Search

The field of extreme event attribution (EEA) has rapidly developed over the last two decades. Various methods have been developed and implemented, physical modelling capabilities have generally improved, the field of impact attribution has emerged, and assessments serve as a popular communication tool for conveying how climate change is influencing weather and climate events in the lived experience. However, a number of non-trivial challenges still remain that must be addressed by the community to secure further advancement of the field whilst ensuring scientific rigour and the appropriate use of attribution findings by stakeholders and associated applications. As part of a concept series commissioned by the World Climate Research Programme, this article discusses contemporary developments and challenges over six key domains relevant to EEA, and provides recommendations of where focus in the EEA field should be concentrated over the coming decade. These six domains are: (1) observations in the context of EEA; (2) extreme event definitions; (3) statistical methods; (4) physical modelling methods; (5) impact attribution; and (6) communication. Broadly, recommendations call for increased EEA assessments and capacity building, particularly for more vulnerable regions; contemporary guidelines for assessing the suitability of physical climate models; establishing best-practice methodologies for EEA on compound and record-shattering extremes; co-ordinated interdisciplinary engagement to develop scaffolding for impact attribution assessments and their suitability for use in broader applications; and increased and ongoing investment in EEA communication. To address these recommendations requires significant developments in multiple fields that either underpin (e.g., observations and monitoring; climate modelling) or are closely related to (e.g., compound and record-shattering events; climate impacts) EEA, as well as working consistently with experts outside of attribution and climate science more generally. However, if approached with investment, dedication, and coordination, tackling these challenges over the next decade will ensure robust EEA analysis, with tangible benefits to the broader global community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Downscaling global climate models (GCMs) provides crucial high-resolution data needed for informed decision-making at regional scales. However, there is no uniform approach to select the most suitable GCMs. Over Southeast Asia (SEA), observations are sparse and have large uncertainties, complicating GCM selection especially for rainfall. To guide this selection, we apply a standardised benchmarking framework to select CMIP6 GCMs for dynamical downscaling over SEA, addressing current observational limitations. This framework identifies fit-for-purpose models through a two-step process: (a) selecting models that meet minimum performance requirements in simulating the fundamental characteristics of rainfall (e.g. bias, spatial pattern, annual cycle and trend) and (b) selecting models from (a) to further assess whether key precipitation drivers (monsoon) and teleconnections from modes of variability are captured, i.e. the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD). GCMs generally exhibit wet biases, particularly over the complex terrain of the Maritime Continent. Evaluations from the first step identify 19 out of 32 GCMs that meet our minimum performance expectations in simulating rainfall. These models also consistently capture atmospheric circulations and teleconnections with modes of variability over the region but overestimate their strength. Ultimately, we identify eight GCMs meeting our performance expectations. There are obvious, high-performing GCMs from allied modelling groups, highlighting the dependency of the subset of models identified from the framework. Therefore, further tests of model independence, data availability and future climate change spread are conducted, resulting in a final subset of two independent models that align with our a priori expectations for downscaling over the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment –Southeast Asia (CORDEX-SEA). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of ongoing climate change, extreme weather events are drawing increasing attention from the public and news media. A question often asked is how the likelihood of extremes might have changed by anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions. Answers to the question are strongly influenced by the model used, duration, spatial extent, and geographic location of the event—some of these factors often overlooked. Using output from four global climate models, we provide attribution statements characterised by a change in probability of occurrence due to anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions, for rainfall and temperature extremes occurring at seven discretised spatial scales and three temporal scales. An understanding of the sensitivity of attribution statements to a range of spatial and temporal scales of extremes allows for the scaling of attribution statements, rendering them relevant to other extremes having similar but non-identical characteristics. This is a procedure simple enough to approximate timely estimates of the anthropogenic contribution to the event probability. Furthermore, since real extremes do not have well-defined physical borders, scaling can help quantify uncertainty around attribution results due to uncertainty around the event definition. Results suggest that the sensitivity of attribution statements to spatial scale is similar across models and that the sensitivity of attribution statements to the model used is often greater than the sensitivity to a doubling or halving of the spatial scale of the event. The use of a range of spatial scales allows us to identify a nonlinear relationship between the spatial scale of the event studied and the attribution statement.

In this study, we employ the Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (CCAM), a variable‐resolution global atmospheric model, driven by two distinct sea surface temperature (SST) data sets: the 0.25° Optimum Interpolation Sea Surface Temperature (CCAM_OISST) version 2.1 and the 2° Extended Reconstruction SSTs Version 5 (CCAM_ERSST5). Model performance is assessed using a benchmarking framework, revealing good agreement between both simulations and the climatological rainfall spatial pattern, seasonality, and annual trends obtained from the Australian Gridded Climate Data (AGCD). Notably, wet biases are identified in both simulations, with CCAM_OISST displaying a more pronounced bias. Furthermore, we have examined CCAM's ability to capture El Niño‐Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) correlations with rainfall during Austral spring (SON) utilizing a novel hit rate metric. Results indicate that only CCAM_OISST successfully replicates observed SON ENSO‐ and IOD‐rainfall correlations, achieving hit rates of 86.6% and 87.5%, respectively, compared to 52.7% and 41.8% for CCAM_ERSST5. Large SST differences are found surrounding the Australian coastline between OISST and ERSST5 (termed the "Coastal Effect"). Differences can be induced by the spatial interpolation error due to the discrepancy between model and driving SST. An additional CCAM experiment, employing OISST with SST masked by ERSST5 in 5° proximity to the Australian continent, underscores the "Coastal Effect" has a significant impact on IOD‐Australian rainfall simulations. In contrast, its influence on ENSO‐Australian rainfall is limited. Therefore, simulations of IOD‐Australian rainfall teleconnection are sensitive to local SST representation along coastlines, probably dependent on the spatial resolution of driving SST. Plain Language Summary: In this research, the Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (CCAM), a global atmospheric model, is used to study the impact of different driving sea surface temperature (SST) data sets on Australian rainfall simulations. Two SST data sets, one with high resolution (OISST) and another at lower resolution (ERSST5), are employed to drive CCAM (CCAM_OISST and CCAM_ERSST5). Model performance is evaluated using a benchmarking approach, indicating that both SST‐driven experiments are in good agreement with observed rainfall patterns in Australia. However, both simulations exhibit wet biases, with CCAM_OISST having a more noticeable bias. The study assesses CCAM's ability to capture the correlation between El Niño‐Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) with rainfall during Austral spring. Results reveal that CCAM_OISST performs better, replicating observed correlations more accurately than CCAM_ERSST5. The research identifies strong SST differences found between OISST and ERSST5 around the Australian coastline. An additional experiment underscores that this "Coastal Effect" plays an important role in simulating IOD‐Australian rainfall correlations, while its impact on ENSO‐Australian rainfall is limited. In conclusion, robust simulations of IOD‐Australian rainfall teleconnection require an accurate representation of local SST, which is related to the spatial resolution of SST products driving the model. Key Points: Novel hit rate metrics are proposed to evaluate El Niño‐Southern Oscillation and Indian Ocean Dipole‐rainfall teleconnectionsCCAM driven by different SST performs well in mean rainfall but ENSO and IOD related rainfall varies substantially over AustraliaResolution of the driving sea surface temperature is important to simulate IOD‐rainfall variability over Australia [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing field of research aims to characterise the contribution of anthropogenic emissions to the likelihood of extreme weather and climate events. These analyses can be sensitive to the shapes of the tails of simulated distributions. If tails are found to be unrealistically short or long, the anthropogenic signal emerges more or less clearly, respectively, from the noise of possible weather. Here we compare the chance of daily land-surface precipitation and near-surface temperature extremes generated by three Atmospheric Global Climate Models typically used for event attribution, with distributions from six reanalysis products. The likelihoods of extremes are compared for area-averages over grid cell and regional sized spatial domains. Results suggest a bias favouring overly strong attribution estimates for hot and cold events over many regions of Africa and Australia, and a bias favouring overly weak attribution estimates over regions of North America and Asia. For rainfall, results are more sensitive to geographic location. Although the three models show similar results over many regions, they do disagree over others. Equally, results highlight the discrepancy amongst reanalyses products. This emphasises the importance of using multiple reanalysis and/or observation products, as well as multiple models in event attribution studies.

Downscaling global climate models (GCMs) provides crucial, high-resolution data needed for informed decision-making at regional scales. However, there is no uniform approach to select the most suitable GCMs. Over Southeast Asia (SEA), observations are sparse and have large uncertainties, complicating GCM selection especially for rainfall. To guide this selection, we apply a standardised benchmarking framework to select CMIP6 GCMs for dynamical downscaling over SEA, addressing current observational limitations. This framework identifies fit-for-purpose models through a two-step process: (a) selecting models that meet minimum performance requirements in simulating the fundamental characteristics of rainfall (e.g., bias, spatial pattern, annual cycle, and trend) and (b) selecting models from (a) to further assess whether key precipitation drivers (monsoon) and teleconnections from modes of variability are captured [El Niño-Southern-Oscillation (ENSO) and Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD)]. GCMs generally exhibit wet biases, particularly over the complex terrain of the Maritime Continent. Evaluations from the first step identify 19 out of 32 GCMs that meet our minimum performance expectations in simulating rainfall. These models also consistently capture atmospheric circulations and teleconnections with modes of variability over the region but overestimate their strength. Ultimately, we identify eight GCMs meeting our performance expectations. There are obvious, high-performing GCMs from allied modelling groups, highlighting the dependency of the subset of models identified from the framework. Therefore, further tests on model independence, data availability, and future climate change spread are conducted, resulting in a final sub-set of two independent models that align with our a priori expectations for downscaling over CORDEX-SEA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global gridded data sets of observed extremes indices underpin assessments of changes in climate extremes. However, similar efforts to enable the assessment of indices relevant to different sectors of society have been missing. Here we present a data set of sector‐specific indices, based on daily station data, that extends the HadEX3 data set of climate extremes indices. These additional indices, which can be used singly or in combinations, have been recommended by the World Meteorological Organization and are intended to empower decision makers in different sectors with accurate historical information about how sector‐relevant measures of the climate are changing, especially in regions where in situ daily temperature and rainfall data are hard to come by. The annual and/or monthly indices have been interpolated on to a 1.875° × 1.25° longitude‐latitude grid for 1901–2018. We show changes in globally‐averaged time series of these indices in comparison with reanalysis products. Changes in temperature‐based indices are consistent with global scale warming, with days with Tmax > 30°C (TXge30) increasing virtually everywhere with potential impacts on crop fertility. At the other end of the scale, the number of days with Tmin < −2°C (TNltm2) are reducing, decreasing potential damage from frosts. Changes in heat wave characteristics show increases in the number, duration and intensity of these extreme events in most places. The gridded netCDF files and, where possible, the underlying station indices are available from https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadex3 and https://www.climdex.org. Plain Language Summary: To be able to assess changes in extreme temperature and rainfall events across the globe, data sets which capture characteristics of these extreme events are required. The use of indices for these characteristics further enables both data sharing and the comparison of events across the world. Extreme events have impacts across human health, our infrastructure and the natural environment. So far there has not been a global product which presents indices which are relevant for different sectors of our society, including health, agriculture and water resources. In this work we present an extension to an existing data set of extremes indices, HadEX3, by including indices defined by the World Meteorological Organization which were developed with sector specific applications in mind. We have used the same approach and methodology, and where possible the same underlying daily temperature and rainfall observations. The temperature indices show changes consistent with global scale warming, with heat wave characteristics showing increases in the number, duration and intensity of these extreme events in most places. The data files are available for use by interested researchers in their work. Key Points: We present a sector specific extension to a data set of gridded temperature and precipitation extremesThis first quasi‐global product of these indices will support decision makers in a wide range of sectorsLong‐term changes show increases in intensity, frequency, and duration of warm extremes, and corresponding decreases in cool extremes [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Millions of sub‐daily sea‐level pressure observations taken between 1919 and 1960 over the British and Irish Isles were transcribed from paper records in the early 2000s but were not published and subsequently forgotten. A chance discussion led to the rediscovery of the transcribed data and 5.47 million observations from 160 locations are now made available, although the data have not been fully quality‐controlled. Much of the data are 3‐hourly, allowing for detailed examinations of synoptic weather variations for this region and time period, and will be invaluable for constraining future reanalyses. We illustrate the value of the data using a stormy period during October and November 1928 and discuss the remaining quality‐control issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]