NOAA press release below, gotta love the word “onslaught” added for dramatic effect. I’m sure Ryan Maue’s end season summary of hurricane ACE (Accumulated Cyclone Energy) for the 2010 will be forthcoming soon. – Anthony
Extremely Active Atlantic Hurricane Season was a ‘Gentle Giant’ for U.S.
NOAA’s Prediction for Active Season Realized; Slow Eastern Pacific Season Sets Record
November 29, 2010
Hurricanes Karl, Igor and Julia (from left to right on Sept. 16) were part of the onslaught of Atlantic storms this season.
Download here (Credit: NOAA)
According to NOAA the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season, which ends tomorrow, was one of the busiest on record. In contrast, the eastern North Pacific season had the fewest storms on record since the satellite era began.
In the Atlantic Basin a total of 19 named storms formed – tied with 1887 and 1995 for third highest on record. Of those, 12 became hurricanes – tied with 1969 for second highest on record. Five of those reached major hurricane status of Category 3 or higher.
These totals are within the ranges predicted in NOAA’s seasonal outlooks issued on May 27 (14-23 named storms; 8-14 hurricanes; 3-7 major hurricanes) and August 5 (14-20 named storms; 8-12 hurricanes; 4-6 major hurricanes). An average Atlantic season produces 11 named storms, six hurricanes and two major hurricanes.
Large-scale climate features strongly influenced this year’s hurricane activity, as they often do. This year, record warm Atlantic waters, combined with the favorable winds coming off Africa and weak wind shear aided by La Niña energized developing storms. The 2010 season continues the string of active hurricane seasons that began in 1995.
But short-term weather patterns dictate where storms actually travel and in many cases this season, that was away from the United States. The jet stream’s position contributed to warm and dry conditions in the eastern U.S. and acted as a barrier that kept many storms over open water. Also, because many storms formed in the extreme eastern Atlantic, they re-curved back out to sea without threatening land.
“As NOAA forecasters predicted, the Atlantic hurricane season was one of the most active on record, though fortunately most storms avoided the U.S. For that reason, you could say the season was a gentle giant,” said Jack Hayes, Ph.D., director of NOAA’s National Weather Service.
Other parts of the Atlantic basin weren’t as fortunate. Hurricane Tomas brought heavy rain to earthquake-ravaged Haiti, and several storms, including Alex, battered eastern Mexico and Central America with heavy rain, mudslides and deadly flooding.
Though La Niña helped to enhance the Atlantic hurricane season, it also suppressed storms from forming and strengthening in the eastern North Pacific. Of that region’s seven named storms this year, three grew into hurricanes and two of those became major hurricanes. This is the fewest named storms (previous record low was eight in 1977) and the fewest hurricanes (previous record low was four in 1969, 1970, 1977 and 2007) on record since the satellite era began in the mid-1960s. An average eastern North Pacific season produces 15 named storms, nine hurricanes and four major hurricanes.
NOAA’s National Weather Service is the primary source of weather data, forecasts and warnings for the United States and its territories. NOAA’s National Weather Service operates the most advanced weather and flood warning and forecast system in the world, helping to protect lives and property and enhance the national economy. Visit us online at weather.gov and on Facebook.
NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Visit us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/usnoaagov.
h/t to Chris Horner
Why don’t they just add up the cumulative power of all the named storms as to size and strength on some kind of Fugita like scale? 2005 would get something like 100 to the 10th power and 2010 would get 100 to the 5th power or something like that.
Yeah, well. We were predicted to have tornado’s and flash flooding here today. Got a little ( and I mean a little), rain. It’s all hype to sell advertising. End of story.
Agree w Frank K above. Many of those named storms should never have qualified as such. NOAA were a little trigger-happy in those cases, striving to hit their targets.
That’s why ACE is a much better metric, looking forward to Dr Maue’s analysis …..
A named or unnamed hurricane or tropical storm is meaningless. The total energy of those depressions would be a better measure. But that alone would not show the real picture. We would also need to put numbers on high pressure windless areas and see which side was more active… high or low pressure fronts?
Well, we’ve had a 30 year half cycle of warming that’s been putting energy into the oceans, and now we’ve started into the 30 year half cycle of cooling (as of about 1999/2000) so it will take a while for storms to suck that heat out of the oceans and dispose of it to the upper atmosphere and space. ( a 60 or so year total cycle, plus or minus a few years).
I would expect a lot of convective activity during the early part of that cycle, and a lot of rain… rather like we had in Mexico / Latin America recently.
That the storms are being steered out to sea and up north is the interesting bit to me.
Reminds me of what it was like 40 to 50 years ago… Then we had more hurricanes hitting places like New York City and Rhode Island. Hmmm…. wonder if that was the same part of the 60+ year cycle as now… and if we can look forward to fewer Florida and Texas hurricanes and more NYC ?…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Hurricane_of_1938
Lets see, that’s about the time the last hot cycle was ending ( 1934 )…..
Just saying…
I think I’ll wait for Ryan to come out with the ACE index before I give a harrumph or a hurrah. The ACE, not the count, tells you whether or not to get your undies in a bunch.
In this satellite era, so long as the criteria for slapping a name on a storm are applied consistently, I’ve no quarrel with the count. However, I do wish there was an asterisk in the books for the new satellite-enhanced records; something like they have in sports when there was a rule or equipment change.
Hmmm… part two:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/history.shtml#carol
If you look at the 40’s to ’50s there were a few in a row hitting up the east coast.
1944 had The Great Atlantic Hurricane.
1954 had Carol and Edna, followed by Hazel
1955 had Connie and Diane
an interesting list of notable ‘canes all going up the East Coast while leaving Florida and Texas to the small stuff. Then, in 1957 Audry hit Texas and in 1960 Donna ran over Florida – but then proceeded right up the coast to New England…
Only in 1969 (near the end of the cooling ice age scare 1/2 cycle) does the list turn to largely Florida and Texas events, holding that pattern until, well, 1999 with Floyd. Almost like something of importance flipped in 1999. Just saying…
I think if I lived on the East Coast on the shore I’d look to sell and move inland now…
And Florida looks like a reasonable time to buy…
Mike Jonas says:
November 29, 2010 at 12:10 pm
I’m not sure that the criticisms of NOAA wrt the Atlantic basin are fully justified. Direct number comparisons with earlier years may indeed be inappropriate, as James Sexton points out, ….
=======================================================
Mike, thanks for the acknowledgment, it’s appreciated. However, when NOAA makes statements such as “tied with 1887 and 1995 for third highest on record.”, we know this is completely disingenuous. And intentionally so.
“NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun,…”
No where in the mission statement do I see “to attempt to manipulate the public’s perception of weather occurrences to bring them to an inaccurate assessment of current climate conditions.”
LearDog says: “Agree w Frank K above. Many of those named storms should never have qualified as such. NOAA were a little trigger-happy in those cases, striving to hit their targets.”
Targets? What targets? You mean those broad-side-of-a-barn “seasonal outlooks?”
“14-23 named storms; 8-14 hurricanes; 3-7 major hurricanes” Jeesh.
A lot like predicting that the UCLA / USC game will end with either USC or UCLA winning. Not a whole lot of predictive skill with a range that big. Laughable, actually.
jorgekafkazar says:
November 29, 2010 at 1:02 pm
That’s what I was about to say. I garantee that next year there will be 1 to 30 storms forming in the atlantic all of which will pass near or over the USA, Mexico or the Cariabean
I recall someone’s getting riled with me when I scoffed at putting a hurricane label on a 30-40 mph blow-up. Heck, most weeks in Oklahoma, we have days with winds (gusts, anyway) that high. When you’re used to tornado wind speeds, it’s hard to get excited about 2-digit wind speeds – at least, when they’re less than 50 or 60. Around 60 mph, you start trying to remember if you’ve tied down (or brought in) the loose stuff in your yard, or at least written your house number on your trash cans.
On another angle, after I noticed the big, honking solar flare not long before Katrina got big, then I noticed hurricanes became less numerous and less severe after we got well into the current solar minimum. It sure looks like solar activity has _something_ to do with how the hurricane season goes.
Sitting here on the Treasure Coast of Florida where we haven’t been hit in 5 years and the previous hit was 80 years before that. And yet our insurance rates continue to rise and the AGW crowd continues to scream….
James Sexton – nicely put. I was really only issuing a caution against slamming NOAA simply because few storms hit the US. Some of NOAA’s language and attempts to talk things up are not defensible. “Gentle” giant?? Only because the giant happened not to call in.
Despite the number of storms they managed to name, total ACE was running considerably below average pretty late in the season. ACE is a far better measure of the intensity of a storm year and it’s been trending downward in recent years.
Ah, maybe they’re hoping a big ‘un hits NYC, so they can point to the “sea level” recorded while a low low pressure eye was surging at high tide and claim the rise.
Seriously, I shouldn’t be but I am amazed. Really? Hyping this hurricane season? Is that wise?
A few more of these things, and even the most vacuous fool will realize there’s nothing out of the ordinary…
This is plain silly. Hawaii was not even threatened. As for the Atlantic, most of the storms were only satellite visible or hitting the Islands. It was an active year for typhoons, though.
Why does NOAA bother trying to suppress good news?
#
If the data doesn’t fit, make it up.
#
Ray says:
November 29, 2010 at 11:29 am
That’s like the sunspot number where specs qualify as sunspots… in the case of “named” hurricanes, as soon as they saw a cloud twirl, they gave a name. It’s easy to win when you control the game.
———————————————-
Yes, and I understand they colluded with the Air Force planes to get false wind readings, and with the European Space Agency to generate fake satellite images.
Hm, what does Maue say — http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/atlantic.html
Can’t understand a word… Ah, here, looks about 160% of normal:
2010 Northern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Activity: ACE
Updated Nov 30, 2010
Basin Current YTD Climo YTD Calendar Year
North Atlantic 169.688 101 103
2010 Tropical Cyclones of the World
North Atlantic
Name Max Wind ACE
Alex 85 7.3725
TD02 30 0.0
Bonnie 35 0.49
Colin 50 2.6375
TD5 30 0.0
Danielle 115 21.805
Earl 120 27.9525
Fiona 55 3.2475
Gaston 35 0.3675
Hermine 55 1.3725
Igor 135 42.7975
Julia 115 14.47
Karl 105 6.0375
Lisa 70 4.2
Matthew 50 1.3
Nicole 35 0.1225
Otto 75 6.6125
Paula 85 7.0725
Richard 80 4.735
Shary 65 2.4575
Tomas 85 11.835
So it seems that with the naming of wimpy short-lived storms, they managed to beat Dr. Hansimian’s prediction of 6-8 named storms. Knew there must have been a valid reason. 😉
Why do scientists have no common sense whatsoever? What we want to know is the history of the hurricane season for the USA. We are the audience. Why do the scientists choose not to serve us? They should be reporting a USA hurricane season. It would include all hurricanes making landfall in the USA. If they want other reports, let them make other reports. But give us our USA hurricane report.
@Jakers:
I guess you missed the ‘remains at decades low’ for Global and NH ACE on http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/
I think people are overlooking the obvious … Insurance rates are calculated on named storms. So someone has their thumb on the scale for a reason, drive up insurance costs.
Targets? What targets? You mean those broad-side-of-a-barn “seasonal outlooks?”
“14-23 named storms; 8-14 hurricanes; 3-7 major hurricanes” Jeesh.
A lot like predicting that the UCLA / USC game will end with either USC or UCLA winning. Not a whole lot of predictive skill with a range that big. Laughable, actually.
————————————————————————————–
Exactly. How many hurricane seasons were outside of those ranges? Not many I’m guessing.
There’s a strong correlation between the ACE index and the AMO. It diverges a tad around the 1940’s.
http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt74/MartinGAtkins/No-Atl-ACE-1.jpg
They appear to be inadvertently comparing the 2010 hurricane season to those of a couple of very cool periods that sparked concerns about an impending ice age. And they may be unwittingly right.
Theo Goodwin makes an excellent point. And before satellite images showing off-shore storms, how did the USA count hurricanes anyway?