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.
###
Does anyone have the original before any adjustments 1934 temps?
If you do, how does 2010 really compare?
Julian in Wales
Yes. Urban and rural regions show the same warming trend.
The AGW or no AGW, most of us here in London welcome our ‘local’ GW in the last few days. Tonight night temperature is predicted to be +11C equalling the average for the June’s night time temperatures.
Hooray!
[George E. Smith says: January 12, 2011 at 12:22 pm]
I’m sorry, but I don’t quite follow the point that Mr. Smith is making.
True, the CO2 absorption bands at 2.7 and 4 microns would interact only with solar radiation. But these absorption windows are saturated, insensitive to current CO2 concentration. Their effect on insolation is essentially constant. As a result, there is no “cooling” effect, since an equilibrium temperature would be reached and would not change. (In any case, the term “cooling” should be reserved for processes that transport heat from the Earth into space.)
However, the CO2 absorption bands at longer wavelengths (notably 10 microns) are not saturated, and it is arguable that increases in CO2 concentration could shift the temperature equilibrium upwards, ever so infinitesimally. I don’t personally accept that this theoretical effect has a conclusive signature in the data. (And I personally believe that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is completely determined by the gas chemistry balance with the oceans. Nothing we can do will alter what that equilibrium is. Human combustion of carbonaceous fuels is irrelevant; Le Chatlier’s Principle will drive the process in whatever direction it needs to go, in order to preserve the equilibrium.)
Finally, I continue to be puzzled why anyone dwells on the subject of latent heat of water. Yes, the thermodynamics of water evaporation and condensation controls heat transport within the atmosphere, from region to region, and altitude to altitude. But it has no meaning in the question of radiative balance of the Earth, between insolation from the Sun and radiation to outer space. Radiation will always transport through the atmosphere far faster than convective processes (compare the speed of light to the speed of sound, which is a good proxy for the mean thermal speed of air molecules), even if it has to follow an indirect path upward.
We all know this to be true from personal experience. If I walk from indoors into broad summer daylight, my sunward side heats up fast, regardless of air temperature. Similarly, if I am in the desert on a very sunny winter day, and step into shadow, I get an instant chill all over. It is the Earth that heats the air, not the other way around, and the Sun that heats the Earth.
Dominic Bernardin (January 12, 2011 at 12:40 pm):
1) “this has got to be the most ill-informed, mislead, and outright stupid message board i have ever seen.”
Why? Because we have the audacity to question purely political propaganda? What ever happened to the slogan “dissent is patriotic”? Oh, yeah… that was Leftist dissent.
2) “actually study the real raw data”
I have. Here’s what I found:
A) Peer reviewed science demonstrates said data to have “an estimated warm bias of about 30%”.
B) Peer reviewed science shows that 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.
3) “look up the atmospheric composition of Venus”
A) Yeah, click here and let’s explore the science instead of the propaganda.
B) Of greater interest is the closely correlated warming trend on Mars. That warming trend began shortly after we landed a spacecraft on Mars — so, I guess humans are to blame, eh?
4) “[Dominic thinks we believe] CO2 is not a greenhouse gas”
A) Well, “greenhouse gas” is an utterly misleading description, but nobody denies the physics.
B) The problem is that everybody admits CO2 alone could NEVER generate enough warming to cause ANY concern. That’s why the purely political propagandists at the IPCC had to ASSUME water vapor would respond in such a way as to create runaway global warming.
Unfortunately (for the propagandists) more and more peer reviewed science is demonstrating this ASSUMPTION to be not merely incorrect, but entirely upside down.
5) Dominic, take a little advice…
When selecting a “message board” to pollute with your purely political propaganda, you’re better off selecting one less frequented by actual scientists.
Click here for some basic climate change science.
Click here to debunk the hysteria topic by topic.
if things weren’t going up, they would be coming down.
Still waiting for the disapperance of cold, snow winters (something the Alarmists have been predicting for almost 10 years). Last Friday through Monday broke all records in South Bend Indiana for 4 day snow falls (39 inches -almost all Lake Effect snows). Since the 2007 IPCC publications, our winters are slowly, but steadily becoming colder and snowier.
Dashiell
I find it remarkable how people on this site are able to continue denying in the face of such evidence.
“Or look up the atmospheric composition of Venus, and its temperatures, note how the side that is in darkness for about a year is still so warm, then say CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.”
_____________________________________________________________
Aha! Some warmist dumbass trotting out the old “Yes, but look at what has happened on Venus BS”.
FYI, Venus’ atmosphere is composed of 95% CO2 (the Earth is 0,04%), is nearly 1000% thicker than the Earth’s and it receives over 50% more solar radiation than the Earth.
Other than that, it’s a really good comparison.
SBVOR
Comments like
appear to be all too common here, and they go unchallenged. What difference does it make what this poster sees out of his or her window, wherever that window might be?
Ferderik Wisse: Dr Jane Lubchenco, formerly a zoology professor at Ore St U, is the director of NOAA.
Arno Arrak
Indeed, the last decade was the warmest ever recorded, according to all of the major temperature records, beating the record set by the previous decade (that beat the record set by the decade before that). This warming trend is significant and it is undeniable.
Roger Otip sez:
“I find it remarkable how people on this site are able to continue denying in the face of such evidence.”
1) I thought you alarmists were fond of lecturing us on climate vs. weather. Was 2010 climate or weather? What about 2008?
2) In my view, climate can only be assessed by examining — at the very least — 10,000 year trends. Personally, I prefer to examine trends over the last 423,000 years.
Click here and here and do both. Then, come back and tell me what the “evidence” has to say.
Who’s the denier now?
Best leave it to those who do then, Bob.
Hottest year ever? Leave to an American government agency to come up with that, and with how to word an alarming as possbile list of global warming horror.
I believe that there are a lot of entries in this blog that reveal minimal knowledge of the various temperature series. NOAA is not GISS — although GISS takes data from NOAA. NOAA does not have the same adjustments as GISS. If my memory serves me correctly, NOAA is adjusted for TOBS (time of observation), but not for UHI. The TOBS adjustment adds an increasing trend to the raw data. Theoretically, a sound UHI adjustment would insert a decreasing trend to raw data. Therefore, we would expect the NOAA trend to be ta higher than one adjusted for UHI. I trust that worthy individuals will correct my memory if it is wrong.
Dominic Bernardin says: January 12, 2011 at 12:40 pm
You’re looking at yourself in a mirror Dominic. I’ll leave others to answer the data accusations you make. As to Venus, it emits more energy than it absorbs… Think, if you can. If Venus emits more energy than it absorbs, it has to have an internal source of heat … so of course the atmosphere is hot… so of course it is also hot on its night side. Doesn’t implicate CO2 at all because all CO2 does is modulate heat, it is not a source of heat. Stupid Hansen not to grasp the implications of this information when it became available. And you?
What is so odd about having above (or below) average years in a row? What would be odd would be having a much above average years and much below average years going back and forth.
The idea that we have a reliable ‘global’ temperature back to 1880 that can be parsed to tenths of a degree is nonsensical. The idea that we have a global sea surface temperature back to 1880 that we can parse to tenths of a degree is simply laughable.
tonyb
Did I miss the new dust bowl?
Pity 2010 wasn’t the clear-cut winner. How much hotter was it than the previous hottest year ever? How much CO2 have we put in the air since the previous hottest year ever? Divide one number by the other, and we have the rate at which CO2 is disrupting the climate. Is this number alarming?
I’ll bet sea level must have risen like crazy, during the hottest year ever! Right?
Best,
Frank
NPR
Last Year: The Warmest Year On Record (Again)
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/12/132865502/last-year-was-the-warmest-year-on-record-again
And they are still using the old study too.
Study Busts Antarctica’s Chill On Global Warming
Antarctica is an anomaly no longer. Like the rest of Earth, it’s warming, according to new data.
Roger Otip says to Julian in Wales
Roger, that’s John Cook’s website geared to only showing evidence favouring AGW. Therefore it’s not true science, which has to show all relevant evidence – at least, good representative evidence from all sides.
First, Cook says “The skeptic argument says: A paper by Ross McKitrick, an economics professor at the University of Guelph, and Patrick Michaels, an environmental studies professor at the University of Virginia, concludes that half of the global warming trend from 1980 to 2002 is caused by Urban Heat Island. (McKitrick & Michaels)”
But Cook doesn’t even rebut this argument, he simply ignores it and refers to the infamous Jones-Wang paper. FYI there is a longstanding dispute from skeptics over the data used in this paper – data from Wang from China – which you can read about at Climate Audit and other places, if you care to.
In addition, several studies (unofficial & non-funded as well as McKitrick & Michaels) show clearly that UHI has risen over time and that urban centres show drastic temperature rises where their truly rural neighbours show no change at all. Search WUWT.
Also check out McKitrick and Michaels direct – again, here, for starters.
I’d like to see a graph or two, simple visuals, like Joe d’Aleo’s updated (updating overdue, Joe?), or maybe all four records, or maybe what all four records said ten/twenty years ago overlaying what they say right now: have they rewritten history as well as cocked a snoot at the multiple causes of data degradation tending to show too much heat? Do we have graphs done ten/twenty years ago, to put GISS to the test? Remember those beautiful urban/rural pairs that that kid did here?
Michael J. Dunn says January 12, 2011 at 1:23 pm
And if in the same desert you emerge from a swimming pool and stand in full sunlight at 140 degrees F and zero humidity you will also get an instant and far greater chill. Try it sometime, you might learn something.