Abstract
The strength of mid-latitude storm tracks shapes weather and climate phenomena in the extra-tropics, as these storm tracks control the daily to multi-decadal variability of precipitation, temperature and winds. By the end of this century, winter mid-latitude storms are projected to intensify in the Southern Hemisphere, with large consequences over the entire extra-tropics. Therefore, it is critical to be able to accurately assess the impacts of anthropogenic emissions on these storms to improve societal preparedness for future changes. Here we show that current climate models severely underestimate the intensification in mid-latitude storm tracks in recent decades. Specifically, the intensification obtained from reanalyses has already reached the model-projected end-of-the-century intensification. The biased intensification is found to be linked to biases in the zonal flow. These results question the ability of climate models to accurately predict the future impacts of anthropogenic emissions in the Southern Hemisphere mid-latitudes.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data used in the manuscript are publicly available: CMIP6 data (https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/projects/cmip6/), NCEP2 (https://psl.noaa.gov/), JRA-55 (https://rda.ucar.edu/), ERA-I and ERA5 (https://www.ecmwf.int), NOAA-CIRES-DOE (https://www.psl.noaa.gov) and CESM (https://www.cesm.ucar.edu/projects/community-projects/LENS/data-sets.html).
Code availability
Any codes used in the manuscript are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6434217.
References
Pfahl, S. & Wernli, H. Quantifying the relevance of cyclones for precipitation extremes. J. Clim. 25, 6770–6780 (2012).
Catto, J. L., Madonna, E., Joos, H., Rudeva, I. & Simmonds, I. Global relationship between fronts and warm conveyor belts and the impact on extreme precipitation. J. Clim. 28, 8411–8429 (2015).
Ma, C. G. & Chang, E. K. M. Impacts of storm-track variations on wintertime extreme weather events over the continental United States. J. Clim. 30, 4601–4624 (2017).
Yau, A. M. W. & Chang, E. K. M. Finding storm track activity metrics that are highly correlated with weather impacts. Part I: frameworks for evaluation and accumulated track activity. J. Clim. 33, 10169–10186 (2020).
Yin, J. H. A consistent poleward shift of the storm tracks in simulations of 21st century climate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L18701 (2005).
O’Gorman, P. A. Understanding the varied response of the extratropical storm tracks to climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 19176–19180 (2010).
Wu, Y., Ting, M., Seager, R., Huang, H. & Cane, M. A. Changes in storm tracks and energy transports in a warmer climate simulated by the GFDL CM2.1 model. Clim. Dyn. 37, 53–72 (2011).
Chang, E. K. M., Guo, Y. & Xia, X. CMIP5 multimodel ensemble projection of storm track change under global warming. J. Geophys. Res. 117, D23118 (2012).
Harvey, B. J., Shaffrey, L. C. & Woollings, T. J. Equator-to-pole temperature differences and the extra-tropical storm track responses of the CMIP5 climate models. Clim. Dyn. 43, 1171–1182 (2014).
Lehmann, J., Coumou, D., Frieler, K., Eliseev, A. V. & Levermann, A. Future changes in extratropical storm tracks and baroclinicity under climate change. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 084002 (2014).
Shaw, T. A. et al. Storm track processes and the opposing influences of climate change. Nat. Geosci. 9, 656–664 (2016).
Chang, E. K. M. Projected significant increase in the number of extreme extratropical cyclones in the Southern Hemisphere. J. Clim. 30, 4915–4935 (2017).
Blazquez, J. & Solman, S. A. Relationship between projected changes in precipitation and fronts in the austral winter of the Southern Hemisphere from a suite of CMIP5 models. Clim. Dyn. 52, 5849–5860 (2019).
Bengtsson, L., Hodges, K. I. & Keenlyside, N. Will extratropical storms intensify in a warmer climate?. J. Clim. 22, 2276–2301 (2009).
Yettella, V. & Kay, J. E. How will precipitation change in extratropical cyclones as the planet warms? Insights from a large initial condition climate model ensemble. Clim. Dyn. 49, 1765–1781 (2017).
Reboita, M. S., da Rocha, R. P., Ambrizzi, T. & Gouveia, C. D. Trend and teleconnection patterns in the climatology of extratropical cyclones over the Southern Hemisphere. Clim. Dyn. 45, 1929–1944 (2015).
Kidston, J. & Gerber, E. P. Intermodel variability of the poleward shift of the austral jet stream in the CMIP3 integrations linked to biases in 20th century climatology. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L09708 (2010).
Simpson, I. R. & Polvani, L. M. Revisiting the relationship between jet position, forced response, and annular mode variability in the southern midlatitudes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 2896–2903 (2016).
Bracegirdle, T. J. et al. Improvements in circumpolar Southern Hemisphere extratropical atmospheric circulation in CMIP6 compared to CMIP5. Earth Space Sci. 7, 01065 (2020).
Priestley, M. D. K. et al. An overview of the extratropical storm tracks in CMIP6 historical simulations. J. Clim. 33, 6315–6343 (2020).
Coumou, D., Lehmann, J. & Beckmann, J. The weakening summer circulation in the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes. Science 348, 324–327 (2015).
Chemke, R. & Ming, Y. Large atmospheric waves will get stronger, while small waves will get weaker by the end of the 21st century. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2020GL090441 (2020).
Eyring, V. et al. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 1937–1958 (2016).
Thompson, D. W. J., Barnes, E. A., Deser, C., Foust, W. E. & Phillips, A. S. Quantifying the role of internal climate variability in future climate trends. J. Clim. 28, 6443–6456 (2015).
Hodges, K., Cobb, A. & Vidale, P. L. How well are tropical cyclones represented in reanalysis datasets? J. Clim. 30, 5243–5264 (2017).
Chemke, R. & Polvani, L. M. Opposite tropical circulation trends in climate models and in reanalyses. Nat. Geosci. 12, 528–532 (2019).
Hawkins, E. & Sutton, R. Time of emergence of climate signals. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L01702 (2012).
Santer, B. D. et al. Human and natural influences on the changing thermal structure of the atmosphere. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 17235–17240 (2013).
Chemke, R. & Polvani, L. M. Linking midlatitudes eddy heat flux trends and polar amplification. NPJ Clim. Atmos. Sci. 3, 8 (2020).
Hawkins, E. & Sutton, R. The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 90, 1095–1107 (2009).
Deser, C., Phillips, A., Bourdette, V. & Teng, H. Uncertainty in climate change projections: the role of internal variability. Clim. Dyn. 38, 527–546 (2012).
Deser, C., Knutti, R., Solomon, S. & Phillips, A. S. Communication of the role of natural variability in future North American climate. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 775–779 (2012).
Kay, J. E. et al. The Community Earth System Model (CESM) Large Ensemble Project: a community resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate variability. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 1333–1349 (2015).
Jones, J. M. et al. Assessing recent trends in high-latitude Southern Hemisphere surface climate. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 917–926 (2016).
James, I. N. Suppression of baroclinic instability in horizontally sheared flows. J. Atmos. Sci. 44, 3710–3720 (1987).
Simmons, A. J. & Hoskins, B. J. The life cycles of some nonlinear baroclinic waves. J. Atmos. Sci. 35, 414–432 (1978).
Vallis, G. K. Atmospheric and Oceanic Fluid Dynamics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006).
Pedlosky, J. Geophysical Fluid Dynamics 2nd edn (Springer-Verlag, 1987).
Kidston, J. & Vallis, G. K. Relationship between eddy-driven jet latitude and width. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L21809 (2010).
Kobayashi et al., S. The JRA-55 reanalysis: general specifications and basic characteristics. J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn 93, 5–48 (2015).
Kanamitsu, M. et al. NCEP-DOE AMIP-II reanalysis (R-2). Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 83, 1631–1643 (2002).
Dee et al., D. P. The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 137, 553–597 (2011).
Slivinski et al., L. C. Towards a more reliable historical reanalysis: improvements for version 3 of the Twentieth Century Reanalysis system. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 145, 2876–2908 (2019).
Hersbach et al., H. The ERA5 global reanalysis. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 146, 1999–2049 (2020).
Chemke, R. & Kaspi, Y. The latitudinal dependence of atmospheric jet scales and macroturbulent energy cascades. J. Atmos. Sci. 72, 3891–3907 (2015).
Chemke, R. & Kaspi, Y. The effect of eddy–eddy interactions on jet formation and macroturbulent scales. J. Atmos. Sci. 73, 2049–2059 (2016).
Chemke, R. & Kaspi, Y. The latitudinal dependence of the oceanic barotropic eddy kinetic energy and macroturbulence energy transport. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 2723–2731 (2016).
Chemke, R., Dror, T. & Kaspi, Y. Barotropic kinetic energy and enstrophy transfers in the atmosphere. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 7725–7734 (2016).
Chemke, R. Atmospheric energy transfer response to global warming. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 143, 2296–2308 (2017).
Chemke, R. Codes for calculating the eddy growth rate. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6434217 (2022).
Peixoto, J. P. & Oort, A. H. Physics of Climate (American Institute of Physics, 1992).
Acknowledgements
R.C. is grateful to the WIS support of young scientists and to A. Novoselsky for downloading the data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
R.C. analysed the data and together with Y.M. and J.Y. discussed and wrote the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Climate Change thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 Recent trends in Southern Hemisphere winter mid-latitude storm tracks.
The mean of all 10-year, 20-year and 30-year trends over the 1979-2018 period in a, eddy kinetic energy and b, poleward eddy moist static energy flux in reanalyses mean (blue) and CMIP6 mean (gray). The black circles show the trends from the individual reanalyses/models.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Latitudinal distribution of poleward eddy moist static energy flux trends.
The 1979-2018 trends in poleward eddy moist static energy flux as a function of latitude in reanalyses mean (blue line) and CMIP6 mean (black line). Shadings show two standard deviations across reanalyses/CMIP6 models.
Extended Data Fig. 3 Variability of winter mid-latitude storm tracks trends.
One standard deviation across all 10-year, 20-year and 30-year trends in a, eddy kinetic energy and b, poleward eddy moist static energy flux in reanalyses mean (blue), CMIP6 mean (gray), and pre-industrial runs (red). The trends in CMIP6 and reanalyses were calculated over the detrended 1979-2018 period. The black circles show the results from individual reanalyses/models.
Extended Data Fig. 4 Recent trends in the meridional structure of the zonal wind.
The 1979-2018 trends in the second meridional derivative of the tropospheric (averaged between 850 mb − 300 mb) mean zonal wind, \(\frac{\partial }{r\partial \phi }\frac{1}{r\cos \phi }\frac{\partial \bar{u}\cos \phi }{\partial \phi }\), in mean reanalyses (blue lines) and CMIP6 models (black lines). Shadings show the 95% confidence interval of the trends. The vertical lines mark the climatological position of the mean zonal wind’s core in reanalyses mean (blue) and CMIP6 models (black). Green line marks the zero line. The latitudinal structure is smoothed with a 3-point running mean for plotting purposes.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Recent trends in eddy momentum flux convergence.
The 1979-2018 trends in vertically averaged eddy momentum flux convergence, \(-\frac{1}{r{\cos }^{2}\phi }\frac{\partial \overline{{u}^{\prime}{v}^{\prime}}{\cos }^{2}\phi }{\partial \phi }\), in mean reanalyses (blue lines) and CMIP6 models (black lines). Shadings show the 95% confidence interval of the trends. The vertical lines mark the climatological position of the mean zonal wind’s core in reanalyses mean (blue) and CMIP6 models (black). Green line marks the zero line. The latitudinal structure is smoothed with a 3-point running mean for plotting purposes.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Table 1 and Figs. 1–14.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chemke, R., Ming, Y. & Yuval, J. The intensification of winter mid-latitude storm tracks in the Southern Hemisphere. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 553–557 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01368-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01368-8
This article is cited by
-
Asymmetric hysteresis response of mid-latitude storm tracks to CO2 removal
Nature Climate Change (2024)
-
Human influence on the recent weakening of storm tracks in boreal summer
npj Climate and Atmospheric Science (2024)
-
Trends in seasonal precipitation extremes and associated temperatures along continental Chile
Climate Dynamics (2024)
-
Tropical or extratropical cyclones: what drives the compound flood hazard, impact, and risk for the United States Southeast Atlantic coast?
Natural Hazards (2024)
-
Atmospheric responses to the interannual variability of sea surface temperature front in the summertime Southern Ocean
Climate Dynamics (2024)