Evaluating the dependence structure of compound precipitation and wind speed extremes
-
Published:2021-01-06
Issue:1
Volume:12
Page:1-16
-
ISSN:2190-4987
-
Container-title:Earth System Dynamics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Earth Syst. Dynam.
Author:
Zscheischler JakobORCID, Naveau PhilippeORCID, Martius OliviaORCID, Engelke Sebastian, Raible Christoph C.
Abstract
Abstract. Estimating the likelihood of compound climate extremes such as concurrent drought and heatwaves or compound precipitation and wind speed extremes is important for assessing climate risks. Typically, simulations from climate models are used to assess future risks, but it is largely unknown how well the current generation of models represents compound extremes. Here, we introduce a new metric that measures whether the tails of bivariate distributions show a similar dependence structure across different datasets. We analyse compound precipitation and wind extremes in reanalysis data and different high-resolution simulations for central Europe. A state-of-the-art reanalysis dataset (ERA5) is compared to simulations with a weather model (Weather Research and Forecasting – WRF) either driven by observation-based boundary conditions or a global circulation model (Community Earth System Model – CESM) under present-day and future conditions with strong greenhouse gas forcing (Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 – RCP8.5).
Over the historical period, the high-resolution WRF simulations capture precipitation and wind extremes as well as their response to orographic effects more realistically than ERA5. Thus, WRF simulations driven by observation-based boundary conditions are used as a benchmark for evaluating the dependence structure of wind and precipitation extremes.
Overall, boundary conditions in WRF appear to be the key factor in explaining differences in the dependence behaviour between strong wind and heavy precipitation between simulations. In comparison, external forcings (RCP8.5) are of second order. Our approach offers new methodological tools to evaluate climate model simulations with respect to compound extremes.
Funder
European Cooperation in Science and Technology
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference74 articles.
1. Ban, N., Schmidli, J., and Schaer, C.: Evaluation of the convection-resolving
regional climate modeling approach in decade-long simulations, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 889–7907,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021478, 2014. a 2. Barry, R. G.: Mountain weather and climate, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,
2008. a 3. Bevacqua, E., Maraun, D., Vousdoukas, M. I., Voukouvalas, E., Vrac, M.,
Mentaschi, L., and Widmann, M.: Higher probability of compound flooding from
precipitation and storm surge in Europe under anthropogenic climate change,
Science Advances, 5, eaaw5531, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw5531, 2019. a 4. Bracegirdle, T. J., Shuckburgh, E., Sallee, J.-B., Wang, Z., Meijers, A. J. S.,
Bruneau, N., Phillips, T., and Wilcox, L. J.: Assessment of surface winds
over the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Ocean sectors of the Southern Ocean in
CMIP5 models: historical bias, forcing response, and state dependence,
J. Geophys. Res-Atmos., 118, 547–562,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50153, 2013. a 5. Catto, J. L. and Pfahl, S.: The importance of fronts for extreme precipitation,
J. Geophys. Res-Atmos., 118, 10791–10801,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50852, 2013. a
Cited by
63 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|