Global Warming = more hurricanes | Still not happening

So far the hurricane season for the Atlantic has been pretty quiet for 2009. Ryan Maue from Florida State University explains why. In related news, Al Gore has dropped the [hurricane frequency] related slide in his traveling PowerPoint show. – Anthony

Great Depression! Tropical Cyclone Energy at 30-year lows

FSU-ACE_vs_GISS-oceantemp4
Global hurricane frequency versus global ocean temperatures - Top image from FSU ACE, bottom image from GISS ocean data plotted by WUWT - click for larger image

Both Northern Hemisphere and South Hemisphere AND therefore overall Global hurricane activity has continued to sink to levels not seen since the 1970s. Even more astounding, when the Southern Hemisphere hurricane data is analyzed to create a global value, we see that Global Hurricane Energy has sunk to 30-year lows, at the least. Since hurricane intensity and detection data is problematic as one goes back in time, when reporting and observing practices were different than today, it is possible that we underestimated global hurricane energy during the 1970s.

Using a well-accepted metric called the Accumulated Cyclone Energy index or ACE for short (Bell and Chelliah 2006), which has been used by Klotzbach (2006) and Emanuel (2005) (PDI is analogous to ACE), and most recently by myself in Maue (2009) , simple analysis shows that 24-month running sums of global ACE or hurricane energy have plummeted to levels not seen in 30 years.

Figure: 24-month running sums of Accumulated Cyclone Energy.

Why use 24-month running sums instead of simply yearly values? Since a primary driver of the Earth’s climate from year to year is the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) acts on time scales on the order of 2-7 years, and the fact that the bulk of the Southern Hemisphere hurricane season occurs from October – March, a reasonable interpretation of global hurricane activity requires a better metric than simply calendar year totals. The 24-month running sums is analogous to the idea of “what have you done for me lately”. During the past 6 months, extending back to October of 2008 when the Southern Hemisphere tropical season was gearing up, global ACE had crashed due to two consecutive years of well-below average Northern Hemisphere hurricane activity. To avoid confusion, I am not specifically addressing the North Atlantic, which was above normal in 2008 (in terms of ACE), but the hemisphere (and or globe) as a whole. The North Atlantic only represents a 1/10 to 1/8 of global hurricane energy output on average but deservedly so demands disproportionate media attention due to the devastating societal impacts of recent major hurricane landfalls.

Why the record low ACE?

During the past 2 years +, the Earth’s climate has cooled under the effects of a dramatic La Nina episode. The Pacific Ocean basin typically sees much weaker hurricanes that indeed have shorter lifecycles and therefore — less ACE . Conversely, due to well-researched upper-atmospheric flow (e.g. vertical shear) configurations favorable to Atlantic hurricane development and intensification, La Nina falls tend to favor very active seasons in the Atlantic (El Nino years are the converse, with must less activity, as forecast by Gray and NOAA for 2009). Thus, the Western North Pacific (typhoons) tropical activity was well below normal in 2007 and 2008 (see table). Same for the Eastern North Pacific. The Southern Hemisphere, which includes the southern Indian Ocean from the coast of Mozambique across Madagascar to the coast of Australia, into the South Pacific and Coral Sea, saw below normal activity as well in 2008. During the 2008-2009 TC season, the Southern Hemisphere ACE was about half of what’s expected in a normal year, with a multitude of very weak, short-lived hurricanes. All of these numbers tell a very simple story: just as there are active periods of hurricane activity around the globe, there are inactive periods, and we are currently experiencing one of the most impressive inactive periods, now for almost 3 years.

Bottom Line

Under global warming scenarios, hurricane intensity is expected to increase (on the order of a few percent), but MANY questions remain as to how much, where, and when. This science is very far from settled. Indeed, Al Gore has dropped the related slide in his PowerPoint. Many papers have suggested that these changes are already occurring especially in the strongest of hurricanes due to warming sea-surface temperatures, but the methodology and data issues with each of these papers perhaps overshadows the conclusions. The notion that the overall global hurricane energy or ACE has collapsed does not contradict the recent climate change / TC linkage literature but provides an additional, perhaps less publicized piece of the puzzle. Indeed, the very strong interannual variability of global hurricane ACE (energy) highly correlated to ENSO, suggests that the role of tropical cyclones in climate is modulated very strongly by the big movers and shakers in large-scale, global climate. The perceptible (and perhaps measurable) impact of global warming on hurricanes in today’s climate is arguably a pittance (or noise) compared to the reorganization and modulation of hurricane formation locations and preferred tracks/intensification corridors dominated by ENSO (and other natural climate factors). Moreover, our understanding of the complicated role of hurricanes with and role in climate is nebulous to be charitable. We must increase our understanding of the current climate’s hurricane activity.

Ryan Maue’s Seasonal Tropical Cyclone Activity Update

Current Tropical Cyclones = 0

September 21: As far as I can tell using the best-tracks, the last day in September without Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE, Bell et al. 2000) being registered was September 24, 2003. During the past 20-years, *15* September days have not had an active tropical cyclone with *5* of those days occurring at the end of September 1999.

Through September 21, comparing 2009 to the previous 20 Septembers for NH ACE, the current total from the operational advisories of about 71 is one standard deviation below the 20-year mean (mean=117,sigma=36). These links are for two plots that show the yearly Northern Hemisphere ACE for September and the average ACE per day during the month.

Since daily ACE represents a 4-times daily sum of wind speed squared, an “average” September 21st could see one of the following (among other combos):

One TC at 125 knots

Two TCs at 90 knots

Three TCs at 70 knots or

Six TCs at 50 knots

Current TCs = 0

September 15: Global Hurricane Frequency [storms with maximum intensity greater than 64 knots] has dramatically collapsed during the past 2-3 years. When measured using 12 or 24 month running sums, the number of tropical cyclones at hurricane intensity is clearly at a 30-year low. HOWEVER, the number of tropical cyclones with intensity greater than 34-knots has remained at the 30-year average (83 storms per year). More on the distinction in an upcoming paper currently submitted for publication.

Global Tropical Cyclone ACE valid September 22, 2009 00Z

BASIN 2009 Current YEARLY CLIMO

Thru Oct 31

CLIMO

Thru Sep 30

CLIMO

Avg Sep

N Hemisphere 244.8 563 493.2 402.8 154
N Atlantic 41.6375 106 99.2 85.0 51.6
W Pacific 109.5 309 254.5 197.9 65.2
E Pacific 89.0625 132 130.1 112.6 36.8
N Indian 4.6 17 9.3 7.3 0.3
S Hemisphere 107 229 Out of Season
  • Northern Hemisphere ACE for the month of July struggled across the finish line, with the lowest recorded value since at least 1970. The monthly ACE value of 15.6 is truly remarkable in its ineptitude considering the average of the previous 40 years is 73! See text file for the previous 40-years ranked according to July ACE activity.
  • May – June – July Northern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Activity: the three month ACE sum for 2009 just missed being the lowest since at least 1970, by less than one ACE point behind the truly anomalous year of 1977.

    Sorted monthly data: Text File


  • Sponsored IT training links:

    Save best on your 1z0-048 exam with testking and get latest 000-153 questions and 70-448 practice test for fail safe exam preparation.


    0 0 votes
    Article Rating

    Discover more from Watts Up With That?

    Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

    96 Comments
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    September 22, 2009 1:43 pm

    What happens if you remove that positive bias (slope) in the temp graph and overlay them? You'd think that hurricane energy would be a nice proxu (with a lag/lead, I'm sure) for ocean temp, and yet there is a slope to yhe temp graph, and not the hurricane energy graph. Couldn't be that the temp graph has an "artificial" slope, could it??;

    timetochooseagain
    September 22, 2009 3:10 pm

    Abrew (13:43:00) : Why would there be a bias in the Sea Surface Temperatures? There are no air conditioners or cities over the oceans, and anyway as you can see from Bob Tisdale’s post here:
    http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/09/record-sea-surface-temperatures-are.html
    The general behavior of the satellite (SURFACE mind you not talking about UAH’s LT, but Satellite Sea SURFACE Temperatures!) and the various data-sets is similar.
    And as I said at:
    Andrew (07:25:42)
    The agreement with a detrended series is indicative of an ENSO signal.

    timetochooseagain
    September 22, 2009 3:19 pm

    MartinGAtkins (12:56:57) : Short term ACE in the Atlantic depends on ENSO conditions (evidently in the opposite way as the Pacific does, but then, the two basins are tightly link as far as activity goes. HOWEVER if you look at the long term ACE data, which is admittedly uncertain, in DOES look a bit like the AMO, with a lot of noise.
    http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_4CE_Hurricanes_files/image017.gif
    The reason for a lack of short term correlation is probably that, absent a volcanic eruption, the Atlantic is warmer during an El Nino BUT the wind shear is greater, thus destroying, on such occasions, the agreement you would normally get with multidecadal changes in SST in the Atlantic RELATIVE to other ocean basins. The increase in ACE since the 70’s is related to warming of the Atlantic, in that the Atlantic has warmed faster than other oceans. But that has nothing to do with Global Warming.

    kurt
    September 22, 2009 4:42 pm

    Can anyone here cogently explain the physical basis for the prediction that warming from CO2 would increase the frequency or strength of hurricanes? I would think that the opposite effect would occur.
    Hurricanes are essentially heat engines that transfer latent heat energy upwardly from the ocean into the atmosphere by evaporation. The kinetic energy from the falling rain that occurs after condensation then feeds the circular winds that in turn draw more heat from evaporation etc. so as to form a positive feedback loop. The critical thing, however is that this heat engine depends on the temperature differential between the surface of the ocean and the atmosphere above to provide the vertical convective loop. Though hurricanes strenthen when moving over warmer water, this is merely due to the fact that the horizontal temperature gradient of the atmosphere is not as steep, i.e. the temperature differential between the water and the atmosphere increases as the storm hits tropical waters; it is not the ocean temperature per se that drives the hurricane. This should come as no surprise given that water flow in a hose is driven by presssure differential rather than the absolute pressure at one end, current flows by voltage differentials etc.
    Since the source of anthropogenic global warming is ostensibly increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, it makes no sense to posit that over time the oceans will warm at a faster rate than the atmosphere above them. That’s like saying you can put a pot of water on a stove, turn on the burner, and the water will heat up fatster than the iron beneath it. To the contrary, if antropogenic global warming is occuring then it must cause the temperature of the atmosphere to rise faster than that of the oceans. The temperature differential that drives the hurricanes then should decrease, and hurricane strength should drop.
    Unfortunately, every article I have read that explains why hurricane strength is anticipated to increase merely cites the observed link between hurricane strength and ocean temperature, without explaining why CO2 would cause water tempertaures to rise more than that of the air above it. This therefore appears to me as a prime example of the left hand not knowing that the right hand is holding your head up your butt.

    Graeme Rodaughan
    September 22, 2009 4:52 pm

    Cassandra King (09:21:57) :
    Listening to Obama/Ban Ki Moon and the others it makes me wonder what it will take for them to confront reality?
    They seem under the influence of some kind of mass delusion which excludes reality and pragmatism, the longer they cling to to their faith the more foolish they are going to look when reality can no longer be denied.
    Do these ‘world leaders’ have an eye to their legacy I wonder? Do they understand that to make an error of this magnitude will ruin their reputations completely in the years to come, it just doesnt make sense to me.
    Surely they some inkling by now that all is not well with the AGW/MMCC/AAM theory and if they are not careful they are going to look pretty stupid, they must be very desperate to push this thing forward if they will risk so much to get it through regardless.

    They expect to Win and not be held Accountable.

    September 22, 2009 4:57 pm

    Anthony,
    Thanks for this great post – one of the best I have read on WUWT. Also, Jim Cantore should be ashamed for invoking global warming when dicussing a single flood event. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    kurt
    September 22, 2009 5:11 pm

    “TERRY46 (05:55:04) :
    Last night I was watching the weather channel and Jim Cantori was in Georgia. He was talking about all the rain they have had recently. He said and I repeat if this isn’t CLIMATE CHANGE I don’t know what is.”
    Read literally, Cantori’s statement sounds pretty accurate to me.

    September 22, 2009 6:54 pm

    Ryan Maue from Florida State University explains why

    Surely you mean he speculates as to why. They sure as hell don’t know.

    Thomas
    September 22, 2009 7:48 pm

    So how does Obama get away with saying that AGW is causing more extreme storms. It’s an outright lie, yet he mentions it again in his most recent speach (read it at nytimes)
    What a joke. Someone should really call this puppet out on his bullshit

    pete m
    September 22, 2009 8:04 pm

    kurt (16:42:32):
    Look at 2 scenarios:
    A – present – say the temperature differential is 15 degrees.
    B – global warming – increase air temp by 2 degrees, but oceans are not as fast, and lag, so increase them by 1 degree. The temperature differntial is then 16 degrees.
    So a higher temperature differential is the result and this means more hurricanes according to the basic premise that the higher the differntial the more storms etc. I don’t really agree, as it ignores other apsects of climate, but perhaps the energy sum would increase.
    One thing that everyone gets excited about is positive feedbacks and tipping points etc.
    One thing that I would like studied is the balancing nature of our climate (ie negative feedbacks). Our climate has a lot of checks and balances in it and these are not well understood imho.
    I’m all for reducing our emissions responsibly – it can only be a good thing to not be ignorant of our use of resources. But let’s not scare everyone into thinking our poor little climate is “fragile” etc.

    AEGeneral
    September 22, 2009 8:54 pm

    Ron de Haan (09:52:11) :
    Is there any legislation that could protect the public from hysterical and misleading media outages in the USA?

    Nope. We’re going to have to either buy them out & take over or prevent the government from bailing them out (which I’ve heard recently that they’re asking for) and force them into bankruptcy.
    As for the global warming/hurricane link, it’s depressing to read how many media articles regularly reference it as a foregone conclusion. It just makes my blood boil thinking about how many kids are being fed this in classrooms every day.
    There is a link between global warming & my blood boiling, however….

    Kurt
    September 22, 2009 10:48 pm

    pete m (20:04:01) :
    “Look at 2 scenarios:
    A – present – say the temperature differential is 15 degrees.
    B – global warming – increase air temp by 2 degrees, but oceans are not as fast, and lag, so increase them by 1 degree. The temperature differntial is then 16 degrees.”
    You have it backwards. Temperature decreases with altitude, meaning that the air above is cooler than that below. That is why warm, moist air rises until it cools to a temperature that squeezes the moisture out as rain. Were the air above to be warmer than the surface, hurricanes could not form. Thus, if the (cooler) air above warms by two degrees and the (warmer) sea surface warms by only one, then the differential in your scenario drops from 15 to 14, decreasing the strength of the hurricane.

    September 22, 2009 11:04 pm

    >>>Unfortunately, every article I have read that explains why
    >>>hurricane strength is anticipated to increase merely cites
    >>>the observed link between hurricane strength and ocean
    >>>temperature, without explaining why CO2 would cause
    >>>water tempertaures to rise more than that of the air above it.
    A similar observation to mine.
    Yes, to get a really good tropical storm, you need tropical warm waters and an arctic airflow above it, giving a huge temperature gradient in the atmosphere (low level warm air and freezing air above).
    A warm atmosphere will kill thermic activity dead.
    .

    p.g.sharrow "PG"
    September 23, 2009 12:36 am

    Maybe the propensity to fudge or round up the atmospheric temperature is causing the temperature to appear to ramp up as hurricane activity goes down. Sensor data from satellites is adjusted ( calibrated ) to match known surface data points.

    September 23, 2009 1:20 am

    What strikes me is the southern hemisphere values (ie global – northern hemisphere) are pretty consistent year to year, while NH fluctuates wildly. Is that really the case?

    Alan the Brit
    September 23, 2009 6:24 am

    Thank you Mr Watts. I thought it would be something like that, although for a moment I thought Dr Vicki Pope from the Met Office was running a version of her old little graph of global temps, which is aired every now & then, curiously stopped in 2007, demonstrating beyond a doubt the warming going on as usual, just before the 2008 temp step drop & further cooling in 09, so that the trend stayed positive!

    Charlie
    September 23, 2009 7:38 am

    The Resilient Earth blog has a link to an interesting paper on Water Vapor which includes a comment about models showing _lower_ cyclone potential for both warmer and cooler climates that today’s. http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/climate-models-blown-away-water-vapor
    “Both the eddy kinetic energy and the dry mean available
    potential energy have a maximum for a climate
    close to that of present day
    Earth and are smaller in
    much warmer and much colder climates”
    Ref: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0908/0908.4410v1.pdf , WATER VAPOR AND THE DYNAMICS OF CLIMATE CHANGES, by T Schneider, P O’Gorman, and X Levine. Page 14 of the pdf. Figure 8.

    MartinGAtkins
    September 23, 2009 8:42 am

    timetochooseagain (15:19:13) :
    MartinGAtkins (12:56:57) : Short term ACE in the Atlantic depends on ENSO conditions
    Reply is in new Cyclone thread.

    Joey Rosa
    September 23, 2009 10:26 am

    why is hurricanes are not effected by global warming can you tell me the details asap

    jcl
    September 24, 2009 6:22 am

    OK, I dumped these to tinypic:
    Hurricane energy versus temp (with temp slope removed for easier comparison)
    http://tinypic.com/r/2ivmwpd/4
    http://i36.tinypic.com/2ivmwpd.jpg
    It looked like they’d line up better with temp moved back one year so:
    Hurricane energy versus temp offset back on year (temp slope removed)
    http://tinypic.com/r/331kbjt/4
    http://i36.tinypic.com/331kbjt.jpg
    All of this of course means absolutely nothing, I just thought it was an interesting experiment….the skewed (by one year) temp graph seems to show some correlation with hurricane energy.
    jcl (12:55:37) :
    Just for kicks, I overlaid the hurricane and temp data (after removing the temp data slope), and it doesn’t line up that well. If you offset the temp data by a year, it doesn’t look too bad though. I don’t know how to include those charts/pics here (done in Excel).
    Jim
    REPLY: use a free image service like http://tinypic.com/ and put the URL to the image in your comments. It will auto-link.
    -Anthony

    MattN
    September 24, 2009 7:34 am

    Clemson University scientists also find no link between warming and stronger storms: http://www.southcarolinaradionetwork.com/2009/09/23/study-refutes-connection-of-global-warming-and-storm-intensity/

    Verified by MonsterInsights