Observationally constrained projection of the reduced intensification of extreme climate events in Central Asia from 0.5 °C less global warming

Peng, Dongdong; Zhou, Tianjun; Zhang, Lixia; Zhang, Wenxia; Chen, Xiaolong

doi:10.1007/s00382-019-05014-6

Cited by 59 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The human influence can be detected in the observed changes in both temperature (Peng et al 2019) and precipitation (Peng et al 2018). In addition, a stronger than global mean warming trend is projected for Central Asia in the twenty-first century and the changes are statistically significant (Christensen et al 2013, Mannig et al 2018, Peng et al 2020. The projected precipitation changes are less clear and not fully consistent (Christensen et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future changes in precipitation over Central Asia based on CMIP6 projections

Jiang

Zhou

Chen

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A stronger than global mean warming trend is projected over Central Asia in the coming century. Based on the historical simulations and projections under four combined scenarios of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and the Representative Concentration Pathways (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) provided by 15 models from the Sixth Phase of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), we show a comprehensive picture of the future changes in precipitation over Central Asia under rapid warming and investigate possible mechanisms. At the end of the twenty-first century, robust increase of annual mean precipitation under all the scenarios is found (4.23 [2.60 to 7.36] %, 10.52 [5.05 to 13.36] %, 14.51 [8.11 to 16.91] %, 14.41 [9.58 to 21.26] % relative to the present-day for SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5 -8.5, respectively). The response of precipitation to increasing global mean temperature shows similar spatial patterns for the four scenarios with stronger changes over Tianshan mountain and the northern part of Central Asia. Further analysis reveals a wetting trend in spring and a drying trend in summer in both the north of Central Asia (NCA) and south of Central Asia (SCA). The wetting trend in spring is balanced by the increase of evaporation, while the drying trend in summer is mainly contributed by the decrease of vertical moisture advection. The thermodynamic effects associated with humidity changes contribute to the drying trends in both the two domains, while the dynamic effects favor for the drying trend in NCA and offset the drying trend in SCA. The response of precipitation to increasing temperature results in enhanced seasonalities for SCA and NCA, and an advancing of the first peak from summer to spring in the NCA.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future changes in precipitation over Central Asia based on CMIP6 projections

Jiang

Zhou

Chen

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, Sillmann et al (2013a) evaluated the performance of the CMIP5 ensemble in simulating climate extremes indices as compared to reanalyses and the CMIP3 ensemble, as well as to observational indices at a global scale; they reported that the CMIP5 ensemble showed some improvements relative to CMIP3. Several continental and subcontinental assessments of twentieth century changes in extreme climate also have been undertaken; examples include Asia (Dong et al, 2017; Peng et al, 2020), North America (Yu et al, 2019), South America (Wu & Polvani, 2017), Africa (Diedhiou et al, 2018), Australia (Alexander & Arblaster, 2017), the United States (Thibeault & Seth, 2014), China (Jiang et al, 2015; Li et al, 2013), and the Tibetan Plateau region (Yin et al, 2019; You et al, 2018). Results of these studies show that the CMIP5 models are generally able to simulate climate extremes, but there are larger uncertainties in the tropics and subtropics (Bador et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Performance of CMIP6 Versus CMIP5 in Simulating Temperature Extremes Over the Global Land Surface

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simulations from the models participating in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), which represent the most recent generation of climate models, are now available. Understanding the performance of these models in simulating historical climate extremes can provide a basis for producing reliable future climate projections. Here, we assess the simulation of 16 indices of temperature extremes defined by the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices using results from 24 CMIP6 models as compared with results from CMIP5. Comparisons with observations and reanalyses indicate that the CMIP6 models could capture the spatial patterns and temporal variations of the observed temperature extremes well for some indices, although less well for others. Based on spatial and temporal skill scores, CMIP6 ensemble means were more skillful in simulating absolute and threshold indices of extreme temperature than CMIP5 ensemble means were, but the performances of both the CMIP5 and CMIP6 ensemble means in simulating the spatial patterns for duration and percentile indices were relatively unsatisfactory (spatial skill scores S < 0.3). Furthermore, our results suggest that there have been improvements in spatial pattern skill scores in some individual CMIP6 models relative to CMIP5 model scores for summer days, tropical nights, cold spell duration, and diurnal temperature range.

show abstract

“…Although some models have more than one realization available, we only use the rst ensemble member to keep all GCMs being equally weighted in multimodel analysis. Previous studies also use the rst ensemble member in climate extreme assessment (e.g., Sillmann et al 2013;Ting et al 2015;Peng et al 2019). Meanwhile, only one ensemble member of GCMs participating in the CMIP5 are used as boundary conditions of the regional models in NA-CORDEX.…”

Section: Cmip5 Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To assess its signi cance, the detected change is considered as "robust" when at least 75% of the models agree on the sign of the change. Similar strategies have been adopted in previous studies to assess the robustness of future climate change (Maloney et al 2014;Peng et al 2019;Chen 2020). Additionally, the study area is divided into nine regions, according to the de ned climatically consistent regions of the contiguous US (Karl and Koss, 1984), for regional-scale analysis of the projected climate extremes (Fig.…”

Section: Detection Of 15°c and 2°c Global Warmingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, current impact assessments of 0.5°C less warming have not included the bias-corrected climate projections. Lastly, the impacts of climate change are regionally dependent (Sillmann et al 2013;Peng et al 2019). For instance, the projected change in precipitation extremes varies in different regions of the contiguous US (Singh et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of 0.5°C Less Global Warming On Climate Extremes in The Contiguous United States

Chen

Ford

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggests limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C would avoid dangerous impacts of anthropogenic climate change and ensure a more sustainable society. As the vulnerability to global warming is regionally dependent, this study assesses the effects of 0.5°C less global warming on climate extremes in the United States. Eight climate extreme indices are calculated based on Coupled Model Intercomparison Project - phase 5 (CMIP5), and North American - Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiments (NA-CORDEX) with and without bias correction. We evaluate the projected changes in temperature and precipitation extremes, and examine their differences between the 1.5°C and 2°C warming targets. Under a warming climate, both CMIP5 and NA-CORDEX show intensified heat extremes and reduced cold extremes across the country, intensified and more heavy precipitation in large areas of the North, prolonged dry spells in some regions of the West, South, and Midwest, and more frequent drought events in the West. Results suggest that the 0.5 °C less global warming would avoid the intensification of climate extremes by 32~46% (35~42%) for heat extremes intensity (frequency) across the country and, by 23~41% for heavy precipitation intensity in the North, South, and Southeast. The changes in annual heavy precipitation intensity are mainly contributed by winter and spring. However, impacts of the limited warming on the frequency of heavy precipitation, dry spell, and drought frequency are only evident in a few regions. Although uncertainties are found among the climate models and emission scenarios, our results highlight the benefits of limiting warming at 1.5°C in order to reduce the risks of climate extremes associated with global warming.

show abstract

Observationally constrained projection of the reduced intensification of extreme climate events in Central Asia from 0.5 °C less global warming

Cited by 59 publications

References 80 publications

Future changes in precipitation over Central Asia based on CMIP6 projections

Future changes in precipitation over Central Asia based on CMIP6 projections

The Performance of CMIP6 Versus CMIP5 in Simulating Temperature Extremes Over the Global Land Surface

Effects of 0.5°C Less Global Warming On Climate Extremes in The Contiguous United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About