the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
METEORv1.6: Spatial climate variability and integrated impact emulation
Abstract. Climate impact assessment increasingly requires spatially explicit projections with realistic temporal variability at sub-annual resolution. METEORv1.6 extends the established METEOR spatial multi-timescale, multi-forcer climate emulation framework with two major capabilities: (1) a monthly climate variability model that generates realistic sub-annual climate sequences with seasonal cycles and inter-annual variability, enabling the generation of ensemble projections and (2) a modular impact assessment framework that translates climate projections into impact metrics. The monthly climate model represents seasonal harmonics and noise, while preserving covariance structures from the source model. Seasonal cycles are represented through harmonic analysis with temperature-dependent parameterization, enabling non-stationary simulation of seasonal timing shifts under warming. Principal Component Analysis is used to decompose monthly anomalies into spatial modes, then their temporal evolution and climate variability is modeled using Vector Autoregressive with eXogenous variables (VARX) processes. The impact assessment framework provides a standardized interface for ensemble processing and uncertainty quantification through a modular system of impact calculators. The initial case implementation includes heating and cooling degree days calculations which are key drivers in estimating energy sector demand, demonstrating ensemble-based uncertainty propagation from climate projections to impact metrics. Validation against CMIP6 data demonstrates that METEORv1.6 accurately reproduces statistical properties of monthly climate variability for a range of future scenarios when trained on a single scenario from an Earth System Model (together with a CO2 quadrupling idealized experiment). The integrated impact framework enables rapid generation of probabilistic climate risk assessments suitable for sectoral applications, bridging the gap between global climate projections and local decision-making needs. The open-source implementation supports broad adoption and continued expansion to additional impact domains.
- Preprint
(3533 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1680 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 21 Jul 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2029 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
CC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Marit Sandstad, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Juan A. Añel,
All CMIP6 data are available through the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF; Cinquini et al., 2014) or via the zarrstore google-api (https://storage.googleapis.com/cmip6/cmip6-zarr-consolidated-stores.csv). As was described in the description paper for the first version of METEOR (Sandstad et. al 2025), METEOR includes software that directly pulls and processes data from the zarrstore google-api to do its training, so the model can be retrained an run with no manual outside of METEOR data download from a separate repository.
We are very sorry if this was not clear from our current Data Availability section and we will update that shortly.
Hope that clarifies the points and will be enough to show that we are in compliance with the journals "Code and Data policy"
Best regards,
Marit Sandstad
Cinquini, L., Crichton, D., Mattmann, C., Harney, J., Shipman, G., Wang, F., Ananthakrishnan, R., Miller, N., Denvil, S., Morgan, M., Pobre, Z., Bell, G. M., Doutriaux, C., Drach, R., Williams, D., Kershaw, P., Pascoe, S., Gonzalez, E., Fiore, S., and Schweitzer, R.: The Earth System Grid Federation: An open infrastructure for access to distributed geospatial data, Future Gener. Comput. Syst., 36, 400–417, https://esgf-node.llnl.gov
Sandstad, M., Steinert, N. J., Baur, S., and Sanderson, B. M.: METEORv1.0.1: a novel framework for emulating multi-timescale regional climate responses, Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 8269–8312, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-8269-2025, 2025.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on CC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Many thanks for the quick reply. Unfortunately, we can not accept that the data used in the work presented are stored in googleapis.com. Namely:
- It does not appear to have a published policy for data preservation over many years or decades (some flexibility exists over the precise length of preservation, but the policy must exist).
- It does not appear to have a published mechanism for preventing authors from unilaterally removing material. Archives must have a policy which makes removal of materials only possible in exceptional circumstances and subject to an independent curatorial decision,
- It does not appear to issue a persistent identifier such as a DOI or Handle for each precise dataset.We could accept the ESGF. However,please, provide clear information about the variables and the specific data files used to train your model. It should not be a simple generic citation to the ESGF, as it is not enough to find the exact data used.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CEC2 -
CC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Marit Sandstad, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Juan A. Añel,
We are happy to update the information in the data availability statement to include variables. METEOR is designed to be extremely lightweight and easily retrainable. For the version described in this and the previous paper it only needs monthly timeresolution data of tas and pr from experiments piControl, abrupt4xCO2, historical and ssp245 from a single ensemble member to train on and produce an emulation for a model. These datasets are also chosen because they are generally available (definitely via ESGF ) for all models that participated in CMIP6, and the ssp245 experiment can in principle be swapped out for any other future scenario that goes up to 2100. We can detail this in the data availability statement.
Would you also like for us to state which exact model and ensemble member versions have been used for the results and plots shown in the manuscript?
best regards,
Marit Sandstad
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CC2 -
CEC3: 'Reply on CC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Again, thanks for the quick reply. Having the most specific information possible about the models and experiments would be highly desirable. So yes, please, include the information.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CEC3 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC3', Benjamin Sanderson, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Juan,
Just following up on this discussion - we've collected together the list of DOIs for the CMIP6 data used in the paper. How should we proceed to add it to the manuscript?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-AC1 -
CEC4: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Ben, dear authors,
Right now, simply post them here in Discussions in reply to this thread. Later, if the editor accepts the manuscript for publication or if requests a reviewed version you will be able to add the new information into the text.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CEC4 -
CC3: 'Reply on CEC4', Marit Sandstad, 22 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Juan A. Añel,
As stated previously, METEOR is trained on monthly tas and pr datasets only, and four experiments are used to train the model; piControl, abrupt-4xCO2, historical and ssp245. (For models CanESM5, CESM2-WACCM, CNRM-ESM2-1, IPSL-CM6A-LR, and UKESM1-0-LL we also evaluate out-of-sample performance emulating scenarios ssp126, ssp585 and ssp534-over.) In this manuscript we show results using METEOR trained on:
NorESM2-MM:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.7840
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8040
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8221
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8255
CanESM5:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3532
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3610
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3673
- ssp126 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3683
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3685
- ssp534-over → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3694
- ssp585 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3696
CESM2-WACCM:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10039
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10071
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10094
- ssp126 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10100
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10101
- ssp534-over → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10114
- ssp585 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10115
CNRM-ESM2-1:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3918
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4068
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4165
- ssp126 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4186
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4191
- ssp534-over → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4221
- ssp585 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4226
IPSL-CM6A-LR:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5109
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5195
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5251
- ssp126 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5262
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5264
- ssp534-over → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5269
- ssp585 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5271
UKESM1-0-LL:
- abrupt-4xCO2 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5843
- historical → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6113
- piControl → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6298
- ssp126 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6333
- ssp245 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6339
- ssp534-over → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6397
- ssp585 → https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6405
best regards,
Marit Sandstad
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CC3 -
CEC5: 'Reply on CC3', Juan Antonio Añel, 22 Jun 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Many thanks for addressing this issue so quickly.
We can consider now the current version of your manuscript in compliance with the code policy of the journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-CEC5
-
CC3: 'Reply on CEC4', Marit Sandstad, 22 Jun 2026
reply
-
CEC4: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC3', Benjamin Sanderson, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
CEC3: 'Reply on CC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
CC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Marit Sandstad, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
CEC2: 'Reply on CC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
CC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Marit Sandstad, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2029', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Jun 2026
reply
This is an exceptional manuscript that was an intellectual joy to read. The authors extend the already published METEOR model to incorporate monthly variability and to the impact space. They evaluate/validate the METEORv1.6 in-sample and out-of-sample. I recommend prompt publication.
Very minor comments:
- Eq 4: is the 5th entry supposed to be 4pi/12 or 2pi/12?
- Data: I briefly checked the zenodo repo and I think you only have code there, right? I think you should release the underlying data of the work as well.
- L586: I would prompt Claude to double check some consistency issues and phrasings throughout the manuscript ;) e.g., "DegreeDaysCalulator" in Fig 1
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2029-RC1
Data sets
METEOR v1.6 source Ben Sanderson et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14967115
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 159 | 41 | 16 | 216 | 23 | 18 | 18 |
- HTML: 159
- PDF: 41
- XML: 16
- Total: 216
- Supplement: 23
- BibTeX: 18
- EndNote: 18
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
For your work you have used CMIP6 data to train your model. However, no details are given on how to access the mentioned data, that should be deposited in a permanent repository acceptable according to the policy of the journal.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish the mentioned data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
Later, if the Topical Editor decides to continue with the review or publication process of your manuscript and you are requested to upload a new version of it, then The 'Code and Data Availability’ section of your manuscript must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
If for some reason you can not store the requested data in a repository acceptable according to the policy, please, clarify what is the reason, so that we can study an exception to the policy. However, a link to the data used for training must be included in the manuscript in any case.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor