Claim: climate change forcing storms further North

From the WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE and the “Where were the storms during the medieval warm period?” department.

Off track: How storms will veer in a warmer world

Weizmann Institute of Science research uncovers the internal mechanisms driving storms toward the poles

Under global climate change, the Earth’s climatic zones will shift toward the poles. This is not just a future prediction; it is a trend that has already been observed in the past decades. The dry, semi-arid regions are expanding into higher latitudes, and temperate, rainy regions are migrating poleward. In a paper that that was recently published in Nature Geoscience, Weizmann Institute of Science researchers provide new insight into this phenomenon by discovering that mid-latitude storms are steered further toward the poles in a warmer climate. Their analysis, which also revealed the physical mechanisms controlling this phenomenon, involved a unique approach that traced the progression of low-pressure weather systems both from the outside – in their movement around the globe – and from the inside – analyzing the storms’ dynamics.

Prof. Yohai Kaspi of the Institute’s Earth and Planetary Sciences Department explains that the Earth’s climatic zones roughly follow latitudinal bands. Storms mostly move around the globe in preferred regions called “storm tracks,” forming over the ocean and generally traveling eastward and somewhat poleward along these paths. Thus, a storm that forms in the Atlantic off the East Coast of the US at a latitude of around 40N will reach Europe in the region of latitude 50N. Until recently, however, this inclination to move in the direction of the nearest pole was not really understood. Dr. Talia Tamarin in Kaspi’s group solved this fundamental question in her doctoral research.

Kaspi:

“From the existing climate models, one can observe the average storm tracks, but it is hard to prove cause and effect from these. They only show us where there are relatively more or fewer storms. Another approach is following individual storms; however, we must deal with chaotic, noisy systems that are heavily dependent on the initial conditions, meaning no storm is exactly like another. Talia developed a method that combines these two approaches. She applied a storm-tracking algorithm to simplified atmospheric circulation models in which thousands of storms are generated, thus eliminating the dependence on initial conditions. This allowed her to understand how such storms develop over time and space, and what controls their movement.”

Even such simplified models involve calculations that require several days of computation in one of the Weizmann Institute’s powerful computer clusters.

In the present study, to understand how the movement of storms may change in a warmer world, Tamarin and Kaspi applied the same method to full-complexity simulations of climate change predictions. Their analysis showed that the tendency of storm tracks to veer in the direction of the poles intensifies in warmer conditions. They discovered that two processes are responsible for this phenomenon. One is connected to the vertical structure and circulation near the tops of these weather systems. A certain type of flow that is necessary for them to grow also steers the storms toward the pole, and these flows are expected to become stronger when average temperatures rise.

The second process is connected to the energy tied up in the water vapor in such storms. In global warming, the hotter air will contain more water vapor, and thus more energy will be released when the vapor condenses to drops. “The hottest, wettest air is circulating up the eastern flank of the storm – to the northern side – and releasing energy there,” says Tamarin. “This process pushes the storm northward (or southward in the southern hemisphere), and this effect will also be stronger in a warmer climate.”

This is a Google earth storm track. CREDIT Google earth

The models of climate change predict that if average global temperatures rise by four degrees over the next 100 years, storms will deviate poleward from their present tracks by two degrees of latitude. The research performed at the Weizmann Institute of Science shows that part of this will be due to the mechanism they demonstrated, and the other part is tied to the fact that storms are born at a higher latitude in a warmer world. “The model Talia developed gives us both qualitative information on the mechanisms that steer storms toward the poles and quantitative means to predict how these will change in the future,” says Kaspi. “Although two degrees may not sound like a lot, the resulting deviation in temperature and rain patterns will have a significant effect on climate zones,” he adds.

###

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
85 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 15, 2017 12:39 pm

I posted my last comment before reading the full article I now have noticed this “…this inclination to move in the direction of the nearest pole.” What is wrong with saying towards instead of “in the direction of”. Is the writer paid by the word?

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Tom Trevor
November 15, 2017 3:29 pm

I suppose if a storm was at 23 degrees latitude and moved northwards to 28 degrees latitude it could be said it is moving “in the direction of the nearest pole”. Very general and not really meaningful. Using “towards” could imply it was close to the pole and getting closer.

Rob
November 15, 2017 12:41 pm

Around here in middle Alberta, as a rule, cold and snow storms come from the north and north west. Any storms that come from the southwest are only in the summer months, and are always locally generated when day time heating is forced up against the mountains. when the rising heat meets cold air it generates thunder storms.

Ricdre
Reply to  Rob
November 15, 2017 1:38 pm

Here in Northern Ohio, those winter “Alberta Clipper” storms track from Northwest to Southeast and bring a quick burst of cold and snow.

Sara
Reply to  Rob
November 15, 2017 5:13 pm

Here in the northern Midwest (Illinois/Wisconsin), those storms tend to come right toward us from the northwest to the southeast, too. Sometimes we really get hit. Just depends on how much humidity there is. Snow I don’t mind. You can shovel snow. You simply can’t shovel wind off to the side yard.

taxed
November 15, 2017 12:47 pm

Here in the UK we had a run of poor summers from 2007 to 2012.
This was in part due to the jet stream tracking further south then normal during these summers.

November 15, 2017 12:49 pm

Re: “if average global temperatures rise by four degrees over the next 100 years”

That’s a very extreme “if,” probably at least 3× reality.

Even the IPCC predicts only 1.5&deg’C to 4.5°C ECS warming per CO2 doubling after several hundred years (or ~⅔ of that shorter term), relative to the Little Ice Age — and we’ve already seen about 1°C of that warming.

That said, she could still possibly still be right about the storm tracks. If so, that would presumably lead to a few more storms landing at higher latitudes, and a few less at lower latitudes.

That tendency, however, might be swamped by the opposite tendency in storm formation. Earlier this year I had a conversation with meteorology Prof. Gary Lackman of NCSU (a confirmed warmist, but a nice & approachable guy), in which I mentioned James Hansen’s 2009 prediction that the, “increasing temperature gradient [between high and low latitudes] is going to drive stronger storms,” as lower latitudes warm faster than higher latitudes — which is exactly backwards: polar amplification and negative temperature feedbacks in the tropics are causing a reduced temperature gradient between high and low latitudes. If I recall correctly, Prof. Lackman replied something to the effect that “we” (I guess he meant he and his NCSU colleagues) expect an increase in tropical cyclones (due to warmer ocean water), but a decrease in extratropical storms (due to the reduced temperature gradient).

Reply to  daveburton
November 15, 2017 12:56 pm

Sigh. Well, I just can’t type anything, today. I intended to write:

Even the IPCC predicts only 1.5°C to 4.5°C ECS warming per CO2 doubling after several hundred years (or ~⅔ of that shorter term, i.e., TCR), relative to the Little Ice Age — and we’ve already seen about 1°C of that warming.

That said, she could still possibly be right about the storm tracks. If so…

Robber
November 15, 2017 12:56 pm

“the movement of storms may change in a warmer world.” MAY change – says it all really. So no evidence from the last 50-100 years: just another set of unproven model runs.

David A Smith
November 15, 2017 12:58 pm

They made an error in their conclusion. It should be…

Claim: Climate change will cause more pleasant weather at lower latitudes by pushing storms farther north.

They always leave out the benefits.

Jones
November 15, 2017 1:07 pm

“temperate, rainy regions are migrating poleward.”

What? So all of Canada and Siberia will become habitable?

Bonus.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  Jones
November 15, 2017 1:30 pm

I’d like to see them chart out the path of storms which originate over Northern Asia.

DCA
November 15, 2017 3:10 pm

Look at the bright side. If storms are moving towards the poles the effect on North America, Europe, and Australia will be greater which are mostly inhabited by white people. (sarc)

Editor
November 15, 2017 3:15 pm

Please pardon my “French” — but this study is models-of-models finding an infinitesimal, unmeasurable-in-the-real-world difference, then assigning the difference (which I suspect falls well within its own true error ranges) to a speculation.

Two degrees of latitude, for those in the know, is about 140 miles — less than my daily commute when I worked at IBM International Headquarters in Armonk, NY.

It may be true that storms would shift northward if there was a planet-wide warming of 4 degrees C over the next century — and Santa Claus might quit bringing gifts to children turning the task over to the Easter Bunny, but I wouldn’t base my prediction on this type of speculative research.

LarryD
November 15, 2017 3:18 pm

Under global climate change, the Earth’s climatic zones will shift toward the poles.
Color me skeptical on this, the paleo-climatic reconstructions just show the arctic zones becoming temperate, but do not show the tropical zone expanding. And that is the climatic difference between hothouse and interglacial.

Alexander Carpenter
November 15, 2017 3:25 pm

Covert averaging.

jeanparisot
November 15, 2017 4:34 pm

Why didn’t she run the models with no warming and 4 degrees of cooling?

Sara
Reply to  jeanparisot
November 15, 2017 5:19 pm

You might also ask why does she use the word ‘hot’ to describe a 1 to 2 degree overall change? It is SO misleading.

I don’t think these climate peeps should be allowed to use certain words. They tend to exaggerate everything, which alerts us to their misleading statements. Instead of “hot”, they should be allowed to use ONLY “warm”, as in warm, warmer, warmest. Oh, yes, I know – it would lack sufficient scare factor and no one would read the articles they publish, but it would be more proper of them to stop shouting “HOT!” when they can’t even detect a real 1 to 2 degree temperature change.

Sara
November 15, 2017 5:21 pm

I don’t think these climate peeps should be allowed to name storms, use certain words that exaggerate an effect, or run models ahead of collecting real data.

But that’s just me.

November 15, 2017 5:57 pm

Under global climate change, the Earth’s climatic zones will shift toward the poles. This is not just a future prediction; it is a trend that has already been observed in the past decades. The dry, semi-arid regions are expanding into higher latitudes, and temperate, rainy regions are migrating poleward.

Not mentioned under this scenario, rain forests would expand into sahel/savanna and the sahel/savanna would encroach on deserts. Those would be good things, so they are not mentioned. Global warming/CO2 can only be responsible for bad stuff, after all.

FFS

Reply to  Smart Rock
November 15, 2017 10:52 pm

As I mentioned in an earlier comment, archaeology (and also what was written down in earlier times) suggests warmer was wetter, all through the Mideast, and westward into the Sahara. I have a hunch the storm track we currently see travelling west to east through the Mediterranean was not merely nudged north, but altered in some way we are not even considering. Perhaps there was even a tertiary storm track. In any case, there were crocodiles in the middle of the Sahara Desert 6000 years ago.

If people are going to play around in model land, I wish they’d try to figure out what sort of weather pattern made the Sahara green. I haven’t seen a good explanation.

tty
Reply to  Caleb
November 16, 2017 4:31 am

Almost certainly a stronger summer monsoon penetrating further north. Note that the traffic of animals and plants was all from south to north, not the other way around.

Reply to  tty
November 16, 2017 4:50 am

I didn’t know that about the animals. I know savanna animals like giraffes headed north, but the cattle were originally a northern species I think.

I don’t think think the desert moved north much, because (as I recall) the Caspian and Aral Seas were larger, and there were some other “seas” further east in Asia that have since dried up.

A winter storm track across north Africa may have been able to generate more rain if the landscape was wetter to begin with. But I am just guessing.

Gareth
November 16, 2017 2:25 am

In a warming world, weather now common in warmer areas will move North and South into previously colder areas. No S*** Sherlock, who would have guessed ? My theory is that if the climate warms on the small damp island in the North Atlantic which is my home, I will be able to grow crops that require warmer temps.
It’s only a theory at present of course, but time will tell.

ddpalmer
November 16, 2017 4:37 am

researchers provide new insight into this phenomenon by discovering that mid-latitude storms are steered further toward the poles in a warmer climate.

They ‘discovered’ no such thing. Discovered would only apply if they analyzed tracks of thousands of actual real world storms. This isn’t what they did. They ‘simulated’ thousands of storms with computer models. Computer models aren’t reality and their use in this way isn’t science.

November 16, 2017 7:40 am

There is a newly discovered mechanism that ties all the current observations and could be used to create more accurate models. Read my investigation and study the graphics on a desk sized monitor. There is a wide open field for new study.

https://www.harrytodd.org

Matt G
November 16, 2017 2:46 pm

This article claims of storms moving North in future are contradicted by scientific evidence over recent decades. It is fair to say there is no scientific evidence here as it is just modeled. The jet stream is by far the biggest cause of storms moving nearer or further away from the poles.

Evidence for a wavier jet stream in response to rapid Arctic warming

“Overall, the pattern of frequency change is consistent with expectations of a more amplified jet stream in response to rapid Arctic warming. Amplified jet-stream patterns are associated with a variety of extreme weather events (i.e., persistent heat, cold, wet, and dry) [22], thus an increase in amplified patterns suggests that these types of extreme events will become more frequent in the future as AA continues to intensify in all seasons.”

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/1/014005/meta

1) A more amplified jet stream pushes the jet stream much further south.
2) A zonal jet stream pushes the jet stream much further north.
3) Arctic warming when the AO becomes negative is a well known seasonal behavior that has always occurred.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vKcMVCF50t0/UcUCcacjETI/AAAAAAAAVp8/xm5w4JGs7bg/s1600/Arctic_Oscillation-01.jpg
4) Arctic warming when the AO becomes negative more frequently, occurs during quieter solar activity periods.
5) Storms moving further North need the jet stream to become more zonal, but the opposite has been observed.
6) The AO being negative has occurred many times previously especially during some of most extreme cold winters in the past.
7) The jet stream was observed moving North and therefore becoming more zonal during the 1980’s and 1990’s, but that soon ended after.

It is impossible for the Arctic Oscillation to increasingly become negative and storms move further north at the same time, negative feedback is everywhere including here. The behavior in the jet stream over recent decades only indicates that the pause has not really gone away.

AndyG55
Reply to  Matt G
November 16, 2017 3:04 pm

“Evidence for a wavier jet stream in response to rapid Arctic warming”

Which is why there was a major Jet Stream around 1977..

Pretty much the Coldest period in 100 years.
comment image

Toneb
Reply to  Matt G
November 19, 2017 5:06 am

Matt:
“Storms moving further North need the jet stream to become more zonal, but the opposite has been observed.”

A merdionally wandering PJS takes mid-latidtude depressions further north precisely becaue it is meridional. Your pic shows the ‘storms’ generated below the cold plunges. There is a reciprocal ridge of warm air pulsed north between. Depressions are taken furth north as the advancing baroclinicity between the ridge and the trough is engaged by short-wave troughs swinging through the long-wave pattern flow.
In short – a slacker PJS produces extremes of latitudinal storm tracking, whereas a zonal PJS has them on a more ‘focused’ mean track.