Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1466
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1466
09 Apr 2026
 | 09 Apr 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).

A flexible methodology to evaluate natural variability in ClimaMeter

Clara Naldesi, Nathalie Bertrand, Davide Faranda, and Mathieu Vrac

Abstract. Anthropogenic climate change (ACC) is critically influencing numerous extreme events worldwide, leading to the development of rapid attribution frameworks that allow for the timely evaluation of the role of ACC in changes in the frequency and intensity of specific extreme events. ClimaMeter (Faranda et al., 2024) is one of the tools recently developed to contextualise extreme weather events relative to climate change. ClimaMeter analyses extreme events shortly after they occur and leverages the analogue methodology for conditional attribution to evaluate whether and how events similar to the one analysed have changed in the recent climate. In order to attribute such changes to ACC, natural variability and its contribution must be quantified. In ClimaMeter, three modes of sea surface temperature variability are considered: the El Niño–Southern Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. These three modes are considered with equal weight regardless of the event’s location and type. Moreover, ACC is implicitly considered the primary factor influencing the occurrence of the event; therefore, changes not explained by natural variability modes are assumed to be attributable to ACC. Such an approach has potential limitations, which we address in this paper by proposing a refined and more flexible version, called ClimaMeter 2.0. First, we propose weighting the three modes of variability according to the strength of the teleconnection between the remote modes and the local hazards. Then, we test the hypothesis that ACC has critically influenced the observed changes by analysing long-term trends in specific quantiles of the local hazard variables. After extensive testing using pre-industrial climate simulations and observational data, we conclude that, while remaining within the same conceptual framework, ClimaMeter 2.0 provides greater flexibility and enables a more nuanced assessment of the influence of ACC on specific extreme events.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Clara Naldesi, Nathalie Bertrand, Davide Faranda, and Mathieu Vrac

Status: open (until 21 May 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Clara Naldesi, Nathalie Bertrand, Davide Faranda, and Mathieu Vrac
Clara Naldesi, Nathalie Bertrand, Davide Faranda, and Mathieu Vrac
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 09 Apr 2026
Download
Short summary
The public increasingly needs to know whether and how climate change influences specific extreme events. ClimaMeter is a scientific tool designed to address this demand. This paper reviews the ClimaMeter methodology, focusing on how it estimates the relative roles of natural variability and climate change. We propose a more flexible and general approach within the same framework, enabling a more nuanced assessment of natural variability.
Share