We generally believe that regional model (e.g. WRF) simulate climate variables more accurately compared to general circulation models as regional model can resolve finer details of topography and other parameters. If we run a fully coupled general circulation model at a very high resolution (assuming that the input data sets used are also of very high resolution and accurate, and no resource constraint for computation), how would the results differ from those of a regional model run at a similar resolution. My question is for which climate variables, improvement in simulated results would be most significant? I am talking in general, please don't say that the results differ regionally and temporally. I am more concerned on the differences in how the equations of mass, momentum and energy are treated in these models.

Similar questions and discussions