Using ensembles from the Community Earth System Model (CESM) under a high and a lower emission scenarios, we investigate changes in statistics of extreme daily temperature. The ensembles provide large samples for a robust application of extreme value theory. We estimate return values and return periods for annual maxima of the daily high and low temperatures as well as the 3-day averages of the same variables in current and future climate. Results indicate statistically significant increases (compared to the reference period of 1996–2005) in extreme temperatures over all land areas as early as 2025 under both scenarios, with statistically significant differences between them becoming pervasive over the globe by 2050. The substantially smaller changes, for all indices, produced under the lower emission case translate into sizeable benefits from emission mitigation: By 2075, in terms of reduced changes in 1-day heat extremes, about 95 % of land regions would see benefits of 1 °C or more under the lower emissions scenario, and 50 % or more of the land areas would benefit by at least 2 °C. 6 % of the land area would benefit by 3 °C or more in projected extreme minimum temperatures and 13 % would benefit by this amount for extreme maximum temperature. Benefits for 3-day metrics are similar. The future frequency of current extremes is also greatly reduced by mitigation: by the end of the century, under RCP8.5 more than half the land area experiences the current 20-year events every year while only between about 10 and 25 % of the area is affected by such severe changes under RCP4.5.

We consider the problem of estimating the ensemble sizes required to characterize the forced component and the internal variability of a number of extreme metrics. While we exploit existing large ensembles, our perspective is that of a modeling center wanting to estimate a priori such sizes on the basis of an existing small ensemble (we assume the availability of only five members here). We therefore ask if such a small-size ensemble is sufficient to estimate accurately the population variance (i.e., the ensemble internal variability) and then apply a well-established formula that quantifies the expected error in the estimation of the population mean (i.e., the forced component) as a function of the sample size n, here taken to mean the ensemble size. We find that indeed we can anticipate errors in the estimation of the forced component for temperature and precipitation extremes as a function of n by plugging into the formula an estimate of the population variance derived on the basis of five members. For a range of spatial and temporal scales, forcing levels (we use simulations under Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5) and two models considered here as our proof of concept, it appears that an ensemble size of 20 or 25 members can provide estimates of the forced component for the extreme metrics considered that remain within small absolute and percentage errors. Additional members beyond 20 or 25 add only marginal precision to the estimate, and this remains true when statistical inference through extreme value analysis is used. We then ask about the ensemble size required to estimate the ensemble variance (a measure of internal variability) along the length of the simulation and - importantly - about the ensemble size required to detect significant changes in such variance along the simulation with increased external forcings. Using the F test, we find that estimates on the basis of only 5 or 10 ensemble members accurately represent the full ensemble variance even when the analysis is conducted at the grid-point scale. The detection of changes in the variance when comparing different times along the simulation, especially for the precipitation-based metrics, requires larger sizes but not larger than 15 or 20 members. While we recognize that there will always exist applications and metric definitions requiring larger statistical power and therefore ensemble sizes, our results suggest that for a wide range of analysis targets and scales an effective estimate of both forced component and internal variability can be achieved with sizes below 30 members. This invites consideration of the possibility of exploring additional sources of uncertainty, such as physics parameter settings, when designing ensemble simulations.

Detection and attribution (D and A) simulations were important components of CMIP5 and underpinned the climate change detection and attribution assessments of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The primary goals of the Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP) are to facilitate improved estimation of the contributions of anthropogenic and natural forcing changes to observed global warming as well as to observed global and regional changes in other climate variables; to contribute to the estimation of how historical emissions have altered and are altering contemporary climate risk; and to facilitate improved observationally constrained projections of future climate change. D and A studies typically require unforced control simulations and historical simulations including all major anthropogenic and natural forcings. Such simulations will be carried out as part of the DECK and the CMIP6 historical simulation. In addition D and A studies require simulations covering the historical period driven by individual forcings or subsets of forcings only: such simulations are proposed here. Key novel features of the experimental design presented here include firstly new historical simulations with aerosols-only, stratospheric-ozone-only, CO2-only, solar-only, and volcanic-only forcing, facilitating an improved estimation of the climate response to individual forcing, secondly future single forcing experiments, allowing observationally constrained projections of future climate change, and thirdly an experimental design which allows models with and without coupled atmospheric chemistry to be compared on an equal footing.

The Paris Agreement of December 2015 stated a goal to pursue efforts to keep global temperatures below 1.5°C above preindustrial levels and well below 2°C. The IPCC was charged with assessing climate impacts at these temperature levels, but fully coupled equilibrium climate simulations do not currently exist to inform such assessments. In this study, we produce a set of scenarios using a simple model designed to achieve long-term 1.5 and 2°C temperatures in a stable climate. These scenarios are then used to produce century-scale ensemble simulations using the Community Earth System Model, providing impact-relevant long-term climate data for stabilization pathways at 1.5 and 2°C levels and an overshoot 1.5°C case, which are realized (for the 21st century) in the coupled model and are freely available to the community. Here we describe the design of the simulations and a brief overview of their impact-relevant climate response. Exceedance of historical record temperature occurs with 60% greater frequency in the 2°C climate than in a 1.5°C climate aggregated globally, and with twice the frequency in equatorial and arid regions. Extreme precipitation intensity is statistically significantly higher in a 2.0°C climate than a 1.5°C climate in some specific regions (but not all). The model exhibits large differences in the Arctic, which is ice-free with a frequency of 1 in 3 years in the 2.0°C scenario, and 1 in 40 years in the 1.5°C scenario. Significance of impact differences with respect to multi-model variability is not assessed.