001887910.1081

UNFCCC (2010), Web, 24 April 2010,

http://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/methodologies_for/vulnerability_and_a
daptation/application/pdf/dynamical_downscaling.pdf

UNFCCC (2010), Web, 24 April 2010,

http://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/methodologies_for/vulnerability_and_a
daptation/application/pdf/statistical_downscaling.pdf

Villegas, E. B. (1991). Zonificación del valle del Mantaro según la

intensidad y riesgo de ocurrencia de las heladas radiacionales, M.
Sc. Thesis, Lima, PeruUniv Nacional Agraria La Molina, Dept. of

56
Physics and Meteorology, 141 pp.

Vuille M., R. Bradley, M. Werner, and F. Keimig (2003). 20th century

climate change in the tropical Andes: Observations and model results,
Climatic Change, 59 (1-2), 75-99.

Vuille M., B. Francou, P. Wagnon, I. Juen, G. Kaser, B. Mark, and R. Bradley

(2008). Climate change and tropical Andean glaciers: Past, present and
future, Earth-Sci. Rev., 89 (3-4), doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2008.04.002.

Weather Underground (2010), Web, 30 May 2010,

<http://www.wunderground.com/>

Wehner, R. (2002). In the Andes Mountains, the pace of climate change is

far from glacial, Grist, Web, April 25, 2010,
<http://www.grist.org/article/now/>

Widmann, M. C. Bretherton, and E. Salathe (2003). Statistical precipitation

downscaling over the Northwestern United States using numerically
simulated precipitation as a predictor, Journal of Climate, 16, 799-816.

Wilby R.L. and T.M.L. Wigley (1997). Downscaling general circulation

model output: a review of methods and limitations, Progress in Physical
Geography, 21; 530-548.

57