The international group of scientists assessed freshwater availability and water storage across the world, including lakes, river flow, groundwater, soil moisture, snow cover and ice melt.
While 2024 was generally a dry and hot year, featuring record-breaking temperatures driven by the warming El Nino weather phenomenon, it also saw significant flooding events, the scientists said.
They found that around 60 per cent of rivers globally showed either too much or too little water compared to the average flow per year.
While the world has natural cycles of climate variability from year to year, long-term trends outlined in the report indicate the water cycle, at a global scale, is accelerating.
…
Stefan Uhlenbrook, WMO director of hydrology in the water and cryosphere division, said scientists feel it is “increasingly difficult to predict”.
“It’s more erratic – so either too much or too low on average flow per year,” he said.
From drought to deluge: WMO report highlights increasingly erratic water cycle
PRESS RELEASE
18 September 2025
The water cycle has become increasingly erratic and extreme, swinging between deluge and drought, according to a new report from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). It highlights the cascading impacts of too much or too little water on economies and society.
Key messages
State of Global Water Resources report highlights cascading impacts of too much or too little water
Only one third of river basins had normal conditions in 2024
All glacier regions worldwide report losses due to melt for third straight year
Report calls for more monitoring and data sharing
The State of Global Water Resources report says only about one-third of the global river basins had “normal” conditions in 2024. The rest were either above or below normal – the sixth consecutive year of clear imbalance.
2024 was the third straight year with widespread glacier loss across all regions. Many small-glacier regions have already reached or are about to passthe so-called peak water point – when a glacier’s melting reaches its maximum annual runoff, after which this decreases due to glacier shrinkage.
The Amazon Basin and other parts of South America, as well as southern Africa were gripped by severe drought in 2024, whilst there were wetter-than-normal conditions in central, western and eastern Africa, parts of Asia and Central Europe, it says.
“Water sustains our societies, powers our economies and anchors our ecosystems. And yet the world’s water resources are under growing pressure and – at the same time – more extreme water-related hazards are having an increasing impact on lives and livelihoods,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo.
“Reliable, science-based information is more important than ever before because we cannot manage what we do not measure. The WMO’s State of Global Water Resources Report 2024 is part of WMO’s commitment to provide that knowledge,” she said.
The annual State of Global Water Resources Report is one of a suite of WMO reports which provide intelligence and insights to decision-makers. It is an authoritative assessment of global freshwater availability, including streamflow, reservoirs, lakes, groundwater, soil moisture, snow and ice. It is based on data contributed by WMO Members, as well as information from global hydrological modelling systems and satellite observations from a wide range of partners.
The report highlights the critical need for improved monitoring and data sharing.
“Continued investment and enhanced collaboration in data sharing are vital to close monitoring gaps. Without data, we risk flying blind,” said Celeste Saulo.
An estimated 3.6 billion people face inadequate access to water at least a month per year and this is expected to increase to more than 5 billion by 2050, according to UN Water, and the world falling far short of Sustainable Development Goal 6 on water and sanitation.
Key messages
Anomalies of mean river discharge for the year 2024 compared to the period 1991–2020, derived from the modelled river discharge data obtained from an ensemble of 12 GHMS simulations.
Climatic Conditions: The year 2024 was the hottest year on record and began with an El Niño event which impacted major river basins. It contributed to droughts in northern South America and the Amazon Basin and southern Africa.
It was wetter-than-average in Central and western Africa, the Lake Victoria basin in Africa, Kazakhstan and Southern Russia, Central Europe, Pakistan and Northern India, Southern Iran, and North-Eastern China
Rivers and lakes: In the past six years only about one-third of the global river catchment area had normal discharge conditions compared to the 1991-2020 average. This means that two thirds have too much or too little water – reflecting the increasingly erratic hydrological cycle.
There was much below-normal discharge across key river basins including the Amazon, São Francisco, Paraná, and Orinoco in South America, and the Zambezi, Limpopo, Okavango, Orange basins in southern Africa.
Extensive flooding occurred in West African basins in Senegal, Niger, Lake Chad, Volta). There was above normal river discharge across Central Europe and parts of Asia, swelling major basins including the Danube, Ganges, Godavari, and Indus.
Nearly all out of selected 75 main lakes across the globe saw above or much above normal temperatures in July, affecting water quality.
Reservoir inflows, groundwater, soil moisture and evapotranspiration trends highlighted regional contrasts, with recharge in wetter areas such as parts of Europe and India, but persistent deficits in parts of Africa, the Americas, and Australia. Over-extraction of groundwater continued to be a problem in some areas, reducing future water availability for communities and ecosystems and further stressing global water resources. Only 38% of the wells (out of 37 406 from 47 countries which submitted groundwater data) had normal levels – the rest were too much or too little.
Glaciers: 2024 was the third consecutive year on record where there was widespread ice loss across all glaciated regions: with 450 Gt lost – the equivalent of a huge block of ice 7 kilometers tall, 7 km wide, and 7 km deep, or enough water to fill 180 million Olympic swimming pools. That much meltwater adds about 1.2 millimetres to global sea level in a single year, contributing to flooding risk for hundreds of millions of people living in coastal zones.
Record mass loss occurred in Scandinavia, Svalbard, and North Asia, while some regions like the Canadian Arctic and Greenland periphery saw more moderate losses. Nearer the Tropics, Colombian glaciers lost 5% in 2024.
Annual glacier mass changes (in gigatonnes) from 1976 to 2024
Extreme Events: Africa’s tropical zone experienced unusually heavy rainfall in 2024 compared to their historical norms, resulting in approximately 2,500 fatalities and 4 million people displaced. Europe experienced its most extensive flooding since 2013, with one-third of the river networks exceeding high flood thresholds. Asia and the Pacific were hit by record-breaking rainfall and tropical cyclones, resulting in over 1,000 deaths. Brazil experienced simultaneous extremes, with catastrophic flooding in the south of the country taking 183 lives and continuation of the 2023 drought in the Amazon basin, affecting 59% of the country’s territory.
Notes to Editors
The State of Global Water Resources report contains input from a wide network of hydrological experts, including National Meteorological and Hydrological Services, Global Data Centres, global hydrological modelling community members and supporting organizations such as NASA, ESA, the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ), the World Glacier Monitoring Service, Global Runoff Data Center (GDRC) and the International Ground Water Assessment Centre.
The report seeks to enhance the accessibility and availability of observational data (both through better monitoring and improved data sharing), further integrate relevant variables into the report, and encourage country participation to better understand and report water cycle dynamics.
Future reports are anticipated to include even more observational data, supported by initiatives like the WMO’s Global Hydrological Status and Outlook System (HydroSOS), the WMO Hydrological Observing System (WHOS), and collaboration with global data centers.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations responsible for promoting international cooperation in atmospheric science and meteorology.
WMO monitors weather, climate, and water resources and provides support to its Members in forecasting and disaster mitigation. The organization is committed to advancing scientific knowledge and improving public safety and well-being through its work.
For further information, please contact:
Clare NullisWMO media officercnullis@wmo.int+41 79 709 13 97
WMO Strategic Communication Office Media Contactmedia@wmo.int
The full report does make a passing reference to Antarctica, on page 26 which contains the map above, the map has the caption “Figure 16. Terrestrial water storage (TWS) in 2024 expressed as anomalies compared with the 2002–2020 reference period. Note that Greenland and Antarctica are not included, as their negative ice mass balance trends over 2002–2020 period are large and therefore hide the other TWS anomalies when plotted on the same scale.“
In the early days of aviation controls were designed for the “average” airman. Planes were falling out of the sky. Turned out that there was no such thing as an “average” airman and that pilots could not adequately reach the controls. Then someone had the bright idea of making the seats adjustable…
They found that around 60 per cent of rivers globally showed either too much or too little water compared to the average flow per year.
Even worse, one might expect that almost no rivers would have a flow which was exactly equal to the average – the average being a mathematical construct. 60%?
Someone is dreaming, or imbibing certain substances to the extreme.
Or maybe just ignorance and gullibility writ large?
Except in Lake Woebegon, where all children are above average.
strativarius
September 19, 2025 2:49 am
water cycle is becoming harder to predict as the climate changes
Given that the climate is constantly changing and isn’t going to stop changing any time soon, that statement is a rather lame excuse for their lack of ability; modelled or otherwise. Why should it be any harder now with all the technology and global coverage by satellites etc?
Goldilocks take note: “showed either too much or too little water”
In the UK they are doubling down on net zero – whatever the cost.
“Data centres have become a focal point in the UK’s push toward digital infrastructure, earning their designation as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) by the government. … The energy consumption of data centres presents an ongoing challenge. They require massive amounts of electricity. … the government’s push to make data centres greener by adopting more energy-efficient technologies and renewable power sources will be a key focus moving forward. – Institute of Government & Public Policy
A Labour minister announced on BBC radio yesterday that data centres will be powered by wind and solar. And I think he really believed it. When none of the predictions, scenarios, or whatever you want to call them, materialise it gets desperate.
So, if the climate can be predicted by climate models (a fallacy, I’m sure), they should be able to predict the water cycle from that information, n’est pas?
One further comment: I remember reading (on this site) many years ago that modeling is NOT a prediction. It is, rather, a way to test the assumptions made in the model and then checking the results against data. As long as the results fit one’s political agenda. they’re good. If they don’t fit, they’re BAAAD.
“… NOT a prediction …”
The term is “scenario” an outcome that is possible. See: Monte Carlo method.
My financial guru ran thousands of simulations and told me I have a 90% chance of outliving my money unless a reduced my wasteful spending on booze, bird dogs, and fast horses (or was it fast women?). I said, I’ll stop paying you!
“water cycle is becoming harder to predict as the climate changes
Given that the climate is constantly changing and isn’t going to stop changing any time soon, that statement is a rather lame excuse for their lack of ability; modelled or otherwise. Why should it be any harder now with all the technology and global coverage by satellites etc? ”
They say that in order to keep the funding coming. Otherwise,a lot of them are out of jobs.
Higher than normal water level in a well isn’t a problem. The authors of, “The state of Global Water Resources Report” couldn’t stop themselves from “Rubber Stamping” higher well water levels as, “…Too Much…” As such, it makes them look foolish. And it begs the question of how much else in the “Report” was essentially predetermined.
Yes, what they’re now admitting is a situation that has existed for a very long time.
That is –
“Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody ever does anything about it”.
The study cited above covers the period “from April 2002 to December 2023″. The period of mass gain referred to lasted from Feb 2020 to the end of 2023, but this only reduced the AIS’ contribution to global mean sea level (GMSL) over the period studied from a peak of 5.99±0.43 mm in February 2020 to 5.10±0.52 mm at the end of 2023.
In other words, the mass gain that occurred near the end of the study period reduced the AIS’ total contribution to GMSL rise between 2002 and 2023 from 5.9 mm to 5.1 mm; less than one millimetre.
By anyone’s measure, ~5.1 mm over ~20 years from the AIS is still a “large” contribution to GMSL, as the WMO report states.
Also, can you point to any model study that said “Antarctica would melt away” between 2002 and 2023?
So a proposed increase in melting in one part of Antarctica over the course of a century is the same thing as all of Antarctica melting away by 2023, is it?
Dear Nail,
Do you understand there is a difference between being a useful contributor to a discussion versus being like a mosquito bite on the buttocks?
By anyone’s measure, ~5.1 mm over ~20 years from the AIS is still a “large” contribution to GMSL, as the WMO report states.
in round numbers 5 mm is about 0.2 inches. That means over 5, 20 year periods (a century), GMSL would go up by around 1 inch. Jeez, I need to move to the highest mountains to escape the carnage!
Again, that’s not GMSL rise; that’s just the Antarctic’s contribution to it over the period in question, 2002 to 2023. (I wish you self-appointed ‘skeptics’ were a little more skeptical and actually tried to read the stuff you are commenting on.)
Recent GMSL rise is currently ~4.3 mm/yr. Ignoring acceleration, which we love to do here at WUWT but which nevertheless is happening, that means that over the next century GMSL will have risen by ~430 mm, or 17 inches. 17 times more than you thought.
And that is ignoring what is becoming an increasingly obvious acceleration.
According to the wheel graph 61% were normal or above. Flooding is not a good thing, but since they don’t give cutoff numbers isn’t it better to be at normal or above?
…..reflecting the increasingly erratic hydrological cycle.
These people have obviously never owned a rain gauge and kept track of the rainfall in their back yard for any length of time…
Giving_Cat
September 19, 2025 8:42 am
> In the past six years only about one-third of the global river catchment area had normal discharge conditions compared to the 1991-2020 average. This means that two thirds have too much or too little water – reflecting the increasingly erratic hydrological cycle.
No, this means these “scientists” don’t know how to express natural variation. At first I thought this was a case of lying with statistics. Then I realized it is worse than we thought. This is reaching conclusions without knowing statistics.
mleskovarsocalrrcom
September 19, 2025 10:49 am
When you run out of options any new “finding” will guarantee publication.
Speaking of “climate” becoming “more unpredictable”, there is this developing story showing mankind’s abject hubris in being able to predict weather, let alone climate (that is, weather over a specified geographical area averaged over 30 years or more):
However, to date and with only ten weeks left in the official 2025 hurricane season that ends on November 30, here is the current tally:
—7 tropical storms,
—1 hurricane (Erin),
—1 major hurricane (Erin)
Of course, the quality of the output from supercomputers modeling weather or “climate”, particularly tropical storms, is only as good as the “science” that goes into programming them and the “data” they are fed. In this case, it appears the NOAA supercomputer outputs are pretty much equivalent in uncertainty to just predicting the expected number of storms (in each category listed) using statistical analysis (the mean and 2-sigma statistics) of the last five years of tropical storm data.
That is, the predictions might as well have been done using an Excel program on a $500 laptop computer.
Of course NOAA is now scrambling to bring up excuses for their currently-failed weather predictions on hurricane developments (most people already know about their failed climate prediction models as submitted to the IPCC’s CMIP-X comparisons) . . . citing things such as “The Atlantic is quiet at the moment, but activity can begin quickly . . . Right now, it might look quiet, but after a week, it might not be.”
Bottom line: It’s not that climate is becoming more unpredictable, it is instead that climate has never been predictable by mankind, despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars and multiple hundreds of thousands of man-hours by scientists trying to do such.
Report reports over or under volumes compared to “the average”. Big question: over what period of time was the average calculated, and what was the variability over that period?
A year with a large + or – relative to the average may be a normal year if the annual variability is large.
You think the writers don’t know this? Note the remark that constant observation is needed, measurements: that’s corporate speak for “we want our jobs and work funded, nobody gets let go or projects dropped, in fact we want money for more bodies, more projects and more technological assets”.
“The annual State of Global Water Resources Report is one of a suite of WMO reports which provide intelligence and insights to decision-makers. It is an authoritative assessment of global freshwater availability, including streamflow, reservoirs, lakes, groundwater, soil moisture, snow and ice. It is based on data contributed by WMO Members, as well as information from global hydrological modelling systems and satellite observations from a wide range of partners.”
Emphasis added. How much of the variable behavior is from the models, and how much from observations?
The report highlights the critical need for improved monitoring and data sharing.
“Continued investment…
leefor
September 19, 2025 8:59 pm
Meanwhile in Perth Western Australia, we have had our wettest winter for 30 years. But they are unhappy, the new Climate Assessment Report says to expect more flooding. 🙁
KlimaSkeptic
September 20, 2025 12:36 am
Am I reading this right “…Dry and Hot With Lots of Rain”?
When you take an average you always get some bigger and some smaller. Are these people stupid?
In a word, yes.
They are protecting their jobs and career and importance in the world. The stupid ones are called “journalists and activists”.
Exactly. And when you define “Normal” as the average then it is entirely possible that no areas will be “Normal “.
In the early days of aviation controls were designed for the “average” airman. Planes were falling out of the sky. Turned out that there was no such thing as an “average” airman and that pilots could not adequately reach the controls. Then someone had the bright idea of making the seats adjustable…
Even worse, one might expect that almost no rivers would have a flow which was exactly equal to the average – the average being a mathematical construct. 60%?
Someone is dreaming, or imbibing certain substances to the extreme.
Or maybe just ignorance and gullibility writ large?
Except in Lake Woebegon, where all children are above average.
water cycle is becoming harder to predict as the climate changes
Given that the climate is constantly changing and isn’t going to stop changing any time soon, that statement is a rather lame excuse for their lack of ability; modelled or otherwise. Why should it be any harder now with all the technology and global coverage by satellites etc?
Goldilocks take note:
“showed either too much or too little water”
In the UK they are doubling down on net zero – whatever the cost.
“Data centres have become a focal point in the UK’s push toward digital infrastructure, earning their designation as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) by the government.
…
The energy consumption of data centres presents an ongoing challenge. They require massive amounts of electricity.
…
the government’s push to make data centres greener by adopting more energy-efficient technologies and renewable power sources will be a key focus moving forward. – Institute of Government & Public Policy
A Labour minister announced on BBC radio yesterday that data centres will be powered by wind and solar. And I think he really believed it. When none of the predictions, scenarios, or whatever you want to call them, materialise it gets desperate.
So, if the climate can be predicted by climate models (a fallacy, I’m sure), they should be able to predict the water cycle from that information, n’est pas?
They model everything. Only now they also roll the bones with Attribution [modelling]. 21st century voodoo.
But that gives them no real useful information on reality, but when you believe that’s no big deal.
One further comment: I remember reading (on this site) many years ago that modeling is NOT a prediction. It is, rather, a way to test the assumptions made in the model and then checking the results against data. As long as the results fit one’s political agenda. they’re good. If they don’t fit, they’re BAAAD.
“… NOT a prediction …”
The term is “scenario” an outcome that is possible. See: Monte Carlo method.
My financial guru ran thousands of simulations and told me I have a 90% chance of outliving my money unless a reduced my wasteful spending on booze, bird dogs, and fast horses (or was it fast women?). I said, I’ll stop paying you!
“water cycle is becoming harder to predict as the climate changes
Given that the climate is constantly changing and isn’t going to stop changing any time soon, that statement is a rather lame excuse for their lack of ability; modelled or otherwise. Why should it be any harder now with all the technology and global coverage by satellites etc? ”
They say that in order to keep the funding coming. Otherwise,a lot of them are out of jobs.
_______________________________________________________________
What constitutes too much water in a well?
Well that’s the question.
Higher than normal water level in a well isn’t a problem. The authors of, “The state of Global Water Resources Report” couldn’t stop themselves from “Rubber Stamping” higher well water levels as, “…Too Much…” As such, it makes them look foolish. And it begs the question of how much else in the “Report” was essentially predetermined.
In one averages the “too much” with the “too little” does it equal “normal”?
Story Tip – Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs)
These were installed with no consultation during lockdowns. Just recently another was added in the dead of night…
Sneaky’ Green-led council installs LTNs at 3am under police protection”
Transport for London (CEO S. Khan) commissioned a report on LTNs. Can you guess what it pointed to? And why nobody has heard of it?
Why didn’t TfL publish the truth about LTNs?
TfL ‘suppressed report showing LTNs don’t cut car use’
The WMO should be ashamed of itself. They should do science, and humanity itself a favor and disband.
Yes, what they’re now admitting is a situation that has existed for a very long time.
That is –
“Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody ever does anything about it”.
The study cited above covers the period “from April 2002 to December 2023″. The period of mass gain referred to lasted from Feb 2020 to the end of 2023, but this only reduced the AIS’ contribution to global mean sea level (GMSL) over the period studied from a peak of 5.99±0.43 mm in February 2020 to 5.10±0.52 mm at the end of 2023.
In other words, the mass gain that occurred near the end of the study period reduced the AIS’ total contribution to GMSL rise between 2002 and 2023 from 5.9 mm to 5.1 mm; less than one millimetre.
By anyone’s measure, ~5.1 mm over ~20 years from the AIS is still a “large” contribution to GMSL, as the WMO report states.
Also, can you point to any model study that said “Antarctica would melt away” between 2002 and 2023?
Models?
Unavoidable future increase in West Antarctic ice-shelf melting over the twenty-first century
Using a regional ocean model, we present a comprehensive suite of future projections
By comprehensive they mean one of them could or even might be right. A scattergun approach. No volcanic activity was even considered.
So a proposed increase in melting in one part of Antarctica over the course of a century is the same thing as all of Antarctica melting away by 2023, is it?
It isn’t melting away.
That’s for the birds (penguins)
No, I didn’t think so and no one said that it would. Perhaps someone should tell Eric?
Perhaps someone should tell Eric?
And what is stopping you? I’m intrigued to know…
Maybe he doesn’t read the comments on his own posts?
There other means
Dear Nail,
Do you understand there is a difference between being a useful contributor to a discussion versus being like a mosquito bite on the buttocks?
You do know there’s a difference between an ad hominem attack and a reply to a reasonable question?
You don’t, do you?
“a proposed increase in melting”
Oh dear, is the big bad wolf huffing and puffing too much ??
Fantasies and fairy-tales. !
“So a proposed increase in melting….”
What does that even mean !!!
Do they have a whole heap of blow-torches at the ready ??
Over his head it goes, as usual.
“By comprehensive they mean one of them could or even might be right”
If they are using anything related to climate models , it is highly unlikely that any of them will come even close to reality.
Antarctic sea ice is currently pretty much up with the normal extent after two low years from the HT volcano.
Arctic sea ice looks like it bottomed out ABOVE 4.6 Wadhams.
There is no evidence of any acceleration in sea level rise at tide gauges in the last 100 years.
Anyone SCARED of 5.1mm sea level rise in 20 years, need to get their head examined and buy a new pair of floaties. !!
That’s just the Antarctic’s contribution to it, not the total GMSL rise. Do read the papers linked to.
in round numbers 5 mm is about 0.2 inches. That means over 5, 20 year periods (a century), GMSL would go up by around 1 inch. Jeez, I need to move to the highest mountains to escape the carnage!
Again, that’s not GMSL rise; that’s just the Antarctic’s contribution to it over the period in question, 2002 to 2023. (I wish you self-appointed ‘skeptics’ were a little more skeptical and actually tried to read the stuff you are commenting on.)
Recent GMSL rise is currently ~4.3 mm/yr. Ignoring acceleration, which we love to do here at WUWT but which nevertheless is happening, that means that over the next century GMSL will have risen by ~430 mm, or 17 inches. 17 times more than you thought.
And that is ignoring what is becoming an increasingly obvious acceleration.
Derived from models ???
YAWN !!!!!!!
“1.2 millimetres to global sea level in a single year, contributing to flooding risk”
WOW.. 1.2mm.. a massive flood risk !!
Do these clowns even read the crap they write !!
Or was it written by a conforming AI, and it was published without review, as it came from an AI?
“They found that around 60 per cent of rivers globally showed either too much or too little water compared to the average flow per year. ”
Wow, that’s dumb and I’m no statistician. How often are the rivers going to have the same amount of flow as the average year? Almost never.
Since an average is a single number (according to climate scientists)…
…. it is extremely unlikely that the flow would ever be “average”…
therefore it should be very close to 100% showing either more, or less, than the average.
Its the lake woebegone fallacy – all children above average; though Garrison Keillor was joking (so he understood).
Too bad he got canceled.
Someone needs to give these “experts” a tutorial on statistics and the concept of standard deviation\
So, in summary – normal variation in the weather. Shocking.
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Charles Mackay’s almost 200 year old book applies to the climate change scam in spades.
According to the wheel graph 61% were normal or above. Flooding is not a good thing, but since they don’t give cutoff numbers isn’t it better to be at normal or above?
There’s a lot of spiralling going on with the climate changers-
Earth’s water system is spiralling with deadly swings between too little and too much, warns WMO
Right on. This study should be shredded and disposed of for in the nearest spiraling water fixture.
These people have obviously never owned a rain gauge and kept track of the rainfall in their back yard for any length of time…
> In the past six years only about one-third of the global river catchment area had normal discharge conditions compared to the 1991-2020 average. This means that two thirds have too much or too little water – reflecting the increasingly erratic hydrological cycle.
No, this means these “scientists” don’t know how to express natural variation. At first I thought this was a case of lying with statistics. Then I realized it is worse than we thought. This is reaching conclusions without knowing statistics.
When you run out of options any new “finding” will guarantee publication.
Story tip:
Speaking of “climate” becoming “more unpredictable”, there is this developing story showing mankind’s abject hubris in being able to predict weather, let alone climate (that is, weather over a specified geographical area averaged over 30 years or more):
NOAA predictions for the 2025 hurricane season in the Atlantic, a 70% confidence of:
— 13 to 19 total named storms
— 6-10 are forecast to become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or higher)
— 3-5 major hurricanes (category 3, 4 or 5; with winds of 111 mph or higher)
(ref: https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/noaa-predicts-above-normal-2025-atlantic-hurricane-season )
And the UK MET Office offered these similar predictions for the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season:
—16 tropical storms,
—9 hurricanes,
—4 major hurricanes
(ref: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/weather/tropical-cyclones/seasonal/northatlantic2025 )
However, to date and with only ten weeks left in the official 2025 hurricane season that ends on November 30, here is the current tally:
—7 tropical storms,
—1 hurricane (Erin),
—1 major hurricane (Erin)
This current miss, despite the two multimillion dollar-per-year Weather and Climate Operational Supercomputing System (WCOSS) supercomputers used by NOAA, each operating at 14.5 petaflops. (source: https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/noaa-completes-upgrade-to-weather-and-climate-supercomputer-system ).
The current government contract award to General Dynamics Information Technology for the WCOSS supercomputers and their designs, deployments, and management is stated to be $505 million over a potential 10-year period. (ref: https://www.gdit.com/about-gdit/press-releases/noaa-awards-general-dynamics-high-performance-computing-contract ).
Of course, the quality of the output from supercomputers modeling weather or “climate”, particularly tropical storms, is only as good as the “science” that goes into programming them and the “data” they are fed. In this case, it appears the NOAA supercomputer outputs are pretty much equivalent in uncertainty to just predicting the expected number of storms (in each category listed) using statistical analysis (the mean and 2-sigma statistics) of the last five years of tropical storm data.
That is, the predictions might as well have been done using an Excel program on a $500 laptop computer.
Of course NOAA is now scrambling to bring up excuses for their currently-failed weather predictions on hurricane developments (most people already know about their failed climate prediction models as submitted to the IPCC’s CMIP-X comparisons) . . . citing things such as “The Atlantic is quiet at the moment, but activity can begin quickly . . . Right now, it might look quiet, but after a week, it might not be.”
Bottom line: It’s not that climate is becoming more unpredictable, it is instead that climate has never been predictable by mankind, despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars and multiple hundreds of thousands of man-hours by scientists trying to do such.
Don’t expect the WMO to admit to this fact.
Report reports over or under volumes compared to “the average”. Big question: over what period of time was the average calculated, and what was the variability over that period?
A year with a large + or – relative to the average may be a normal year if the annual variability is large.
You think the writers don’t know this? Note the remark that constant observation is needed, measurements: that’s corporate speak for “we want our jobs and work funded, nobody gets let go or projects dropped, in fact we want money for more bodies, more projects and more technological assets”.
“The annual State of Global Water Resources Report is one of a suite of WMO reports which provide intelligence and insights to decision-makers. It is an authoritative assessment of global freshwater availability, including streamflow, reservoirs, lakes, groundwater, soil moisture, snow and ice. It is based on data contributed by WMO Members, as well as information from global hydrological modelling systems and satellite observations from a wide range of partners.”
Emphasis added. How much of the variable behavior is from the models, and how much from observations?
Did you read the report?
I never thought much of the WMO after reading this I think even less of them.
Same old refrain:
The report highlights the critical need for improved monitoring and data sharing.
“Continued investment…
Meanwhile in Perth Western Australia, we have had our wettest winter for 30 years. But they are unhappy, the new Climate Assessment Report says to expect more flooding. 🙁
Am I reading this right “…Dry and Hot With Lots of Rain”?