The Nature and Predictability of the East Asian Extreme Cold Events of 2020/21

Dai, Guokun; Li, Chunxiang; Han, Zhe; Luo, Dehai; Yao, Yao

doi:10.1007/s00376-021-1057-3

Cited by 46 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the largest interannual variability occurs in the late 1990s to early 2010s in C1 and C2 (Figure 7D). During winter 2020/21, there were extreme cold waves that invaded China from December 2020 (Dai et al, 2021), then the record-breaking warm event in February 2021 (Zhang et al, 2021) was caused by Arctic sea ice melting and stratospheric sudden warming. As such, the EmCEI in December 2020 and February 2021 is revealed as the opposite extreme in Figure 8D.…”

Section: Spatiotemporal Trends In Seasonal and Subseasonal Periodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subseasonal to Annual Long-Term Trends in Climate Extremes Over East Asia, 1981–2021

Moon

Choi²,

Kim³

et al. 2022

Front. Earth Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the up-to-date observed trends of subseasonal to annual range climate extremes over the East Asia region using the high-resolution global unified gauge-based analysis of the NOAA Climate Prediction Center for 1981–2021. The spatial extent of extreme events is identified using the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices (ETCCDI)-based modified climate extreme index (EmCEI) with five subcomponents (maximum temperature, minimum temperature. total rainfall, heavy rainfall, and wet and dry days). By combining the spatiotemporal fields into a simple index, trends in climate extremes are systematically obtained in various time ranges. Annual and semi-annual long-term trends in East Asia showed a statistically significant increase in the percentage of area affected by the upper-extreme climate (warm days, warm nights, wet extreme) and concurrently by the decrease of lower-extreme climate (cool days, cool nights, dry extreme). As the time range becomes higher, the tendency is consistent but extremeness depends on seasons and calendar months. The total EmCEI shows an increasing trend greater in the warm (summer) season than in the cold (winter) season. The temperature extreme components (C1 and C2) are dominated in spring and summer. In the subseasonal months, March has the highest trend among the calendar months both in C1 and C2. The increasing trend is consistently distinct in the 2010s for all time ranges and all components. The long-term trend in winter exhibits distinctive features of the smallest increase than in other seasons and months caused by robust interannual to multidecadal variability in the 1990s–2000s. The area affected by heavy rainfall is mainly dominated in summer while the total rainfall and wet day extreme extend in summer and fall, respectively. The EmCEI suggests that the change in the spatial extent of climate extremes is mainly caused by a shift in temperature and rainfall distributions toward warm and wet extremes over East Asia.

show abstract

Section: Spatiotemporal Trends In Seasonal and Subseasonal Periodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subseasonal to Annual Long-Term Trends in Climate Extremes Over East Asia, 1981–2021

Moon

Choi²,

Kim³

et al. 2022

Front. Earth Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In summer, UB may cause floods and heat waves in East Asia (Li et al., 2020; Wang & Gu, 2016). However, UB events are usually followed by amplification of the Siberian High (Takaya & Nakamura, 2005) and subsequent outbreaks of cold air in East Asia during the winter (Dai, Li et al., 2021; Ding & Krishnamurti, 1987; Joung & Hitchman, 1982).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Arctic Sea Ice Concentration on Extended‐Range Prediction of Strong and Long‐Lasting Ural Blocking Events in Winter

Dai

et al. 2022

JGR Atmospheres

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is traditionally considered that the predictability of atmosphere reaches approximately 2 weeks due to its chaotic features. Considering boundary conditions, the lead prediction time can exceed 2 weeks in certain cases. We find that the Arctic sea ice concentration (SIC) is crucial for extended‐range prediction of strong and long‐lasting Ural blocking (UB) formation. By applying the rotated empirical orthogonal function‐based particle swarm optimization algorithm, the conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation is calculated with the Community Atmosphere Model, version 4, to identify the optimally growing boundary errors in extended‐range prediction of strong and long‐lasting UB formation. It is found that SIC perturbations in the Greenland Sea (GS), Barents Sea (BS), and Okhotsk Sea (OKS) are important for strong and long‐lasting UB formation prediction in four pentads. Further analysis reveals that the SIC perturbations in these areas first influence the local temperature field through the diabatic heating process and further affect the temperature field in the Ural sector mainly by advection and convection processes. Moreover, the zonal winds in the Ural sector are adjusted by the thermal wind balance, thus affecting UB formation. The local characteristics of the SIC perturbations indicate that the GS, BS, and OKS may be sensitive areas in regard to extended‐range prediction of strong and long‐lasting UB formation, which can provide scientific support for the SIC target observations in the future.

show abstract

“…While this work is widely cited, the two concepts are still often confused, including on educational websites and in climate change communication studies (e.g., Lyons et al., 2018; Shepherd, 2016; UCAR, 2021; UCDavis, 2019). Even recent papers within the atmospheric science community are not always clear about which circulation feature(s) they are discussing, and some use the term “polar vortex” to describe synoptic‐scale disturbances associated with CAOs, echoing the inaccurate usage in popular media (e.g., Bushra & Rohli, 2019, 2021; Dai et al., 2021; Jiang, 2021; Juzbašić et al., 2021; Kömüşcü & Oğuz, 2021; Nielsen‐Gammon et al., 2021; Overland, 2021; Overland & Wang, 2019; Xiong et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021). Sometimes the most public‐facing parts of research papers (abstracts, plain language summaries, key points) do not clearly define how the term “polar vortex” is used.…”

Section: The Stratospheric Polar Vortex Tropospheric Jet Streams and ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…not always clear about which circulation feature(s) they are discussing, and some use the term "polar vortex" to describe synoptic-scale disturbances associated with CAOs, echoing the inaccurate usage in popular media (e.g., Bushra & Rohli, 2019Dai et al, 2021;Jiang, 2021;Juzbašić et al, 2021;Kömüşcü & Oğuz, 2021;Nielsen-Gammon et al, 2021;Overland, 2021;Overland & Wang, 2019;Xiong et al, 2021;Zhang et al, 2021). Sometimes the most public-facing parts of research papers (abstracts, plain language summaries, key points) do not clearly define how the term "polar vortex" is used.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What's in a Name? On the Use and Significance of the Term “Polar Vortex”

Manney

Butler

Lawrence

et al. 2022

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This commentary appears in the Special Collection focusing on the Arctic stratospheric "polar vortex" in 2019/2020. But how clear are we about what constitutes a "polar vortex"? Confusion persists in the popular press about what a polar vortex is and how polar vortices relate to extreme weather events. This confusion stems in part from imprecise descriptions by the scientific community.In January 2014, a cold air outbreak (CAO) set record-low minimum temperatures throughout the south central and eastern US (e.g., Screen et al., 2015). Headlines hailed it as "the polar vortex," and this language became commonplace in news and popular science media. At the time, the term "polar vortex" in scientific literature typically described the stratospheric polar vortex (see, e.g., Lillo et al., 2021;Waugh et al., 2017, for discussion of this), but some studies used the term to describe the "tropospheric polar vortex" (e.g., Wallace et al., 2014;Yu & Zhang, 2015), in both cases often without further qualification. Waugh et al. (2017) sought to dispel confusion, describing the stratospheric and tropospheric "circumpolar" vortices as these terms had been commonly used in scientific literature, highlighting their differences and relationships to extreme weather events, and providing recommendations for describing them. While this work is widely cited, the two concepts are still often confused, including on educational websites and in climate change communication studies (e.g.,

show abstract

The Nature and Predictability of the East Asian Extreme Cold Events of 2020/21

Cited by 46 publications

References 51 publications

Subseasonal to Annual Long-Term Trends in Climate Extremes Over East Asia, 1981–2021

Subseasonal to Annual Long-Term Trends in Climate Extremes Over East Asia, 1981–2021

Influence of Arctic Sea Ice Concentration on Extended‐Range Prediction of Strong and Long‐Lasting Ural Blocking Events in Winter

What's in a Name? On the Use and Significance of the Term “Polar Vortex”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About