Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part I: Detection and Attribution
Name
bams-d-18-0189.1.pdf
Description
Published version
Size
1.36 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
093e4e192d1da3f2872a6d5ceb071eb8
Author(s)
Knutson, Thomas
Camargo, Suzana J.
Chan, Johnny C. L.
Emanuel, Kerry Andrew
Ho, Chang-Hoi
Kossin, James
Mohapatra, Mrutyunjay
Satoh, Masaki
Sugi, Masato
Walsh, Kevin
Date Issued
October 2019
Journal
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Citation
Knutson, Thomas et al. "Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part I: Detection and Attribution." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 100, 10 (October 2019): 1987-2008 © 2019 American Meteorological Society
Version
Final published version
Abstract
An assessment was made of whether detectable changes in tropical cyclone (TC) activity are identifiable in observations and whether any changes can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change. Overall, historical data suggest detectable TC activity changes in some regions associated with TC track changes, while data quality and quantity issues create greater challenges for analyses based on TC intensity and frequency. A number of specific published conclusions (case studies) about possible detectable anthropogenic influence on TCs were assessed using the conventional approach of preferentially avoiding type I errors (i.e., overstating anthropogenic influence or detection). We conclude there is at least low to medium confidence that the observed poleward migration of the latitude of maximum intensity in the western North Pacific is detectable, or highly unusual compared to expected natural variability. Opinion on the author team was divided on whether any observed TC changes demonstrate discernible anthropogenic influence, or whether any other observed changes represent detectable changes. The issue was then reframed by assessing evidence for detectable anthropogenic influence while seeking to reduce the chance of type II errors (i.e., missing or understating anthropogenic influence or detection). For this purpose, we used a much weaker “balance of evidence” criterion for assessment. This leads to a number of more speculative TC detection and/or attribution statements, which we recognize have substantial potential for being false alarms (i.e., overstating anthropogenic influence or detection) but which may be useful for risk assessment. Several examples of these alternative statements, derived using this approach, are presented in the report.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
Terms of Use
Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use.
Persistent DSpace Link
DOI of Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-18-0189.1
