Climate Dynamics

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 351–363 | Cite as

Testing the Clausius–Clapeyron constraint on changes in extreme precipitation under CO2 warming

  • P. PallEmail author
  • M. R. Allen
  • D. A. Stone


Increases in extreme precipitation greater than in the mean under increased greenhouse gases have been reported in many climate models both on global and regional scales. It has been proposed in a previous study that whereas global-mean precipitation change is primarily constrained by the global energy budget, the heaviest events can be expected when effectively all the moisture in a volume of air is precipitated out, suggesting the intensity of these events increases with availability of moisture, and significantly faster than the global mean. Thus under conditions of constant relative humidity one might expect the Clausius–Clapeyron relation to give a constraint on changes in the uppermost quantiles of precipitation distributions. This study examines if the phenomenon manifests on regional and seasonal scales also. Zonal analysis of daily precipitation in the HadCM3 model under a transient CO2 forcing scenario shows increased extreme precipitation in the tropics accompanied by increased drying at lower percentiles. At mid- to high-latitudes there is increased precipitation over all percentiles. The greatest agreement with Clausius–Clapeyron predicted change occurs at mid-latitudes. This pattern is consistent with other climate model projections, and suggests that regions in which the nature of the ambient flows change little give the greatest agreement with Clausius–Clapeyron prediction. This is borne out by repeating the analyses at gridbox level and over season. Furthermore, it is found that Clausius–Clapeyron predicted change in extreme precipitation is a better predictor than directly using the change in mean precipitation, particularly between 60°N and 60°S. This could explain why extreme precipitation changes may be more detectable then mean changes.


Extreme Precipitation Precipitation Change Saturation Vapour Pressure Constant Relative Humidity Lower Percentile 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors especially wish to thank Jonathan Gregory for provision of data and assistance with analysis. We also thank him, along with William Ingram, for insightful discussion. Furthermore, we are grateful to the reviewers for helpful suggestions and Steve Jewson and Robert Muir-Wood for advice on interpretation of results. P.P. was supported by a CASE Award studentship from the UK Natural Environment Research Council with Risk Management Solutions Ltd. M.R.A. received support from the US NOAA/DoE International Detection and Attribution Group. D.A.S. was supported by the UK Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs and a Wellcome Trust Showcase Award.


  1. Adler R, Huffman G, Chang A, Ferraro R, Xie P, Janowiak J, Rudolf B, Schneider U, Curtis S, Bolvin D, Gruber A, Susskind J, Arkin P, Nelkin E (2003) The version-2 global precipitation climatology project (GPCP) monthly precipitation analysis (1979-present). J Hydrometeorol 4:1147–1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen M, Ingram W (2002) Constraints on future changes in climate and the hydrologic cycle. Nature 419:224–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Betts A, Jakob C (2002) Evaluation of the diurnal cycle of precipitation, surface thermodynamics, and surface fluxes in the ECMWF model using LBA data. J Geophys Res 107:8045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boer G (1993) Climate change and the regulation of the surface moisture and energy budgets. Clim Dyn 8:225–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins M, Booth B, Harris G, Murphy J, Sexton D, Webb M (2006) Towards quantifying uncertainty in transient climate change. Clim Dyn (in press)Google Scholar
  6. Cubasch U, Meehl GA (2001) Projections of future climate change. In: Houghton JT et al (eds) Climate change 2001, The scientific basis, chap. 9. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 527–582Google Scholar
  7. Dai A, Trenberth K (2004) The diurnal cycle and its depiction in the community climate system model. J Clim 17:930–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dai A, Giorgi F, Trenberth K (1999) Observed and model-simulated diurnal cycles of precipitation over the contiguous United States. J Geophys Res 104:6377–6402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Easterling D, Evans J, Groisman P, Karl TR, Kunkel K, Ambenje P (2000) Observed variability and trends in extreme climatic events: a brief review. Bull Am Meteor Soc 81:417–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Emori S, Brown S (2005) Dynamic and thermodynamic changes in mean and extreme precipitation under changed climate. Geophys Res Lett 32:L17 706Google Scholar
  11. Emori S, Hasegawa A, Suzuki T, Dairaku K (2005) Validation, parameterization dependence, and future projection of daily precipitation simulated with a high-resolution atmospheric gcm. Geophys Res Lett 32:L06708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Folland CK, Karl TR (2001) Observed climate variability and change. In: Houghton JT et al (eds) Climate change 2001, The scientific basis, chap. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 99–181Google Scholar
  13. Frei C, Schär C, Lüthi D, Davies H (1998) Heavy precipitation processes in a warmer climate. Geophysical Res Lett25:1431–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior C, Banks H, Gregory J, Johns T, Mitchell J, Wood R (2000) The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Clim Dyn 16:147–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Groisman P, Legates D (1994) The accuracy of United States precipitation data. Bull Am Meteor Soc 75:215–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Groisman P, Karl T, Easterling D, Knight RW, Jamason P, Hennessy K, Suppiah R, Page C, Wibig J, Fortuniak K, Razuvaev V, Dougal A, Førland E, Zhai P (1999) Changes in the probability of heavy precipitation: important indicators of climatic change. Clim Change 42:243–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hegerl G, Zwiers F, Stott P, Kharin V (2004) Detectability of anthropogenic changes in annual temperature and precipitation extremes. J Clim 17:3683–3700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Held I, Soden B (2006) Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming. J Clim (accepted)Google Scholar
  19. Hennessy K, Gregory J, Mitchell J (1997) Changes in daily precipitation under enhanced greenhouse conditions. Clim Dyn 13:667–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hennessy K, Whetton P, Katzfety J, McGregor J, Jones R, Page C, Nguygen K (1998) Fine resolution climate change scenarios for New South Wales, annual report 1997–1998: research undertaken for the New South Wales environment protection authority. Available from CSIRO Private Bag 1, Mordialloc, Victoria 3195, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  21. Ingram W (2002) On the robustness of the water vapor feedback: Gcm vertical resolution and formulation. J Clim 15:1917–1921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. IPCC (2002) Report on: Workshop on changes in extreme weather and climate events. Beijing, China, 11–13 June 2002. IPCC supporting material Available from
  23. Johns T, Gregory J, Ingram W, Johnson C, Jones A, Lowe J, Mitchell J, Roberts D, Sexton D, Stevenson D, Tett S, Woodage M (2003) Anthropogenic climate change for 1860 to 2100 simulated with the HadCM3 model under updated emissions scenarios. Clim Dyn 20:583–612Google Scholar
  24. Karl T, Knight R (1998) Secular trends of precipitation amount, frequency and intensity in the USA. Bull Am Meteor Soc 79:231–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kharin V, Zwiers F (2000) Changes in the extremes in an ensemble of transient climate simulations with a coupled atmosphere-ocean GCM. J Clim 13:3760–3788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kiktev D, Sexton D, Alexander L, Folland C (2003) Comparison of modeled and observed trends in indicies of daily climate extremes. J Clim 16:3560–3571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knutson T, Tuleya R, Shen W, Ginis I (2001) Impact of CO2 induced warming on hurricane intensities as simulated in a hurricane model with ocean coupling. J Clim 14:2458–2468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koster R, Dirmeyer P, Guo Z, Bonan G, Chan E, Cox P, Gordon C, Kanae S, Kowalczyk E, Lawrence D, Liu P, Lu CH, Malyshev S, McAvaney B, Mitchell K, Mocko D, Ok T, Oleson K, Pitman A, Sud Y, Taylor C, Verseghy D, Vasic R, Xue Y, Yamada T (2004) Regions of strong coupling between soil moisture and precipitation. Science 305:1138–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lambert F, Stott P, Allen M, Palmer M (2004) Detection and attribution of changes in 20th century land precipitation. Geophys Res Lett 31:L10 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lambert F, Gillett N, Stone D, Huntingford C (2005) Attribution studies of observed land precipitation changes with nine coupled models. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18 704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leggett J, Pepper WJ, Swart R (1992) Emissions scenarios for the IPCC: an update. In: Houghton JT et al (eds) Climate change 1992, the supplementary report to the IPCC scientific assessment, chap. 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 69–75Google Scholar
  32. McAvaney B (2001) Model evaluation. In: Houghton JT et al (eds) Climate change 2001, the scientific basis, chap. 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 471–526Google Scholar
  33. McGuffie K, Henderson-Sellers A, Holbrook N, Kothavala Z, Balachova O, Hoekstra J (1999) Assessing simulations of daily temperature and precipitation variability with global climate models for present and enhanced greenhouse climates. Int J Climatol 19:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meehl G, Boer G, Covey C, Latif M, Stouffer R (2000a) The coupled model intercomparison project (CMIP). Bull Am Meteor Soc 81:313–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meehl G, Zwiers F, Evans J, Knutson T, Mearns L, Whetton P (2000b) Trends in extreme weather and climate events: issues related to modelling extremes in projections of future climate change. Bull Am Meteor Soc 81:427–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meehl G, Arblaster J, Tebaldi C (2005) Understanding future patterns of increased precipitation intensity in climate model simulations. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18 719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mitchell J, Wilson C, Cunnington W (1987) On CO2 climate sensitivity and model dependence of results. Q J R Mereorol Soc 113:293–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Osborn T, Hulme M (1997) Development of a relationship between station and grid-box rainday frequencies for climate model evaluation. J Clim 10:1885–1908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Osborn T, Hulme M, Jones P, Basnett T (2000) Observed trends in the daily intensity of United Kingdom precipitation. Int J Climatol 20:347–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pope V, Gallani ML, Rowntree P, Stratton R (2000) The impact of new physical parameterizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3. Clim Dyn 16:123–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Räisänen J, Hansson U, Ullerstig A, Döscher R, Graham L, Jones C, Meier H, Samuelsson P, Willén U (2004) European climate in the late twenty-first century: regional simulations with two driving global models and two forcing secnarios. J Clim 22:13–31Google Scholar
  42. Semenov V, Bengtsson L (2002) Secular trends in daily precipitation characteristics: greenhouse gas simulation with a coupled AOGCM. Clim Dyn 19(2):123–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith R (1990) A scheme for predicting layer clouds and their water content in a general circulation model. Q J R Mereorol Soc 116:435–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Suppiah R, Hennessy K (1998) Trends in total rainfall, heavy rain events and number of dry days in australia, 1910–1990. Int J Climatol 18:1141–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trenberth K (1999a) Atmospheric moisture recycling: role of advection and local evaporation. J Clim 12:1368–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Trenberth K (1999b) Conceptual framework for changes of extremes of the hydrological cycle with climate change. Clim Change 42:327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Trenberth K, Dai A (2003) The changing character of precipitation. Bull Am Meteor Soc 84:1205–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Watterson I, Dix M (2003) Simulated changes due to global warming in daily precipitation means and extremes and their interpretation using the gamma distribution. J Geophys Res 108:4379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wehner M (2004) Predicted 21st century changes in seasonal extreme precipitation events in the Parallel Climate Model. J Clim 17:4281–4290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilby R, Wigley T (2002) Future changes in the distribution of daily precipitation totals across the United States. Geophys Res Lett 29:391–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xie P, Arkin P (1997) Global precipitation: a 17-year monthly analysis based on gauge observations, satellite estimates and numerical model outputs. Bull Am Meteor Soc 78:2539–2558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yin J (2005) A consistent poleward shift of the storm tracks in simulations of 21st century climate. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18 701CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of PhysicsUniversity of Oxford, Clarendon LaboratoryOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations