the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The 2018 west-central European drought projected in a warmer climate: how much drier can it get?
Abstract. Projections of changes in extreme droughts under future climate conditions are associated with large uncertainties, owing to the complex genesis of droughts and large model uncertainty in the atmospheric dynamics. In this study we investigate the impact of global warming on soil moisture drought severity in west-central Europe by employing pseudo-global warming (PGW) experiments, which project the 1980–2020 period in a globally warmer world. The future analogues of present-day drought episodes allow investigation of changes in drought severity conditional on the historic day-to-day evolution of the atmospheric circulation.
The 2018 west-central European drought is the most severe drought in the 1980–2020 reference period in this region. Under 1.5 °C, 2 °C and 3 °C global warming, this drought episode experiences strongly enhanced summer temperatures, but a fairly modest soil moisture drying response compared to the change in climatology. This is primarily because evaporation is already strongly moisture-constrained during present-day conditions, limiting the increase in evaporation and thus the modulation of the temperature response under PGW. Increasing precipitation in winter, spring and autumn limit or prevent an earlier drought onset and duration. Nevertheless, the drought severity, defined as the cumulative soil moisture deficit volume, increases considerably, with 20 % to 39 % under 2 °C warming.
The extreme drought frequency in the 1980–2020 period strongly increases under 2 °C warming. Several years without noticeable droughts under present-day conditions show very strong drying and warming. This results in an increase in 2003-like drought occurrences, compounding with local summer temperature increases considerably above 2 °C.
Even without taking into account a (potentially large) dynamical response to climate change, drought risk in west-central Europe is strongly enhanced under global warming. Owing to increases in drought frequency, severity and compounding heat, a reduction in recovery times between drought episodes is expected to occur. Our physical climate storyline provides evidence complementing conventional large-ensemble approaches, and is intended to contribute to the formulation of effective adaptation strategies.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(8376 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(8376 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Patrick Ludwig, 16 Nov 2022
Review of egusphere-2022-954 ‘The 2018 west-central European drought projected in a warmer climate: how much drier can it get?’ by Aalbers et al.
General comments:
In their paper `The 2018 west-central European drought projected in a warmer climate: how much drier can it get?´, the authors investigate the impact of global warming on soil moisture drought severity for the year 2018 in west-central Europe. With this aim, pseudo-global warming (PGW) experiments with a regional model were performed, forced by three GCMs for three different global warming levels (+1.5K, +2K, +3K). Their results show, that under global warming the 2018 drought episode experiences strongly enhanced summer temperatures, but a fairly modest soil moisture drying response compared to the change in climatology as evaporation is already strongly moisture-constrained during present-day condition. In more general, the authors show that the drought risk in west-central Europe is strongly enhanced under global warming.
This work provides is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the consequences of global warming on extreme events (here drought) observed so far. The methods, techniques and the experimental setup applied in this study are sound and state of the art; the use of different GCMs (considering an ensemble mean for each GCM) to create the perturbations under global warming provides robust estimates of how global warming might modify the 2018 drought event. Beside some minor comments, this study is a very valuable contribution to NHESS.
Minor Comments
L62: What does the abbreviation SPEI stand for?
L135ff: Usually, global warming levels (GWL) are defined based on the pre-Industrial reference period (1850-1900). In the IPCC AR6 report, the global warming between 1850-1900 and 2011-2020 is estimate with 1.09K, thus meaning roughly GWL1. Based on the Paris agreement, the long-term temperature goal is to keep the rise in mean global temperature to well below 2K (GWL2) above pre-industrial levels, and preferably limit the increase to 1.5K (GWL1.5). To avoid any confusion, between the IPCC based and your GWLs (based on the 1991-2020 period), a short note might be helpful.
L144ff: Can you comment briefly about the model quality of the 3 GCMs in comparison with observation? Is for example the temperature bias of the reference period you use (1991-2020) the same for all models? Or are the GCMs that already show enhanced global warming for this period in comparison with the observational record?
L258: Should read ‘over the British Isles’
L393: The 2011 spring drought is not indicated in Figure 6b. Could you add this year to the graphs?
Figure1: Ep is missing in the list of variables in (a); the orange lines for the observations (obs) for 2018-2019 are hard to see; consider to use a more striking color.
Figure2: Consider moving the column with JFM as the first column; would better reflect the course of the year.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-954-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Linda van Garderen, 22 Nov 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Anonymous Referee #3, 14 Dec 2022
General Overview:
The authors investigate the impact of global warming on soil moisture drought severity in west-central Europe by employing pseudoglobal warming (PGW) experiments.
The manuscript is well written and the methodology is sound and the results are novel. In my opinion, the manuscript can be accepted after minor revision mentioned below.
- The authors mention “future weather analogues” in the manuscript but actuallaly no analogue metdology is applied (e.g. Sánchez-Benítez et al., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2019.100238 ). I would suggest the authors to change the wording on “weather analogues” throughout the manuscript.
- Despite the methodology is sound, I had difficulty to follow section 2.2. Can the authors re-write section 2.2.
- Why the authors exclude 2018-2020 from the climatology?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-954-RC3 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC2-supplement.pdf
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Patrick Ludwig, 16 Nov 2022
Review of egusphere-2022-954 ‘The 2018 west-central European drought projected in a warmer climate: how much drier can it get?’ by Aalbers et al.
General comments:
In their paper `The 2018 west-central European drought projected in a warmer climate: how much drier can it get?´, the authors investigate the impact of global warming on soil moisture drought severity for the year 2018 in west-central Europe. With this aim, pseudo-global warming (PGW) experiments with a regional model were performed, forced by three GCMs for three different global warming levels (+1.5K, +2K, +3K). Their results show, that under global warming the 2018 drought episode experiences strongly enhanced summer temperatures, but a fairly modest soil moisture drying response compared to the change in climatology as evaporation is already strongly moisture-constrained during present-day condition. In more general, the authors show that the drought risk in west-central Europe is strongly enhanced under global warming.
This work provides is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the consequences of global warming on extreme events (here drought) observed so far. The methods, techniques and the experimental setup applied in this study are sound and state of the art; the use of different GCMs (considering an ensemble mean for each GCM) to create the perturbations under global warming provides robust estimates of how global warming might modify the 2018 drought event. Beside some minor comments, this study is a very valuable contribution to NHESS.
Minor Comments
L62: What does the abbreviation SPEI stand for?
L135ff: Usually, global warming levels (GWL) are defined based on the pre-Industrial reference period (1850-1900). In the IPCC AR6 report, the global warming between 1850-1900 and 2011-2020 is estimate with 1.09K, thus meaning roughly GWL1. Based on the Paris agreement, the long-term temperature goal is to keep the rise in mean global temperature to well below 2K (GWL2) above pre-industrial levels, and preferably limit the increase to 1.5K (GWL1.5). To avoid any confusion, between the IPCC based and your GWLs (based on the 1991-2020 period), a short note might be helpful.
L144ff: Can you comment briefly about the model quality of the 3 GCMs in comparison with observation? Is for example the temperature bias of the reference period you use (1991-2020) the same for all models? Or are the GCMs that already show enhanced global warming for this period in comparison with the observational record?
L258: Should read ‘over the British Isles’
L393: The 2011 spring drought is not indicated in Figure 6b. Could you add this year to the graphs?
Figure1: Ep is missing in the list of variables in (a); the orange lines for the observations (obs) for 2018-2019 are hard to see; consider to use a more striking color.
Figure2: Consider moving the column with JFM as the first column; would better reflect the course of the year.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-954-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Linda van Garderen, 22 Nov 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-954', Anonymous Referee #3, 14 Dec 2022
General Overview:
The authors investigate the impact of global warming on soil moisture drought severity in west-central Europe by employing pseudoglobal warming (PGW) experiments.
The manuscript is well written and the methodology is sound and the results are novel. In my opinion, the manuscript can be accepted after minor revision mentioned below.
- The authors mention “future weather analogues” in the manuscript but actuallaly no analogue metdology is applied (e.g. Sánchez-Benítez et al., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2019.100238 ). I would suggest the authors to change the wording on “weather analogues” throughout the manuscript.
- Despite the methodology is sound, I had difficulty to follow section 2.2. Can the authors re-write section 2.2.
- Why the authors exclude 2018-2020 from the climatology?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-954-RC3 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Emma Aalbers, 26 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-954/egusphere-2022-954-AC2-supplement.pdf
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
402 | 202 | 16 | 620 | 8 | 9 |
- HTML: 402
- PDF: 202
- XML: 16
- Total: 620
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
Emma Elizabeth Aalbers
Erik van Meijgaard
Geert Lenderink
Hylke de Vries
Bart J. J. M. van den Hurk
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(8376 KB) - Metadata XML