Interesting graph – Fraction of the Globe in Drought: 1982-2012

Well, this agrees with AR5. There you have it, I guess. There’s been no increase in global drought.

“Piltdown” Mann will shortly begin savagely attacking these researchers.

The downward trend seems to be mainly visible in the two least severe categories with the most severe being fairly steady.
In other words, it seems like the total area between regions that are drought free and regions in exceptional drought are tightening up. There’s been some ideas about CO2 being a major driver in the trend by enhancing rainfall (and the biosphere), though we would need data that goes further back than this.

So, no increase in droughts, floods, hurricanes, cyclones, famines, plagues, etc, etc, etc…
Isn’t it revealing that we are getting so much real (ie not simulated) data that shows there is basically no discernible trend in our climate whatsoever, and yet the alarmists are squealing like stuck pigs that we’re all going to die by 2050, or sometime in the indeterminate future?
Observation trumps models at every juncture.

I wonder if Pinatubo in 1991, even though it cooled the Earth, also caused an increase in drought.

A report from the Cal Dept. Of Water Resources on the 87-92 drought published in 1993.
http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/2_drought-1987-92.pdf
Interesting read. A table shows California suffers a multi-year drought ever 20-30 year.

Anthony, a correction: D0 (yellow) = abnormally dry; D1 (orange) = moderate drought
[fixed mod]

I see a steady downwards trend.

“Unless my eyes deceive me, it looks like there is no net change in global drought area for 30 years.”
Actually, It looks to me like there is a very slight decline.

I added some Horizontal lines to the graph:
http://i62.tinypic.com/24x04fa.jpg
I’d guess the D0 and D1 rankings have diminished 25% over the thirty years. The D2 and D3 diminished to a smaller degree, but appear to certainly be less.

Quick, someone spill the beans to Pres. Obama and Sen. Boxer that the gig is up!

The 1982 start date may be the best for a “planet” wide presentation. There are many regional studies that reach back further. For example, near Charlottesville:
http://www.cvillepedia.org/mediawiki/index.php/Worst_drought_of_record
Mention is made at the above of a drought in 1976-77. The drought impacted the northwest part of the US also. The Washington State North Cascade Highway – usually closed in winter – did not close that winter. Lack of snow was blamed on the drought.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Traffic/Passes/NorthCascades/closurehistory.htm
The link’s FAQ page – see Q.#5 – mentions the drought.

Good Point above:
Louis says:
May 22, 2014 at 8:40 pm
……
Well, people have died of thirst while lost at sea…
Nature is complicated enough for humans not to understand that we only are humans and not God

The trend is small but distinct: a declining trend for global drought overall, from ’82 to present.
At the same time, atmospheric CO2 (plant food) has increased about 50 – 60 ppm, aiding the greening of desert, arid high plains, and all flora world wide. More CO2 helps plants grow, even if available moisture doesn’t increase.
It is additional anecdotal evidence that more atmospheric CO2 is a good thing for planet earth and all its denizens!

Holy hydration Batman!!!

Yes but drought is hidding in the deep ocean! It will bubble up causing the Earth to dry. We need to spend a few billion to model it now!

Jer0me says: May 22, 2014 at 7:27 pm
So, no increase in droughts, floods, hurricanes, cyclones, famines, plagues, etc, etc, etc…
Isn’t it revealing that we are getting so much real (ie not simulated) data that shows there is basically no discernible trend in our climate whatsoever, and yet the alarmists are squealing like stuck pigs that we’re all going to die by 2050, or sometime in the indeterminate future?
=====================================================================
Indeed! A simple but overwhelming fact.
Also, If there was (and there is not) a reduction in precipitation, it would have to be substantial to be noticed as the world’s vegetation at 400 ppm CO2 is just as robust and green with about 12 to 15% less water, then it would be at 280ppm.
Once again the basic observation is that CO2 is net beneficial, by a large margin.

Unless my eyes deceive me, it looks like there is no net change in global drought area for 30 years.

I think your eyes are fine.
The fact is that the period covered by the above paper almost exactly matches the recent global warming and the “HOTTEST DECADE EVAAAAAH”. Is this not real experimentation V observations? Our co2 out, global droughts not getting worse? If this is correct then is this not a fail (so far)?
Here are some more results.

Letter To Nature – 11 September 2012
Justin Sheffield et al
Little change in global drought over the past 60 years
…….Previous assessments of historic changes in drought over the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries indicate that this may already be happening globally. In particular, calculations of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) show a decrease in moisture globally since the 1970s with a commensurate increase in the area in drought that is attributed, in part, to global warming4, 5……..Here we show that the previously reported increase in global drought is overestimated because the PDSI uses a simplified model of potential evaporation7 that responds only to changes in temperature and thus responds incorrectly to global warming in recent decades. More realistic calculations, based on the underlying physical principles8 that take into account changes in available energy, humidity and wind speed, suggest that there has been little change in drought over the past 60 years. The results have implications for how we interpret the impact of global warming on the hydrological cycle and its extremes, and may help to explain why palaeoclimate drought reconstructions based on tree-ring data diverge from the PDSI-based drought record in recent years9, 10.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7424/full/nature11575.html
—————
Abstract – 16 October 2012
Changes in the variability of global land precipitation
Fubao Sun et al
[1] In our warming climate there is a general expectation that the variability of precipitation (P) will increase at daily, monthly and inter-annual timescales. Here we analyse observations of monthlyP (1940–2009) over the global land surface using a new theoretical framework that can distinguish changes in global Pvariance between space and time. We report a near-zero temporal trend in global meanP. Unexpectedly we found a reduction in global land P variance over space and time that was due to a redistribution, where, on average, the dry became wetter while wet became drier. Changes in the P variance were not related to variations in temperature. Instead, the largest changes in P variance were generally found in regions having the largest aerosol emissions. Our results combined with recent modelling studies lead us to speculate that aerosol loading has played a key role in changing the variability of P.
Geophysical Research Letters – Volume 39, Issue 19
DOI: 10.1029/2012GL053369
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL053369/abstract

We MUST do something to save our deserts from CO2 induced climate change. Future farming will certainly change it’s delicate ecosystem. Enormous rain shades will have to be constructed to preserve desert habitat and wildlife. It would be easier to just stop producing CO2. /sarc off. GK

“Drought is by far the most costly natural disaster that can lead to widespread impacts”???
Where is the proof for this statement. Sure agriculture will be affected locally but food for the masses can be imported. Sure the lawn browns when most of the available water is diverted to ag and environmental reasons but I’m pretty sure cold and snow have a much greater deleterious effect on economy/GDP, if “cost” is the basis for the argument. Just look at CNBC and everyone still blames the bad winter for failure of the jobs/housing/retail/restaurants/economy to bounce back from the recession of 5 years ago.

Obviously the data in this graph needs some adjusting. Like the temperature record, these data don’t understand the nuance.
That is, the nuance embodied in the HHCMs.
(High Holy Climate Models)

No sign that the ‘infamous’ Australian so-called Millenium Drought which started in 2001 and lasted to at least 2006 in most areas was anything out of the ordinary globally (despite the area involved) . Funny, I could have sworn many Australian climate scientists (and professional climate alarmists like Tim Flannery) were saying publicly that it was the worst (= most widespread/intense) drought since 1900 and that it could easily last for decades (which of course it didn’t). The now disbanded Federal Department of the Environment was printing glossy reports to that effect. Of course Flim Flannery has not had the decency to apologize, he’s too busy doing a travelogue series in China for the ABC.

Extra droughty and dry
Is the nervous cough
From those who traffic
In pure bollocks…
When the rain falls not
Or comes in sheets
Either way it’s a crime
To the bleats of sheep…

We see a gradually decreasing total land area that is in drought. The alarmists see that (as a percentage of the total) the drought area that is classified as “Extreme” is increasing.