Search

Towards the end of June 2021, temperature records were broken by several degrees Celsius in several cities in the Pacific Northwest areas of the US and Canada, leading to spikes in sudden deaths and sharp increases in emergency calls and hospital visits for heat-related illnesses. Here we present a multi-model, multi-method attribution analysis to investigate the extent to which human-induced climate change has influenced the probability and intensity of extreme heat waves in this region. Based on observations, modelling and a classical statistical approach, the occurrence of a heat wave defined as the maximum daily temperature (TXx) observed in the area 45-52N, 119-123W, was found to be virtually impossible without human-caused climate change. The observed temperatures were so extreme that they lay far outside the range of historical temperature observations. This makes it hard to state with confidence how rare the event was. Using a statistical analysis that assumes that the heat wave is part of the same distribution as previous heat waves in this region led to a first-order estimation of the event frequency of the order of once in 1000 years under current climate conditions. Using this assumption and combining the results from the analysis of climate models and weather observations, we found that such a heat wave event would be at least 150 times less common without human-induced climate change. Also, this heat wave was about 2 C hotter than a 1-in-1000-year heat wave would have been in 1850-1900, when global mean temperatures were 1.2 C cooler than today. Looking into the future, in a world with 2 C of global warming (0.8 C warmer than today), a 1000-year event would be another degree hotter. Our results provide a strong warning: our rapidly warming climate is bringing us into uncharted territory with significant consequences for health, well-being and livelihoods. Adaptation and mitigation are urgently needed to prepare societies for a very different future.

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]

Advances in the field of extreme event attribution allow to estimate how anthropogenic global warming affects the odds of individual climate disasters, such as river floods. Extreme event attribution typically uses precipitation as proxy for flooding. However, hydrological processes and antecedent conditions make the relation between precipitation and floods highly nonlinear. In addition, hydrology acknowledges that changes in floods can be strongly driven by changes in land‐cover and by other human interventions in the hydrological system, such as irrigation and construction of dams. These drivers can either amplify, dampen or outweigh the effect of climate change on local flood occurrence. Neglecting these processes and drivers can lead to incorrect flood attribution. Including flooding explicitly, that is, using data and models of hydrology and hydrodynamics that can represent the relevant hydrological processes, will lead to more robust event attribution, and will account for the role of other drivers beyond climate change. Existing attempts are incomplete. We argue that the existing probabilistic framework for extreme event attribution can be extended to explicitly include floods for near‐natural cases, where flood occurrence was unlikely to be influenced by land‐cover change and human hydrological interventions. However, for the many cases where this assumption is not valid, a multi‐driver framework for conditional event attribution needs to be established. Explicit flood attribution will have to grapple with uncertainties from lack of observations and compounding from the many processes involved. Further, it requires collaboration between climatologists and hydrologists, and promises to better address the needs of flood risk management. This article is categorized under:Paleoclimates and Current Trends > Modern Climate ChangePaleoclimates and Current Trends > Detection and AttributionAssessing Impacts of Climate Change > Observed Impacts of Climate Change [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the Euro-Mediterranean the likelihood of a heat wave at least as hot as summer 2017 is now on the order of 10%. Anthropogenic climate change has increased the odds [...]

Towards the end of June 2021, temperature records were broken by several degrees Celsius in several cities in the Pacific northwest areas of the U.S. and Canada, leading to spikes in sudden deaths, and sharp increases in hospital visits for heat-related illnesses and emergency calls. Here we present a multi-model, multi-method attribution analysis to investigate to what extent human-induced climate change has influenced the probability and intensity of extreme heatwaves in this region. Based on observations and modeling, the occurrence of a heatwave with maximum daily temperatures (TXx) as observed in the area 45° N-52° N, 119° W-123° W, was found to be virtually impossible without human-caused climate change. The observed temperatures were so extreme that they lie far outside the range of historically observed temperatures. This makes it hard to quantify with confidence how rare the event was. In the most realistic statistical analysis, which uses the assumption that the heatwave was a very low probability event that was not caused by new nonlinearities, the event is estimated to be about a 1 in 1000 year event in today's climate. With this assumption and combining the results from the analysis of climate models and weather observations, an event, defined as daily maximum temperatures (TXx) in the heatwave region, as rare as 1 in a 1000 years would have been at least 150 times rarer without human-induced climate change. Also, this heatwave was about 2 °C hotter than a 1 in 1000-year heatwave that at the beginning of the industrial revolution would have been (when global mean temperatures were 1.2 °C cooler than today). Looking into the future, in a world with 2 °C of global warming (0.8 °C warmer than today), a 1000-year event would be another degree hotter. It would occur roughly every 5 to 10 years in such global warming conditions. Our results provide a strong warning: our rapidly warming climate is bringing us into uncharted territory with significant consequences for health, well-being, and livelihoods. Adaptation and mitigation are urgently needed to prepare societies for a very different future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In eastern Africa droughts can cause crop failure and lead to food insecurity. With increasing temperatures, there is an a priori assumption that droughts are becoming more severe, however, the link between droughts and climate change is not sufficiently understood. In the current study we focus on agricultural drought and the influence of high temperatures and precipitation deficits on this. Using a combination of models and observational datasets, we studied trends in six regions in eastern Africa in four drought-related annually averaged variables – soil moisture, precipitation, temperature and, as a measure of evaporative demand, potential evapotranspiration (PET). In standardized soil moisture data, we find no discernible trends. Precipitation was found to have a stronger influence on soil moisture variability than temperature or PET, especially in the drier, or water-limited, study regions. The error margins on precipitation-trend estimates are however large and no clear trend is evident. We find significant positive trends in local temperatures. However, the influence of these on soil moisture annual trends appears limited as evaporation is water limited. The trends in PET are predominantly positive, but we do not find strong relations between PET and soil moisture trends. Nevertheless, the PET-trend results can still be of interest for irrigation purposes as it is PET that determines the maximum evaporation rate. We conclude that, until now, the impact of increasing local temperatures on agricultural drought in eastern Africa is limited and recommend that any soil moisture analysis be supplemented by analysis of precipitation deficit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In August 2017 Bangladesh faced one of its worst river flooding events in recent history. This paper presents for the first time an attribution of this precipitation-induced flooding from a combined meteorological and hydrological perspective. Experiments were conducted with three observational data sets and two climate models to estimate changes in extreme 10-day precipitation event frequency over the Brahmaputra basin. The precipitation fields were then used as meteorological input for four different hydrological models to estimate the corresponding changes in river discharge, allowing for comparison between approaches and for the robustness of the attribution results to be assessed. In all three observational precipitation data sets the climate change trends for extreme precipitation similar to observed in August 2017 are not significant, however in two out of three series, the sign of this insignificant trend is positive. One climate model shows a significant positive influence of anthropogenic climate change, whereas the other simulates a cancellation between the increase due to greenhouse gases and a decrease due to sulphate aerosols. Considering discharge rather than precipitation, the hydrological models show that attribution of the change in discharge towards higher values is somewhat less uncertain than for precipitation, but the 95 % confidence interval still encompasses no change in risk. For the future, all models project an increase in probability of extreme events at 2 °C global heating since pre-industrial times, becoming more than 1.7 times more likely for high 10-day precipitation, and about a factor 1.5 more likely for discharge. Our best estimate on the trend in flooding events similar to the Brahmaputra event of August 2017 is derived by synthesizing the observational and model results: We find the change in risk to be greater than one and of similar order of magnitude (between 1 and 2) for both the meteorological and hydrological approach. This study shows that, for precipitation-induced flooding events, investigating changes in precipitation is useful, either as an alternative when hydrological models are not available, or as an additional measure to confirm qualitative conclusions. Besides, it highlights the importance of using multiple models in attribution studies, particularly where the climate change signal is not strong relative to natural variability or is confounded by other factors such as aerosols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several major storms pounded Western Europe in January 2018, generating large damages and casualties. The two most impactful ones, Eleanor and Friederike, are analyzed here in the context of climate change. Near surface wind speed station observations exhibit a decreasing trend of the frequency of strong winds associated with such storms. High-resolution regional climate models on the other hand show no trend up to now and a small increase in the future due to climate change. This shows that that factors other than climate change, which are not represented (well) in the climate models, caused the observed decline in storminess over land. A large part is probably due to increases in surface roughness, as shown for a small set of stations covering The Netherlands and in previous studies. This trend could therefore be independent from climate evolution. We concluded that human-induced climate change has had so far no significant influence on storms like the two studied. However, all simulations indicate that global warming could lead to a marginal increase (0-20%) of the probability of extreme hourly winds until the middle of the century, consistent with previous modelling studies. However, this excludes other factors, such as roughness, aerosols, and decadal variability, which have up to now caused a much larger negative trend. Until these factors are simulated well by climate models they cannot give credible projections of future storminess over land in Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The variability of results from different automated methods of detection and tracking of extra-tropical cyclones is assessed in order to identify uncertainties related to the choice of method. Fifteen international teams applied their own algorithms to the same dataset--the period 1989-2009 of interim European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) data. This experiment is part of the community project Intercomparison of Mid Latitude Storm Diagnostics (IMILAST; see www.proclim.ch/imilast/index.html). The spread of results for cyclone frequency, intensity, life cycle, and track location is presented to illustrate the impact of using different methods. Globally, methods agree well for geographical distribution in large oceanic regions, interannual variability of cyclone numbers, geographical patterns of strong trends, and distribution shape for many life cycle characteristics. In contrast, the largest disparities exist for the total numbers of cyclones, the detection of weak cyclones, and distribution in some densely populated regions. Consistency between methods is better for strong cyclones than for shallow ones. Two case studies of relatively large, intense cyclones reveal that the identification of the most intense part of the life cycle of these events is robust between methods, but considerable differences exist during the development and the dissolution phases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]