Ever since Al Gore used hurricane Katrina as a false example of AGW driven severe weather, there has been a drought of major landfalling U.S. Hurricanes, which can only be a good thing. This year I hope Mr. Gore makes some pronouncement to extend his “Gore effect” on hurricanes. Satire and silliness aside, Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. highlights the number of hurricane drought days.
He writes:
In preparation for an upcoming talk, have updated the figure above to the start of the 2012 hurricane season, which will begin with a record-long stretch of no intense hurricane landfalls still continuing. (In most browsers you can click on the figure for a larger view.) The long stretch with no intense hurricane landfalls has surely shaped expectations, setting the stage for all sorts of animal spirits to be in play. Oh, to be a commodities trader this summer.
More at The US Intense Hurricane Drought
In the meantime, Dr. Ryan Maue has reconstituted his Tropical page.
This page, which was once at Florida State, is now here: http://policlimate.com/tropical/
Bookmark it. The graphs are telling.
Figure: Historical North Atlantic tropical storm and major hurricane frequency since 1970 from the HURDAT best-track dataset. Since 1970, there have been 465 tropical storms including 102 major hurricanes (22%). Since 1995, the ratio is slightly higher (26%) or 64 major hurricanes out of a total of 250 storms. Data File
Figure: Historical North Atlantic tropical storm Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) since 1970 from the HURDAT best-track dataset. It is clear from the ACE metric that the active-era since 1995 in the Atlantic is well described with a marked step increase. This is partially due to a preponderance of long-lived Cape Verde origin major hurricanes that have higher intensity and longer duration which means more ACE. ACE is the convolution or sum of the reported wind speed squared (in knots) over the lifetime of the storm. Data File
Historical Tropical Cyclone Activity Graphics
Figure: Global Hurricane Frequency (all & major) — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached at least hurricane-force (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 64-knots). The bottom time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached major hurricane strength (96-knots+). Adapted from Maue (2011) GRL.
Figure: Last 4-decades of Global and Northern Hemisphere Accumulated Cyclone Energy: 24 month running sums. Note that the year indicated represents the value of ACE through the previous 24-months for the Northern Hemisphere (bottom line/gray boxes) and the entire global (top line/blue boxes). The area in between represents the Southern Hemisphere total ACE.
1970-2011 monthly ACE Data File (Maue, 2010 GRL) [–] 1970-2011 global tropical cyclone frequency monthly Data File
Figure: Last 4-decades of Global Tropical Storm and Hurricane frequency — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of TCs that reach at least tropical storm strength (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 34-knots). The bottom time series is the number of hurricane strength (64-knots+) TCs.
Global tropical cyclone power dissipation index
Figure: Global and Northern Hemisphere Power Dissipation Index (Emanuel 2005) 1970-2011: 24 month running sums. Note that the year indicated represents the value of PDI through the previous 24-months for the Northern Hemisphere (bottom line/gray boxes) and the entire global (top line/blue boxes). The area in between represents the Southern Hemisphere total PDI. Power dissipation and Accumulated Cyclone Energy are analogous for running-sum time series — correlation > 0.97
1970-2011 monthly PDI Data File (Maue, 2010 GRL)
These charts look a lot like the sea level, ice extent, and lesser spotted critter migratory pattern charts. I think someone needs to look at the correlation between them as clear evidence of AGW. Where should I submit my grant application?
Seriously, how much more money do we need to continue pouring into the analysis of noise?
Mathematically, noise contains all possible signals,
so with some suitably jiggered ‘signal extraction’
the CO2 signal can be discerned, gathering its ‘forcing’.
Any day now that CO2 monster will burst out of the noise
and burn us all. Hurry, get those taxes up now!
The real reason they want us to hurry with their statism
is so they can take credit for the coming global cooling.
Interstellar Bill: Nah, it’s not quite so simple.
If your theory were true, NASA, DoE, EPA, et al would already be funding research to extract a cooling signal from the noise. After all, there would be no reason to wait. The temps are changing all the time so there’s nothing to stop them changing the noise analysis algorithms today.
Yep … that whole business about “windows of opportunity” and “tipping points” was all about getting the legislation put in place before the global temperature cooled. As I said on another site, all we have to do is hold off the rabid environmentalist long enough for Nature to do its thing, and the scare will be over.
Of course, this doesn’t mean they won’t be sreaming of another possible ice age, .. and of course, because of fossil fuels.
Speaking of Global Temperature … a little project for you data modeling guys. I wonder what the global temparature would allegedly look like if you subrtracted the so called CO2 induced warming of the current temp metric. I would think we’d be back down to Dalton Minimum readings by now.
Satire and silliness aside,???
This week, the physicists came out with yet another announcement about particles that communicate instantaneously despite a separation in space. We have hints, therefore, of a vast communication throughout the entire universe. IF that degree of communication indeed exists throughout the universe, then it is alive, aware and intelligent to a degree that quite answers to all the classic claims about “God.” And the Earth is alive and aware of its living cargo.
If there is any God, obviously He gives humans far more freedom than is imagined by some of our more troublesome religious sects.
I have read James Lovelock’s “Gaia Hypothesis.” He just says the chemical composition of Earth’s atmosphere is distinctly different from that of dead worlds like Jupiter and that we can tell whether a world bears life similar to ours by its atmospheric composition. But the physicists’ results imply a Gaia that is indeed laughing at Gore and mocking his nonsense.
There is a serious and protective side to it, as well. What chemist can fail to be outraged by claims of Ocean “acidification” from a claimed pH change from 8.2 to 8.1? Not only is the change too small to be reliable or mean much if true, but that would be a beneficial neutralization if true. Wouldn’t a conscious Gaia want the increase in ocean life that such a change would bring?
What would rational beings do with an EPA that calls CO2 a pollutant. I am a biologist who has never heard of any life form that is not derived from the chemical reduction of carbon dioxide. The EPA is profoundly anti-Life. How about the whole point of Mann’s infamous hockey stick? “Trees are growing too well.” What?
.
How about the shrieking about warming when Dr. Indur Goklani’s work shows that humans die more in cold weather than warm? How about “tropical Paradise?” How about the most biodiverse zones the warm ones and the Arctic and Antarctic are deserts? Is it Summer or winter that you mow your grass?
Oh, I am not sure at all that we are just joking about the Gore Effect. Maybe Gaia is fighting for her life.
I told you:
http://www.letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here
there will not be more hurricanes
\
the systems are cooling down
from 1994/1995 already
I’m sure when the next severe hurricane does make landfall in the USA alarmists will help us “connect the dots” to it being attributable to climate change.
It is good that none of these charts show extraordinary fluctuations, else it would immediately be seized upon as evidence of ‘global climate change’, aka ‘climate weirding’.
This is admittedly anecdotal but it is something I have noticed in over 40 years of paying attention to the weather: Periods of extreme weather seem to often be closely followed by a period of the opposite extreme. For example, a period of extreme drought will often be followed by extremely wet weather. Or a period of extremely wet weather will be followed by drought. Periods of normal weather can be followed by either extreme but it just seems that I have noticed that droughts are broken by flooding, floods by droughts, etc. Notice this graph of the Palmer Drought Severity Index for the Contiguous US for the most recent 12 month period how few “Normal” (value of 0) years there are. In fact, I can’t find a single one while there are many years that are over +2 or under -2.
Oops, forgot the link: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/time-series/index.php?parameter=pdsi&month=3&year=2012&filter=12&state=110&div=0
@ Interstellar Bill
“The real reason they want us to hurry with their statism
is so they can take credit for the coming global cooling.”
“…., but the measured energy imbalance occured during the deepest solar minimum in the record when the sun’s energy reaching Earth was least.” James Hansen at 8:22
What coming global cooling! Have you seen the latest April UAH temperature update:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2012/05/uah-global-temperature-update-for-april-2012-0-30c/
If May and June are going up 2012 will be another record warm year and global temperatures make absolutely no attempt of going down or staying cool.
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+002
We need a Maunder Minimum to get us back to the temperatures of the Eighties, but we will never return to the Little Ice Age under these atmospheric circumstances.
Whilst the tropical air masses widened during the late 20th century solar induced warming spell hurricane intensity slowly increased.
There then seems to have been an inflection point in the 90s when the trend of increasing activity stopped and now we have falling activity.
I suggest that what we see is a post 2000 (or thereabouts) narrowing of the tropical air masses with a greater frequency of incursions of high level polar air creating more wind shear and suppressing hurricane growth.
I propose hurricane activity as a diagnostic indicator for the clearly cyclical widening or narrowing trends observed in the tropical air masses.
The above charts clearly also show lower levels of activity during the 70s ‘cooling’ spell. They also lend some support to Henry P’s contention that ocean surface cooling actually began around 1994.
This is easily explained, and unfortunately, you have opened the door for the warmists. Obviously, global warming, er, climate change, er, climate disruption is the cause for this “weird” time period between hurricane landfalls. The weather just gets weirder and weirder.
/snarc
I do a fair amount of trading. It’s my major source of “Lunch Money”.
One of THE major errors made by “The Public” (i.e. folks who don’t trade a lot) is to project trends into the future. Traders are always talking about “overbought” and “oversold” and “reversion to the mean” trades.
So the average Joe says “Look, it is up for 6 months, it will go up more!” and usually just about in time for the “reversion to the mean”.
So in “climate science” we have a known 60 year cycle with 30 year half cycles.
The “warmers” started hollering strongest just about the top. As one thing after another has “rolled over”, they move to the next one that has not rolled over yet, just in time for it to collapse under them too.
The degree to which that matches human behaviour at market tops is astounding.
In many ways, Al Gore is just incredibly naive about it all. Being a semi-clueless mouthpiece, and finding out that by the time he’s on board, the curve is rolling over.
There are also many natural systems that have a ‘spike before the reversal’. In stocks that is called a “blowoff top”. When riding a bicycle, you move the handlebars just a touch right, to tip the bike, into a left hand turn; then the handlebars go a bit left to stabilize the turn. (Most of us learned to do the “a then b with a lean” intuitively and never realize how it really works… on a very large motorcycle it’s more obvious). So what did we see in the temperature data? A spike in 1998 just before the reversal. What do we see in the ACE graph? A spike in 2004/5 just before the drop. Expect a return to 1970 levels. Over about 30 years from 2000.
It is now inevitable. All we need to do is assure that Warmers can’t claim they did it.
(Or cook the books enough to hide it.)
I would like to see Bob Tisdale take the second graph, the one with the red and blue bars, and overlay the La Nina and El Nino years to see what relationship there is if any.
Great idea; and call the resulting graph/index the TCOF (Thanks CO2 Figure)? or the CACM (CO2 Accumulated Cooling Mitigation)? or …
Suggests a terminology strategy: Refer to the various temperature etc. peaks and valleys as “market tops” and “market bottoms”. Do you see parallels to the “head and shoulders” pattern?
Is all the energy being saved up for a Cat 10?
The ice age is coming???
It still amazes me, that one of my life’s fascinations, and the great icebreaker of conversation has been co-opted into a guilt trip.
The weather.
I maybe wrong here but I vaguely recall some of the worst hurricanes occurred during the Little Ice Age. Anyway, it’s funny how we could not hide the decline / flatline during the hottest several years on the record. This is a problem for the AGW speculation.
We are called ‘deniers’ but I think we privately know who is doing the denying.
The lack of major hurricanes affecting North America may not be entirely a good thing. It makes the place a more placid place to live but the air gets a bit grotty. A nice big hurricane cleans up the local atmosphere a bit. It’s probable however that those living in the path of a hurricane may not entirely appreciate their good fortune.
The cyclone season has just ended in Australia with not one single tropical cyclone of any strength appearing anywhere near the north east coast (there were a couple in WA)- and BOM told us to “expect a slightly higher than average number of tropical cyclones,” in their 17 October 2011 season forecast. 40 years ago cyclones were making landfall as far south as the Gold Coast, but there hasn’t been one striking that far south for at least 30 years. One low almost made Cat 1 off Fraser Island this year but petered out. The trouble is, people forget and get complacent, and when one does hit where they used to in the past it will be all because of global warming. Definitely a quiet phase!
Cyclones are looked forward to in the NWest of Australia, it’s often the only source of significant rain. The towns are mostly built to withstand all but the very worst they can throw at us.
I sat through the whole video of Hansen’s speech at TED.
I think he really believes it.
My take is simple: I don’t know but,
I read WUWT
I have read the “harry_read_me” file and climategate emails.
Also, I have read what Wikipedia says the IPCC mission is. “to provide comprehensive scientific assessments of current scientific, technical and socio-economic information worldwide about the risk of climate change caused by human activity…”
So, it sounds too much like another government scare.
I don’t believe they ‘know’ as much as they think they know.
It’s a big jigsaw puzzle.
But, even if what they say is true (except the boiling ocean part) I’d still have to say it’s worth it.
If the earth warms and we lose some coastline over the next few hundred years, so be it.
It’s worth it. (besides, I don’t believe it)
The third world needs energy to lift themselves out of poverty.
My family, your family and Hansen’s family need it to maintain our comfortable lives.
I doubt Hansen would forbid his children and grandchildren the use of fossil fuels. Ya think?
My guess is another ice age will happen before long so maybe we should enjoy this interglacial and it’s bounty.
Keep in mind that while we have “technically” had no major hurricane hits, the combination of pressure and wind which I use for my power scale had Gustav and Ike on scales of 1-10 as major hurricanes and they did the damage accordingly. If we want to ascertain the overall intensity of the storm, pressure is big factor, and the idea of a 1 minute wind speed in what is just a small area is deceiving. For instance, Able in May 1951 was a “major” hurricane but had a pressure of 980 mb. My point is that with the lowest pressures ever recorded for instance in a century for every station averaged from Hatteras to JFK ( it beat GLoria, because it was right on the coast) ranging from 951 at ECG to 961 at Sandy Hook, Irene was as an impressive display of overall tropical prowess as anything on the east coast since Donna. And Gustav and Ike with sub 955 mb pressures, should be remembered as major hurricanes. In fact at Baton Rouge LA, only the legendary Betsy in 1965 had a higher wind gust! As far as Ike, you ask people in the path of that storm that have gone through majors what they think.
We should be looking more for the overall power of the storm and the low pressure that we see is an indication that this is not something I would be touting ( the lack of a major hurricane). While its true We cant call Irene that ( on my scale, the pressure rated a 3.4, the wind only 1.5 at landfall, hence a 4.9 which but it under.. its a 1-10 scale) Gustav at 955 was a 3.5 and 2.5 ( 6 out of 10) and Ike a 3.5 and 2.75 (6.25 out of 10) both of which, and I think people that went through them in those areas would agree, were major hurricanes.
In terms of the meteorology, pressure of the storm does mean something as far as how much energy the storm has, and I think this metric would give a better look at the overall picture of the storm relative to history
Chuck Nolan says May 16, 2012 at 8:45 pm:
“Also, I have read what Wikipedia says the IPCC mission is.”
Chuck, the Dec 1988 IPCC founding charter is right here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/docs/UNGA43-53.pdf
From the get-go, it uses terms such as “human activities could change global climate”; “threatening”; “disastrous for mankind”; “climate change affects humanity as a whole”; “cause and effect relationship of human activities and climate”; “climate change resulting from certain human activities”; “response strategies to delay, limit, or mitigate the adverse impact of climate change”; etc etc.
I don’t understand why anyone even remotely considers the IPCC to be a “scientific institution,” when it demonstrably is not. As clearly announced in its own charter, the IPCC a political organization with an established and stated agenda.
Sorry to be a nit-picker, Anthony, but the word you need in your headline is “dearth” not “drought”.
Anthony,
I disagree with the following statement ” there has been a drought of major landfalling U.S. Hurricanes, which can only be a good thing”. Although a good thing for coastal cities, towns and communities, and for the insurance industry, it is a bad thing for the environment. Florida’s water table is dependent on Tropical Waves, Tropical Storms and Hurricanes. In years where no Tropicals have come ashore, there has been serious issues with drought. Look at the recent drought in Texas. If one or two Tropicals had come ashore, many of those issues would have been solved.
I just wanted to put my two cents out there.
Mark says:
May 18, 2012 at 1:50 am
One did last summer – it immediately evaporated in the dry air. I was rather impressed.
E.M.Smith says:
May 16, 2012 at 1:42 pm
One thing I noticed while getting good at riding a bicycle was that annoying feeling when you’re right next to the edge of the road and the visual cortex is screaming “move left, move left” but the handlebars “refuse” to turn left. Some part I couldn’t hear must have been yelling back “that idiot didn’t give me enough space to start a turn – again!”
It’s a good thing we don’t have to know all that consciously when learning to ride or we would have all “graduated” from tricycles to cars.
Robbie
….2012 will be another record warm year…..We need a Maunder Minimum to get us back to the temperatures of the Eighties,
No year since 1998 has been warmer than 1998. There is no global warming happening. The warming is missing. That’s what the data from around the world shows—except James Hansen’s data. And of course we all know James Hansen is an activist. And I see you posted a video of him in your comment. Very telling of you.
I love it when you chaps talk like this. Screaming bloody murder over things non-existent. Get a helmet so when that sky falls you have some protection.
Here’s a look at what has happened to James Hansen’s temperature data in recent years:
Part 1
Part 2
I hear it’s getting windier up on the “Hill”. I guess Congress should appoint a commission to study that for the destructive potential, or as part of the green energy mandate, how best to make use of it. The researchers will probably be imported from China, no doubt, headed up by Algore.