Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 32451
Uncertainty of the Brazilian Earth System Model for Solar Radiation

Authors: Elison Eduardo Jardim Bierhals, Claudineia Brazil, Deivid Pires, Rafael Haag, Elton Gimenez Rossini


This study evaluated the uncertainties involved in the solar radiation projections generated by the Brazilian Earth System Model (BESM) of the Weather and Climate Prediction Center (CPTEC) belonging to Coupled Model Intercomparison Phase 5 (CMIP5), with the aim of identifying efficiency in the projections for solar radiation of said model and in this way establish the viability of its use. Two different scenarios elaborated by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were evaluated: RCP 4.5 (with more optimistic contour conditions) and 8.5 (with more pessimistic initial conditions). The method used to verify the accuracy of the present model was the Nash coefficient and the Statistical bias, as it better represents these atmospheric patterns. The BESM showed a tendency to overestimate the data ​​of solar radiation projections in most regions of the state of Rio Grande do Sul and through the validation methods adopted by this study, BESM did not present a satisfactory accuracy.

Keywords: Climate changes, projections, solar radiation, uncertainty.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 857


[1] IPCC. 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, 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, 996 pp, 2007.
[2] NOBRE, P. 2013. Brazilian Earth System Model. INPE.
[3] Guilyardi, E., And Coauthors, and the Metafor Group, 2011: The CMIP5 model and simulation documentation: A new standard for climate modelling metadata. CLIVAR Exchanges, 56, 42–46.
[4] Taylor, K. E., R. J. Stouffer, and G. A. Meehl, 2012: An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 93, 485–498, doi:10.1175/BAMSD-11-00094.1.
[5] Guilyardi E, Balaji V, Lawrence B, Callaghan S, Deluca C, Denvil S, Lautenschlager M, Morgan M, Murphy S, Taylor KE (2013) Documenting climate models and their simulations. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 94:623–627.
[6] Souza, E. B. Grads – Grid Analysis and Display System Fundamentos e rogramação Básica. Universidade Federal do Pará. 2004. Disponível [7] Machado, Aline Ribeiro; Mello Junior, Arisvaldo Vieira; Wendland, Edson Cezar. Avaliação do modelo J2000/JAMS para modelagem hidrológica em bacias hidrográficas brasileiras. Eng. Sanit. Ambient., Rio de Janeiro, v. 22, n. 2, p. 327-340, Apr. 2017.
[8] Bierhals, E. E., Brazil, C. Pereira, F. B., Rossini, E., Haag, R, 2018. Mudanças climáticas e projeções para a radiação solar no estado do Rio Grande do Sul a partir dos modelos CMIP5 e BESM. Anais do VII Congresso Brasileiro de Energia Solar, Gramado, RS.
[9] Moriasi, D. N.; Arnold, J. G.; Van Liew, M. W.; Bingner, R. L.; Harmel, R. D.; Veith, T. L. (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, v. 50, n. 3, p. 885-900.