Search

The extreme precipitation that resulted in historic flooding in central-northern France began 26 May 2016 and was linked to a large cutoff low. The floods caused some casualties and over a billion euros in damage. To objectively answer the question of whether anthropogenic climate change played a role, a near-real-time “rapid” attribution analysis was performed, using well-established event attribution methods, best available observational data, and as many climate simulations as possible within that time frame. This study confirms the results of the rapid attribution study. We estimate how anthropogenic climate change has affected the likelihood of exceedance of the observed amount of 3-day precipitation in April–June for the Seine and Loire basins. We find that the observed precipitation in the Seine basin was very rare, with a return period of hundreds of years. It was less rare on the Loire—roughly 1 in 20 years. We evaluated five climate model ensembles for 3-day basin-averaged precipitation extremes in April–June. The four ensembles that simulated the statistics agree well. Combining the results reduces the uncertainty and indicates that the probability of such rainfall has increased over the last century by about a factor of 2.2 (>1.4) on the Seine and 1.9 (>1.5) on the Loire due to anthropogenic emissions. These numbers are virtually the same as those in the near-real-time attribution study by van Oldenborgh et al. Together with the evaluation of the attribution of Storm Desmond by Otto et al., this shows that, for these types of events, near-real-time attribution studies are now possible.

In northern and central Ethiopia, 2015 was a very dry year. Rainfall was only from one-half to three-quarters of the usual amount, with both the “belg” (February–May) and “kiremt” rains (June–September) affected. The timing of the rains that did fall was also erratic. Many crops failed, causing food shortages for many millions of people. The role of climate change in the probability of a drought like this is investigated, focusing on the large-scale precipitation deficit in February–September 2015 in northern and central Ethiopia. Using a gridded analysis that combines station data with satellite observations, it is estimated that the return period of this drought was more than 60 years (lower bound 95% confidence interval), with a most likely value of several hundred years. No trend is detected in the observations, but the large natural variability and short time series means large trends could go undetected in the observations. Two out of three large climate model ensembles that simulated rainfall reasonably well show no trend while the third shows an increased probability of drought. Taking the model spread into account the drought still cannot be clearly attributed to anthropogenic climate change, with the 95% confidence interval ranging from a probability decrease between preindustrial and today of a factor of 0.3 and an increase of a factor of 5 for a drought like this one or worse. A soil moisture dataset also shows a nonsignificant drying trend. According to ENSO correlations in the observations, the strong 2015 El Niño did increase the severity of the drought.

Science on the role of anthropogenic influence on extreme weather events, such as heatwaves or droughts, has evolved rapidly in the past years. The approach of “event attribution” compares the occurrence-probability of an event in the present, factual, climate with its probability in a hypothetical, counterfactual, climate without human-induced climate change. Several methods can be used for event attribution, based on climate model simulations and observations, and usually researchers only assess a subset of methods and data sources. Here, we explore the role of methodological choices for the attribution of the 2015 meteorological summer drought in Europe. We present contradicting conclusions on the relevance of human influence as a function of the chosen data source and event attribution methodology. Assessments using the maximum number of models and counterfactual climates with pre-industrial greenhouse gas concentrations point to an enhanced drought risk in Europe. However, other evaluations show contradictory evidence. These results highlight the need for a multi-model and multi-method framework in event attribution research, especially for events with a low signal- to-noise ratio and high model dependency such as regional droughts.

Extreme one-day rainfall caused widespread flooding in Chennai, India, in December 2015. No effect of global warming was detected, likely caused by aerosols counteracting greenhouse gases up to now.

The year 2014 broke the record for the warmest yearly average temperature in Europe. Attributing how much this was due to anthropogenic climate change and how much it was due to natural variability is a challenging question but one that is important to address. In this study, we compare four event attribution methods. We look at the risk ratio (RR) associated with anthropogenic climate change for this event, over the whole European region, as well as its spatial distribution. Each method shows a very strong anthropogenic influence on the event over Europe. However, the magnitude of the RR strongly depends on the definition of the event and the method used. Across Europe, attribution over larger regions tended to give greater RR values. This highlights a major source of sensitivity in attribution statements and the need to define the event to analyze on a case-by-case basis.

Anthropogenic climate change is likely to increase the frequency of extreme weather events in future. Previous studies have robustly shown how and where climate change has already changed the risks of weather extremes. However, developing countries have been somewhat underrepresented in these studies, despite high vulnerability and limited capacities to adapt. How additional global warming would affect the future risks of extreme rainfall events in Bangladesh needs to be addressed to limit adverse impacts. Our study focuses on understanding and quantifying the relative risks of seasonal extreme rainfall events in Bangladesh under the Paris Agreement temperature goals of 1.5 °C and 2 °C warming above pre-industrial levels. In particular, we investigate the influence of anthropogenic aerosols on these risks given their likely future reduction and resulting amplification of global warming. Using large ensemble regional climate model simulations from weather@home under different forcing scenarios, we compare the risks of rainfall events under pre-industrial (natural), current (actual), 1.5 °C, and 2.0 °C warmer and greenhouse gas only (anthropogenic aerosols removed) conditions. We find that the risk of a 1 in 100 year rainfall event has already increased significantly compared with pre-industrial levels across parts of Bangladesh, with additional increases likely for 1.5 and 2.0 degree warming (of up to 5.5 times higher, with an uncertainty range of 3.5 to 7.8 times). Impacts were observed during both the pre-monsoon and monsoon periods, but were spatially variable across the country in terms of the level of impact. Results also show that reduction in anthropogenic aerosols plays an important role in determining the overall future climate change impacts; by exacerbating the effects of GHG induced global warming and thereby increasing the rainfall intensity. We highlight that the net aerosol effect varies from region to region within Bangladesh, which leads to different outcomes of aerosol reduction on extreme rainfall statistics, and must therefore be considered in future risk assessments. Whilst there is a substantial reduction in the impacts resulting from 1.5 °C compared with 2 °C warming, the difference is spatially and temporally variable, specifically with respect to seasonal extreme rainfall events.

Targets agreed to in Paris in 2015 aim to limit global warming to 'well below 2 °C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels'. Despite the far-reaching consequences of this multi-lateral climate change mitigation strategy, the implications for global river flows remain unclear. Here we estimate the impacts of 1.5 °C versus 2.0 °C mitigation scenarios on peak flows by using daily river flow data from a multi-model ensemble which follows the HAPPI Protocol (that is specifically designed to simulate these temperature targets). We find agreement between models with regard to changing risk of river flow extremes. Moreover, we find that the response at 2.0 °C is not a uniform extension of the response at 1.5°, suggesting a non-linear global response of peak flows to the two mitigation levels. Yet committing to the 2.0 °C warming target, rather than 1.5 °C, is projected to lead to an increase in the frequency of occurrence of extreme flows in several large catchments. In the most affected areas, predominantly in South Asia, while region-specific features such as aerosol loads may determine precipitation patterns, we estimate that under our 1.5 °C scenario the historical 1-in-100 year flow occurs with a frequency of 1-in-25 years. At 2.0 °C, similar increases are observed in several global regions. These shifts are also accompanied by changes in the duration of rainy seasons which influence the occurrence of high flows.

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 to anthropogenic climate change from a combined meteorological and hydrological perspective. Experiments were conducted with three observational datasets and two climate models to estimate changes in the extreme 10-day precipitation event frequency over the Brahmaputra basin up to the present and, additionally, an outlook to 2 ∘C warming since pre-industrial times. 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 datasets the climate change trends for extreme precipitation similar to that 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 ensemble shows a significant positive influence of anthropogenic climate change, whereas the other large ensemble model simulates a cancellation between the increase due to greenhouse gases (GHGs) and a decrease due to sulfate 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 in precipitation, but the 95 % confidence intervals still encompass no change in risk. Extending the analysis to 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 being more likely by a factor of about 1.5 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 1 and of a 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 this, 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.

During August 25-30, 2017, Hurricane Harvey stalled over Texas and caused extreme precipitation, particularly over Houston and the surrounding area on August 26-28. This resulted in extensive flooding with over 80 fatalities and large economic costs. It was an extremely rare event: the return period of the highest observed three-day precipitation amount, 1043.4 mm 3dy-1 at Baytown, is more than 9000 years (97.5% one-sided confidence interval) and return periods exceeded 1000 yr (750 mm 3dy-1) over a large area in the current climate. Observations since 1880 over the region show a clear positive trend in the intensity of extreme precipitation of between 12% and 22%, roughly two times the increase of the moisture holding capacity of the atmosphere expected for 1 °C warming according to the Clausius-Clapeyron (CC) relation. This would indicate that the moisture flux was increased by both the moisture content and stronger winds or updrafts driven by the heat of condensation of the moisture. We also analysed extreme rainfall in the Houston area in three ensembles of 25 km resolution models. The first also shows 2 × CC scaling, the second 1 × CC scaling and the third did not have a realistic representation of extreme rainfall on the Gulf Coast. Extrapolating these results to the 2017 event, we conclude that global warming made the precipitation about 15% (8%-19%) more intense, or equivalently made such an event three (1.5-5) times more likely. This analysis makes clear that extreme rainfall events along the Gulf Coast are on the rise. And while fortifying Houston to fully withstand the impact of an event as extreme as Hurricane Harvey may not be economically feasible, it is critical that information regarding the increasing risk of extreme rainfall events in general should be part of the discussion about future improvements to Houston's flood protection system.

Atmospheric modes of variability relevant for extreme temperature and precipitation events are evaluated in models currently being used for extreme event attribution. A 100 member initial condition ensemble of the global circulation model HadAM3P is compared with both the multi-model ensemble from the Coupled Model Inter-comparison Project, Phase 5 (CMIP5) and the CMIP5 atmosphere-only counterparts (AMIP5). The use of HadAM3P allows for huge ensembles to be computed relatively fast, thereby providing unique insights into the dynamics of extremes. The analysis focuses on mid Northern Latitudes (primarily Europe) during winter, and is compared with ERA-Interim reanalysis. The tri-modal Atlantic eddy-driven jet distribution is remarkably well captured in HadAM3P, but not so in the CMIP5 or AMIP5 multi-model mean, although individual models fare better. The well known underestimation of blocking in the Atlantic region is apparent in CMIP5 and AMIP5, and also, to a lesser extent, in HadAM3P. Pacific blocking features are well produced in all modeling initiatives. Blocking duration is biased towards models reproducing too many short-lived events in all three modelling systems. Associated storm tracks are too zonal over the Atlantic in the CMIP5 and AMIP5 ensembles, but better simulated in HadAM3P with the exception of being too weak over Western Europe. In all cases, the CMIP5 and AMIP5 performances were almost identical, suggesting that the biases in atmospheric modes considered here are not strongly coupled to SSTs, and perhaps other model characteristics such as resolution are more important. For event attribution studies, it is recommended that rather than taking statistics over the entire CMIP5 or AMIP5 available models, only models capable of producing the relevant dynamical phenomena be employed. ISSN:0930-7575 ISSN:1432-0894

The extreme precipitation that would result in historic flooding across areas of northeastern France and southern Germany began on May 26th when a large cut-off low spurred the development of several slow moving low pressure disturbances. The precipitation took different forms in each country. Warm and humid air from the south fueled sustained, large-scale, heavy rainfall over France resulting in significant river flooding on the Seine and Loire (and their tributaries), whereas the rain came from smaller clusters of intense thunderstorms in Germany triggering flash floods in mountainous areas. The floods left tens of thousands without power, caused over a billion Euros in damage in France alone, and are reported to have killed at least 18 people in Germany, France, Romania, and Belgium. The extreme nature of this event left many asking whether anthropogenic climate change may have played a role. To answer this question objectively, a rapid attribution analysis was performed in near-real time, using the best available observational data and climate models. In this rapid attribution study, where results were completed and released to the public in one week and an additional week to finalise this article, we present a first estimate of how anthropogenic climate change affected the likelihood of meteorological variables corresponding to the event, 3-day precipitation averaged over the Seine and Loire basins and the spatial maximum of 1-day precipitation over southern Germany (excluding the Alps). We find that the precipitation in the Seine basin was very rare in April–June, with a return time of hundreds of years in this season. It was less rare on the Loire, roughly 1 in 50 years in April–June. At a given location the return times for 1-day precipitation as heavy as the highest observed in southern Germany is 1 in 3000 years in April–June. This translates to once roughly every 20 years somewhere in this region and season. The probability of 3-day extreme rainfall in this season has increased by about a factor 2.3 (> 1.6) on the Seine a factor 2.0 (> 1.4) on the Loire, with all four climate models that simulated the statistical properties of the extremes agreeing. The observed trend of heavy 1-day precipitation in southern Germany is significantly negative, whereas the one model that has the correct distribution simulates a significant positive trend, making an attribution statement for these thunderstorms impossible at this time.

A succession of storms reaching Southern England in the winter of 2013/2014 caused severe floods and £451 million insured losses. In a large ensemble of climate model simulations, we find that, as well as increasing the amount of moisture the atmosphere can hold, anthropogenic warming caused a small but significant increase in the number of January days with westerly flow, both of which increased extreme precipitation. Hydrological modelling indicates this increased extreme 30-day-average Thames river flows, and slightly increased daily peak flows, consistent with the understanding of the catchment’s sensitivity to longer-duration precipitation and changes in the role of snowmelt. Consequently, flood risk mapping shows a small increase in properties in the Thames catchment potentially at risk of riverine flooding, with a substantial range of uncertainty, demonstrating the importance of explicit modelling of impacts and relatively subtle changes in weather-related risks when quantifying present-day effects of human influence on climate.

Within the last decade, extreme weather event attribution has emerged as a new field of science and garnered increasing attention from the wider scientific community and the public. Numerous methods have been put forward to determine the contribution of anthropogenic climate change to individual extreme weather events. So far nearly all such analyses were done months after an event has happened. Here we present a new method which can assess the fraction of attributable risk of a severe weather event due to an external driver in real-time. The method builds on a large ensemble of atmosphere-only general circulation model simulations forced by seasonal forecast sea surface temperatures (SSTs). Taking the England 2013/14 winter floods as an example, we demonstrate that the change in risk for heavy rainfall during the England floods due to anthropogenic climate change, is of similar magnitude using either observed or seasonal forecast SSTs. Testing the dynamic response of the model to the anomalous ocean state for January 2014, we find that observed SSTs are required to establish a discernible link between a particular SST pattern and an atmospheric response such as a shift in the jetstream in the model. For extreme events occurring under strongly anomalous SST patterns associated with known low-frequency climate modes, however, forecast SSTs can provide sufficient guidance to determine the dynamic contribution to the event.

Geoscientific Model Development, 10 (5), ISSN:1991-9603, ISSN:1991-959X