During our discussion of the preposterous news story from Pravda, claiming this headline: “Earth begins to kill people for changing its climate” a scientist dropped in to provide us some insight into his latest paper. It was highly relevant at the time since one of the repeating themes we see in the mainstream (and not so mainstream) media is the attribution of increasing death due to severe weather events to “global warming”.
But that is not supported by the real data, it is a false premise.
In the paper, Indur Goklany examines the worldwide trends and makes some surprising discoveries base of examining data from the World Health Organization, NOAA, and other sources.
Some have claimed that, all else being equal, climate change will increase the frequency or severity of weather-related extreme events (see, e.g., IPCC 2001; Patz 2004; MacMichael and Woodruff 2004). This study examines whether losses due to such events (as measured by aggregate deaths and death rates2) have increased globally and for the United States in recent decades. It will also attempt to put these deaths and death rates into perspective by comparing them with the overall mortality burden, and briefly discuss what trends in these measures imply about human adaptive capacity.
The most telling graph is the first one in the paper:
Goklany writes:
Despite the recent spate of deadly extreme weather events – such as the 2003 European heat wave and the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons in the USA – aggregate mortality and mortality rates due to extreme weather events are generally lower today than they used to be.
Globally, mortality and mortality rates have declined by 95 percent or more since the 1920s. The largest improvements came from declines in mortality due to droughts and floods, which apparently were responsible for 93 percent of all deaths caused by extreme events during the 20th Century. For windstorms, which, at 6 percent, contributed most of the remaining fatalities, mortality rates are also lower today but there are no clear trends for mortality. Cumulatively, the declines more than compensated for increases due to the 2003 heat wave.
There is also a table of supporting data:
Click for a larger image
There are a number of things that have contributed to this trend of lowered death rates due to extreme weather events that I have identified, here is a short list:
- Better real-time monitoring due to satellite technology and surface networks
- Better forecasting due to increased skill sets and improvements in computer aided forecasting
- Better warning lead times, due to satellites for hurricanes and radar for tornadoes and flash floods
- Better and faster warning dissemination thanks to radio, TV, and Internet
But there is always this recurring complaint that “there are more natural disasters now than 50-100 years ago”. From a perspective rooted in the human experience of the western world, this is likely due to the instant communications we have now. 50 years ago, if there was a massive flood in China, we might not hear about it for days, 100 years ago, perhaps never.
The shrinking world due to instant global communications will ensure that our frequency of such experiences of severe weather will increase. As testament to this, this very blog entry will be read by a few people worldwide within minutes of its posting. Those outside of the USA, please post a comment to illustrate. This is posted at 9:10 PM Pacific time, 4:10 UTC on July 5th.
See more in the paper: Death and Death Rates Due to Extreme Weather Events, Indur Goklany
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I don’t believe the numbers in Table 1.
Are the numbers as is or are they in thousands? The 2004 tsunami killed about 225,000 people. If no one else died from waves/surges 1990-2006 that would be about 14,000 per year, the table shows 207 per year. So the wave/surges numbers are not correct.
According to the table, Extreme Temperatures killed 110 per year from 1900-1989, and then killed 5,671 per year from 1900-2006. These numbers don’t make any sense. See Chris D’s comment above.
Move over, the deaths are not caused only by the event, but also by the lack of infrastructure to protect against the event (flood control, water supply systems, etc.)
The numbers appear to be so uncertain that no conclusions can be drawn.
Then, as now, storm surge remains the major killer in a hurricane and should never be underestimated, particularly by people below or near sea level.
Didn’t log on yesterday (my bad!). Just got home from church and am now reading. As said many times already – great stuff and thank you! Read in Chapel Hill, NC, 12:56 PM 7/06.
Good day to you all, wherever you are!
REPLY: Hey Bob since you are in Chapel Hill, NC do you think you could get some follow up photos of this official USHCN Weather station there? It is visible from the street and Google Street view but would like better photos, particularly of the MMTS shelter closeup to see if mold/dirt exists on it.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=35.908787,-79.079633&spn=0.001249,0.003803&t=h&z=19
It is at the Orange Water and Sewer Authority on Jones Ferry Road. A couple of pix from compass point angles would be appreciated if you can get them.
More here:
http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php?g2_itemId=5147
robert burns (09:10:24) : “The 2004 tsunami killed about 225,000 people.”
Quote from Death and Death Rates Due to Extreme Weather Events: Notes 1 This paper uses “extreme weather events” synonymously with “extreme events.”
A little confusing, but perhaps because the 2004 tsunami was not weather related, the 225,000 were not included?
I’m from France and read this topic now at 19:13 July 6/2008 Paris time .
And that’s coming back from a freezing weekend at the beach, if it were on working days, I would have been alerted minutes after your posting by my RSS newsfeed.
read it at 1:43 PM Sunday the 6th, because I was too busy to go on-line yesterday and overslept today on my day off.
My training is as an archaeologist, not as a meteorologist or climate scientist, but when I saw Mann et als.’s hockey stick I knew from my own research it was fraudlent( it failed the test of consilience — my work involved dating African sites using obsidian hydration, which is temperature dependent, and very clearly the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warming period both show up, and cancel each other out for dates preceeding them) , and after watching Ted Koppel ream out Al Gore on Nightline years ago I’ve never trusted him since then. Also, Military Historian, we are both trained in data analysis, which makes it easy to spot liars.
Montreal, Canada, July 6th, 14h00 EDT, 18h00UDT
I have developed my own chronology of weather disasters based upon many books and some internet sources. There were plenty of disasters between 1910 and 1919 and here are some of the larger ones extracted from my list:
1910: In Niger, the first year of a four year drought. 85000 die over 4 years.
1911: In September, in China, the Yangtze overflowed forming a lake 80 miles ling and 35 miles wide; 100000 died.
1912: In August in China, a typhoon kills 50000 people.
1913: On June 12, Canton China was wiped out by flooding and 100000 died.
1914: On January 14, the North Sea overflowed the Netherlands and killed 10000.
1915: On September 24-29, a hurricane hit the Gulf Coast destroying 90% of the buildings over a wide area, killing 500. [NHC rank 85/259 with 279 dead]
1916: On December 1, a cyclone hit Pondicherry, India, killing 1000.
1917: On June 5-6, tornados in KS, KY, MI, and MO killed 249.
1917: On July 27-August 3, a heat wave hit NYC setting a 25 year record and killing 190.
1918: On September 30, a typhoon hit Tokyo, Japan, killing 1619, leaving 1000 homeless, and destroying 2000 boats.
1919: On September 10, a hurricane struck the FL Keys drowning more than 500 persons (600-900).
1919: On September 14-17, the hurricane struck Corpus Christi TX killing 250- 280 along the Gulf Coast. [NHC rank 50/259 with 600 to 900 dead]
There were also lots of hot spells during that decade such as:
1911: On July 4, the northeastern United States experienced sweltering 100 degree heat. The temperature soared to 105 degrees at Vernon VT and North Bridgton ME, and to 106 degrees at Nashua NH, to establish all-time records for those three states. Afternoon highs of 104 at Boston MA, 104 at Albany NY, and 103 at Portland ME, were all-time records for those three cities; 380 die in the heat wave from July 3 to 11.
1913: On July 10, the mercury hit 134 degrees at Greenland Ranch in Death Valley CA, the hottest reading of record for the North American continent. Sandstorm conditions accompanied the heat. The high the previous day was 129 degrees, following a morning low of 93 degrees.
1916: On July 10-29, a heat wave scorched Chicago killing 305.
1918: On August 6, unusually hot weather began to overspread the Atlantic Coast States, from the Carolinas to southern New England. The temperature soared to an all-time record high of 106 degrees at DC, and Cumberland and Keedysville hit 109 degrees to establish a state record for MD. Temperatures were above normal east of the Rockies that month, with readings much above normal in the Lower MO Valley. Omaha Neb reached 110 degrees.
1918: On August 7, Philadelphia PA established an all-time record with a high of 106 degrees. NYC experienced its warmest day and night with a low of 82 degrees and a high of 102 degrees. Afternoon highs of 108 degrees at Flemington NJ and Somerville NJ established state records for the month of August.
And plenty of cold spells as well, but they don’t mention deaths during those events as far as I know.
Read and posted around 2 pm in the foothills of cold WV.
As we lower the natural human death rate through technology, we interfere with natural selection and change the course of evolution. No longer do just the strong survive, now almost everyone does and that allows the weak and defective to reproduce passing on those weak and defective genes on to the next generation. Our species is being watered down to our own detriment.
Natural disasters, AGW weather-related or other, are no longer my greatest fear. I took a look at the operating manual for our new digital cooktop stove yesterday, and now I’m afraid to turn it on. From page 3(in bold type):
!DANGER !WARNING
!You can be killed or seriously injured if you don’t *immediately* follow instructions!
And (?) immediately below that, again in bold black type:
!You can be killed or seriously injured if you don’t follow instructions!
Following is three additional fullsize pages of Safety Warnings, from the sublime to the ridiculous.
These idiotic warnings of impending disaster are everywhere in our culture. The media hype and mass hysteria over AGW is just a reflection of how paranoid our culture has become.
If the weather don’t get’cha, your electric stove will!
It’s 11:34AM in So. CA
Read at 7.40pm Co. Waterford Ireland, a wet, windy and cool ireland! This post just goes to prove what one gentleman, a lot more intelligent than me said… “We’ve got nothing to fear but fear itself”
The 2004 tsunami killed about 225,000 people.
Not weather related (as previously noted).
I simply do not believe that there were only 110 deaths due to extreme temps throughout the entire period of 1900-1989.
That would be deaths per year.
we are both trained in data analysis, which makes it easy to spot liars.
There are liars, damnliars, and outliers.
There is red snow, white snow–and yellow snow.
Anthony – I know where the OWASA plant is on Jones Ferry road – let me take a look and see what I can do. Not being familiar with these stations, I assume it is connected with the structure identified as MMTS on Google. Is that what you’re referring to?
Thx,
BobW in NC
REPLY: Hi Bob, this is what the MMTS looks like:
http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php?g2_itemId=40494
As people have pointed out most of the deaths in recent natural disasters could have been cheaply and easily averted with almost zero cost. Since the french disaster there have been many warm periods. The french have learned. The death toll is now near zero from heat related deaths in subsequent heat waves.
There is a web page you can find with google on the top 100 natural disasters of the 20rh century. It is fascinating study. If you consider how the population of the world has tripled and the reporting of disasters has improved over the years it is likely the percentage decline in disaster deaths is down possibly as high as 99 percent.
Even things like katrina as someone pointed out should not have killed anyone. A stupid local politician decided not to evacuate people sending 1000 to their deaths but even that is an astonsihsing figure. Hundreds of helicopters rescued tens of thousands of people from other wise certain death. This mayor could have been responsible for 10000 deaths but with excellent systems even a stupid irresponsible local mayor cannot cause too much damage.
Everytime I look at these “projected” deaths it seems like the people saying these things must be unbelievably stupid or purposefully deceitful. For instance the starving in 2080 claim just makes my head feel like its going to burst. The idea we will have less food in 2080 defies any rational thinking. It has to be the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen written.
Yes. MMTS. Looks a bit like a beehive.
Tom in Florida,
It’s not enough that we have to overcome the AGW idiocy, but we still must fight Global Eugenics? I guess I was naive enough to believe we won that war when we took Hitler out.
Another great post, Anthony, and yet another spanner in the wheels of the alarmist bandwagon. I work for a large corporation which offers life insurance, among other services. Our internal communications often stress the importance of being greener, cutting back on carbon emissions, etc. But I’m now beginning to wonder which reality our own actuaries are looking at – the AGW version, where deaths are projected to increase (and which the company pays lip-service to, at least), or the real deal, as revealed by Indur Goklany. Corporate schizophrenia? Hmm, looks like something for me to find out…
This is posted from London, UK at 9:17 PM British Summer Time on Sunday July 6th.
I’ve seen the decline in deaths for some events reported elsewhere, but it’s nice to see the whole picture presented. Thanks!
Reading this a little later than normally (1:15 Pacific) because earlier today a Tree Rat committed suicide by shorting the transformer across the street. Once they got here, the PGE crew took all of 15 minutes to replace it and restore power — makes one think they’ve done it before.
Cohenite,
Earlier this year the UK Department of Health and the Health Protection Agency published a report ‘Health Effects of Climate Change in the UK 2008’
It has a whole chapter on heat and cold related deaths from which the following excerpt is taken;
“Despite the increasing temperature, the trend in annual heat-related mortality per million
aged 65+ fell significantly in Scotland and non-significantly in other regions:
South-East England from 258 in 1971 to 193 in 2003
rest of England and Wales from 188 to 93
Scotland from 125 (in 1974) to only 8 in 2003 (p<0.05).
Winter temperatures tended to rise and the trend in cold-related mortality per million
aged 65+ fell in all regions (p<0.001):
South-East England from 9,174 to 5,903
rest of England and Wales from 9,222 to 6,088
Scotland from 9,751 in 1974 to 6,166 in 2003.”
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_080702
Re john mathon (12:27:38)
Even more disheartening is that the mayor was re-elected and the blame was put on the Federal Gov. Other politicians (Louisiana’s Congressmen) had supposedly diverted funds that should have gone to the levees to other projects, thus ensuring the disaster was much worse than it should have been.
Many of you have raised questions regarding the paper and the data it provides.
First, please look at Endnotes 3 and 4 to get a better idea about the data, whence it came, and its quality. Second, regarding the jump in numbers after the 1910-1919 period noted by many of you (e.g., Evan Jones, Jan Jenssens, WWS), I think this is probably due to a combination of generally poorer communications in earlier days, and, as noted by Evan Jones and WWS, probably due to the fact that with the war from 1914-1918 and the Bolshevik Revolution and its aftermath, newspapers and other information sources probably weren’t focusing on deaths from extreme weather events. From the perspective of their time, it was probably more like “routine” deaths.
Also note the sources of the basic data: NGOs, research institutes, UN agencies, insurance companies, press agencies and newspapers. At that time there were few NGOs, virtually no research institutes, no UN agencies, and I suspect insurance companies (which would be operating in the developed countries for the most part) were like, press agencies and newspapers, more concerned with other events.
K: The paper only looks at extreme weather events, specifically, hydrometeorological events such as droughts, extreme temperatures, slides, floods, waves/surges, wildfires, windstorms. I excluded famines because they are frequently exacerbated by, if not entirely due to, human failures (e.g., wars, collectivization, and other political experiments, etc.). Had I included them, then the apparent reduction in deaths and death rates during the 20th century would have been even more pronounced.
Chris D.: Regarding deaths from extreme temperatures from 1900-1989, Table 1 provides deaths per year, so actually that would be 90 x 110 deaths (= 9,906 deaths). That said, I’m also skeptical of these numbers myself. I have to believe that many more people worldwide died from extreme cold, for instance, in particular during the world war periods when many were close to starvation – but would that be “natural” or “man-made”? For example, how many soldiers froze to death on the Eastern Front? I would think the numbers would be greater. But take a look at Endnotes 3 and 4, and you can see that many deaths from extreme weather events during war periods were probably excluded.
Jan Janssens: You raise a really good question. More detailed examination of the data indicates that from 1940-49, most of the deaths were due to droughts and none to extreme temperatures! Surely some soldiers, not to mention civilians, froze to death on the Eastern Front. See above comments. However, there were zero deaths attributed to extreme temperatures from 1910-1919 too. I think the reason might have to do with a combination of poorer coverage in earlier years, and perhaps some luck – after all we are talking about extreme events.
Robert Burns and M. Jeff: Deaths from the 2004 Tsunami were excluded. See Endnote 3. But now looking at Endnote 1, I can see how one might think that tsunami deaths were included. So to clarify, the paper only looks at extreme WEATHER events, but for brevity in the paper I refer to them as “extreme events”.
Douglas Hoyt: It’s a pleasure to make your acquaintance, even if it’s in the virtual sphere. It should be possible to figure out if EM-DAT, the original source of the data, has accounted for the events you have identified. You may want to communicate your list to them. They are at: http://www.emdat.be/
M. Jeff….You are correct, the tsunami was not an extreme weather event. In my (weak) defense, “wildfires” do not appear to me to be extreme weather events either. And Table 1 shows EM-DAT as a source. EM-DAT shows the 2004 tsunami deaths in it’s waves/surges classification.
Evan Jones…please reread my post, i said per year. The 110 deaths per year times 90 years is 9,900 deaths. Google showed me 1,213 people died in 1934 in the USA due to extreme heat. If both numbers are correct, that means 12% of the deaths for the world over 90 years took place in 1 year in one country.
My point is that Table 1 is flawed, and therefore no conclusions can be drawn from the data.
Douglas Hoyt: I should have added that the next time I update the paper, I’ll look into whether the events you identified were accounted for. If there are significant discrepancies between your list an EM-DAT, I would either jettison the data from the earlier decades or, more likely, I’ll note that prominently on the graphs and tables, etc. Thanks.
Evan Jones wrote: ” Yes. MMTS. Looks a bit like a beehive.”
Kinda looks like a Malibu lamp to me.