Where Are the Hurricanes?
Posted by Dave Cohen on August 24, 2006 - 2:40pm
What a difference a year makes. Last year at this time, Katrina was bearing down on the Gulf of Mexico and Rita was still in the future. The Oil Drum's traffic was way up as our editors and commentors provided up to the minute coverage.
Today, the National Hurricane Center is tracking Debbie, the 4th named storm of 2006. When Katrina hit, it was "the eleventh named storm, fifth hurricane, third major hurricane, and second Category 5 hurricane of the 2005 Atlantic season."
Where are the hurricanes?
Typhoon Saomai tore into Cangnan County in eastern China's Zhejiang province Thursday after authorities relocated 1 million people in the densely populated commercial province, Xinhua said....On August 18th, Bloomberg reported Tropical Storm Wukong Hits Japan's Kyushu; Flights Cancelled. Wikipedia summarizes the 2006 Pacific typhoon season.Saomai, Vietnamese for "morning star," capsized boats and collapsed houses as it carved a swath of destruction through southern China, following in the path of seven previous typhoons this season.
In addition, the NHC is now tracking Ileana in the Eastern Pacific where there has been more activity than in the Atlantic.
The forecast team at Colorado State's The Tropical Meteorology Project, led by Dr. William Gray, predicted in April of 2006 that there would be 17 named storms, 9 hurricanes and 5 intense hurricanes during 2006. The latest revision for activity after August 1st indicates 13 named storms, 7 hurricanes and 3 intense hurricanes.
Similarly, NOAA's Climate Prediction Center 2006 forecast called for
NOAA continues to predict a high likelihood (75% chance) of an above-normal 2006 Atlantic hurricane season and a 20% chance of a near-normal season, according to a consensus of scientists at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Climate Prediction Center (CPC), National Hurricane Center (NHC), and Hurricane Research Division (HRD). Therefore, 2006 is forecast to be the tenth above-normal season in the last twelve years. See NOAA's definitions of above-, near-, and below-normal seasons.Both the NOAA and Colorado State predictions still forecast more hurricanes to come. Sea surface temperatures have been reported as below 2005 levels but now there are signs that the Atlantic hurricane factory is primed.This updated outlook calls for a seasonal total of 12-15 named storms, with 7-9 becoming hurricanes, and 3-4 becoming major hurricanes (categories 3-5 on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane intensity scale). The likely range of NOAA's Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index (Bell and Halpert, 2000) is 110%-170% of the median. These totals include the three tropical storms (Alberto, Beryl, and Chris) that have already occurred. Therefore, for the remainder of the season, we expect an additional 9-12 named storms, 7-9 hurricanes, and 3-4 major hurricanes.
The latest space-based measurements of Atlantic Ocean surface temperatures have revealed a wide swath of hot water ready to supercharge any storms that form there -- if a few other things line up as well.Are we still in hot water? Or have we made a miraculous escape from the ravages of Atlantic tropical storms in 2006? Discuss.In recent weeks the water temperatures have risen significantly from the Cape Verde Islands off northern Africa, all the way west to the Gulf of Mexico.
A broad expanse of surface waters have hit the magic 82 degrees Fahrenheit (28 C) mark, which hurricane experts say is prerequisite for the hurricane factory to kick on.
"We're a little bit cooler than this time last year, but it's still warm enough," said NASA oceanographer David Adamec.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Yeeeessshhhh!!!!
Best of my reading they don't "do" weather. Same with the jesuates. Or the Jews. Or them Gnomes of Zurich
Maitreya,
Never heard of them - ok Him/Her. Somehow the world teacher - hurracane link would be hard to make. Not like yakuza...
http://www.flashnews.com/news/wfn1050908J5463.html
The rest of the list are just people...and while they might want to control the weather...mostly they just report on it.
Or report on the people controlling it. Or something.
A few of the Mets on the Eastern US Weather Board are looking closely at Invest 97L. They think this has the makings of the most dangerous system so far this season. If it develops, then the Western GOM is definitely at risk.
ON 97L..significant threat for western Carib western Gulf
Thoughts on 97L
Oh, and also it's worth looking at this thread. Statistically, we're only about 30% of the way through the season for major hurricanes (>cat3).
The problem so far has been for systems to reach the Gulf without being ripped apart by shear (which could still happen to TD 5). A storm that makes it to the Gulf could intensify rapidly.
I am sure that the GOM does not want a lot of hurricanes
The track on Jeff Master's blog is definitely NOT good. Guess I'll be checking the drive-away kit this weekend.
I read some weather sites like "weather underground" and a few articles along the way. This doesn't make me much of an expert.
That being said: from what I've read it seems likely that a hurricane will move through the GOM sonetine in the next 12 weeks or so, or at least a tropical storm.
Impacts will depend upon size of storm, timing and location of the strike, and ability of folks to prepare and evacuate.
Impact on GOM production depends also on the usual factors.
What are the odds the GOM will avoid hurricanes altogether this season? Have there been very many seasons in the past where the GOM has completely lucked out?
I know crews are still being organized to replace damage from IVAN let alone last years offshore damage - stocks like HOFF and GLBL have years of backlog work.
By Neil Chatterjee
SINGAPORE, Aug 25 (Reuters) - Oil prices climbed towards $73 on Friday as another storm brewed in the Caribbean with the potential to reach the Gulf of Mexico next week, creating worries over U.S. production already trimmed by an outage in Alaska.
Support also came from Iran's nuclear dispute with the West that could lead to United Nations sanctions against the world's fourth largest oil exporter U.S. crude for October delivery <CLc1> was up 55 cents at $72.91 a barrel by 0237 GMT, after gaining 60 cents on Thursday. London Brent crude <LCOc1> for October rose 32 cents to $73 a barrel.
A spinning band of squalls in the southeastern Caribbean was on the verge of becoming Tropical Storm Ernesto by Friday, expected to head northwest towards the Gulf of Mexico by the middle of next week, forecasters said.
"Traders have turned their focus from comfortable inventory levels in the U.S. to storm activity out in the Atlantic," said Tobin Gorey of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
Forecasters expected Tropical Storm Debby to strengthen and possibly become the season's first hurricane, but saw its path heading away from the U.S. Gulf Coast, where production was battered by hurricanes Katrina and Rita last year.
<CUT>
Any sort of event or threat to any significant production capacity causes a multiple-dollar jump.
I don't want to put ideas in anyone's head, but...
How hard would it be to pay some Iraqi bandits to blow up a pipeline?
Or, probably much easier : pay some Nigerian bandits to kidnap some oil-company personnel?
But that's the danger of disrupting climate. The systems are so complex that we don't really understand them yet. Popular mythology says these things take thousands of years to change. Why? Because that is what science believed, about 100 years ago. It often takes a long time for popular mythology to catch up with current science. And current science shows that some extreme prior warming periods caused flips to full up ice ages in under a single decade in the earth's past, and what happened before could happen again.
Be careful of what you wish for because you might just get it.
And current science shows that some extreme prior warming periods caused flips to full up ice ages in under a single decade in the earth's past, and what happened before could happen again.
Can you site a source for this?
Many thanks,
Garth
So the system can change suddenly and global warming doesn't mean we'll end up warm and toasty. We might and we might not. That's the danger of tampering with the climate! All of our grains, our entire world economy, our civilization itself have all been engineered around this particular climate. Several degrees of warming or cooling could wreck our agricultural base, destroy key cities, etc. And it could occur within the span of a single human lifetime, and, as documented above, it can rarely occur in as short as five years.
They do talk about climate change within "decades", though not "a decade", they give no evidence, nor even make the suggestion, that global warming could cause an Ice Age.
Ice ages take time. Snow must fall and then not melt in the summer. Then more snow falls and so on and so on. How long would it take for an ice-cap one mile thick to form over Canada? On the other hand, how long would it take for the ice caps to melt? Ice ages simply cannot happen within a decade, or even several decades. The temperature may drop or rise over a couple of decades but what makes an ice age is ice, lots and lots of ice. That takes many decades.
But it was a great article and I would invite everyone to read it:
http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-56/iss-8/p30.html
It is my understanding that ice ages, as identified by climate scientists, are the result of the actual climate flip - a significant drop in average global temperature. The ice buildup is an effect of the climate flip. I believe that you have your causes and effects backwards, sir.
More links on rapid climate change:
Discussion of rapid climate change and the historical record.
http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/transit.html
Another article specifically on climate shift in one decade or less:
http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/transit.html
This article also states that the Younger Dryas began and ended within a decade and thereafter temperatures remained 5 degrees colder globally for over 1000 years:
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/viewArticle.do?id=10046
This article discusses the Greenland melt extent as of 2005, which is relevant because of the increase of freshwater entering the North Atlantic, which is believed to be a change mechanism to the Thermohaline Circulation:
http://cires.colorado.edu/science/groups/steffen/greenland/melt2005/
Rapid climate change is an established fact, Darwinian. You seem to be clinging to the climate science of yesteryear.
An ice dam in the Northern Hemisphere bursts, sending at least 2 Sverdrups of freshwater flowing into the North Atlantic. This stops the flow of the Gulf Stream, plunging Europe and most of of the rest of the Hemisphere into a virtually instant ice age. Glaciers start growing again, etc. Meanwhile, the heat from the sun doesn't disappear; instead, it goes south. There it slowly melts the southern glaciers and is absorbed into the ocean. Eventually the tipping point is reached and the earth enters another warming phase. The 'mini ice ages' triggered by such an event have lasted anywhere from 200 to 1,000 years. And they began almost instantaneously upon the breaking of the ice dam.
Now, it should be noted that there are no longer any ice dams in the Northern Hemisphere. There is however, a large body of surface ice commonly referred to as Greenland which is now melting at 3 times the rate previously thought. If a large enough portion of the ice sheet slid into the Atlantic it would trigger a mini ice age.
So, it is within the realm of possibility.
From one of your links:
There you go! Even the little ice age took several decades just to end. The Little Ice Age, small as it was, actually lasted 300 years, from about 1550 to 1850.
Ice does play a very significant factor in the formation of ice ages. As more ice forms at the poles, more heat is reflected into the atmosphere and consequently the colder it gets. More ice the next year, more heat reflected back into space, means more ice next year and so on and so on. Ice and long term climate changes, which lead to either an ice age or the ending of an ice age, cannot be separated. The ice itself plays the most significant part in the formation of an ice age....Sir!
Meteorologists may talk about "climate flip" and indeed there may be short-term flips of a few degrees. Indeed we are experiencing such a "flip" right now. And we have been in that "flip" for over two decades. And if the methane hydrates begin to melt, we will see the "flip" speed up considerably. But there is no such thing as a "flip" into or out of an ice age. After all, even the little ice age, which was not really an ice age, took several decades to end. An actual ice age would take centuries to form or to end, at least.
Krakatoa made for some beautiful sunsets around the world.
-best
http://www.theoildrum.com/comments/2006/7/28/19350/1306/169#169
My guess is the probability of a significant cooling in the next century or so is very low and the probability of significant warming is very high.
And ggg71 asks:
Can you site a source for this?
Right ggg, I would like to see that source myself. But I will be far bolder than you chose to be; I flat don't believe it! I am an avid reader of geological history and I will say flat out that there is absolutely no historical evidence of any such event. Ice ages take centuries to develop but that is beside the point. There is no evidence that any ice age has ever been caused by global warming.
I fully realize that there is a theory that melting Arctic ice could cause a sudden drop in temperatures in Western Europe. Be that as it may, even if such an event did happen it still would not stop global warming. The overall temperature of the earth would still keep on rising because of the continuing rise of greenhouse gases. And there would be a positive feedback as well. The hotter the average temperature of the sea and tundra, the more methane that gets dumped into the atmosphere and the hotter and hotter the earth gets, mini ice age in Western Europe notwithstanding.
Global Warming means we're going to have nastier and nastier hurricane seasons!! It's different this time!!!
Please.
We're talking about miniscule changes on a year to year basis. There will be good years, and there will be bad years, just like there has always been. It is possible that over the course of decades Hurricanes as a group might be slightly stronger due to warmer waters. I won't discount that.
2005 was an incredible year for Hurricanes. All sorts of records were set. But the "average" year just doesn't change that much.
I feel really bad for people on the gulf coast, and rebuilding in coastal areas that are below sea level, or marginally above sea level might not make sense. But the scaremonger stuff I read just flies in the face of common sense.
- The NUMBER of storms is fairly constant for the given activity period (which swings along a multidecade cycle), but
- The POWER of storms is increasing linearly in line with the current warming.
And this makes sense since sea surface temperatures (SSTs) are what power hurricanes according to current theory. By increasing SSTs you increase the latent energy available to a developing storm.So no, we don't expect more hurricanes overall and in terms of NUMBER, 2005 was an oddity. But in terms of POWER, 2005 is part of the trend.
Let's hope it's not 30. From National Geographic August, 2006
Superstorms: No end in Sight
Records are made to be broken. Just because 2005 was a record year, doesn't mean that a year in the near or far future will not beat it. And as Wilma proved, a hurricane can go from Cat 1 to Cat 5 in a short period of time. The longer the heat builds up in the GoM, the more energy that will be released by the hurricane over the right area of water. That is not scaremongering, just fact.
People who build in hurricane areas should be prepared for them. If you live in earthquake zones, build for them. If you badly build a flimsy house, who is to blame for an earthquake that destroys it? One guy built his house to withstand a cat 5 hurricane, and it did with a few minor leaks. He was the only one in the area to build a hurricane proof house. Most other houses were trashed. I bet the neighbours before the hurricane thought he was a nut, but I bet he thought his neighbours were stupid for not building hurricane proof houses on the beach. He showed building houses to withstand a major hurricane can be done and not be particularly expensive and can look very elegant.
When I bought my house, I checked on the chances of flooding, because I live in a flood plain of a river, but 30 miles or more from the sea. For my house to flood there would have to be a massive and prolonged cloud burst over a couple of days. So if my house floods, it is my fault. I will blame nobody and expect no help in cleaning up and repairing the aftermath. People living in the gulf area should expect hurricanes. They have been there since man moved into the area, so they can hardly complain that they did not know about hurricanes. Of course, if they believe that hurricanes only happen to other people and do not plan for consequences, then they get what they deserve. Some of our castles by the coast have 30 foot thick stone walls, I'd like to see what a hurricane would do to one of the Welsh castles built by Edward Longshanks. But coastal american homes seem to be built out of wood. Not exactly what I would use to build a home in a hurricane area.
Let me just set the record straight. I am American, and I do believe in Global Warming.
But take the heading from this story: "Where are the Hurricanes?"
It's inflammatory! They make it sound like there's some sort of conspiracy to keep the number of hurricanes down this year! The reality is there are good years, bad years, and truly horrific years. 2005 was a truly horrific year.
2006 is shaping up to be a mild year. We could have a bad September, we might not. No one knows. These long term weather predictions are nothing more then glorified guesses. Cycles oscillate. And while you may be able to see those oscillations on previous years charts, they do not mean you can predict the future oscillations with any certainty.
Since both Gray and NHC predicted an above normal hurricane season, I wondered out loud where the Atlantic hurricanes were. My assumption was that others might be wondering the same thing. I also noted that there has been activity in the Western Pacific affecting Japan, Taiwan and mainland China.
Another interesting question to wonder about on August 24th is whether we're going to be OK this year or not. The SST's are up and the season is not over. I do not want to see any hurricanes.
I like to use a catchy title to attract reader interest. I think, however, that it is only inflammatory in your mind.
So, take a stress pill and calm down.
No they aren't. The long term climate (which is different than weather) are very good and have an exceptional track record. Just look at Hansen's and the IPCC's past guesses and compare them to today.
That said, there is a widely known climate phenomenon called the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) that shows up in many different climate analysis, say for precipitation and temperature trends. This can be a fairly strong signal in the range of 1.8 to 2.5 years. The cause is somewhat of a mystery, but it is known that there is repeating pattern change in stratospheric winds over the tropics on this time scale (no one's been able to link this with the QBO's appearance in surface climate data, I note).
The QBO may simply be showing up in a "reduced" hurricane season for 2006, though, indeed, it is still a bit early to write off 2006 at the moment.
-best
Tropical Storm Debby May Take Backseat to Caribbean-Bound Storm
If it becomes a tropical storm, it will be Ernesto. This storm, unlike Debby, may threaten the U.S.
Plus storm track:
Looks grim.
For the laymen who can't read scientific journals, here is a very well sourced and very easy answer to your questions. It's rough draft but I'll be updated it soon enough.
http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptic_arguments/SAL.htm
Satellite photos too!
so your trying to prove just because we have not had Atlantic hurricanes that we have no global warming?
I don't know if i should laugh or cry at the stupidity of that.
I think. I'm not sure what that page is saying.
If that's the answer for laypeople, I hate to see the one for experts...
It's an exact quote. Someone actually said this to me.
I think. I'm not sure what that page is saying.
Hrm........ then I'm not going my job right. I'm showing that our recent hurricane activity is very likely due to global warming. Call it a "50% and growing boost" ontop of the natural hurricane cycle. I edited the page. If you would be kind enough to reread it and tell me if it's clear you'd be doing me and the cause a great service. ugh.. I need a blog.
If that's the answer for laypeople, I hate to see the one for experts...
It can be a big pain.
I don't know if i should laugh or cry at the stupidity of that.[/quote]
http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptic_arguments/skeptic-arguments.html
I hope that explains it. I will adjust the title.
Nope I got caught once in a weird wind storm in a 22 foot fishing boat in the gulf it was about 8 years ago.
It was kicking up at least 25 foot waves. We could see them coming at us on our radar. No rain but monster swells. Many of the waves had white caps and this was 50 miles offshore.
Later I talked with some shippers and many said they were afraid to lift there booms because the waves would capsize them.
It ain't fun. I learned a lot of respect for Mother Nature that night.
Also I've been in the gulf when it was smooth as glass with banks of fog drifting over the water a incredible site.
The Gulf may be fairly tame but it is not always.
There was one in Montserrat, a really big one in Siberia, and another in SE Asia...
A climatology newsletter I get forecast a tame start to the hurricane season in Spring this year because the increased particulate levels in the upper atmosphere from these volcanoes, leading to a bit of temporary cooling in the early part of this year.
Its the Browning Letter is anyone's interested - http://www.fraser.com/news.html
I've scanned comments above and don't believe I saw anyone mention of El Nino - that massive Pacific current that washes ashore on S America every few years.
My understanding is that the whole global climate is somehow linked to El Nino, which, depedning upon its configuration determines the location of the N hemisphere jet stream. The Jet Stream in turn has a major influence on Hurricane activity.
El Nino was active last year and this combined with warm ocean temperatures gave rise to the very active hurricane season. I believe El Nino has reverted to normal mode this year - perhaps linked to the active Typhoon season in the Pacific.
Hurricanes disperse heat energy from the oceans and in their absence surface waters wil just get hotter and hotter. The next time El Nino switches it may just produce hurricanes that flatten everything in thier path.