Pollution in Northern Hemisphere helped cause 1980s African drought

From the University of Washington:

Decades of drought in central Africa reached their worst point in the 1980s, causing Lake Chad, a shallow lake used to water crops in neighboring countries, to almost dry out completely.

The shrinking lake and prolonged drought were initially blamed on overgrazing and bad agricultural practices. More recently, Lake Chad became an example of global warming.

smokestacks

U.S. Library of Congress

Sulfate-laden aerosols coming out of a U.S. smokestack in 1942. Emissions rose steadily until legislation was passed in the late 1960s and ’70s.

New University of Washington research, to be published in Geophysical Research Letters, shows that the drought was caused at least in part by Northern Hemisphere air pollution.

Aerosols emanating from coal-burning factories in the United States and Europe during the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s cooled the entire Northern Hemisphere, shifting tropical rain bands south. Rains no longer reached the Sahel region, a band that spans the African continent just below the Sahara desert.

When clean-air legislation passed in the U.S. and Europe, the rain band shifted back, and the drought lessened.

Related research by the UW researchers and their collaborators shows that global warming is now causing the land-covered Northern Hemisphere to warm faster than the Southern Hemisphere, further reversing the pre-1980s trend.

Previous research has suggested a connection between coal-burning and the Sahel drought, but this was the first study that used decades of historical observations to find that this drought was part of a global shift in tropical rainfall, and then used multiple climate models to determine why.

“One of our research strategies is to zoom out,” said lead author Yen-Ting Hwang, a UW doctoral student in atmospheric sciences. “Instead of studying rainfall at a particular place, we try to look for the larger-scale patterns.”

dirt and plants

Wikimedia / Annabel Symington

The road to Timbuktu, in the Sahel region, during more normal conditions.

To determine that the Sahel drought was part of a broader shift, the authors looked at precipitation from all rain gauges that had continuous readings between 1930 and 1990.  Other places on the northern edge of the tropical rain band, including northern India and South America, also experienced dryer climates in the 1970s and ’80s. Meanwhile, places on the southern edge of the rain band, such as northeast Brazil and the African Great Lakes, were wetter than normal.

To understand the reason, authors looked at all 26 climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Researchers discovered that almost all the models also showed some southward shift, and that cooling from sulfate aerosols in the Northern Hemisphere was the primary cause.

“We think people should know that these particles not only pollute air locally, but they also have these remote climate effects,” Hwang said.

Light-colored sulfate aerosols are emitted mainly by dirty burning of coal. They create hazy air that reflects sunlight, and also lead to more reflective, longer-lasting clouds.

People living in the Northern Hemisphere did not notice the cooling, the authors said, because it balanced the heating associated with the greenhouse effect from increased carbon dioxide, so temperatures were steady.

map of world

UW / Y.-T. Hwang

Global precipitation change between 1931-1950 and 1961-1980. The African Sahel, center, is much drier, while east Africa and east Brazil are wetter.

“To some extent, science messed this one up the first time around,” said co-author Dargan Frierson, a UW associate professor of atmospheric sciences. “People thought that a large part of that drought was due to bad farming practices and desertification. But over the last 20 years or so we’ve realized that that was quite wrong, and that large-scale ocean and atmosphere patterns are significantly more powerful in terms of shaping where the rains fall.”

The models did not show as strong a shift as the observations, Frierson said, suggesting that ocean circulation also played a role in the drought.

The good news is that the U.S. Clean Air Act and its European counterpart had an unintended positive effect beyond improved air quality and related health benefits. Although shorter-term droughts continue to affect the Sahel, the long-term drought began to recover in the 1980s.

“We were able to do something that was good for us, and it also benefited people elsewhere,” Frierson said.

The work was funded by the National Science Foundation. Sarah Kang at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology in South Korea was a co-author.

###

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

69 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael Tremblay
June 7, 2013 9:18 am

Lately we’ve read several theories about why desertification in the Sahel has advanced and retreated. This one has to be the most far-fetched yet. I believe what we are seeing is a group of people grasping at straws because their current expectations are proven to be wrong when faced with reality.

Stephen Singer
June 7, 2013 9:28 am

So the US is going to blame China’s aerosol emissions for the recent droughts in the southwest and central plains states?

Tim Clark
June 7, 2013 9:54 am

Spurious correlation.

Jimbo
June 7, 2013 10:08 am

Could this above study as well as more co2 partly explain the greening of the Sahel?
Abstract – (31 May 2013)

“CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe’s warm, arid environments”………….
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50563/abstract

Bill Marsh
Editor
June 7, 2013 10:44 am

““People living in the Northern Hemisphere did not notice the cooling, the authors said, because it balanced the heating associated with the greenhouse effect from increased carbon dioxide, so temperatures were steady.””
So, if temperatures were steady, then there wasn’t any cooling, right? Unless we are to believe that the Sahel is clever enough to ignore the heating and only accept the cooling.

DirkH
June 7, 2013 10:53 am

– Polluting industry
– causes famine in Africa
– says the computer.
Triple Truthiness!
Fact: 94 & of American scientists are liberals!
It shows.

Jimbo
June 7, 2013 10:58 am

Before 5000 BC Lake Chad (Lake Mega-Chad) used to cover an area of 400,000 km2. In 2000 it covered 1,500 km2. It seems prolonged drought episodes is not unique to modern times.
http://hol.sagepub.com/content/10/3/293.short

ATMJ
June 7, 2013 11:01 am

Got to spend Christmas in N. London in 1968 and was surprised at how clean the air seemed. When I returned to the states in 1970 and lived in NYC, the air was markedly cleaner than I remembered. Many of the old Con Ed coal fired power plants had been retired once the Indian Point atomic plants had come online. Not sure where this pollution into the 80’s comes from.

lemiere jacques
June 7, 2013 11:45 am

generally speaking models are not good at hindcasting rain…but whenever they are ..we can trust the models…
we can trust the models
we can trust the models…

Mac the Knife
June 7, 2013 4:06 pm

“One of our research strategies is to zoom out,” said lead author Yen-Ting Hwang…..
Zoom out? I’ll say! One wonders if they are even on the same planet as the rest of us?! They certainly are NOT on the same plane of reality…..
MtK

Mac the Knife
June 7, 2013 4:23 pm

Stephen Singer says:
June 7, 2013 at 9:28 am
So the US is going to blame China’s aerosol emissions for the recent droughts in the southwest and central plains states?
I like the way you think Stephen!
Sure, That’s The Ticket! And they caused the Dust Bowl in the US, back in the 1930s too! Yeah, that’s what they did! Reminds me of Jon Levitz’s character ‘The Pathological Liar’….
http://youtu.be/pkYNBwCEeH4

June 7, 2013 5:24 pm

Our gov is a global embarrassment but… ‘Buyer beware. In exchange for those trinkets, your heating bill, food bill, and transportation costs will sky rocket.’
We don’t have much variety on this shopping trip.
Since we’re shopping… how about 3 trillion for Ahmadinejad’s antique Persian carpets? That’s what Mitt Romney was shopping for to put in his presidential library. With his close friend, Benjamin Netanyahu. I just have to stop in Dallas and see Saddam Hussein’s trillion dollars + pistol on display. What a bargain! What a deal, we get more tax cuts for the wealthiest as icing on the cake, too. Lose our jobs as the country’s whole infrastructure like roads and bridges crumble and debt spirals sky high!
Why mess around with little trinkits? Let’s just go shopping for big time stuff like Vladimir Putin’s 4 yachts and 58 aircraft. That’s a bargain at around oh, what… 5 trillion? Heck, yeah, that’s such a bargain ya’ sop it up with a biscuit!

Janice Moore
June 7, 2013 7:40 pm

Thank you, Mac the Knife, for sharing the hilarious Jon Lovitz. I just love that guy. He’s so funny.
Almost every other DAY, I think of his pathological liar routine as I read WUWT and encounter the wild speculation and outright li-e-s of the Human-caused Climate Change advocates.
****************
And I NEEDED a laugh after reading all the nonsense in the post above at 5:24PM. “I’m not even going to try,” I thought as I read it, shaking my head in disgust.

June 7, 2013 10:45 pm

So let me get this straight: First climate scientists say that warming causes drought. So we need to ban fossil fuels. Now cooling causes drought, so ban fossil fuels?

Mike M
June 8, 2013 3:29 am

My “take home” conclusion is they are claiming that the Clean Air Act caused global warming?
But more seriously, doesn’t this mean that, if the Clean Air Act has been fully in place back in say 1900, the temperature record over the last 113 years would have shown us a rate of warming well within the bounds of natural variability?

June 8, 2013 4:00 pm

Janice you just plain can’t do it. Facts are stubborn things. Who in their right mind gives big tax cuts and immediately proceeds to launch 3 trillion dollars + in wars. Look around you at a lot of our boys in uniform being driven by spouses and family to the outpatient clinics with bandaged stumps. Then recall the thousands of talking points of propaganda to justify that costly mistake. I did.

David Cage
June 9, 2013 9:45 am

But over the last 20 years or so we’ve realized that that was quite wrong, ….
So suddenly after being wrong this answer is so certainly right we have to be guilty and fork out a fortune to them. Pull the other one,. If you were wrong last time there is and even bigger chance you are wrong this one given the political pressures to conform. No matter what the cause it has one common factor, the west have to fork out to compensate the third world now that people are too fed up with just giving aid all the time with the result there are an even larger population needing aid than before..
Isn’t it time scientists stopped prostituting themselves to the dogma of the trendy lefties.

June 9, 2013 3:41 pm

I see other factors. One is AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation), and anything loosely linked to it in the Pacific. It largely correlates with the periodic component visible in HadCRUT3:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/
AMO appears to me as a north-south oscillation of global heat balance, especially at the Atlantic surface and on nearby land areas. North-warming makes global temperatures warmer because the Arctic greatly and the Antarctic only-hardly have strong regional surface albedo positive feedback. Likewise, global warming is modeled to disproportionately affect the Arctic.
As north-south balance shifts, climate zones – such as the rainy intertropical convergence zone – also shift.
Another factor: Historically over the past several thousand years, when the globe was warmer, the intertropical rainforest band was wider. When the world was cooler, that rainforest band was narrower.

June 12, 2013 1:03 pm

wait “the cooling was masked by warming”!?!?! wow, that’s a new one!!! LMAO