Experts say global warming is causing stronger hurricanes

[destruction]

Experts say global warming is causing stronger hurricanes

By Randolph E. Schmid, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON — The number of hurricanes in the most powerful categories — like Katrina and Andrew — has increased sharply over the past few decades, according to a new analysis sure to stir debate over whether global warming is worsening these deadly storms.

Katrina was a Category 5 hurricane while in the Gulf of Mexico, but made landfall as a Category 4.

NOAA

While studies have not found an overall increase in tropical systems worldwide, the number of storms reaching categories 4 and 5 grew from about 11 per year in the 1970s to 18 per year since 1990, according to a report in Friday's issue of the journal Science.

Peter J. Webster of the Georgia Institute of Technology said it's the warm water vapor from the oceans that drives tropical storms, and as the water gets warmer the amount of evaporation increases, providing more fuel for the tempests. Between 1970 and 2004 the average sea surface temperature in the tropics rose nearly 1°F.

Co-author Greg Holland of the National Center for Atmospheric Research said the researchers can't say rising sea-surface temperatures caused Hurricane Katrina. But their study shows the potential for more Katrina-like events to occur, he said.

Katrina was a category 5 storm at sea and was category 4 when it made landfall. The increase in storms they found is for category 4 and 5. Category 4 storms have wind speeds of 131 mph to 155 mph and Category 5 is for storms with sustained winds of 156 mph and over. (Related graphic: Saffir-Simpson scale of hurricane intensity.)

Co-author Judith Curry of Georgia Tech said the team is confident that the measured increase in sea surface temperatures is associated with global warming, adding that the increase in category 4 and 5 storms "certainly has an element that global warming is contributing to."

There is a natural variability of the climate and some would interpret the changing number of storms to be part of that variability, Holland said. But the variability in the past has been over 10-year periods, and this is sustained over 30 years.

Webster added that sea surface temperatures "are rising everywhere in the tropics and that is not connected to any natural variability we know."

In their analysis of hurricanes — known as typhoons or cyclones in other parts of the world — the researchers counted 16 category 4 and 5 storms in the Atlantic-Caribbean-Gulf of Mexico in 1975-1989. This increased to 25 in the 1990-2004 period.

In the eastern Pacific the increase was from 36 to 49 storms and it went from 85 to 116 in the western Pacific. In the southwest Pacific the increase was from 10 to 22 powerful storms, while the total went from one to seven in the north Indian Ocean and from 23 to 50 in the south Indian Ocean.

Kerry Emanuel, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, reported in August in the journal Nature that hurricanes in both the Atlantic and Pacific have increased in duration and intensity since the 1970s. (Related story: Global warming fueling nastier storms, expert says.)

While the new study looks at the problem differently, "we are clearly seeing the same signal in the data," Emanuel said.

But other researchers were cautious.

Christopher Landsea, a meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Hurricane Research Division in Miami, questioned the data showing an increase in major storms, saying the estimates of the wind speed in storms in the 1970s may not be accurate.

The study looked at storms worldwide, and "for most of the world there was no way to determine objectively what the winds were in 1970," he said. The techniques used today were invented later and infrared satellite studies weren't available until the 1980s, Landsea said.

The Atlantic-Caribbean-Gulf of Mexico region is the best monitored in the world and that region had the smallest increase, he noted.

"This really highlights the need to go back and get all the original data ... and reanalyze the storms with today's techniques," Landsea said in a telephone interview. "These are billion dollar questions and we need to better answer them."

Holland agreed there have been changes in the observing system since the 1970s but noted the increase has been steady over the period, "it didn't just kick in when the new measurement methods kicked in."

The fact that the trend is smaller in the Atlantic basin is beside the point, he added, because it has gone up as there well.

"The end result is that there is no doubt that there is a substantial increase here," Holland said.

Roger Pielke, director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said the report "reinforces the view that we should pay even greater attention to preparing for the inevitability of future intense hurricanes striking vulnerable locations around the world. In the context of ever-growing coastal development, the costs of hurricanes are going to continue to escalate."

Neither Emanuel, Landsea nor Pielke was part of Webster's research team.

Webster's research was funded by the National Science Foundation and the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2005-09-15-globalwarming-hurricanes_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

[drlogic]

so,,,,,,,it must be Bush's fault.....it's just gotta be!

Now Rita is coming,,,,,,holy makarol! wut 2 do now? giminey christmas,,,go fig'r????

Gotta leave work early today to take care of the house in the keys and tie down the boat.......

Damn those rich, evil Republicans!!!

lol

Seriously though,,,,LA is looking to get pegged again.......

[kramadas]

so,,,,,,,it must be Bush's fault.....it's just gotta be!

Now Rita is coming,,,,,,holy makarol! wut 2 do now? giminey christmas,,,go fig'r????

Gotta leave work early today to take care of the house in the keys and tie down the boat.......

Damn those rich, evil Republicans!!!

lol

Seriously though,,,,LA is looking to get pegged again.......

Dude, you gotta stop reading Republican Teen! Its putting you in a paranoid frenzy! You and destruction should hold hands and sing "oombyah"!

[drlogic]

Dude, you gotta stop reading Republican Teen! Its putting you in a paranoid frenzy! You and destruction should hold hands and sing "oombyah"!

Actually,,,its "KOOMBAYA"...but I,,,,ah fugetaboutit...

I'm all love maaaan! Can't hang w/ descruxchun....he's all hate...

If you've read my previous posts,,you'll see that I'm taking a break from bringing perspective to this board.

I thought I'd do as the others do....When in Rome, right?

So, as someone once said. What better way to illustrate absurdity than by being JUST AS ABSURD........

destruction is a goon and a tool. All he knows is Bush is the devil. (Somebody clue him into the fact that Bush can't run for another term...)....

Now, where was I? Oh yeah,,,

DESTRUCTION WAS SAYING :"the sky is falling, the sky is falling......my pussy hurts, my tits are sore,,,my brown eye is throbbing......somebody get me some granola,,,QUICK! LOL

[obby]

DESTRUCTION WAS SAYING :"......my pussy hurts, my tits are sore LOL

LOL

I needed that laugh.

[destruction]

Actually,,,its "KOOMBAYA"...but I,,,,ah fugetaboutit...

I'm all love maaaan! Can't hang w/ descruxchun....he's all hate...

If you've read my previous posts,,you'll see that I'm taking a break from bringing perspective to this board.

I thought I'd do as the others do....When in Rome, right?

So, as someone once said. What better way to illustrate absurdity than by being JUST AS ABSURD........

destruction is a goon and a tool. All he knows is Bush is the devil. (Somebody clue him into the fact that Bush can't run for another term...)....

Now, where was I? Oh yeah,,,

DESTRUCTION WAS SAYING :"the sky is falling, the sky is falling......my pussy hurts, my tits are sore,,,my brown eye is throbbing......somebody get me some granola,,,QUICK! LOL

I am sorry that the sixth grade writing level was too hard for you dr. irrolgic. I am also sorry that you could not get the education you deserve to be able to properly converse with regular people. You might want to get someone who can spell to write a letter to your representative and ask for education reform.

[igloo]

A

DESTRUCTION WAS SAYING :"the sky is falling, the sky is falling......my pussy hurts, my tits are sore,,,my brown eye is throbbing......somebody get me some granola,,,QUICK! LOL

[drlogic]

I am sorry that the sixth grade writing level was too hard for you dr. irrolgic. I am also sorry that you could not get the education you deserve to be able to properly converse with regular people. You might want to get someone who can spell to write a letter to your representative and ask for education reform.

TA-TA-TA,,,,,lol

Regular people? Note to destruction: Those people you share a padded wall dormitory w/ are not normal people. Some things just are,,,,,,and you are Mongo-squared.

Obah-kaybee Corky? La,la,la,la,,,,life goes on.....

[drlogic]

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2005-09-15-globalwarming-hurricanes_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/newsroom/20050920a.html

SCIENTISTS WARN OF CLIMATE CHANGES -- ON MARS!...

New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune.

That's just one of the surprising discoveries that have resulted from the extended life of NASA's Mars Global Surveyor, which this month began its ninth year in orbit around Mars. Boulders tumbling down a Martian slope left tracks that weren't there two years ago. New impact craters formed since the 1970s suggest changes to age-estimating models. And for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.

OH MY GOD! BUSH IS DESTROYING MARS TOO! HE BETTER SIGN KYOTO OR THE GALAXY IS DOOMED!

Just a thought? Could the sun have anything to do w/ climate change or would that just be a stretch? LOL

[destruction]

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/newsroom/20050920a.html

SCIENTISTS WARN OF CLIMATE CHANGES -- ON MARS!...

New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune.

That's just one of the surprising discoveries that have resulted from the extended life of NASA's Mars Global Surveyor, which this month began its ninth year in orbit around Mars. Boulders tumbling down a Martian slope left tracks that weren't there two years ago. New impact craters formed since the 1970s suggest changes to age-estimating models. And for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.

OH MY GOD! BUSH IS DESTROYING MARS TOO! HE BETTER SIGN KYOTO OR THE GALAXY IS DOOMED!

Just a thought? Could the sun have anything to do w/ climate change or would that just be a stretch? LOL

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#Q3

Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Warming, assisted by the record El Niño of 1997-1998, has continued right up to the present, with 2001 being the second warmest year on record after 1998. Linear trends can vary greatly depending on the period over which they are computed. Temperature trends in the lower troposphere (between about 2,500 and 26,000 ft.) from 1979 to the present, the period for which Satellite Microwave Sounding Unit data exist, are small and may be unrepresentative of longer term trends and trends closer to the surface. Furthermore, there are small unresolved differences between radiosonde and satellite observations of tropospheric temperatures, though both data sources show slight warming trends. If one calculates trends beginning with the commencement of radiosonde data in the 1950s, there is a slight greater warming in the record due to increases in the 1970s. There are statistical and physical reasons (e.g., short record lengths, the transient differential effects of volcanic activity and El Niño, and boundary layer effects) for expecting differences between recent trends in surface and lower tropospheric temperatures, but the exact causes for the differences are still under investigation (see National Research Council report "Reconciling Observations of Global Temperature Change").

An enhanced greenhouse effect is expected to cause cooling in higher parts of the atmosphere because the increased "blanketing" effect in the lower atmosphere holds in more heat, allowing less to reach the upper atmosphere. Cooling of the lower stratosphere (about 49,000-79,500ft.) since 1979 is shown by both satellite Microwave Sounding Unit and radiosonde data, but is larger in the radiosonde data.

Relatively cool surface and tropospheric temperatures, and a relatively warmer lower stratosphere, were observed in 1992 and 1993, following the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. The warming reappeared in 1994. A dramatic global warming, at least partly associated with the record El Niño, took place in 1998. This warming episode is reflected from the surface to the top of the troposphere.

There has been a general, but not global, tendency toward reduced diurnal temperature range (DTR), (the difference between high and low daily temperatures) over about 50% of the global land mass since the middle of the 20th century. Cloud cover has increased in many of the areas with reduced diurnal temperature range. The overall positive trend for maximum daily temperature over the period of study (1950-93) is 0.1°C/decade, whereas the trend for daily minimum temperatures is 0.2°C/decade. This results in a negative trend in the DTR of -0.1°C/decade

Indirect indicators of warming such as borehole temperatures, snow cover, and glacier recession data, are in substantial agreement with the more direct indicators of recent warmth. Evidence such as changes in glacier length is useful since it not only provides qualitative support for existing meteorological data, but glaciers often exist in places too remote to support meteorological stations, the records of glacial advance and retreat often extend back further than weather station records, and glaciers are usually at much higher alititudes that weather stations allowing us more insight into temperature changes higher in the atmosphere.

Large-scale measurements of sea-ice have only been possible since the satellite era, but through looking at a number of different satellite estimates, it has been determined that Arctic sea ice has decreased between 1973 and 1996 at a rate of -2.8 +/- 0.3%/decade. Although this seems to correspond to a general increase in temperature over the same period, there are lots of quasi-cyclic atmospheric dynamics (for example the Arctic Oscillation) which may also influence the extent and thickness of sea-ice in the Arctic. Sea-ice in the Antarctic has shown very little trend over the same period, or even a slight increase since 1979. Though extending the Antarctic sea-ice record back in time is more difficult due to the lack of direct observations in this part of the world.

[drlogic]

Right,,,

global warming and cooling is a natural cycle the earth has always gone through for millions of years. I'm definitely not pro-pollution but can't take those who blame man for the warming seriously.

burning of fossil fuels may have an effect on the ozone, but it's miniscule when compared to the damage volcanic eruptions and the release of gases from the ocean floor. One large volcanic erruption throws more crap into the atmosphere than all of the pollution created by the combustion engine (world wide) since it's invention.

[obby]

Right,,,

global warming and cooling is a natural cycle the earth has always gone through for millions of years. I'm definitely not pro-pollution but can't take those who blame man for the warming seriously.

burning of fossil fuels may have an effect on the ozone, but it's miniscule when compared to the damage volcanic eruptions and the release of gases from the ocean floor. One large volcanic erruption throws more crap into the atmosphere than all of the pollution created by the combustion engine (world wide) since it's invention.