Press release: http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html
NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
According to NOAA scientists, 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year of the global surface temperature record, beginning in 1880. This was the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average. For the contiguous United States alone, the 2010 average annual temperature was above normal, resulting in the 23rd warmest year on record.
This preliminary analysis is prepared by scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., and is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.
2010 Global Climate Highlights:
- Combined global land and ocean annual surface temperatures for 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest such period on record at 1.12 F (0.62 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence (to the 95 percent level) associated with the combined surface temperature is +/- 0.13 F (+/- 0.07 C).*
- The global land surface temperatures for 2010 were the warmest on record at 1.80 F (1.00 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence associated with the land surface temperature is +/- 0.20 F (+/- 0.11 C).
- Global ocean surface temperatures for 2010 tied with 2005 as the third warmest on record, at 0.88 F (0.49 C) above the 20th century average. The range of confidence associated with the ocean surface temperature is +/- 0.11 F (+/- 0.06 C).
- In 2010 there was a dramatic shift in the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), which influences global temperature and precipitation patterns — when a moderate-to-strong El Niño transitioned to La Niña conditions by July. At the end of November, La Niña was moderate-to-strong.
- According to the Global Historical Climatology Network, 2010 was the wettest year on record, in terms of global average precipitation. As with any year, precipitation patterns were highly variable from region to region.
- The 2010 Pacific hurricane season had seven named storms and three hurricanes, the fewest on record since the mid-1960s when scientists started using satellite observations. By contrast, the Atlantic season was extremely active, with 19 named storms and 12 hurricanes. The year tied for third- and second-most storms and hurricanes on record, respectively.
- The Arctic sea ice extent had a record long growing season, with the annual maximum occurring at the latest date, March 31, since records began in 1979. Despite the shorter-than-normal melting season, the Arctic still reached its third smallest annual sea ice minimum on record behind 2007 and 2008. The Antarctic sea ice extent reached its eighth smallest annual maximum extent in March, while in September, the Antarctic sea ice rapidly expanded to its third largest extent on record.
- A negative Arctic Oscillation (AO) in January and February helped usher in very cold Arctic air to much of the Northern Hemisphere. Record cold and major snowstorms with heavy accumulations occurred across much of eastern North America, Europe and Asia. The February AO index reached -4.266, the largest negative anomaly since records began in 1950.
- From mid-June to mid-August, an unusually strong jet stream shifted northward of western Russia while plunging southward into Pakistan. The jet stream remained locked in place for weeks, bringing an unprecedented two-month heat wave to Russia and contributing to devastating floods in Pakistan at the end of July.
U.S. Climate Highlights:
- In the contiguous United States, 2010 was the 14th consecutive year with an annual temperature above the long-term average. Since 1895, the temperature across the nation has increased at an average rate of approximately 0.12 F per decade.
- Precipitation across the contiguous United States in 2010 was 1.02 inches (2.59 cm) above the long-term average. Like temperature, precipitation patterns are influenced by climate processes such as ENSO. A persistent storm track brought prolific summer rain to the northern Plains and upper Midwest. Wisconsin had its wettest summer on record, and many surrounding states had much above-normal precipitation. Since the start of records in the U.S. in 1895, precipitation across the United States is increasing at an average rate of approximately 0.18 inches per decade.
- The year began with extremely cold winter temperatures and snowfall amounts that broke monthly and seasonal records at many U.S. locations. Seasonal snowfall records fell in several cities, including Washington; Baltimore, Md., Philadelphia; Wilmington, Del.; and Atlantic City, N.J. Several NOAA studies established that this winter pattern was made more likely by the combined states of El Niño and the Arctic Oscillation.
- Twelve states, mainly in the Southeast, but extending northward into New England, experienced a record warm June-August. Several cities broke summer temperature records including New York (Central Park); Philadelphia; Trenton, N.J.; and Wilmington, Del.
- Preliminary totals indicate there were 1,302 U.S. tornadoes during 2010. The year will rank among the 10 busiest for tornadoes since records began in 1950. An active storm pattern across the Northern Plains during the summer contributed to a state-record 104 confirmed tornadoes in Minnesota in 2010, making Minnesota the national tornado leader for the first time.
- During 2010, substantial precipitation fell in many drought-stricken regions. The U.S. footprint of drought reached its smallest extent during July when less than eight percent of the country was experiencing drought conditions. The increased precipitation and eradication of drought limited the acres burned and number of wildfires during 2010. Hawaii had near-record dryness occurring in some areas for most of the year.
Scientists, researchers and leaders in government and industry use NOAA’s monthly reports to help track trends and other changes in the world’s climate. This climate service has a wide range of practical uses, from helping farmers know what and when to plant, to guiding resource managers‘ critical decisions about water, energy and other vital assets.
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 online at www.noaa.gov or on Facebook at www.facebook.com/usnoaagov.
###
Is Climatic Data Center, pretty much the same thing as Climactic Data Center. Seems like these guys peddle more of the latter, than the former; just an observation on my part.
This is truely remarkable. 2010 tied with 2005 for the warmest year despite a moderate El Niño, a very strong La Niña and the lowest solar minimum in a long time. I suspect 2012 might be off the charts, when the sun picks up again and La Niña has gone, barring a massive volacno erruption.
As to the UHI, there’s no such thing in the troposphere. RSS and UAH show the same warming trend, and Dr.Spencer has confirmed that 2010 is on par with 1998 (warmest year in the satellite based data set).
Is it just me(and the voices in my head) or does US government appear to be a total con?
The Treasury sells debt and the Fed buys it back a month later paying stiff comissions.
Warmest year ever? You, NOAA, lie.
1) Isn’t the NCDC data the same data demonstrated by peer reviewed science to have “an estimated warm bias of about 30%”?
2) USA data tell a different story</a (especially when different eyes examine the same data).
To Billd: Look at any, or all of the temperature records and show me where there has been any “substantial warming” since the turn of the centry (sic)? It pays to look at the data before drawing a conclusion.
Second attempt with the HTML error corrected:
1) Isn’t the NCDC data the same data demonstrated by peer reviewed science to have “an estimated warm bias of about 30%”?
2) USA data tell a different story (especially when different eyes examine the same data).
Is this like saying that some of the highest altitudes on planet earth can be found up in the mountains. ? If we have just come through a short period; (since the coming ice age scare of the late 1970s) of global warming; which seems to have about stalled around 1995, so we seem to be at some sort of local maximum; would one not expect higher Temperatures to be clustered around such a maximum.
Isn’t it likely, that when we reach the next era of coming ice age scare with “unprecedented” (lately) low Temperatures; that government (taxpayer) granted researchers will note the clustering of low Temperatures about that next minimum ??
What if they say the truth. What would it happen to their jobs?. We should consider this. Have to eat ya know….
The UAH data are far more reliable than NCDC data.
Can anybody examine the UAH data and conclude that it would be a good idea to waste $45 TRILLION in an utterly futile effort to micromanage climate change?
Didn’t Kyoto quantify the abject folly of that nonsense? We can spend all the money in the world and never even be able to measure the warming (allegedly) prevented.
Here is an “inconvenient truth” which the government employees at NOAA will never publicize:
Both the Arctic AND the Antarctic are experiencing an on-going, uninterrupted 10,000 year cooling trend wherein the latest warming is proven to be not even close to being outside the bounds of natural variation.
The citation links and more details are found here and here.
I dont know how many people have bothered to check the original data from NCDC. Something distinctly fishey is going on. We do not have the data for December from NCDC yet, but we have an annual report. I wonder why.
Typically NCDC data comes out on or about the 15th of the next month; e.g. December’s data is expected around 15th January. This is only the 12th. Last month we did not get November’s data until after Christmas. If we read the NCDC data carefully, the average for 2010 from Jan to Nov is 0.64 C. The average for the whole of 2010 is given as 0.62 C. If these figures are right, it implies that Decemeber’s value is 0.40 C!! If this is true, then this represents a considerable reduction from all other months in 2010.
So it appears that NCDC are playing politics. They are releasing this ANNUAL report, BEFORE they issue the December report, because they know that when the December report comes out it will show that global temperatures are starting the expected drop; we are in a La Nina year.
It will be interesting to see when NCDC releases the Decemebr data. It ought to be late this week, or early next week. Maybe we wont see it until late in January, so as to give maximum coverage to the idea that 2010 waa the warmest on record, and not reveal that December’s data indicates that global temperatures are starting to fall significantly
In the UK 2010 mean temp was the 256th “warmest” since records began in 1659.
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat.
The mean temp was the same in 1659 as in 2010.! So clearly not “global”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/8255922/Tags-created-to-help-penguins-could-be-killing-them.html
Sorry if it is off topic. Just another climate nuttiness to amuse you all.
If seems that tag penguins are dying in greater numbers than non tagged penguins.
:”Responses of flipper-banded penguins to climate variability differ from non-banded birds.”
Of course they ‘found’ that the climate ‘crisis’ goes on. Look how much funding depends on it, and this is just the tip of the iceberg:
http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/6250/Climate-Change-Skeptics-are-Stooges-for-Big-Oil
Meanwhile Australia especially Queensland is experiencing catastrophic flooding courtesy of a strong La Nina. Weather is not climate; but still it is not reassuring that our own climate mavens confidently predicted more drought in future. Not in this part of it.
The measure in tenths and report in hundredths (violation of math rule #1). The temperature will continue to rise while the world freezes because:
#1 – they hide the data
#2 – they own the “adjustments”
Most people will realize that cold is cold – no matter how hot they want to “adjust” the temperature to.
Even if we accept that 2010 is the joint warmest year in the surface temperature record, it is a mere 1.02C (0.3% in absolute terms) warmer than the coldest year (1907).
Is that even statistically significant?
I wonder why there are people around who think it is important for us mortals to believe that the earth is still warming up.
If it does, then all is well and good, but only the most gullible will take that as proof that CO2 is causing that warming.
Or even of any cooling, which is very likely to follow next.
I have come more and more to appreciate Dr Kevin Trenberth’s official NOAA/NASA/NCDC “Global Energy Budget” cartoon graph with its gaudy colors.
Too bad it is not all inclusive, since it doesn’t say word one about either thermal conduction or convection in the earth’s oceans; which after all, are the d(r)epositoty of most of the earth’s energy receipts from the sun; but that issue aside, it is at least a listing of a whole host of important thermal energy transport processes, that are involved in the earth’s weather, and climate phenomena.
Trenberth should update his drawing to separate those myriad energy transport processes into their two natural super groups, that are of interest to scientists and governments all around the globe; and the subject of endless talk and haranguing.
Those two groups, are the group of processes that are the cause and bailiwick of Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption; and the far less important group of processes that have NO connection to Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption whatsoever.
The first, most important group, involves ONLY the Non-Condensing greenhouse gases such as CO2, O3, CH4, and many others too numerous to mention.
This group is also very special, in that the ONLY energy transport processes that are involved in Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption is Long Wave Electromagnetic Radiation in the spectral range from a minimum of about 4.0 microns wavelength, (and more likely 4.5 to 5.0 microns) up to about 80 microns or 100 microns tops.
No other energy transport processes are caused by, or contribute significantly to Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption. In particular since none of the evil members of this terror gases category are “condensing”; and we know CO2 isn’t since we already did that dry ice snow fiasco, way back when; until Phil disabused us of that silly idea; then we need not mention ever again “LATENT HEAT”, which is a property only of condensing atmospheric gases such as H2O for example; which also happens to differ from CO2, in that whereas CO2 persists in the atmosphere for around 200 years; although some say for as much as 1000 years; H2O is a permanent component of the earth’s atmosphere, and is always present everywhere in the atmosphere; and virtually always in amounts far in excess of the CO2 abundance.
One thing we can be comfortable with as regards the theory of “Black Body Radiation”, is that NO material, can radiate at a higher spectral radiant emittance; at any wavelength, than can a “black Body” at the same Temperature.
Since a 288 K BB has its spectral peak emittance at about 10.1 microns, then a 333 K BB (+60 deg C / 140 deg F) peaks at about 8.7 microns. Half of that is 4.35 microns; so we can be quite confident, that considerably less than 1% of all of the Long Wave Thermal Infra-Red radiation that interracts with the Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption non-condensing culprits lies at less than 4.35 microns wavelength.
This is important, because CO2 has important IR absorption bands at 2.7 microns, and lower, as well as a 4.0 micron region band and we can be quite confident, that the only significant source of EM radiant energy in those bands, is the sun; almost none is emitted from the earth surface, or the atmosphere.
So to the extent, that CO2 absorbs EM radiant energy at around 4.0 microns, and below, that energy has to be original raw incoming solar radiation, and its capture by CO2 results in LESS solar energy reaching earth’s surface; so for that range of energy wavelengths, CO2 like condensing H2O, is a COOLING influence on the earth, instead of a Man-MadeGreenhouse Gas CausedGlobal WarmingClimateChangeCatastrophic Climate Disruption influence.
I just thought you would find that interesting.
Dear NOAA
Your “confidence intervals” are total BS.
When can we expect NOAA to start gathering and reporting actual unfudged data?
It may be the warmest year on your planet but that isn’t what we experienced here on Earth.
[snip – heated rhetoric – tone it down and resubmit please -moderator]
Who is in charge of NOAA ? Who choose her to be in that position ? Did she need to make socalled commitments , promises , to get this job ? Was it that 2010 needed to be the hottest year on record ? When was that trumpeted around ? May , april 2010 or even earlier ? Why do not they give proof of their statements to the taxpayer who is paying them ? What did Somerset Maughan remark about statements lacking details ? Why did Winston Churchill not trust statistics ? The US congress should be putting these and more questions to the NOAA burocracy probably asking for more subsidies for next season before disaster happens . From my point of view shit only happens .
The stories in newspapers should be “No Global Warming – For the last 16 years there has been no statistical increase in global temperatures. This is consistent with the growing perception that climate models predicting increased temperatures as a result of growing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are inaccurate.”
But I bet no one prints that.
Good to see that this inconvenient bit of evidence hasn’t stopped the denial here.
I do believe that the recent years since 1998 include the warmest on record. The cause of these very warm years really is global warming but it isn’t what they think it is. Satellite records show a step warming that started with the super El Nino of 1998, raised global temperature by a third of a degree in four years, and then stopped. Its cause was not any greenhouse effect but the huge amount of warm water brought over by the super El Nino. A third of a degree is fully half of what has been allotted to the entire twentieth century so it should show up as a noticeable warming of the climate. The warming itself was over by 2002 and was followed by a six year warm period I call the twenty-first century high. Nothing happened because the warm water lingered and suppressed a La Nina that should have appeared about 2004. When warm water had partly dissipated the 2008 La Nina cooling arrived and caused much puzzlement at CRU as Climategate emails showed. Carbon dioxide had been going up and computer predictions of warming had been going up during this period but nothing happened. And then a sudden cooling. Trenbertth called it a travesty that they could not understand this cooling. But if you understand something about ENSO you would know that the cooling simply signified the resumption of ENSO oscillations that the arrival of the 1998 super El Nino had disrupted. It has since been followed by the 2010 El Nino and the next La Nina is already well on the way. Expect such alternation of El Ninos and La Ninas indefinitely into the future and do not expect any anthropogenic temperature rise whatsoever. Ferenc Miskolczi has shown that the optical thickness of the atmosphere in the infrared band (where carbon dioxide absorbs) has been constant for the last 61 years. This means that addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere for all these years has had no effect on the transparency of the atmosphere to heat radiation from below. Or, to put it in other words, the greenhouse absorption signature of the added carbon dioxide is simply missing. Do not expect it to warm up the world. This explains why satellite temperature measurements show that there was no warming in the eighties and nineties until the super El Nino arrived. And why the twenty-first century high was a warm period but there was no additional warming as Trenberth expected. There was no such additional warming because it was made impossible by Miskolczy’s observations.