Quantifying the Human Influence on the Intensity of Extreme 1- and 5-Day Precipitation Amounts at Global, Continental, and Regional Scales

Abstract

Abstract This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the human contribution to the observed intensification of precipitation extremes at different spatial scales. We consider the annual maxima of the logarithm of 1-day (Rx1day) and 5-day (Rx5day) precipitation amounts for 1950–2014 over the global land area, four continents, and several regions, and compare observed changes with expected responses to external forcings as simulated by CanESM2 in a large-ensemble experiment and by multiple models from phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). We use a novel detection and attribution analysis method that is applied directly to station data in the areas considered without prior processing such as gridding, spatial or temporal dimension reduction, or transformation to unitless indices and uses climate models only to obtain estimates of the space–time pattern of extreme precipitation response to external forcing. The influence of anthropogenic forcings on extreme precipitation is detected over the global land area, three continental regions (the western Northern Hemisphere, western Eurasia, and eastern Eurasia), and many smaller IPCC regions, including central North America, East Asia, east-central Asia, eastern Europe, eastern North America, northern Europe, and western Siberia for Rx1day, and central North America, eastern Europe, eastern North America, northern Europe, the Russian Arctic region, and western Siberia for Rx5day. Consistent results are obtained using forcing response estimates from either CanESM2 or CMIP6. Anthropogenic influence is estimated to have substantially decreased the approximate waiting time between extreme annual maximum events in regions where anthropogenic influence has been detected, which has important implications for infrastructure design and climate change adaptation policy. Significance Statement All previous detection and attribution studies of observed changes in extreme precipitation (i) use station data that has been heavily processed via gridding, transformation, and spatial and temporal averaging or other dimension reduction approaches, as well as using climate models to estimate the responses to external forcing, and (ii) also use models to estimate the unforced natural variability of extreme precipitation. Both aspects reduce user confidence in detection and attribution results. This study uses station data directly and avoids difficult to verify model-based estimates of the unforced variability of precipitation extremes. Results confirm findings from previous studies, and extend them to a number of subcontinental regions, thus substantially increasing confidence in detection and attribution findings precipitation.