Amplification of the discrepancy between simplified and physics-based wet-bulb globe temperatures in a warmer climate

Abstract

The Simplified Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (sWBGT) is widely used in heat stress assessments for climate-change studies, but its limitations have not been thoroughly explored. Building on recent critiques of sWBGT's use for current climate on global scale, this study examines sWBGT's biases using dynamically-downscaled sub-daily climate projections under multiple future emission scenarios. The analysis is aimed at understanding caveats in the application of sWBGT and the uncertainties in existing climate change analysis dependent on sWBGT. Results indicate sWBGT's biases are heavily influenced by local near-surface air temperature, with overestimation of heat stress in East Asia regions, particularly hot and humid areas, due to static assumptions of radiation and wind speed. This overestimation is amplified in warmer climates, leading to exaggerated projected heat stress increases in future. In contrast, underestimations are found for heat stress levels attributed to low wind speeds and strong radiations, such as over the Tibetan Plateau and certain extreme events. Additionally, sWBGT underestimates variability in extreme heatwave events compared to WBGT in both current and future climates, irrespective of overestimation in absolute heatwave intensities. This study emphasizes the limitations of sWBGT, especially in future warmer climates. Importance of sub-daily data for capturing daily maximum heat stress level and reflecting diurnal variations in different components is also discussed. In conclusion, we recommend using Liljegren's model (i.e., physics-based calculation) with high-resolution sub-daily climate data for more accurate outdoor heat stress assessments in climate change studies.