Verdict: favorable. The same /v1/score number a booking flow consumes.
One sub-spot · four decades
A kitesurfing sub-spot in Tarifa today scores 87. Same engine, same curves, projected forward via the bias-corrected CMIP6 ensemble under SSP2-4.5 (the middle-of-the-road emissions scenario). The trajectory is what an asset manager can build a portfolio strategy around.
Slight wind-regime shift. Sub-spot still viable for the activity, season may compress by 2 weeks.
Season compression ~30%. Workable verdict but operator must rebalance equipment mix.
Adaptation decisions required: site relocation, season migration, or activity portfolio change.
Same sub-spot · four scenarios
The choice of emissions pathway changes which world you're underwriting. The engine returns the full grid — score and confidence per (year × scenario × spot). Below: same Tarifa kitesurf sub-spot, projected to 2075 across the four canonical IPCC pathways.
From CMIP6 to a single score
No new physics, no new machine learning. The projection pipeline is composition over what already runs in production: same providers (climate, not just weather), same physics formulas, same calibrated curves, same confidence model.
CMIP6 ensemble
30+ general-circulation models, 4 emission scenarios, multi-decadal time series. We fetch the raw NetCDF from ESGF + bias-correct against the local ERA5 record per sub-spot.
CORDEX downscaling
EUR-11 (12km) for Europe, NAM-22 for North America. Higher-resolution regional climate models that resolve sub-spot orography missed at the global 100km scale.
Bias correction
Per-(sub-spot × variable) multiplicative + additive offsets fitted nightly. Bayesian shrinkage when the sub-spot record is short — borrows strength from the parent region.
Profile re-score
Same physics curves the /v1/score endpoint uses. The activity's calibrated suitability function evaluated on the projected (wind, wave, temp, snow) distribution at each decade.
Adaptation report
POST /v1/projections/adaptation-report → multi-year × multi-scenario summary, with confidence intervals derived from ensemble spread + bias-correction uncertainty.
Three personas, one report
Tourism boards
Adaptation roadmap for an entire activity portfolio.
REITs · property
Asset-level viability across the mortgage horizon.
Adaptation grant filers
Defensible projections as supporting evidence.
Scale plan · contracted
Adaptation projections aren't on the self-serve tiers — the CMIP6 ensemble pull alone costs us non-trivially per call, and the report-grade output needs a discovery call to scope the spot list + scenario set. Onboard via the partner desk; contracts run annual with a fixed report cadence (quarterly refresh by default).
The bias-correction model + the per-scenario uncertainty propagation are documented in the open Research Frontier page. EU adaptation grants and tourism-board RFPs commonly ask for a methodology statement — we provide one that maps to the published methodology, not a black-box "trust us".
Three weeks from first call to first report
A typical onboarding: kick-off call (your spot list + scenario set + reporting cadence), pilot delivery (one region, two scenarios, sample report) at week 2, contract execution + full rollout by week 4. We don't sell adaptation studies — we sell an ongoing engine subscription that produces them.