Guest essay by Eric Worrall
It is predictable that climate alarmists like Michael Mann are quick to see anthropogenic influence in high profile extreme weather events, like Hurricane Harvey. But Mann’s message about Harvey has interesting implications for the Texan wind power industry.
It’s a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly
Michael E Mann
Tuesday 29 August 2017 00.07 AEST
What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.
What we know so far about tropical storm Harvey
Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot (15cm) over the past few decades (see here for a decent discussion). That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.
…
Finally, the more tenuous but potentially relevant climate factors: part of what has made Harvey such a devastating storm is the way it has stalled near the coast. It continues to pummel Houston and surrounding regions with a seemingly endless deluge, which will likely top out at nearly 4ft (1.22m) of rainfall over a days-long period before it is done.
The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.
More tenuous, but possibly relevant still, is the fact that very persistent, nearly “stationary” summer weather patterns of this sort, where weather anomalies (both high-pressure dry hot regions and low-pressure stormy/rainy regions) stay locked in place for many days at a time, appears to be favoured by human-caused climate change. We recently published a paper in the academic journal Scientific Reports on this phenomenon.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/28/climate-change-hurricane-harvey-more-deadly
Back in 2011, climate scientists were predicting global warming would lead to stronger winds.
If Mann is right, if large scale stationary weather patterns are to become more frequent – days, maybe weeks of low wind speeds, potentially coupled with cloudy conditions which prevent solar systems from working, in my opinion the renewable energy business model in regions affected by this phenomenon is well and truly broken.
No plausible backup power regime other than fossil fuels or nuclear power could cope with such prolonged outages.
Original article h/t Willie Soon
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Mann is utterly deranged.
More wind. No, less wind. The climate alarmist professionals are very adept at speaking out of both sides of their asses.
We need to build tunnels from where it is windy to where it isn’t because as everyone knows, wind tunnels work.
Yes, they do, but not in the manner or for the purpose on how you believe they operate.
Mann: “Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot (15cm) over the past few decades…”
That is self-contradictory. SLR due to oil drilling cannot also be due to climate change.
The best long sea-level measurement record near Houston is at Galveston. It experiences one of the highest rates of SLR in America, because Galveston was elevated with a lot of fill dirt, which is still slowly compacting.
Here’s NOAA’s graph of sea-level at Galveston:
http://sealevel.info/8771450_Galveston_Pier_21_2017-07-18_noaa.png
As you can see, sea-level is rising there at 6.5 mm/year, which is more than 4x the global average. But at least 3/4 of that rise is due to subsidence, which obviously has nothing to do with climate change.
Additionally, there’s obviously been no significant acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise over the last century. As is typical throughout the world, sea-level is rising no faster now on the U.S. Gulf Coast than it was when CO2 was 100 ppmv lower. All that CO2 has had no detectable effect on the rate of sea-level rise.
Subsidence due to landfill compaction has been plaguing Hong Kong for decades and now is occurring in Shanghai as well. As I recall the new Hong Kong Airport sank 50 mm over a two year period.
Coastal development in marginal zones is a big factor. Anthropogenic, absolutely. But, not meteorological in the least.
Japan’s has the same problem.
Also “Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta in Bangladesh, L band InSAR instruments, calibrated with CORS, are measuring land subsidence rates as much as 18 millimeters/year, with the lowest rates appearing primarily in exposed Pleistocene terraces and the highest rates in Holocene organic-rich muds [Higgins et al., 2014]. ”
From https://eos.org/features/global-risks-and-research-priorities-for-coastal-subsidence
Bangladesh has a lot of ‘reclaimed’ land.
“That is self-contradictory. SLR due to oil drilling cannot also be due to climate change.”
Well, it can be if climate change is due to oil drilling can’t it? 😛
Useful information: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/50yr.htm?stnid=8771450
No sign of acceleration.
Michael Mann:
“The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.”
———————-
The Southern Central Plains has been in an atypical cool Summer. It’s 74F in Oklahoma City, right now and might rise late afternoon to 84F. It’s been this way since July. Avg. for today is 90F, record 106F.
Not much Subtropical expansion, here.
By Mann’s screed, it’s cooler here, because it’s hotter, because Global Warming.
Thanks Alan, that’s the truth…….
So it’s worse than we thought, with Global Warming caused by cooler temperatures? I can’t even keep up!
And if the winds Christopher Columbus was sailing with blew to the south pole the mayor of NYC would still raise the price of a pack of cigarettes to $13.00 and I could save 15% with GEICO.
Don’t put words in my mouth, he would say. The main point of this rant is that he wants us to believe he can get GCM’s to say and predict just about anything he likes.
Did Dr. Mann predict the death of wind power?
IMHO, wind power is undead. We should now have enough real data on wind power to bury it … but no. In the face of all the evidence the faithful still assure us that wind power is viable.
From Mr Mann:
As if half a foot more storm surge matters when you get over 3 feet of rain on areas 50 feet above sea level.
Speaking of wind power, I don’t see the end of Mann’s ultracrepidarian pleonastic bloviations.
Yup, and if my grandma had wheels she’d be a wagon. Fact!
I would say investors are betting against him on wind projects in Texas, except they are running out of the best windy locations for new projects.
Resourceguy, you and they suck money from the rest of the populace. That time is coming to an end.
First, it’s important to recognize Dr. Mann’s proven abilities to prognosticate; in the past he hasn’t done quite as well as Punxsutawney Phil and, in short, I wouldn’t depend on his ability to predict the sun will rise in the morning, but enough Scientific accolade.
“It’s a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly
See there? Right off the bat Mann makes a completely unfounded assertion and then proceeds to not present any evidence for it. Ain’t Climate Science grand?
What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.
Note here two things; first, the use of the Royal “we”– Mann doesn’t stand alone in his proclamations and takes no personal responsibility for the statements, allegations or over the top hyperbole to follow. He has followers he speaks for.
Second, he rapidly losses the “anthropogenic” part of AGW and relies on
the reader not noticing that the hurricane in question (Harvey) was doubtless influenced by climate change since all weather events known to humans are influenced by climate. Captain Obvious makes his first empty point.
What we know so far about tropical storm Harvey
Sea level rise attributable to climate change
Again, not AGW, just “climate change”. His readers are expect to fill in the gaps for him and most do. Very clever and deceptive rhetoric.
– some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot (15cm) over the past few decades (see here for a decent discussion).
Some of which is due. No mention of how much and no evidence presented that the number is larger than zero. So we don’t really know how much, if any, is caused by subsidence, or what fraction of that (if any) is caused by oil drilling. But true believers understand that oil drilling is bad and it probably caused all of it. If it happened. At all.
That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.
How many decades Dr. Mann? 10? 100? 1000?
… Finally, the more tenuous but potentially relevant climate factors: part of what has made Harvey such a devastating storm is the way it has stalled near the coast. It continues to pummel Houston and surrounding regions with a seemingly endless deluge, which will likely top out at nearly 4ft (1.22m) of rainfall over a days-long period before it is done.
More “tenuous” Dr. Mann? Do tell? Would that include wild speculation on your part?
The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.
This is of course a simple weather report (see Bill Murray, “Groundhog Day”) having little or nothing to do with “climate”. But when it suits “us”, “we” will decide what is climate and what isn’t.
More importantly, which aspects of the weather aren’t predicted in “model simulations of human caused climate change”? Since the models have historically predicted everything between an ice age and the current climate of Venus, you’ve painted with a very broad and forgiving brush here.
More tenuous, but possibly relevant still,
I’m not clear on this Dr. Mann; is this next point even “more tenuous” than the last (even wilder speculation on your part), or is it simple more wild speculation?
… is the fact that very persistent, nearly “stationary” summer weather patterns of this sort, where weather anomalies (both high-pressure dry hot regions and low-pressure stormy/rainy regions) stay locked in place for many days at a time, appears to be favoured [sic] by human-caused climate change. We recently published a paper in the academic journal Scientific Reports on this phenomenon.”
At last we visit an analysis of “human caused” climate change, for which you present no evidence.
I’ll rush right out and buy your new paper.
Brilliant post. Thank you.
The Mann’s mad.
Video of rescue efforts in Houston shows lots of fossil-fueled vehicles. EV’s nowhere to be found. If the CAGW wackos get their way would the rescuers have EV police vehicles? Busses? EV dump trucks? EV helicopters? Talk about needing a 100% fossil fueled backup plan, if you need to have reliable rescue capability.
Still seems too cloudy for solar to matter, and who knows what the winds are doing. Most wind farms were feathered days ago. Where’s Roger Sowell to explain how great all that non-power is?
In the meantime engines and generators are saving lives. Can you imagine the plight of a city built on wind and solar? If you can’t manage to a serious hurricane with it, it is worthless.
You are entirely correct to point out that the energy systems we need have to work “despite” the weather, not “because” of the weather.
Except that unlike the 18y king tide which accompanies Sandy, flooding did not occur during landfall this time, it happened days later due to persistent static weather pattern over land.
Storm surge was not large and was not a factor.
Flooding happened AFTER Harvey had dropped to tropical storm status well after landfall.
In addition, the storm was stationary.
I apologize. I realize you were saying the same thing, “due to persistent static weather pattern over land.”
I’m the Joe Q Public type that Mann thinks he is reaching and convincing. He assumes I’m dumb.
The man is an idiot. He makes no sense. The gobbledegook written above has nothing to do with meteorological knowledge.
I learn more watching Joe Bastardi every day since he started his daily updates (18 months ago?), and before that, his Saturday summaries. The free videos are on the right
https://www.weatherbell.com/premium
Joe Bastardi has been right 98-99% of the time over the years AND he has predicted what was going to happen 3-4 months before an event, and before anyone else.
Michael Mann is such an idiot. He should stick to counting tree rings and trying to make that significant.
Are there any numbers of how many wind turbines and solar got destroyed because of this hurricane.
“This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.”
I believe this is called fair warm weather, or alternatively, summer.
—–
It is very common for weather fronts to stall out over the gulf coast.
Tropical Storm Claudette stalled out there and dumped over 60″ of rain in Friendswood, Tx. as measured by multiple people’s rain gauges. (Officially, only 43 inches in nearby Alvin)
My brother-in-law was cursing God while watching the sheets of rain come down from the sky because they were supposed to fly out on vacation to Mexico that day.
The winter after that, we had fog and rain for all but 3 days for over 3 months in Clear Lake City – essentially zero visibility from early January into April. Every front that came through that year just stalled out right over the edge of the gulf and kept bringing more fog and rain.
There’s a reason why the area from Houston to New Orleans to Mobile is so rainy, weather systems commonly stall out there.
No idea if this is related, but here in southern Alberta the temps have been above normal for the past few weeks: July and August look similar to the same two months in 1936. A quick look at the wind turbine stats
(AESO) seems to show that wind generation is way down in the same period. Would take an hour or two of digging to “prove” my claim. We are stuck in a stagnant air mass. Heat is way over rated. ☺
(The reverse was also true last December when it was very cold, high demands and wind was missing in inaction.)
Yes, I am aware that I am referring to weather vs climate.
Watch Joe Bastardi’s Daily Updates and you’ll understand why. He doesn’t cover Canada but he shows it.
https://www.weatherbell.com//premium
The freebies are on the right.
Oops. Link is bad. Correct one: https://www.weatherbell.com/premium
“We are stuck in a stagnant air mass. ‘
South of you, we have fires, smoke, and no wind.
Local temp just hit 38°C (100° F)
Link to the regional wind farm output:
https://transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/wind/baltwg.aspx
See the green line at the bottom.
1936 is a long way to go back but most of our Saskatchewan records were set in the 30’s. I think those highs were mostly a result of the very dry conditions prevalent through the 30’s. This year has been quite warm and dry with a number of days in the 30C + range. I can’t tell the difference between this year’s weather and what I remember from around 1975, including that we had more wind this year than for a long time.
So to my mind, approximately 65 years of CO2 effect has produced zero recognizable change in our weather. I can find better things to worry about than this extremely expensive non-event!
The hidden damage to blades and associated components will be devastating. Wait till they turn them back on….
“The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.”
The first part of the first sentence is correct, the hurricane stalled because the steering flow collapsed (thanks Captain Obvious). The last sentence is also accurate, the models do predict subtropical expansion. Everything else in the paragraph is wrong. The subtropical high pattern over the US right now is less extensive than average and the jet stream has been dipping further south than usual for most of the summer. This summer is hardly a conformation of the expansion of the subtropical ridge predicted by the models. It is actually more evidence that the models have no skill.
There is so much ignorance demonstrated in this paragraph alone, that I am gobsmacked. The idea that hurricanes and tropical storms that hit Texas are typically ‘steered off to sea’ would be an idiotic thing for anyone to say, much less a renowned University Professor with a specialty in climate studies. It’s akin to a history professor claiming that the origin of communism begins with the Romans being defeated by the Incas in Australia!
I’m pretty sure this wins the quote of the day here at WUWT!
rip
There is zero ignorance demonstrated by Michael Mann. When utter crap comes out of his mouth you can rest assured he knows better! His complete B.S. 1998 paper was likewise not in error. It was exactly crafted with cherry picked data and “funny” math, then he spliced on a scientifically irrelevant blade to his concoction to produce a piece of activist propaganda to drive his career.
Where on earth does Mann get the “land subsidence partly caused by oil drilling” from?? Another of his cock-eyed inventions to deflect us from the truth that he denies, that the hurricane formed naturally, i.e. without man’s assistance?