  We present an intercomparison and verification analysis of several regional
climate models (RCMs) nested into the same run of the same Atmospheric Global
Circulation Model (AGCM) regarding their representation of the statistical
properties of the hydrological balance of the Danube river basin for 1961-1990.
We also consider the datasets produced by the driving AGCM, from the ECMWF and
NCEP-NCAR reanalyses. The hydrological balance is computed by integrating the
precipitation and evaporation fields over the area of interest. Large
discrepancies exist among RCMs for the monthly climatology as well as for the
mean and variability of the annual balances, and only few datasets are
consistent with the observed discharge values of the Danube at its Delta, even
if the driving AGCM provides itself an excellent estimate. Since the considered
approach relies on the mass conservation principle and bypasses the details of
the air-land interface modeling, we propose that the atmospheric components of
RCMs still face difficulties in representing the water balance even on a
relatively large scale. Their reliability on smaller river basins may be even
more problematic. Moreover, since for some models the hydrological balance
estimates obtained with the runoff fields do not agree with those obtained via
precipitation and evaporation, some deficiencies of the land models are also
apparent. NCEP-NCAR and ERA-40 reanalyses result to be largely inadequate for
representing the hydrology of the Danube river basin, both for the
reconstruction of the long-term averages and of the seasonal cycle, and cannot
in any sense be used as verification. We suggest that these results should be
carefully considered in the perspective of auditing climate models and
assessing their ability to simulate future climate changes.
