Hurricane season begins with a new record hurricane drought for the USA

track. Uses the color scheme from the .

Hurricane Wilma track in October 2005. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Atlantic Hurricane season starts today, June 1st, 2013.

While NOAA predicts an active Atlantic Hurricane Season, it is useful to note this other milestone of hurricane drought, a duration not seen since 1900.

As of today, it has been 2777 days or 7.6 years since the US has been hit by a Cat 3 or greater hurricane. The last such hurricane was Wilma on October 24th, 2005. Each day forward will be a new record in this drought period.

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. summarizes:

The graph above provides an update to data on the remarkable ongoing US “intense hurricane drought.” When the Atlantic hurricane season starts next June 1, it will have been 2,777 days since the last time an intense (that is a Category 3, 4 or 5) hurricane made landfall along the US coast (Wilma in 2005). Such a prolonged period without an intense hurricane landfall has not been observed since 1900.

Dr. Pielke also has some other thoughts related to hurricane Sandy

We live in interesting times.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Latitude

great……even if we get one hurricane….we’re going to have to listen to all the hype about how they are increasing

True, but pointing out the drought is a good way to cut across the misinformation.

Laurie Bowen

And the big push to phase out hurricane clips is on the way!

Dr. Deanster

The longer the “drought”, the more likely that we will hear “unprecedented” when a hurricane finally reaches shore.
Headline … Cat [3,4,5] Hurrincane slams US for the first time in X years …. this unprecedented occurrence is more proof that Global Warming is creating more Exteme Weather!!

Theo Goodwin

What is likely from the Alarmists is a new system for describing and classifying hurricanes. Watch for it.

littlepeaks

About 15 years or so, we had the remains of a Pacific hurricane come through here in Colorado. It rained about 3 days straight. With our drought here in Colo. Springs, we could certainly use one of those right now (except for the people in the Waldo Canyon burn scar area, who are worried about flooding).

Gary Meyers in Ridgecrest

Somebody ought to write a parody about how global warming is killing the hurricane, natures weather regulators. Without hurricanes to redistribute temperatures more regularly, and stir up the oceans to keep currents flowing normally, how can we survive?

Rud Istvan

Unfortunately, Bayes theorem says that it is increasingly likely this won’t last. And the NHC is predicting a more active Atlantic season than normal for pretty solid reasons.

Get it into the MSM as thoroughly as you can, before the first of the season arrives.

Kajajuk

Tropical storm Barbara morphs into the first tropical depression of the 2013 hurricane season: Andrea. Andrea quickly develops into a category 1 and makes a run at the northern part of Cuba.
Eventually the ‘alarmists’ will notice that although the intensity of storms is not increasing, per se, the size (geographical area) of the storms are, the development of storms are very fast, and that storms die out slowly and last longer. Another swan song of ‘alarmists’ will be the ‘new’ trend of the blending together of multiple depressions, especially that of continental and oceanic.
…it will be more apparent this season that developing storms tend to take over entire basins, then move up the Gulf Stream and blend with one of a continuous series of continental depressions with interesting affects.

AndyG55

We are basically at the top of a slight warming period, everything is sort of stable and balanced.
Unfortunately, as temperatures drop slightly over the next decade or so, that may not remain the case.

There is an intriguing correlation between the N. Atlantic’s hurricane index (ACE) and past Arctic atmospheric pressure
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NAHs.htm
As you can see it suggests further drop in the ACE index, well below 100, while in 2000 it was around 250.

Gary Hladik

Gary Meyers in Ridgecrest says (June 1, 2013 at 11:49 am): “Somebody ought to write a parody about how global warming is killing the hurricane, natures weather regulators.”
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of hurricanes at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. — parody of Kevin Trenberth
Obviously the missing hurricanes are hiding in the deep ocean or Middle Earth, I forget which. 🙂

pokerguy

As other cynics like me have pointed out. this won’t matter once NYC or Boston gets slammed with another 1950’s style hurricane this season. Or next. They’re coming. Conditions are ripe. Look out below.

What does it matter what the alarmist say? No matter what happens, they will say it is our fault.

Latitude

dang vukcevic, that’s a tight fit….
…I happen to agree with it too
NHC has overshot their mark

clipe

But with regard to the frequency of landfalling U.S. hurricanes, does it make any difference if the basin is in an ‘active’ period or a ‘quiet’ period? The surprising answer is ‘not much at all’. For the state of Florida there is a slightly greater risk during an active phase, but for the entire coastline from Brownsville, Texas, to Eastport, Maine, the risk is actually slightly higher when the Atlantic basin is in a period of lower tropical cyclone activity.
http://flhurricane.com/cyclone/showflat.php?Board=tb2013&Number=94287&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&fpart=1

David

littlepeaks says (June 1, 2013 at 11:46 am) wrote:
About 15 years or so, we had the remains of a Pacific hurricane come through here in Colorado. It rained about 3 days straight. With our drought here in Colo. Springs, we could certainly use one of those right now (except for the people in the Waldo Canyon burn scar area, who are worried about flooding).

I remember it well, Hurricane Nora, Sept 1997. Most of western AZ received more than their normal annual rainfall in 1 day.

When was the last time they predicted a less than average season?

Rud Istvan

Philjourdan, actually last year 2012. And NHC was right.
But one of the fewer than normal was Sandy, which happened to make landfall where fewer hurricanes do even in an above average active year.
The NYT and Bloomberg Businessweek ‘forgot’ and blamed Sandy on AGW. They also forgot the Midnight Monster of 1893 and the Long Island Express of 1938.
Jeez, back before AGW even hurricane names were cooler!

@Rud Istvan – I believe I said “less than average. In 2012, they predicted an AVERAGE season:

NOAA’s 2012 Atlantic Hurricane Season Outlook indicates that a near-normal season is most likely. The outlook calls for a 50% chance of a near-normal season, a 25% chance of an above normal season, and a 25% chance of a below-normal season.

.

Gary Pearse

“I know that it may be hard to believe, but both hurricane damage and climate hype are set to increase dramatically in the years to come.” (from RP Jr.’s link in the article above)
Thank goodness! I thought I had been preaching to deaf ears. In almost every article on WUWT dealing with hurricanes over the past couple of years (essentially all about the hurricane drought) I commented (with alarm!) that it was only a matter of time (60 yrs after the 1950s cool period) skeptics were going to be caught crowing about the “drought” when we get hit with a multi-hurricane season. I admonished that if we didn’t take possession of the hurricane narrative and predict coming strong hurricanes (I would even like to see some predictions based on past history and climatic factors), then the very desperate, on-the-ropes, back-pedaling warming political scientists would, giving succour and new life to the Agenda that would take another generation of skepticism, coming from behind to eradicate. Can you imagine how skeptics would sound – “Oh, we knew this was going to happen!”, precisely the kind of gruel being dished out by the “retrospective predictions” of the walking dead.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/14/in-retrospect-we-predicted-global-warming-would-slow/
I did the heavy lifting(perhaps) on the hurricanes are coming back meme . I strongly suggest that a real hurricane expert make predictions on likely hurricanes (big and small, landfall and offshore). If someone doesn’t, I will try to do this using statistics relating to the temperature record, etc.

Kajajuk

@Kajajuk – Respectfully, “normal” is not less than average.

NOAA’s 2012 Atlantic Hurricane Season Outlook indicates that a near-normal season is most likely. The outlook calls for a 50% chance of a near-normal season, a 25% chance of an above normal season, and a 25% chance of a below-normal season.

Anthony Scalzi

^Gary Pearse:
Joe Bastardi has been predicting a return to 1950’s weather pattern and hurricane frequency for several years now.

Gary Pearse

Further to my worry that skeptics would rest on their laurels on the hurricane drought and hand the initiative back to the grasping-at-straws warmists when hurricanes returned with a vengeance: a lot of the complacency of late has rested on low ACE (accumulated cyclone energy) figures. Note in Dr. Ryan Maue’s chart of ACE from a WUWT post of last October:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/maue_ace_by-year.png
that ACE can jump as much as 100 points in a year. 2009 -2010 jumped from approximately 40 to 135 (Oct 1 data) and then fell down in 2011 and 2012 to ~100. Also, the very busy hurricane season of 2005 that spawned Katrina and an entire alphabet of other storms, the ACE was ~175 but dropped to about 75 in 2006 – the beginning of the hurricane doldrums. Hurricane droughts are not a safe haven for skeptics.

markx

Gary Pearse says:
June 1, 2013 at 4:21 pm
“….skeptics were going to be caught crowing about the “drought” when we get hit with a multi-hurricane season……[….]…take possession of the hurricane narrative and predict coming strong hurricanes ….”
Hi Gary,
I can’t see where you are coming from here.
The central issue is most of the recent (pro CAGW) reporting has been over dramatic reporting and outright lying about the issue.
The ‘skeptical’ approach has been to report the facts as they happen and point out the historical significance (or lack thereof) of the events.
I don’t see how the advent of a future season which matches historical seasons will change anything; again, it will simply be a matter of pointing out that it has all happened before. Predicting it (or even ‘projecting’ it!) is rife with the risk of getting it completely wrong, and I cannot see it would achieve anything or what discussion would ensue with such a prediction.
However, no doubt an ‘unprecedented’ season would provoke some discussion, but I’m not sure making random predictions would preempt that.

Theo Goodwin

markx says:
June 1, 2013 at 5:17 pm
Gary Pearse says:
June 1, 2013 at 4:21 pm
“I don’t see how the advent of a future season which matches historical seasons will change anything; again, it will simply be a matter of pointing out that it has all happened before.”
Right on. If we have a “normal” hurricane season then the change is simply natural variation.
Of course the Alarmist crazies will bring out an old worn Tarbaby and start punching away at it. They will argue that natural variation is not a cause. They will argue that this increase in annual hurricane activity is unprecedented, all the while ignoring that the preceding year has better title to “unprecedented.” They will punch and punch and punch. And the New York Times and MSNBC will amplify all of it. What a bore it is to live at a time when the all mighty MSM thumbs its nose at science and at genuine news (the hurricane drought).
No doubt someone will mention that there has been no drought in the Atlantic, just a drought of hurricanes coming ashore in North America. There are a lot of hurricanes in the Atlantic because the Alarmists have revised their descriptions and rating systems for hurricanes.

pokerguy

Gary Pearce writes: “Thank goodness! I thought I had been preaching to deaf ears. In almost every article on WUWT dealing with hurricanes over the past couple of years (essentially all about the hurricane drought) I commented (with alarm!) that it was only a matter of time (60 yrs after the 1950s cool period) skeptics were going to be caught crowing about the “drought” when we get hit with a multi-hurricane season.”
Couldn’t agree more. I think these hurricane drought posts are short-sighted. I keep saying essentially the same thing. We saw what they did with “superstorm” Sandy last year. Crowing about a hurricane drought is not smart since it has to end, likely this year.
REPLY: Who’s crowing? Its a statement of fact.- Anthony

pat

the Irish see no letup!
30 May: Irish Times: Cormac O’Raifeartaigh: No relief as climate change accelerates
Is there any letup?
(Dr Cormac O’Raifeartaigh lectures in physics at Waterford Institute of Technology and writes science blog Antimatter)
As pointed out in a recent article in the Economist, global surface temperatures have not risen appreciably in the last 10 years. This leads the Economist to question our understanding of the response of the earth to a rise in greenhouse gases…
This attractive idea has been widely cited, but the Economist is not a scientific authority and it is probably a false hope. In the first instance, a decade is a very short time in climate science. Second, it is only surface temperatures that have stabilised somewhat in recent years…
Third, temperature is not always a good measure of heat…
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/no-relief-as-climate-change-accelerates-1.1410069

I found it odd that the news here in Florida reported that the NOAA sequester furloughs were slated to occur specifically in the June to September time-frame. Has anyone else heard this?
If so, why wait until hurricane season starts? More posturing maybe?

johanna

Well said, philjourdan. An ‘average’ almost never happens. It comprises a compilation and computation of highs and lows.
It is supremely irritating to listen to MSM discussions about weather events which focus on something being above or below average, as though it is significant in itself.

pat

will we ever return to sanity on weather matters?
in Australia, all polls have the Opposition Coalition Party winning the national elections in September. many people believe the Opposition are CAGW sceptics!
31 May: Port Macquarie News: Melissa Pretorius: Climate Change no con
HUMAN induced climate change is not a conspiracy or a con, but a real and serious threat to Australia, Parliament agreed this week.
Australia’s scientific community has praised the move.
It comes as Federal Independent MP Rob Oakeshott moved a motion for the House of Representatives to confirm the science community was right and climate change posed serious problems for Australia.
“Let us see where the bums land, from all members of parliament, in support of the very best advice in the science community,” Mr Oakeshott said this week.
“The advice is real and the question for the House today is whether or not we accept it.” Labor, the Liberals and the National Party supported the motion unanimously…
Mr Creamer (president of Climate Change Australia’s Hastings branch) said the show of confidence was heartening for activists and Mr Oakeshott had again showed leadership on this “critical issue”…
“It’s essential that this scheme – and all of its component parts – be retained by the next government and not replaced with less-effective measures.”…
Mr Oakeshott said the motion finally endorsed the work of Australia’s science community in confirming man-made climate change was not a con.
“No more games,” he said. “Today Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott were joined at the hip on climate change,” Mr Oakeshott said.
“Today, the unprecedented attacks on our science community come to an end.”
http://www.portnews.com.au/story/1539100/climate-change-no-con/?cs=257
——————————————————————————–

Has “The Weather Channel” been copied on this memo?

Kajajuk

philjourdan says:
June 1, 2013 at 6:37 pm
————————-
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2013/20130523_hurricaneoutlook_easternpacific.html
Was lazy (still am) with research…
Since i expect that someone has predicted a less than average season somewhere.
Will check the farmer’s almanac next…lol

@Kajajuk
Thank you. You also blew my bubble apart. When I made the statement, I was only thinking of the Atlantic. But as you demonstrated, there are 5 regions for storms (Atlantic, Eastern, Central, and Western Pacific, and Indian).
I guess I should have said “Atlantic hurricane prediction”, but that they did predict one anywhere that was to be below normal is a surprise to me.

Latitude says June 1, 2013 at 2:23 pm
dang vukcevic, that’s a tight fit….
…I happen to agree with it too
NHC has overshot their mark

AND then, Louis Lerner, government employee receiving government pay for performing government work will refuse to answer government questions about her involvement with her government work by pleading the fifth to the body granted government oversight responsibility … Oh, wait. Wrong agency …
Maybe after this is all over with we can ask some questions of the group ‘picking’ these numbers, as in, what is their basis and how does their ‘process’ work to come up with these numbers in the face of a non-debatable ‘dearth’ of hurricane activity. To paraphrase John Boehner, “Who’s going to jail over this ” … -er- well maybe that’s a little extreme …
.

Kajajuk

Well philjourdan…
You were correct in your insinuation; the NOAA has never predicted a below average hurricane season for the Atlantic basin.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/outlooks/hurricane-archive.shtml
And as it happens their 50% chance of a near normal hurricane season in 2012 was WRONG…
“The 2012 Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active, tied with 1887, 1995, 2010, and 2011 for having the third-most named storms on record.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Atlantic_hurricane_season
Their best chance was in 2009 when it was a below-average season:
“The 2009 Atlantic hurricane season was a below average Atlantic hurricane season that produced eleven tropical cyclones, nine named storms, three hurricanes, and two major hurricanes.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Atlantic_hurricane_season
But alas they predicted another near normal season at 50% chance and below seasonal at 25%.
Damn probability so uncertain…

Kajajuk

Glad to be wrong (sometimes) 😉
Barbara 13 is pulled apart by wind sheer; watch her demise…
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2013/h2013_Barbara.html

Latitude,
Jim
Re: hurricane index correlation (http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NAHs.htm )
Hi
‘Correlation’ I found, I discussed with one of the well known hurricane experts (adviser to insurance companies). Reply was positive but with reservation that the 15 year lag is the main challenge here and a plausible explanation is required. I look into various climate data as a hobby, it is up to professional scientists to sort out a meaningful physical mechanism, providing there is one. Considering the importance of long tern projection it may be their worth while to do so.

Chris Schoneveld

Why is a graph of hurricanes that hit the US coast significant as a measure for hurricane activity in general? Why not make a graph of hurricane activity irrespective of its path towards the US?

On somewhat different (but related) subject, May’s sunspot count according to SIDC = 78.7, slightly up on April’s 72.4
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.htm
Chris Schoneveld says:
It appears that most if not all of the N. Atlantic hurricanes head for the USA
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Retired_Atlantic_hurricane_tracks.png

Increasing hurricane activity is yet another example of an alarmist prediction that turned out to be completely wrong.
So far, the alarmist crowd is batting 1.000 in failed predictions. They have not gotten one single prediction right yet: Arctic ice disappearing, ocean ‘acidification’, catastrophic AGW — or even any measurable AGW, coral reefs going extinct, failed IPCC predictions, etc., etc. Not one alarmist prediction has come to pass.
In any other branch of science, they would be publicly ridiculed for their complete incompetence. But not in Climastrology, where wrong predictions are A-OK — just so long as the grant money keeps flowing.

Jimbo

Remember a couple of years back they were screaming that we had just had the ‘hottest decade on the record’, yet it has been “2777 days or 7.6 years since the US has been hit by a Cat 3 or greater hurricane.”

Simon

I just paid a trip to the Hurricane Research Division website and it is hard to say hurricane activity is doing anything but increasing in the Atlantic Basin. If you click on the graphs for Major Storms, Hurricanes and Major Hurricanes…. numbers are heading one way and that’s up. Sure major hurricanes aren’t back up to the level in the 50′s, but they are headed that way. The other two graphs are well past any historic comparison.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E11.html

David L.

philjourdan on June 1, 2013 at 3:40 pm
When was the last time they predicted a less than average season?”
Good question. Probably never. If one keeps predicting an active hurricane season, eventually they will be right. And lucky for them that the public has severe ADD and won’t remember the past many times they were wrong.

David L.

johanna on June 1, 2013 at 8:40 pm
Well said, philjourdan. An ‘average’ almost never happens. It comprises a compilation and computation of highs and lows.
It is supremely irritating to listen to MSM discussions about weather events which focus on something being above or below average, as though it is significant in itself.”
……………………
Couldn’t agree more! I hate that too, and hate the additional “average high” and “average low” nonsense as well, or the proclamations of great significance of a heat wave lasting 3 of 4 days. Flip a quarter, count how many time you get heads in a row 4 times. It happens. Doesn’t mean anything.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Simon says on June 2, 2013 at 1:48 am:

I just paid a trip to the Hurricane Research Division website and it is hard to say hurricane activity is doing anything but increasing in the Atlantic Basin. If you click on the graphs for Major Storms, Hurricanes and Major Hurricanes…. numbers are heading one way and that’s up. Sure major hurricanes aren’t back up to the level in the 50′s, but they are headed that way. The other two graphs are well past any historic comparison.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E11.html

Strangely enough, I was just there, I’m going berserk trying to find ACE data elsewhere.
Next time, before getting alarmed, actually read what the page says at top:

The Atlantic hurricane database (or HURDAT) extends back to 1851. However, because tropical storms and hurricane spend much of their lifetime over the open ocean – some never hitting land – many systems were “missed” during the late 19th and early 20th Centuries (Vecchi and Knutson 2008). Starting in 1944, systematic aircraft reconnaissance was commenced for monitoring both tropical cyclones and disturbances that had the potential to develop into tropical storms and hurricanes. This did provide much improved monitoring, but still about half of the Atlantic basin was not covered (Sheets 1990). Beginning in 1966, daily satellite imagery became available at the National Hurricane Center, and thus statistics from this time forward are most complete (McAdie et al. 2009).

Got that? Before 1966 the numbers are crap. As has been mentioned MANY times before, it only looks like there’s a dramatic increase in tropical storms and hurricanes starting with the 2nd half of the 20th century, because before there was normally no one to see them. Before satellites there were lots of “fish storms” that never made landfall that were never recorded because no one saw them.
I found the slopes of the linear trend lines with my spreadsheet. I started from 1970 because that’s a nice looking start number on the graph. Hurricanes have risen only 0.099 per year. That is within the frequently-vocal observations that more storms these days are called “hurricanes” when their wind speeds are barely past the threshold for mere minutes.
Major Hurricanes are even better, only 0.068 per year increase.
But the eye-opener is Named Storms, up 0.211 per year. This is well within the likewise-reported observations that they’re naming storms that only briefly hit the tropical storm threshold.
Nothing happening there but better detection, and better measurement taking allowing more frequent wind speed measurements thus more storms rated at levels they never would have gotten in the past.

MichaelS

Simon says:
June 2, 2013 at 1:48 am
“& Landsea et al. (2010) documented a rather large increase in short-lived tropical storms and hurricanes in the last decade, which is likely due to improved monitoring capabilities, that may be influencing the climatological average number of TCs in the Atlantic basin. With the artificial jump in the 2000s in the frequency of short-lived systems, a more realistic estimate of the long-term climatology may be closer to 13 tropical storms and hurricanes per year.”

MichaelS

Kadaka beat me to it!

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

MichaelS said on June 2, 2013 at 3:36 am:

Kadaka beat me to it!

Did not! We copied different sections. We complemented, not overlapped.

pokerguy

“REPLY: Who’s crowing? Its a statement of fact.- Anthony”
Disingenuous. Sure it’s a fact. And you love putting it out there. Which is fine. I understand why you would. It’s a damn good counter-argument to all this extreme weather baloney. However imo it would be smarter to also try and get out ahead of what’s coming. If it were my blog I’d be putting up several posts with all the current predictions for an active hurricane season with explanations as to why this is likely so.
My objection isn’t substantive but tactical. Ultimately, this is all PR. It’s the way they’re playing the game and we should be responding in kind. You’re setting yourself up for a pretty big slam when we get a Cat 3 crossing Cape Cod later this summer.

See - owe to Rich

I was very surprised to see Roger Pielke say at his blog that Sandy was of hurricane strength at landfall. As noted on the WUWT thread at the time, I looked very carefully for evidence in National Weather Service measurements that anywhere on land saw sustained winds of 74mph. I can’t remember what the highest was, but it was something like 55mph. No-one refuted my analysis and pointed to proper evidence of hurricane strength.
I would have left this comment at Roger Pielke’s blog, but apparently you need some sort of “profile” to comment there.
Rich.