Abstract
Recent studies have reached inconsistent conclusions from scaling analysis about whether flood or extreme precipitation is more sensitive to warming climate. To explain the reasons behind the inconsistency, here we first used scaling analysis to illustrate how extreme daily precipitation and streamflow scale with daily air temperature across the Continental United States (CONUS). We found both similar and opposite scaling in extreme precipitation and streamflow. It indicates based on scaling analysis, the sensitivity of extreme streamflow to warming climate can be either similar, higher or lower to that of extreme precipitation. We further explored why there are contrasting scaling relationships in the CONUS. Generally, the similar scaling was found in regions where the timing of extreme precipitation and streamflow is correspondent, as well as with similar temporal evolution in extreme event timing and magnitude, e.g., the west coast and southern plains, implying extreme precipitation is the dominant driver of local floods. However, for regions with dissimilar scaling in extreme precipitation and streamflow (e.g., Rocky Mountains, southern plains), the characteristics of extreme streamflow show large difference to those of extreme precipitation, and the temporal evolution of extreme streamflow timing and magnitude are more correlated with factors/processes such as soil moisture and snowmelt. This study reflects that the contrasting scaling relationships of extreme precipitation and streamflow are oriented from the local hydro-climatological specifics. Using scaling analysis to compare the sensitivity of extreme precipitation and streamflow to warming climate is not suitable. Instead, we should focus more on local flood generating mechanisms or flood drivers when investigating floods in the changing climate.
Contrasting scaling relationships of extreme precipitation and streamflow to temperature across the United States
