It was only a matter of time. NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth plays the never ending blame game.
Scientists see climate change link to Australian floods
SINGAPORE (Reuters) – Climate change has likely intensified the monsoon rains that have triggered record floods in Australia’s Queensland state, scientists said on Wednesday, with several months of heavy rain and storms still to come.
But while scientists say a warmer world is predicted to lead to more intense droughts and floods, it wasn’t yet possible to say if climate change would trigger stronger La Nina and El Nino weather patterns that can cause weather chaos across the globe.
“I think people will end up concluding that at least some of the intensity of the monsoon in Queensland can be attributed to climate change,” said Matthew England of the Climate Change Research Center at the University of New South Wales in Sydney.
“The waters off Australia are the warmest ever measured and those waters provide moisture to the atmosphere for the Queensland and northern Australia monsoon,” he told Reuters.
…
The rains have been blamed on one of the strongest La Nina patterns ever recorded. La Nina is a cooling of ocean temperatures in the east and central Pacific, which usually leads to more rain over much of Australia, Indonesia and other parts of Southeast Asia.
This is because the phenomena leads to stronger easterly winds in the tropics that pile up warm water in the western Pacific and around Australia. Indonesia said on Wednesday it expected prolonged rains until June.
…
Prominent U.S. climate scientist Kevin Trenberth said the floods and the intense La Nina were a combination of factors.
He pointed to high ocean temperatures in the Indian Ocean near Indonesia early last year as well as the rapid onset of La Nina after the last El Nino ended in May.
“The rapid onset of La Nina meant the Asian monsoon was enhanced and the over 1 degree Celsius anomalies in sea surface temperatures led to the flooding in India and China in July and Pakistan in August,” he told Reuters in an email.
He said a portion, about 0.5C, of the ocean temperatures around northern Australia, which are more than 1.5C above pre-1970 levels, could be attributed to global warming.
===========================================================
Read the entire news article here
Below is the Nino3.4 index from the WUWT Enso/Sea level page here
Note that in late 2007 and early 2008, a La Niña even deeper than the one we are in now occurred. Now we are quickly coming off a strong El Niño, so no doubt there would be some heat left in SST’s and some additional water vapor in the region. The current SST image shows it rather warm around Australia. Of course, it is summer there. You can also see the current strong La Niña in blue
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Robuk says:
January 13, 2011 at 10:23 am
I will post this once more, notice dates 1918, 1954 and 1991 and today,
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Australianfloods3.jpg”
Come on now, you’re smarter than that. Those dates are 1918, 1954, and 1991. We are talking about the WORST FLOOD IN THE 21ST CENTURY!!!! Not the 20th century. To prove my globull warming thesis, we’re only considering data back to Jan 1, 2000.
So go bury your 20th century data! It has no place in this discussion…./big sarc off
I wonder if he would suggest, as indirectly, it was global warming back in the early 90′ too, and global cooling in the 70′.
It seems a somewhat 20 years natural cycles in flooding is at an end, ’cause this cycle was mann made?
It is ironic that where my folks live their dammed up river system has never flooded to disaster in the last 70 years because they didn’t go cheap on the design and infrastructure. Other places in my country, with dammed up river systems from the same era, hasn’t been as “fortunate” and the only difference, they went cheap to save money, but, however, obviously not for a rainy day.
Peter Plail –
BBC World Service Have Your Say changes the BBC stance. btw this program was painful to listen to, with the BBC presenter desperately looking for CAGW confirmation and mostly being rebuuffed by the people interviewed (not the public calling in) in the various countries. the presenter would say to the Sao Paulo individual, this must be a surprise at this time of year, “no surprise” the Sao Paulo man says, we get these rains at this time of year blah blah. BBC managed to throw in 3 alleged emails from listeners in African countries just after the half-hour mark, all linking these natural disasters to “CC”.
in the runup, the presenter says the disasters are caused by La Nina, but the extreme nature of the disasters caused many people to ask (really, which people?) if they were due to “CC”, as if El Nino/La Nina were not “CC”:
13 Jan: Ben Allen: BBC World Have Your Say: The power of La Nina
There’s massive flooding in Australia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines and now Brazil with many hundreds dead and millions affected. Meanwhile, drought is leading to a spike in food prices in Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay..
Many of you will probably want to know if this is linked to climate change, well according to Reuters’ Climate Change Correspondent David Fogarty the jury is still out:
“Some computer climate models tend to show a future trend toward more El Nino episodes as the world warms.
Climate scientists say it will be some years before a clearer pattern is likely to emerge. By then computers will be much more powerful to run detailed, high-resolution simulations to test the impacts of warmer oceans and atmosphere over time-scales of several decades to a century.
Scientists say a warmer world will mean more extreme droughts and floods and possible sudden shifts in ocean or atmospheric patterns, with devastating impacts.”
Have you been affected by La Nina? Should we be more prepared for such weather patterns? ..
comment: Donnamarie in Switzerland wrote:
I’ve never been affected by a La Nina, but as a native Californian I like to have drowned in any number of El Nino events. No one outside the meterological and climatology fields ever heard of El Nino until the early 1980’s, with La Nina not far behind.
These events have been growing stronger as time goes by. All anyone who is skeptical about climate change has to do is to look back at how these events have grown stonger and stronger over the past 30 years–and beware of what these events will bring in the future!!…
comment: Mers in Oregon wrote:
I beseech the commentators – please please please don’t confuse “weather” with “climate.” The words are not interchangable…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/
I am forecasting a drop in the solar signal from around mid Feb through March, this should increase precipitation again for Australia.
Fair play to the BBC so far they have attrbuted blame to la nina….. but now with Brazil and sri lanka floodsit is only a matter of time before CC is introduced to the reports!
From SMH, another little piece, much the same:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/its-time-to-talk-of-climate-change-20110113-19pr3.html
http://s446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/?action=view¤t=AustralianFloodsshort.mp4
A whole series of things are all coming together for the first time in 30 years.
What are all?, he mentions only La nina and El nino.
The SOI over recent months just prior these floods has been at it’s highest levels since……(wait for it)……..late 1973/early 1974 when the last similar, but worse flooding event occurred. Although recent high levels have last 2 more months longer already then back in 1974. The longer these levels stay high it was only a matter of time.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/soihtm1.shtml
Michael
In regard to the smh article you refer to.
When one looks at the long-term temp records in Australia, the 1860-1880s period seems to be much warmer than today. The early 1890s were some of the wettest years on record (Brisbane’s biggest flood was 1893) and then this was followed by the Federation drought from 1895 – 1902. In fact, the 2 driest years in the last 110 years appear to be 1902 and 1905.
I don’t know how these people can make those claims without reference to the historical records which are there for all to see. It’s just fraud.
I was just watching ABC News (American). It was pronounced that we have proof of global warming because of the floods in the SH and snow in the NH. I have to wash out my mouth now and flush the vomit.
I would like to put forward an alternative view which I believe deserves serious consideration.
I recomment that we encourage the AGW Team of Climate Experts (AWGTCE) to start a daily “weather is not climate” service.
Their forecast for Sydney today for example could read “fine with 0.00002739% risk of a scattered, late, light, evening shower (clearly caused by disasterous dangerous climate disruption).
The more they are encouraged to prattle on about things they clearly do not understand, the quicker the entire voting public will come to realise that the gods of climate science have feet of clay and that the clay is quickly being washed down the river of time and out to vast sea of midnight nightmares and delusions.
The damage from the floods may be much greater than the earlier ones. The land is obviously flood plain, yet it is more densely developed now than it was then.
How was that allowed?
A C Osborn says:
January 13, 2011 at 3:22 am
With such a long history of Flooding it seems very strange not to have spent a lot of money on mitigation because the cost of letting it flood even once is enormous.
————–
Why make this up? They have spent a lot if money on flood prevention.
————–
Could it be that the authorities completely swallowed the AGW drought story, either way it smacks of total incompetence. Perhaps they are all ex UK politicians and local authorities.
————–
Why assert thus fantasy?
The CSIRO climate modelling says, if memory serves, that weather patterns will move south, so that northern australia will get more rain and southern Australia will get less rain.
Queensland is in northern Australia. So the AGW prediction is, allowing for models not being great at the regional level, more rain for Queensland.
For those who have trouble with nuances drier conditions does not mean no floods. It means a greater frequency of droughts and more intense droughts. It also means more rapid evaporation of water after floods.
I can tell that this argument is compelling around here because the scoffing index has reached new highs in this blog.
The whole connection between temperature and rain fall is not a simple one.
The Australian floods caused by unprecedented global warming?
KNOWN FLOODS IN THE BRISBANE & BREMER RIVER BASIN
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF BRISBANE AND IPSWICH
1825…….marked the flood to rise here of one hundred feet….. 94 feet 10.5 inches
1839…….height of between 35 and 40 feet above the level……overflowed its banks to the extent of 54 feet
The water rose 70 feet at Ipswich and no such flood again seen until the 1893 trouble. In the floods of 1857, 1863, 1864, 1870 the water rose 45 feet to 50 feet in Ipswich. The 1887 flood is said to have risen 50 feet in Ipswich….
The river rose 50 feet in 12 hours at Ipswich…..
the Bremer roses 24 or 25 foot…..
etc., etc., etc.,…………
http://www.bom.gov.au/hydro/flood/qld/fld_history/brisbane_history.shtml
………
h/t Piers Corbyn tweet
http://twitter.com/Piers_Corbyn
Nick Stokes says “It’s also hardly controversial that the warm tropical waters waters are a factor in the increased rainfall in Northern Australia.”
Well, Nick, that’s arm waving. It has to be shown that warmed waters were traversed by the winds that brought the rain; it has to be shown that the heat transfer rates and quantities in the cycle of water to air to rain are of the right order. It has to be explained quantitatively how the heavy rains were spread overland from Darwin to Tasmania because of a warming of some ocean locations. It has to be shown that rain-generating mechanisms other than warm water can be dissected out and accounted for.
(Oh – I notice from your quote that you are using the square of waters. Why?)
“HR says:
January 13, 2011 at 1:02 am”
Yes, David Karoly, thats the guy I was thinking of who, basically, said that the warm waters around Australia were a direct result of climate change. He, conveniently, forgot to mention other, much older, flood events in the region.
Although he didn’t say it, he meant AGW. He’s been very quiet for sometime now and I guess this flood event in Queensland has given him the amunition to launch an attack on the minds of Australians to try to convince them our emissions of CO2 is causing AGW.
He is a very nasty arrogant man who will not allow anyone a word in edgeways in discussions. He’s a bit like Trenbreth, only his opinion matters.
“It rained all night the day I left, the weather it was dry;
The sun so hot, I froze to death, Susanna don’t you cry…”
Domingo Tavella says:
January 13, 2011 at 2:17 am
How about you? Do you have some level of authority?
Mark
[RyanMaue: this is a blog, and you’d be surprised who has a PhD ’round these parts. Peer-reviewed literature is constantly evolving and will likely resemble this format more so in the future, rather than reams of paper.]
I think it’s about time to try to develop a short select list: Bad Things Not Caused Or Worsened By Global Warming.
I’m drawing a blank, here …
😉
With the strongest La Nina since 1917, the BOMs Neville Nicholls predicts global cooling for some time ahead.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/42858.html
With Sol looking wane, I suspect this cooling will go on longer than Nev can see with his models.
Yup, the Australian MSM are milking this for all it’s worth…
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/drowning-in-a-hothouse-20110113-19pr1.html
From the article “The Queensland floods are another reminder of what climate science has been telling us for 25 years, like the recent long-running drought, the 2009 heatwaves and the dreadful Victorian bushfires.”
Of course anyone with a memory knows most of the 2009 Victorian bushfires were started by people, the worst fire which killed most people was started by a faulty power cable. But by far the biggest contributor to the fires was local authorities, with their green leaning policies, which prevented property owners from clearing fuel away from property.
I am not convinced Queenslanders believe that this flood is anything different to the 1974 flood. And in 1954, 1910, 1890 and 1840.
Have just read some of the comments posted and I am amazed the way some of you are completely devoid of the facts.
If it wasn’t for the Wivenhoe dam that was built just after the large floods of 74 there would now be very little left of Brisbane. Consequently it would be very easy to suggest that this flood is far worse than anything that has been experienced before and that is without considering all the other flood dramas that have been going on since before christmas.
sophocles says:
Much of it might be flood plain, it’s true. But most of the time it’s fine and people want to live somewhere. By your standards, la, San Fran and Tokyo shouldn’t exist either. And Kansas definitely should be abandoned along with new Orleans . Floods, bushfires, storms, cyclones – in Australia it’s a case of choosing your risk category!
pecqror says:
January 13, 2011 at 8:35 am
Brisbane en 1841,
Great, bigger picture.
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Brisbane1842.jpg
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Brisbane1842.jpg
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Brisbane3.jpg