Abstract
Abstract Climate model simulations of daily precipitation statistics from the third phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP3) were evaluated against precipitation observations from North America over the period 1979–99. The evaluation revealed that the models underestimate the intensity of heavy and extreme precipitation along the Pacific coast, southeastern United States, and southern Mexico, and these biases are robust among the models. The models also overestimate the intensity of light precipitation events over much of North America, resulting in fairly realistic mean precipitation in many places. In contrast, heavy precipitation is simulated realistically over northern and eastern Canada, as is the seasonal cycle of heavy precipitation over a majority of North America. An evaluation of the simulated atmospheric dynamics and thermodynamics associated with extreme precipitation events was also conducted using the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR). The models were found to capture the large-scale physical mechanisms that generate extreme precipitation realistically, although they tend to overestimate the strength of the associated atmospheric circulation features. This suggests that climate model deficiencies such as insufficient spatial resolution, inadequate representation of convective precipitation, and overly smoothed topography may be more important for biases in simulated heavy precipitation than errors in the large-scale circulation during extreme events.