Resumen
Australia experiences a variety of climate extremes that result in loss of life and economic and environmental damage. This paper provides a first evaluation of the performance of state-of-the-art Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) global climate models (GCMs) in simulating climate extremes over Australia. Here, we evaluate how well 37 individual CMIP6 GCMs simulate the spatiotemporal patterns of 12 climate extremes over Australia by comparing the GCMs against gridded observations (Australian Gridded Climate Dataset). This evaluation is crucial for informing, interpreting, and constructing multimodel ensemble future projections of climate extremes over Australia, climate-resilience planning, and GCM selection while conducting exercises like dynamical downscaling via GCMs. We find that temperature extremes (maximum-maximum temperature -TXx, number of summer days -SU, and number of days when maximum temperature is greater than 35 °C -Txge35) are reasonably well-simulated in comparison to precipitation extremes. However, GCMs tend to overestimate (underestimate) minimum (maximum) temperature extremes. GCMs also typically struggle to capture both extremely dry (consecutive dry days -CDD) and wet (99th percentile of precipitation -R99p) precipitation extremes, thus highlighting the underlying uncertainty of GCMs in capturing regional drought and flood conditions. Typically for both precipitation and temperature extremes, UKESM1-0-LL, FGOALS-g3, and GCMs from Met office Hadley Centre (HadGEM3-GC31-MM and HadGEM3-GC31-LL) and NOAA (GFDL-ESM4 and GFDL-CM4) consistently tend to show good performance. Our results also show that GCMs from the same modelling group and GCMs sharing key modelling components tend to have similar biases and thus are not highly independent.