What We Can and Can't Say About Global Warming and Hurricane Dean

Posted August 21, 2007 | 08:43 AM (EST)



stumbleupon :What We Can and Can't Say About Global Warming and Hurricane Dean   digg: What We Can and Can't Say About Global Warming and Hurricane Dean   reddit: What We Can and Can't Say About Global Warming and Hurricane Dean   del.icio.us: What We Can and Can't Say About Global Warming and Hurricane Dean

2007-08-21-DeanLandfallWeatherUnderground.jpg
Hurricane Dean at landfall early this morning, image courtesy of the Weather Underground.

Now we see why the ancient Mayans built their cities inland from the coasts.

Early this morning, Hurricane Dean slammed the Yucatan as a still-intensifying Category 5 storm with sustained winds upwards of 165 miles per hour. Dean required some troubling readjustments of our hurricane records, and as a result, we may hear some serious chatter today about the relationship between these intense storms and global warming.

For that reason, the purpose of this post is to lay out what we can and can't reliably say about Hurricane Dean. The upshot is this: We have to be careful what we claim and how we claim it, but even so, Dean fits into a worrisome pattern.

Here are the key records that Dean either broke or otherwise affects:

1. With a minimum central pressure of 906 millibars, Dean was the ninth most intense hurricane ever observed in the Atlantic basin (for comparison Hurricane Katrina's minimum pressure was 902 millibars).

2. That 906 millibar pressure reading was at landfall, making Dean the third most intense landfalling hurricane known in the Atlantic region and the first Category 5 storm at landfall since 1992's Hurricane Andrew.

3. When measured by minimum pressure, six of the ten most intense Atlantic hurricanes--Wilma, Rita, Katrina, Mitch, Dean, and Ivan--have occurred in the past ten years.

We can't blame any one hurricane event on global warming directly. Nevertheless, the information above is certainly consistent with the idea advanced by some scientists that global warming is causing an intensification of the average hurricane. We're apparently seeing the strongest hurricanes recur in the Atlantic with a higher frequency than before -- or at least, than we've ever been able to measure before.

Measuring systems weren't as good in earlier eras, you see -- a fact that makes our records somewhat impeachable. A "record" is only what's recorded, after all. And so skeptics will inevitably quibble with our imperfect data and challenge it. There might well have been a storm much stronger than Dean 200 years ago -- we just don't know.

Nevertheless, if you look at the data we have, Dean fits into a very troubling pattern and context. Moreover, the present data, with all their admitted imperfections, aren't all we have to go on. There's also the theoretical expectation that hurricanes ought to intensify, for basic thermodynamic reasons, as global warming adds more heat to the oceans. Add together this theoretical expectation with the new records today and, well, anyone would be justified in feeling pretty worried by Hurricane Dean.

Dean was also the strongest hurricane anywhere in the world so far this year -- and by far the strongest at landfall. We can only hope that somehow, the damage is lighter than expected as the storm tears across the Yucatan today and then prepares to cross the Bay of Campeche and make a second expected landfall in mainland Mexico.

For a further and more detailed discussion of Dean in its Atlantic and global context, see my "Storm Pundit" post at The Daily Green, available here.

Comments for this post are now closed

 
 

Comments
170
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

I heard an interesting piece of data as I drove my Kia home from school today. A moose produces more methane than a SUV produces CO2. Methane adds more warming credits to the atmosphere than CO2. This piece of data is from scandinavia where 28,000 moose roam. Moose on the solar barby anyone?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 08/22/2007

We can move to all electric cars within five years --

Remember that earthquakes are also part of Global Warming and Climate Crisis --

Global Warming will continue to produce chaotic weather --

And it is not simply humanity which is threatened -- our planet may not survive our stupidity --

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 PM on 08/22/2007

haveaheart writes: "We can move to all electric cars within five years"

Can we really?

According to whom?

And since the electric grid is almost peaked out right now, where is all the additional electricity going to come from?

Such a move would require doubling the capacity of the current electrical grid; do you really think all those plants could be built in only five years?

Since the Average American keeps his car about SEVEN years, how are we going to get everyone to buy a new one within the next five?

And since over 60% of electricity today is generated by burning CO2 producing fossil fuel, exactly what would the advantage be?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:49 PM on 08/22/2007

TS,

Back from the grave?

According to THIS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F

And if you don't like this one, there are 612,000 other hits for "Who Killed the Electric Car".

It answers ALL your questions. I've seen it several times.

Thank you. Good questions, son! (Good to see you back.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 08/22/2007

yellowdogSC writes:According to THIS:

Strange.

Not once in the article is the five year time frame mentioned. It can't answer ALL my questions, itf it can't even answer the first.

Oh, wait a minute. I get it. You just need to cite a movie to prove a statement?

How about these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco:_The_Rules_of_Engagement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 08/22/2007

haveaheart: "Remember that earthquakes are also part of Global Warming and Climate Crisis"

Ahhh, no, they are not, although earthquakes can contribute big time to global warming, such as when they trigger undersea landslides that release large quantities of methane, a much more powerful greenhouse gas, from frozen methane calthrates.

"And it is not simply humanity which is threatened -- our planet may not survive our stupidity"

The planet can survive anything we can throw at it just nicely, thanks, as will life as a whole.
The tenants in the place will just be very different is all.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:02 PM on 08/22/2007

I came here in 2001 aged 58 to escape cold dreary England and the long winters and the neuralgia. I had never seen a hurricane or an alligator or known a lethal snake or worried about gnat bites. I did not know what a sand spur was or a water moccasin. I WAS used to strong winds on the East Coast of England and as a driving instructor in Peterborough had a stressful existence. Now I rarely wear a proper shirt except to church. I don't wear socks or underpants to my children's mock horror. I have encountered a wild hurricane as in 'Ivan' in Pensacola and done tree climbing with a rope and a hand saw. I have been eaten alive just in my back yard. I have stayed in just to avoid the brutal heat. I have to be aware that my dog could get heartworm? I have to be aware of walking in woods for snakes. I have to expect racoon and possum and turtles to call my yard their own. I see the most exotic birds ever. I have never endured a temperature of below 60 degrees outside for very long. I had not endured neuralgia for six years and my house has been at a constant temperature of 72 degrees winter and summer. My health is good and my legs are strong from climbing in Greece and walking whenever I could in UK. I have a small sailboat and overall I guess I am in Paradise. Global Warming is an issue but I am not contributing much. My kids are in cold England and maybe there will still be a Paradise here for them to come to in senior years?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 AM on 08/22/2007

59 Degrees in New York City Yesterday. Record Cold for August.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 AM on 08/22/2007

Climate CHANGE means a greater variability, not just incremental increases in warming. Please understand the complexities of an issue before making such a foolish comment on a public forum.

Recent grad from Columbia University's Climate and Society program taking questions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 08/22/2007

True Believers vs. the Deniers.

The first problem with religious war, it diverts attention from other environmental issues. Like water.

The second problem, ad hominem attacks, smearing anyone who disagrees . Especially when you brand someone as 'denier' and Exxon shill. I could say consensus scientists are concerned about their grant money.

The consensus frayed around the edges last year, some scientists objected to the report, didn't sign off, had their names included anyway. Maybe 80%-X.

The third problem, we must Do Something. Well, we did something in Iraq. We're doing something on ethanol.

One article concluded production cycle yields a net-loss. Meanwhile, you may have noticed a jump in food prices.

Planktos, Inc. Did Something about February, seeding in the Pacific with 50,000 pounds of iron oxide to improve the growth of phytoplankton. Phyto become carbon sinks, success.

Yet, shortly, an infestation of phyto was off the California coast. Anyone From Florida remembers the 'red tides', 1950s. Bad phyto produce neurotoxin sea life can absorb. Eat seafood at your peril! Or, if susceptible, succumb to asthma attacks when coastline infestations release gaseous excretions.

Last year it was, we must Do Something Now. A week ago, a report by consensus-type scientists: the warming increase starts next year.

Next, I find an article by solar scientists. The largest solar flare ever recorded, last Dec 6. Another, solar output would increase next year for three years. NASA, sunspot minimum reached last year. Yet! ham radio operators say the skip is better than normal. Maybe it's due to polar coronal holes.

The shorthand of "11-year cycle" is incorrect, unless my astronomy professor lied to me. The ~11 years is half the cycle, minimum to minimum. Lke a sine wave, the spots move from equator toward poles, diminish, start back down. There's polarity reversal. Does this make a difference?

More questions than answers, I'm reminded of Stephen Leacocks man who "jumped on his horse and rode madly off in all directions."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 AM on 08/22/2007

I have heard the claim that the sun is responsible used before please consider this article http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/jul/11/climatechange.climatechange1
I am a person who realizes that science is an ongoing process that keeps correcting itself. However I am also a person that if enough evidence reasonably points to a conclusion I will believe it. There are more scientists today that believe that Global Warming is man made then the latter.

As for comparing people who don't believe GW is caused by man to Columbus or Albert Einstein for discovering something contrary to conventional thinking, I think they are doing just the opposite. It has been long argued that GW or the Greenhouse effect was not man made and people who thought so were label alarmists these people were in the minority. The majority now realize our situation now that we have waited so long. There has been enough science done and now it is a time of action while the process must still continue we need to focus our energies in a new direction, that of mitigation.

While its true that we probably can not avert GW entirely. Doing nothing will only amplify the final outcome. Ask yourself do you want to be the person who tried to make a difference and perhaps failed or the person who added to everyone else's misery? If you have a an illness that threatens your life that is treatable, like a heart condition caused by your own habits, do you toss up your hands and give up and say no I wont change my life style I would rather die, no you don't.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 08/22/2007

The existence, or not, of Global Climate change, it seems to me, is almost the weakest argument one can make in favor of a transition to a non hydrocarbon based economy that one can throw at conservative naysayers anyway. Conservatives have historically found change of any form to be anathema.

Conservatives will fight change tooth and nail to an ultimately pyrrhic victory and feel good about themselves in the process. Just look at the Catholic church and the reformation; hundreds of years worth of religious war and burning heretics at the stake and it has just now come out with a statement which proclaims protestantism to be invalid! We don't have 500 years to argue the issue.

Show them how the U.S. is being thrown into third world obscurity and turmoil because of reliance on a raw material we must dominate the world to procure reliably and then, perhaps, you will make some headway with them.

Tell them that their golden years will be spent under an overpass begging food from the likes of George and his fellow "compassionate conservatives" and then you'll get somewhere. You can't go wrong appealing to the selfish propensities of such people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 AM on 08/22/2007

nipdad,

"Conservatives have historically found change of any form to be anathema."
TRUE, unless, oddly, it involves the CONSTITUTION. But maybe that"s not so strange, since both the constitution and the environment are victims of republican "SLASH AND BURN".

The phrase "compassionate conservatives" is peculiar, too.
You never see "compassionate liberal" because it would be redundant. But for a "cc", being an oxymoron, it MUST be spelled out fully.

In any other issue these jokers would be compelled to SAVE THE WORLD!!! (no matter how many women and children are butchered.) But not here. BIZARRE!

Thanks, friend.


    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 PM on 08/22/2007

Yeah, your right! But I got to tell you that I live in the cold North East and I am looking forward to global warming as I have had it with the miserable winters up here.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 AM on 08/22/2007

cyl,

I hope you're just making a cruel joke, because anywhere dry will be shared by over a billion refugees that haven't learned to tread water.

Thanks for the beautiful gesture, friend.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 08/22/2007

There are between 80 and 90 named tropical cyclones/hurricanes/typhoons world-wide each year, spread among six ocean basins where the storms form: North Atlantic-Caribbean, Northeast Pacific, Northwest Pacific, and North Indian in the northern hemisphere, and the South Indian, and Southwest Pacific in the southern hemisphere.

The number of storms formed in each basin varies from year to year due to factors such as the El Nino-La Nina cycle, but the total number of storms remains relatively stable, so more storms in one basin results in fewer storms in other basins during any one year. Hence, 2006, while relatively quite in the North Atlantic-Caribbean basin, was a barn-stormer in the Pacific basins.

The North Atlantic-Caribbean basin typically generates 11% of named storms each year, while the Northwest Pacific alone accounts for 36% of them, so, it is myopic to focus only on North Atlantic-Caribbean basin storms when looking for an emerging change in pattern of storm intensity.

The fact is that although the total number of storms per year has remained stable, the number of category 4 & 5 storms per year has nearly doubled over the past 35 years--coincident with a steady measured rise in sea surface temperatures. See: http://www.gatech.edu/news-room/release.php?id=654

New records for storm intensity (sustained wind speeds, central barometric pressure lows) and frequency are being set not just in the North Atlantic-Caribbean basin but world-wide. We have also seen the first tropical hurricane yet observed to make landfall in the South Atlantic basin (Catarina, in southern Brazil, 2004), and the first tropical hurricane to form in, as opposed to transit through, the South Central Pacific basin (supertyphoon Ioke, 2006, also the longest lived sustained typhoon at 198 hours, reaching cat 5 three separate times).

That the strength, power, and frequency of intense hurricanes is increasing is not debatable.

That it is due to global warming is becoming less and less so.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:22 PM on 08/21/2007

not debatable?

legitimate scientists might beg to differ:

"Though there is evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record to date, no firm conclusion can be made on this point."

http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/~tk/glob_warm_hurr.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 AM on 08/22/2007

TimmySlagle: "not debatable?
legitimate scientists might beg to differ..."

Read what I wrote again, timmy, this time for comprehension.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:51 PM on 08/22/2007

I don't know how many times I have said this but I have to say this again:

Anyone who brings up Mars or Venus doesn't know what the heck they are talking about.

Mars Climate Warming...well, his orbit is highly eccentric for one thing..just do a little research and you will find that current thinking is that Martian winds are uncovering the darker soil beneath...and you know exactly what dark things do...they warm up quicker than lighter things.

And as to Venus...I haven't seen any evidence anywhere...that it is warmer on Venus..of course we don't have a lander there that can report back because surface temps (remember that the atmospheric pressure is 40 x that of
Earth and it's atmosphere is 95% C02)are almost 900 degrees F...it's because of Global Warming.

Solar Astronomers are telling us that there just is no increase in irradiance..solar output apart from the normal variation and right now we are at the low point of the Sunspot Cycle..and Global Warming is increasing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:35 PM on 08/21/2007
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Chris Mooney›
 

 Site  Web ask.com