From 1 - 10 / 57
  • These files include downscaled projections of decadal average monthly snow-day fraction ("fs", units = percent probability from 1 – 100) for each month of the decades from 2010-2019 to 2090-2099 at 771 x 771 m spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal average monthly mean. Output is available for the CCSM4, GFDL-CM3, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5A-LR, and MRI-CGCM3 models and three emissions scenarios (RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5). These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled decadal average monthly temperature. Separate equations were used to model the relationship between decadal monthly average temperature and the fraction of wet days with snow for seven geographic regions in the state: Arctic, Western Alaska, Interior, Cook Inlet, SW Islands, SW Interior, and the Gulf of Alaska coast, using regionally specific logistic models of the probability that precipitation falls as snow given temperature based on station data fits as in McAfee et al. 2014. These projections differ from McAfee et al. 2014 in that updated CMIP5 projected temperatures rather than CMIP3 temperatures were used for the future projections. Although the equations developed here provide a reasonable fit to the data, model evaluation demonstrated that some stations are consistently less well described by regional models than others. It is unclear why this occurs, but it is likely related to localized climate conditions. Very few weather stations with long records are located above 500m elevation in Alaska, so the equations used here were developed primarily from low-elevation weather stations. It is not clear whether the equations will be completely appropriate in the mountains. Finally, these equations summarize a long-term monthly relationship between temperature and precipitation type that is the result of short-term weather variability. In using these equations to make projections of future snow, as assume that these relationships remain stable over time, and we do not know how accurate that assumption is. These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled projected decadal average monthly temperature. The equations were developed from daily observed climate data in the Global Historical Climatology Network. These data were acquired from the National Climatic Data Center in early 2012. Equations were developed for the seven climate regions described in Perica et al. (2012). Geospatial data describing those regions was provided by Sveta Stuefer. Perica, S., D. Kane, S. Dietz, K. Maitaria, D. Martin, S. Pavlovic, I. Roy, S. Stuefer, A. Tidwell, C. Trypaluk, D. Unruh, M. Yekta, E. Betts, G. Bonnin, S. Heim, L. Hiner, E. Lilly, J. Narayanan, F.Yan, T. Zhao. 2012. NOAA Atlas 14. Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the United States.

  • This set of files includes downscaled projections of decadal means of annual day of freeze or thaw (ordinal day of the year), and length of growing season (numbers of days, 0-365) for each decade from 2010 - 2100 at 2km x 2km meter spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal mean of an annual mean calculated from mean monthly data. ---- The spatial extent includes Alaska, the Yukon Territory, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RPCs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. Day of Freeze, Day of Thaw, Length of Growing Season calculations: Estimated ordinal days of freeze and thaw are calculated by assuming a linear change in temperature between consecutive months. Mean monthly temperatures are used to represent daily temperature on the 15th day of each month. When consecutive monthly midpoints have opposite sign temperatures, the day of transition (freeze or thaw) is the day between them on which temperature crosses zero degrees C. The length of growing season refers to the number of days between the days of thaw and freeze. This amounts to connecting temperature values (y-axis) for each month (x-axis) by line segments and solving for the x-intercepts. Calculating a day of freeze or thaw is simple. However, transitions may occur several times in a year, or not at all. The choice of transition points to use as the thaw and freeze dates which best represent realistic bounds on a growing season is more complex. Rather than iteratively looping over months one at a time, searching from January forward to determine thaw day and from December backward to determine freeze day, stopping as soon as a sign change between two months is identified, the algorithm looks at a snapshot of the signs of all twelve mean monthly temperatures at once, which enables identification of multiple discrete periods of positive and negative temperatures. As a result more realistic days of freeze and thaw and length of growing season can be calculated when there are idiosyncrasies in the data. Please note that these maps represent climatic estimates only. While we have based our work on scientifically accepted data and methods, uncertainty is always present . Uncertainty in model outputs tends to increase for more distant climatic estimates from present day for both historical summaries and future projections.

  • This set of files includes downscaled projections of monthly totals, and derived annual, seasonal, and decadal means of monthly total precipitation (in millimeters, no unit conversion necessary) from Jan 2006 - Dec 2100 at 2km x 2km spatial resolution. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RPCs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. The downscaling process utilizes PRISM climatological datasets from 1961-1990. **Brief descriptions of the datasets:** Monthly precipitation totals: The total precipitation, in mm, for the month. For Decadal outputs: 1. Decadal Average Total Monthly Precipitation: 10 year average of total monthly precipitation. Example: All January precipitation files for a decade are added together and divided by ten. 2. Decadal Average Seasonal Precipitation Totals: 10 year average of seasonal precipitation totals. Example: MAM seasonal totals for every year in a decade are added together and divided by ten. 3. Decadal Average Annual Precipitation Totals: 10 year average of annual cumulative precipitation. For seasonal means, the four seasons are referred to by the first letter of 3 months making up that season: * `JJA`: summer (June, July, August) * `SON`: fall (September, October, November) * `DJF`: winter (December, January, February) * `MAM`: spring (March, April, May) Please note that these maps represent climatic estimates only. While we have based our work on scientifically accepted data and methods, uncertainty is always present. Uncertainty in model outputs tends to increase for more distant climatic estimates from present day for both historical summaries and future projections.

  • This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of monthly totals, and derived annual, seasonal, and decadal means of monthly total precipitation (in millimeters, no unit conversion necessary) from 1901 - 2006 (CRU TS 3.0) or 2009 (CRU TS 3.1) at 771 x 771 meter spatial resolution.

  • This dataset consists of 6000 GeoTIFFs produced by the Geophysical Institute Permafrost Lab (GIPL) Permafrost Model. Six distinct CMIP5 model-scenario combinations were used to force the GIPL model output. Each model-scenario combination includes annual (2021-2120) summaries of the following ten variables: - Mean Annual Ground Temperature (MAGT) at 0.5 m below the surface (°C) - MAGT at 1 m below the surface (°C) - MAGT at 2 m below the surface (°C) - MAGT at 3 m below the surface (°C) - MAGT at 4 m below the surface (°C) - MAGT at 5 m below the surface (°C) - Mean Annual Surface (i.e., 0.01 m depth) Temperature (°C) - Permafrost top (upper boundary of the permafrost, depth below the surface in m) - Permafrost base (lower boundary of the permafrost, depth below the surface in m) - Talik thickness (perennially unfrozen ground occurring in permafrost terrain, m) There are 1000 GeoTIFF files per model-scenario combination. The model-scenario combinations are: - GFDL-CM3, RCP 4.5 - GFDL-CM3, RCP 8.5 - NCAR-CCSM4, RCP 4.5 - NCAR-CCSM4, RCP 8.5 - A 5-Model (GFDL-CM3, NCAR-CCSM4, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5A-LR, MRI-CGCM3) Average, RCP 8.5 - A 5-Model (GFDL-CM3, NCAR-CCSM4, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5A-LR, MRI-CGCM3) Average, RCP 4.5 The file naming convention is `gipl_model_scenario_variable_year.tif` for example: `gipl_GFDL-CM3_rcp45_talikthickness_m_2090.tif` Each GeoTIFF uses the Alaska Albers (EPSG:3338) projection and has a spatial resolution of 1 km x 1 km. All rasters in this dataset have indentical extents, spatial references, and metadata objects. Once extracted, the entire dataset (all 6000 GeoTIFFs) requires 39 GB of disk space. Data are compressed into ten .zip files, one per variable. Each archive will contain all model-scenario combinations and all years for that variable. Each .zip file contains 600 GeoTIFFs. This research was funded by the Broad Agency Announcement Program and the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center and Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (ERDC-CRREL) under Contract No. W913E521C0010. The GIPL2-MPI/GCM simulations were supported in part by the high-performance computing and data storage resources operated by the Research Computing Systems Group at the University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute.

  • Mean temperature and precipitation values extracted at community locations across Alaska and Canada from downscaled raster datasets containing historical and projected estimates for these variables.

  • These data contain historical and future projections of percent land cover from 1950 to 2100, as simulated by the Alaska Thermokarst Model for the boreal region. The data are 1km spatial resolution. The climate data used to drive the model simulations are from the Climate Research Unit, Time Series 4.0 (CRU_TS40) for the historical period (1950 to 2015), and from RCP 8.5 and global circulation models NCAR-CCSM4 and MRI-CGCM3 for the projected period (2016 to 2100). Datasets from the years 1950, 2000, 2050, and 2100 are provided. Annual maps are available upon request. Please note that this data is used to fill in a gap in available data for the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM) and does not constitute a complete or precise measurement of this variable in all locations. If used for publication, these data should be cited as the following: Genet H., Lara M., McGuire A.D., Jorgenson T.M., Euskirchen E.S., Clein J., Carman T., Rutter R., Rupp S., Breen A., Kurkowski T., Bennett A., Torgenson B., Romanovski V., Marchenko S. 2018. Land cover dynamic in the Tanana Flats from 1950 to 2100 driven by thermokarst activity.

  • This set of files includes downscaled projections of monthly totals, and derived annual, seasonal, and decadal means of monthly total precipitation (in millimeters, no unit conversion necessary) from Jan 2006 - Dec 2100 at 771x771 meter spatial resolution. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RPCs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. The downscaling process utilizes PRISM climatological datasets from 1971-2000. Brief descriptions of the datasets: Monthly precipitation totals: The total precipitation, in mm, for the month. For Decadal outputs: 1. Decadal Average Total Monthly Precipitation: 10 year average of total monthly precipitation. Example: All January precipitation files for a decade are added together and divided by ten. 2. Decadal Average Seasonal Precipitation Totals: 10 year average of seasonal precipitation totals. Example: MAM seasonal totals for every year in a decade are added together and divided by ten. 3. Decadal Average Annual Precipitation Totals: 10 year average of annual cumulative precipitation. For seasonal means, the four seasons are referred to by the first letter of 3 months making up that season: * `JJA`: summer (June, July, August) * `SON`: fall (September, October, November) * `DJF`: winter (December, January, February) * `MAM`: spring (March, April, May) Please note that these maps represent climatic estimates only. While we have based our work on scientifically accepted data and methods, uncertainty is always present. Uncertainty in model outputs tends to increase for more distant climatic estimates from present day for both historical summaries and future projections.

  • This data set consists of PRSIM mean air temperature climatologies for Alaska in GeoTIFF format. The files in this data set are available from the PRISM Climate Group as text files but have been processed into GeoTIFFs. These are monthly climatologies with a resolution of 771m. Units are degrees Celsius. There are multiple climatological periods currently available through PRISM, but only one is currently available through SNAP in this dataset: 1971-2000.

  • These are map products depicting modeled treeline dynamics. The left panel indicates modeled treeline dynamics from a single 2014 baseline year to the year 2100. The right panel indicates basal area accumulation on a 1km x 1km pixel basis during the year 2100, which gives an indication where possible further treeline advance may occur beyond 2100. The source datasets used to create these maps can be found here: http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/alfresco-model-outputs-linear-coupled-annual ALFRESCO is a landscape scale fire and vegetation dynamics model. These specific outputs are from the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM) project, and are from the linear coupled version using AR4/CMIP3 and AR5/CMIP5 climate inputs (IEM Generation 1a). These outputs include data from model rep 171(AR4/CMIP3) and rep 26(AR5/CMIP5), referred to as the “best rep” out of 200 replicates. The best rep was chosen through comparing ALFRESCO’s historical fire outputs to observed historical fire patterns. Single rep analysis is not recommended as a best practice, but can be used to visualize possible changes. The IEM Generation 1 is driven by outputs from 4 climate models, and two emission scenarios: AR4/CMIP3 SRES A1B CCCMA-CGCMS-3.1 MPI-ECHAM5 AR5/CMIP5 RCP 8.5 MRI-CGCM3 NCAR-CCSM4