From Cornell University and the CMIP modeling jockeys comes this claim:
ITHACA, N.Y. – As a consequence of a warming Earth, the risk of a megadrought – one that lasts more than 35 years – in the American Southwest likely will rise from a low chance over the past thousand years to a 20- to 50-percent chance in this century. However, by slashing greenhouse gas emissions, these risks are nearly cut in half, according to a Cornell-led study in Science Advances, Oct. 5.
“Megadroughts are rare events, occurring only once or twice each millennium. In earlier work, we showed that climate change boosts the chances of a megadrought, but in this paper we investigated how cutting fossil fuel emissions reduces this risk,” said lead author Toby Ault, Cornell professor of earth and atmospheric science.
If climate change goes unabated – and causes more than a 2-degree Celsius rise in atmospheric temperature – megadroughts will become very probable, Ault said.
“The increase in risk is not due to any particular change in the dynamic circulation of the atmosphere,” Ault said. “It’s because the projected increase in atmospheric demand for moisture from the land surface will shift the soil moisture balance. If this happens, megadroughts will be far more likely for the next millennium.”
Ault explained a natural “tug-of-war” governing the surface moisture balance between the precipitation supply (rain) and evaporation (transpiration). But he cautions that increases in average regional temperatures could be so dramatic – more than 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) – that evaporation wins out. This, in turn, dries out the land surface and makes megadroughts 70- to 99-percent likely.
“We found that megadrought risk depends strongly on temperature, which is somewhat good news,” Ault said. “This means that an aggressive strategy for cutting greenhouse gas emissions could keep regional temperature changes from going beyond about 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).”
This lower average warming figure cuts the megadrought risk almost in half, he said.
These tug-of-war scenarios could very well play out in the American Southwest, according to tree ring and geologic records. During sequences of exceptionally dry years, those rings tend to be relatively narrower than in wet years, he said.
“Tree rings from the American Southwest provides evidence of megadroughts, as there are multiple decades when growth is suppressed by dry conditions,” Ault said, pointing to several megadroughts that occurred in North America between 1300 and 1100 B.C.
“We also know they have occurred in other parts of the world, and they have been linked to the demise of several pre-industrial civilizations,” he said.
The tug of war between moisture supply and demand might play out differently in other parts of the world, Ault said.
“Nonetheless, even in the Southwest we found examples of plausible 21st-century climates where precipitation increases, but megadroughts still become more likely,” said Ault, who noted the normally verdant Northeast is in the middle of drought. “This should serve as a cautionary note for areas like the Northeast expecting to see a more-average moisture supply.
“Megadrought risks are still likely to be higher in the future than they were in the past,” he said. “Hence, efficient use of water resources in the drought-stricken American Southwest are likely to help that region thrive during a changing climate.”
“I wouldn’t ever bet against our ability to, under pressure, come up with solutions and ideas for surmounting these challenges,” said co-author Jason Smerdon of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory,” but the sooner we take this seriously and start planning for it, the more options we will have and the fewer serious risks we’ll face.”
###
On the paper, “Relative Impacts of Mitigation, Temperature, and Precipitation on 21st-Century Megadrought Risk in the American Southwest,” Ault is joined by Justin S. Mankin and Benjamin Cook, both of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and Smerdon. The National Science Foundation supported this research.
To their credit, they do make the paper available, rather than just expect us to believe the press release.
Abstract
Megadroughts are comparable in severity to the worst droughts of the 20th century, but of much longer duration. A megadrought in the American Southwest would impose unprecedented stress on the limited water resources of the area, making it critical to evaluate future risks under different climate change mitigation scenarios, as well as for different aspects of regional hydroclimate. We find changes in the mean hydroclimate state, rather than its variability, determine megadrought risk in the American Southwest. Estimates of megadrought probabilities based on precipitation alone tend to underestimate risk. Furthermore, business-as-usual emissions of greenhouse gases will drive regional warming and drying, regardless of large precipitation uncertainties. We find regional temperature increases alone push megadrought risk above 70%, 90%, or 99% by the end of the century, even if precipitation increases moderately, does not change, or decreases, respectively. While each possibility is supported by some climate model simulations, the latter is the most common outcome for the American Southwest in Climate Model Intercomparison 5 (CMIP5) generation models. An aggressive reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions cuts megadrought risks nearly in half.
Gosh, if only we could take “agressive” action on GHG’s. The Paper is here: https://cornell.app.box.com/v/megadrought-2016/1/11542178339/96890226850/1
They also provide a video, explaining/pushing the idea…but it was 500 mb in size, on a slow server and I don’t have 45 minutes to wait around to upload to WUWT. You can watch it here if you want:
https://cornell.app.box.com/v/megadrought-2016/1/11540712875
But, megadroughts have been a common feature of the southwest, long before “climate change/global warming” was a glimmer in Jim Hansen’s eye:
For example: Roman Period “megadrought” found in the USA southwest
Certainly, California has experienced megadroughts before. We covered a study that showed they were quite common:
The paper:
North American drought: Reconstructions, causes, and consequences, Cook et al. 2007
PDF here: NADrought
Figure 10 is the source of the above graph:
Fig. 10. Long-term aridity changes in the West (A) as measured by the percent area affected by drought (PDSIb−1) each year (B) (redrawn from Cook et al., 2004). The four most significant ( pb0.05) dry and wet epochs since AD 800 are indicated by arrows. The 20th century, up through 2003, is highlighted by the yellow box. The average drought area during that time, and that for the AD 900–1300 interval, are indicated by the thick blue and red lines, respectively. The difference between these two means is highly significant ( pb0.001).
But the most important statement in their study is this one:
Given differences with current radiative forcing it remains uncertain if the Pacific will react in a similar manner in the 21st century…
That’s very true, we just don’t know. Some people claim we’ll see more precipitation and we’ll be in a more El Niño like state rather than La Niña. Just a few months ago we heard this in a story we covered:
Global warming will increase rainfall in some of the world’s driest areas over land, with not only the wet getting wetter but the dry getting wetter as well.
I’ll believe somewhat iffy paleoclimate records over models (especially the poorly skilled CMIP models) any day.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


I don’t know what caused the historic megadrought events (it obliviously has nothing to do with CO2), but there is a simple explanation for Californian droughts in recent years.
Drought in California = atmospheric blocking caused by the RRR (Ridiculously Resilient Ridge, see Wikipedia) near the West coast of the US. This high air pressure region diverts the storm track from the region resulting lack of precipitation.
The European heat wave in 2003, and the Russian drought in 2010 were also caused by blocking anticyclones.
“Warm temperature extremes result from strong adiabatic warming due to downward motion and radiative anomalies in blocking anticyclones. The percentage of blocking-related warm temperature extremes exceeds 80% in large continental regions north of 45°N, and exceeds 60% over the oceans.”
Source: Shaw et al. 2016: Storm track processes and the opposing influences of climate change (Nature Geoscience)
It has nothing to do with AGW.
Instead of counting all of the ‘likelys’ and ‘coulds’ in these unverifiable and untestable model scenarios I simply add ‘Of course it also could be as likely as monkeys flying out of our butts. We just don’t know for sure but we need to prepare for the possibility’ to the end of the conclusion. Seems they all have the same ending.
I thought megadroughts in the SW US arise from protracted Negative PDO conditions. Not warmth, but cold?
In this month’s Atlantic, UofA’s Jonathan Overpeck makes the most of the Cornell report: http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/10/megadroughts-arizona-new-mexico/503531/
It’s a wonder he still owns property in Tucson.
I would love to see the rain totals for Phoenix, Tucson, and Flagstaff, AZ this year. I know they had record rains earlier in the year. I have seen a lot of rain on the weather map recently, and in the last couple months. Do they just forget about the record rains 6 months prior? (delete them?).
Depending on dates selected (cherry-picking, in otherwords) one can arrive at whatever answer wanted.
Generally this has been a slightly wet year to date for Tucson:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/images/twc/cliplot/KTUS2016plot.png
Wherever you measure rain
you will find a pattern
like I did here
if you put it into the relevant solar cycles
just to clarify
4 Hale cycles = 1 Gleissberg cycle
I think that in periods of low solar activity does not threaten California drought.
please clarify
[your comment is self contradictory]
“Tree-ring reconstructions extend this
relationship back to the Medieval Warm Period
(MWP, A.D. ~900 to 1300), which was seemingly
characterized by positive solar forcing, inactive
tropical volcanism, La Niña–like conditions, and
multidecadal “megadroughts”
“The influence of solar variability on Earth’s
climate over centennial to millennial time
scales is the subject of considerable debate.
The change in total solar irradiance over recent
11-year sunspot cycles amounts to <0.1%, but
greater changes at ultraviolet wavelengths (1)
may have substantial impacts on stratospheric ozone
concentrations, thereby altering both stratospheric
and tropospheric circulation patterns (2). Estimates
of the secular increase in total irradiance since the
late 17th century Maunder sunspot minimum
range from ~0.05 to 0.5% (1). Values in the middle
of this range are sufficient to force the intermediatecomplexity
Zebiak-Cane model of El Niño–
Southern Oscillation (ENSO) dynamics into a more
El Niño–like state during the Little Ice Age (A.D.
~1400 to 1850) (3), a response dubbed the “ocean
dynamical thermostat” because negative (or positive)
radiative forcing results in dynamical ocean
warming (or cooling, respectively) of the eastern
tropical Pacific (ETP) (4). This model prediction is
supported by paleoclimatic proxy reconstructions
over the past millennium."
http://instaar.colorado.edu/~marchitt//reprints/tmmscience10.pdf
“The mid-Holocene (5600–3500 yr
BP) was a time of consistently weak El Niño activity, as were the
Early Middle Ages (∼1000–1500 yr BP) and the 19th-to-mid-20th
centuries. El Niño event strength and frequency were moderate to
high during the remainder of the last 3500 years.
Empirical evidence from a diverse set of continuous paleoclimate
records make clear that the ENSO mode of climate variability
persisted throughout the last 9200 years, except for the period
from about 5500–3800 yr BP, when ENSO was weak or inoperative.
Synchronous changes in Galápagos rainfall extremes and in
the occurrence of US Great Plains drought with cosmogenic nuclide
production supports a link between solar activity and ENSO
throughout most of the Holocene. These observations can be exploited
to improve models being used to predict changes in ENSO
caused by anthropogenic climate forcing. Indeed, based on the
Holocene evolution of ENSO, we propose it is likely that the future
intensity and frequency of both El Niño and La Niña will be
at least partly modulated by natural variations in solar activity.”
http://faculty.washington.edu/jsachs/lab/www/Zhang_Leduc_Sachs-El%20Junco%20Botryo%20dD%20Holocene-EPSL14proofs.pdf
ren
These observations can be exploited to improve models being used to predict changes in ENSO caused by anthropogenic climate forcing. Indeed, based on the Holocene evolution of ENSO, we propose it is likely that the future intensity and frequency of both El Niño and La Niña will at be least partly modulated by natural variations in solar activity
henry says
that is also a contradiction…. I find there is no [measurable] man made global warming, hence all climate change aka change in drought/precipitation, is forced by solar activity.
I know this to be true
firstly because of my own results on a variety of parameters,
– indeed the Gleissberg cycle became the only explanation for the results, at 86.5 years exactly –
but also from measurements by others shows that the Gleissberg is as relevant today as it was during the whole of the holocene
http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/17/585/2010/npg-17-585-2010.html
2016-86.5= 1930
[1932 saw the start of the dust bowl drought]
When it suits their purposes, the AGW soldiers can treat climate as a statistical phenomenon – discussing ‘risks’ and chances – rather than a deterministic phenomenon – CO2 sensitivity, ‘the science is settled’. The reality is that you can’t have it both ways.
Either you know enough about the many causes and effects to make hard predictions, or you must admit to incomplete knowledge and roll the dice.
@tadchem
your name suggests being a chemist?
in that case you might be interested in knowing that I am also [a retired] chemist.
CO2 warming is supposed to increase minimum temperatures, pushing the means up.
I analysed all daily data of 54 weather stations, 27 in the NH and 27 SH – latitudes balanced to zero.
For the rate of change I find a perfect curve. There is no room for any man made warming in the curve….
the curve follows a pattern and it is therefore predictable what will happen in the future
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/11/claim-megadrought-risks-in-southwest-soar-as-atmosphere-warms-based-on-model-ignores-records/#comment-2317099