Winter Storm Xynthia kills 62 in Europe

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:21 PM GMT on March 01, 2010

Share this Blog
3
+

Devastating Winter Storm Xynthia ripped a swath of destruction through Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, and Germany over the weekend, killing at least 62 people. It was Europe's 5th deadliest winter storm of the past 60 years. Hardest hit was France, where at least 51 died. The storm also caused six deaths in Germany, including a 2-year-old boy blown into a river and drowned. Three people were dead in Spain, and Belgium, Portugal, and England had one fatality each. At least ten people are still missing. Most of the deaths in France occurred when a powerful storm surge topped by battering waves up to 25 feet high, hitting at high tide, smashed though the sea wall off the coastal town of L'Aiguillon-sur-Mer. A mobile home park built close to the sea wall was particularly hard-hit. The sea wall was several hundred years old, built in the time of Napoleon, and locating a mobile home park so close to it showed poor coastal development practices, critics said. The storm cut power to more than 1 million homes in France, and up to 1 million customers in Portugal also lost power. A few wind peak wind gusts measured during the storm:

Portugal
Pampilhosa da Serra 147 km/h (91 mph)
Penhas Douradas 126.1 km/h (78 mph)
Porto (Airport LPPR) 113km/h (70 mph)

Spain
Lardeira: 196.1 km/h (122 mph)
Serra do Eixe: 157 km/h (98 mph)
Campus de Vigo: 146.9 km/h (92 mph)
Gandara: 145.8 km/h (91 mph)

France
Eiffel Tower, Paris: 175 km/h (106 mph)
Saint-Clement of the Whales: 159km/h (99 mph)
Charente-Maritime: 161km/h (100 mph)

A Personal Weather Station in Les Portes-en-Re recorded sustained winds of 143 km/h (89 mph) gusting to 180 km/h (112 mph) before losing power at the height of the storm. According to Meteo France, the maximum recorded gust from Xynthia for elevations lower than 1200m was 160 km/h along the coast and 120 km/h inland. In 1999, Winter Storm Lothar brought gusts of almost 200 km/h to coastal areas and up to 160 km/h in the interior at these lower elevations.


Figure 1. Six-hour animation of the surface winds as Winter Storm Xynthia crossed the Bay of Biscay and smashed into France.

Destructive European storms of the past 60 years:
2010: Winter Storm Xynthia of February 27, 2010 killed 51 people in France, Spain, and neighboring countries, and did $2 - $4 billion in damage. Lowest pressure: 967 mb.

Winter Storm Klaus hit northern Spain and southwest France January 23 - 25, 2009, and was Earth's most costly natural disaster of 2009, causing $5.1 billion in damage and killing 26. Minimum pressure: 967 mb.

Kyrill (January 18, 2007) killed at least 45, with Germany suffering the most fatalities (13). Minimum pressure: 964 mb.

Back-to-back winter storms Lothar and Martin December 26-28, 1999) killed 140 people, 88 of the victims in France. Minimum pressure: 961 mb (Lothar), 965 mb (Martin).

The Burns' Day Storm of 1990 killed 97, mostly in England. Minimum pressure: 949 mb.

The Great Storm of 1987 was Europe's "storm of the century". It killed 22 people in England and France. Minimum pressure: 953 mb.

The North Sea Flood of 1962 killed 318 people--315 of them in Hamburg, Germany.

The North Sea Flood of 1953 killed 2,000 people in the Netherlands and England.

Xynthia's warm air surge sets records
One reason Xynthia became so powerful is that it formed very far south, where it was able to tap into an airmass that was unusually warm and moist. Satellite measurements (Figure 2) showed a plume of high total precipitable water (the amount of precipitation one can produce by condensing all the water vapor from the surface to the top of the atmosphere), about 300% above average, flowing from southwest to northeast along Xynthia's cold front. Enhancing the amount of moisture was the presence of very warm sea surface temperatures 1°C above average along this plume. As this extra moisture flowed into the storm, the moisture condensed into rain, releasing the "latent heat" stored up in the water vapor (the extra energy that was originally used to evaporate the water into water vapor). This latent heat further intensified Xynthia. The storm's central pressure fell to 966 mb at the storm's peak intensity, reached at 18 GMT Saturday after it passed over Spain's northwest corner.

As warm, tropical air surged northeastwards in advance of Xynthia's cold front, it set several all-time high temperature records for the month of February. Melilla, Spain hit 34°C (93°F) at 3pm local time on the 27th, beating previous highest February temperature of 30.6°C, set in 1979. The temperature surged upwards a remarkable 9.1°C (16°F) in one hour as Xynthia's warm front passed through. Record February warmth was also observed in the Canary Islands as Xynthia's warm front passed though.


Figure 2. Satellite measurements show a region of high total precipitable water (the amount of precipitation one can produce by condensing all the water vapor from the surface to the top of the atmosphere) up to 300% above average, flowing from southwest to northeast along Xynthia's cold front. Enhancing the amount of moisture was the presence of very warm sea surface temperatures along this plume, about 1°C above average. If this pool of very warm water is still around in July, it could lead to an earlier than average start to the Atlantic hurricane season. Image credit: Sheldon Kusselson, NOAA/NESDIS, and National Hurricane Center.

Next storm
For the the U.S., the next winter storm of note is a moderately strong low pressure system currently over Texas that is expected to move quickly eastwards today and Tuesday. The storm should bring an inch or so of snow to Atlanta and northeast Alabama, and 2 - 4" to the nearby mountains of South and North Carolina, including Charlotte. After that, the models show a long break from winter storm activity for the Eastern U.S. Beginning Sunday, it looks like it will be the Midwest's turn, when a powerful winter storm will drop out of the Rockies, then move across the northern tier of Midwestern states early next week.

Next post
I'll have a new post Tuesday or Wednesday.

Jeff Masters

Xynthia - High seas in Carcavelos (Portugal) (rozzopt)
High seas an waves from storm Synthia, with storm-surge taking over the entire beach, and "attacking" bars usually 30meters away from the sea.
Xynthia - High seas in Carcavelos (Portugal)

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 259 - 209

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19Blog Index

I'm done for a while.......MY show 24 just came on ....BBL!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting doabarrelroll:

How very interesting TampSpin zone. How I be taxed?


LOOK at your Electric and Water bill. You will see it there and more to come if Obama gets his Energy Bill he wants passed through the Senate. Part of it in cap and trade also.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Oh yeah skip over my previous comment when I actually had a link to the IPCC's outrageous warming predictions for 2010-2011 and 2038? Shocked you huh? Oh yeah let's just ignore that and move on to Levi's next comment because he's losing the PDO argument....

Oh brother....classic cherry-picking.

I'm done for now we'll come back to it again sometime I'm sure. Laterz all. Drg0d post all the links and articles and whatever you want when I leave.


IPCC says (your quote) "1F warming by 2011"

Now as i posted the latest sat image


We have now 1.03F just to compare LAST YEAR!!!! ... pretty accurate if you ask me. And as you can see it undermines the prediction already in the start of 2010.

Pretty scary development.

http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/01/accuweather%e2%80%99s-joe-bastardi-admits-earth-continues-war mest-winter-since-satellite-measurements-started-and-feb-should-be-warmest-on-record/
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Don't get me wrong. I am all good and want very much to have a Clean Earth with Clean air and water and land. And Yes, we should all do what we can to have clean energy but, lets not fabricate the real truth to serve for a purpose just to tax the public into thinking we are the culprits of GW. It just is not the truth and what is behind the Politics behind it. "IT'S THE SUN STUPID!"
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
249. Skyepony (Mod)
Didn't Emanuel & some think PDO maybe more aerosol driven? But many AGW nonchemistry believers don't want to peer into the window of chemical & atmospheric coupling on many & all levels deep ocean to space, solid to gas. We've got too much to learn to wait for all the answers...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

Yes i think it is the best to look at the data and the people who do this for a leaving. You prefer what? Your opinion? Levi i see no reason why you should not look at the data of the observed PDO and all the other data which is there. Each single system we observe points to warming. So lets start reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and do our best to counter dangerous climate change.


Oh yeah skip over my previous comment when I actually had a link to the IPCC's outrageous warming predictions for 2010-2011 and 2038? Shocked you huh? Oh yeah let's just ignore that and move on to Levi's next comment because he's losing the PDO argument....

Oh brother....classic cherry-picking.

I'm done for now we'll come back to it again sometime I'm sure. Laterz all. Drg0d go ahead and post all the links and articles and whatever you want when I leave.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting TampaSpin:


Levi give up Brother! Those that believe will put something together and change there story as to what is happening until an Ice Age begins and even then they will have us in Global Warming!


I give up eventually when this guy starts spewing out propaganda for too many hours in a row, but I will never give in to this political nonsense they want us to believe.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting atmoaggie:

I have no idea. Not my strong suit, admittedly.


This may help a bit. I was reading from this site the other day :)

Found this interesting !

http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/Sun/Sunspots.html

"Magnetic flip. An additional indication that Cycle 23 peaked in the year 2000 came in a NASA report in February 2001 that the Sun's magnetic field had flipped. That means that Sun's north pole, which had been in the northern hemisphere of the Sun before the flip, now is in the southern hemisphere.The flip really wasn't a surprise since it seems to happen at the peak of each solar cycle. "

http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/Sun/SolarIndicesFAQ.html
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Quoting Levi32:
I won't argue anymore about the PDO. It's pointless. Every real Meteorologist knows what it is and what its impacts are. I'm not going to waste my time trying to refute the nonsense being fed to us by people that have been exposed for falsifying temperature data. Come on that's the best you people can do?

Yes i think it is the best to look at the data and the people who do this for a leaving. You prefer what? Your opinion? Levi i see no reason why you should not look at the data of the observed PDO and all the other data which is there. Each single system we observe points to warming. So lets start reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and do our best to counter dangerous climate change.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:
I won't argue anymore about the PDO. It's pointless. Every real Meteorologist knows what it is and what its impacts are. I'm not going to waste my time trying to refute the nonsense being fed to us by people that have been exposed for falsifying temperature data. Come on that's the best you people can do?


Levi give up Brother! Those that believe will put something together and change there story as to what is happening until an Ice Age begins and even then they will have us in Global Warming!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I won't argue anymore about the PDO. It's pointless. Every real Meteorologist knows what it is and what its impacts are. I'm not going to waste my time trying to refute the nonsense being fed to us by people that have been exposed for falsifying temperature data. Come on that's the best you people can do?
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting Levi32:

Climate Science
Every Meteorologist in the world knows what the PDO is. So-called climate scientists have apparently stooped to changing the definition to suit their own needs.


While PDO does have some degree of correlation with short term variations in global temperature, the striking feature of Figure 3 is the contrast in trends between PDO and global temperature. Obviously the PDO as an oscillation between positive and negative values shows no long term trend. In contrast, temperature displays a long term warming trend. When the PDO last switched to a cool phase, global temperatures were about 0.4C cooler than currently.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Pacific-Decadal-Oscillation.htm

Levi look at the data.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
oh, oh, scripted answer found!

In the presence of a correlation to the number of flights taking off within a 1/10th of a mile, the PDO fits the temperature rise perfectly.

I would love to see a plot of that. Number of flights taking off plus the PDO plotted with the surface temps.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Skepticall:
Hey atmo, is the 2.2 year lag on sun spots reaching the Earth true?

I have no idea. Not my strong suit, admittedly.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

Levi i like what you wrote about clean energy, thanks for sharing this insight.
But you now put all your argument on the PDO and say it is natural. What if you are wrong with your opinion and the science is right?

And tell me where did you read that it will be warmer in 2032? with 2f???

AS i understand the models more data points to sudden increase, something we observe in 2010 now!


It's 2038 not 2032. Yes I have a link....

"ICPP Predictions:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) has projected that in the next century, global warming will continue to rise to catastrophically higher and higher levels (Figure 4). The basis for this prediction is that the IPCC believes that rising atmospheric CO2 is the cause of global warming and that CO2 levels will continue to rise in the future, so global temperatures will also continue to rise. Computer models, programmed to calculate rise in global temperatures as a function of CO2, predict that by 2100, atmospheric CO2 will to rise to 540-970 ppm and global temperature will increase 0.6 C (1.1 F) by 2010, 1.2 C (2.1 F) by 2038, and up to 10.7C (19 F) by 2100."

Link
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
The PDO is a climate phenomena found primarily in the North Pacific (as opposed to El Niño which affects mostly the tropical Pacific). It has two phases that it typically alternates between; usually staying in one phase for a significant period of time (as little as 10 and as much as 40 years). However, it's not uncommon for these long periods to be broken by intervals when it switches phases for anything between 1 and 5 years. The phases of the PDO have been called warm phases (positive values) or cool phases (negative values).


Figure 1: Monthly values for PDO index: 1900 to May 2006. Figure source: Climate Impacts Group

So the first lesson of PDOs is that while we talk about a 20 to 30 year period, it is not very clear cut at all. In fact, an analysis of the frequency of the events does not produce much in the way of a firm period. Incidentally back in 1999 it was predicted that we were entering a cool phase.

The second lesson of PDOs is that while we talk about warm phases and cool phases these are more names than physical descriptions. As seen in Figure 2, a cool phase PDO is associated with cool sea surface temperatures along the Pacific coast of North America, but the center of the North Pacific ocean is still quite warm. Consequently it would appear that there is nothing fundamental about a PDO that would cause significant changes to global temperatures.


Figure 2: PDO warm phase (left) and cool phase (right). Image courtesy of JISAO.

Nevertheless, climate is always full of surprises and to be complete we should look at how the PDO's change of phase coincide with a change in climate trends? In 1905, PDO switched to a warm phase as global warming began. In 1946, PDO switched to a cool phase as temperatures cool mid-century. In 1977, PDO switched to a warm phase around the same time as the modern global warming period. Is PDO the smoking gun?


Figure 3: Monthly PDO index (blue) versus monthly global land ocean temperature anomanly (red). Smoothed data and trend lines are added.

While PDO does have some degree of correlation with short term variations in global temperature, the striking feature of Figure 3 is the contrast in trends between PDO and global temperature. Obviously the PDO as an oscillation between positive and negative values shows no long term trend. In contrast, temperature displays a long term warming trend. When the PDO last switched to a cool phase, global temperatures were about 0.4C cooler than currently.

The long term warming trend indicates the total energy in the Earth's climate system is increasing. This is due to an energy imbalance - more energy is coming in than is going out (Hansen 2005). Various factors affect the Earth's energy balance. A brightening sun increases inbound energy. Atmospheric aerosols reflect sunlight, decreasing inbound energy. Greenhouse gases absorb outgoing longwave radiation, reducing the amount of outgoing energy.

The total energy imbalance is expressed as net forcing, the sum of all the various forcings (eg - solar, aerosols, greenhouse gases, etc). Figure 4 compares net forcing to global temperature over the 20th century:


Figure 4: Net forcing (Blue - NASA GISS) versus global land ocean temperature anomaly (Red - GISS Temp).

When all forcings are included, net forcing shows good correlation with global temperatures. There is no single smoking gun. As our climate continues to absorb more energy than it emits, we can expect the long term warming trend to continue with short term fluctuations superimposed. This is the point of Keenlyside 2008 and is echoed by the Hadley Centre who predicted internal variability will partially offset the anthropogenic global warming signal for the next few years (Smith 2007).

Both predictions come from the next generation of climate models incorporating ocean dynamics (I'm surprised noone has coined the term GCM 2.0 yet). These new models predict that while warming will slow over the next few years due to internal variability, the warming trend will resume in the long term.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Pacific-Decadal-Oscillation.htm
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Skyepony:


So you expect us to bust into flames? NOAA figures we'll kill our ocean as a food source by 2050 from us not mean but polluting people making the oceans too acidic.. sea level rise is already forcing people from their homes..lowest sea rise projections put 10% of the world population out of a home in less than 90 years... There are so many reasons we need to stop burning & polluting to get by even if you remove AGW from the situation.


Ever seen this? http://www.atlantisquest.com/Bahama.html

Possible people have been leaving for higher ground, in stages, for a long, long time.

Where are people currently fleeing for high ground besides areas of subsidence and atolls? (other reasons to consider for the latter)
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463

Climate Science
PDO as an oscillation between positive and negative values shows no long term trend, while temperature shows a long term warming trend. When the PDO last switched to a cool phase, global temperatures were about 0.4C cooler than currently. The long term warming trend indicates the total energy in the Earth's climate system is increasing due to an energy imbalance.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Pacific-Decadal-Oscillation.htm


I'm ashamed of our so-called "science" system now. Look at them running and scrambling for anything to support what they say so they can keep making money. They wrote papers claiming that GW would produce NO SNOW, then this winter happens, and they deny ever saying such a thing.

Reliable temperature records are only available back to 1979 which is when the last cold PDO ended, we have not observed a cold PDO yet, and we are about to, and that will prove who's right and who's wrong in the next 20-30 years, maybe even sooner. Anything before 1979 is either incomplete, error-ridden, or manipulated by people trying to make money off of scamming people (hint: IPCC). Keep to the hard data, none of this fancy stuff about millions of years ago and trying to tell all of us very smart people that these things are proven facts. It's nonsense. The only real data is from 1979, that's what to watch, not these manipulated tools twisted to suit a political agenda.

Every Meteorologist in the world knows what the PDO is. So-called climate scientists have apparently stooped to changing the definition to suit their own needs.

Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting Levi32:


Man if you ever read anything I said you'd know that I said the oceans have been warm for the last 30 years due to natural cycles and so DUH it's warm. I never deny that fact. It's also a fact that the oceans are about to cool as we enter a cold PDO and eventually cold AMO as well. My children won't be growing up with a lot of "warm energy in the pipeline". By 2030 it will be quite cold ocean-wise, and I betcha the IPCC's insane predictions of 1F warming by 2011 and 2F warming by 2038 will crash and burn. There is no evidence to support the oceans staying in warm cycles for the next 30 years outside of the norm.

We're coming off a strong El Nino now....January and February global temps are going to be really really warm...that's OBVIOUS, it's not unexpected warming. After this El Nino a La Nina will likely follow (supported by the models) and temps will cool slightly. As long as another strong El Nino doesn't develop next winter, which I think very unlikely, then next February will definitely not be warmer.

Levi i like what you wrote about clean energy, thanks for sharing this insight.
But you now put all your argument on the PDO and say it is natural. What if you are wrong with your opinion and the science is right?

And tell me where did you read that it will be warmer in 2032? with 2f???

AS i understand the models more data points to sudden increase, something we observe in 2010 now!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Man if you ever read anything I said you'd know that I said the oceans have been warm for the last 30 years due to natural cycles and so DUH it's warm. I never deny that fact. It's also a fact that the oceans are about to cool as we enter a cold PDO and eventually cold AMO as well. My children won't be growing up with a lot of "warm energy in the pipeline". By 2030 it will be quite cold ocean-wise, and I betcha the IPCC's insane predictions of 1F warming by 2011 and 2F warming by 2038 will crash and burn. There is no evidence to support the oceans staying in warm cycles for the next 30 years outside of the norm.


Déjà vu. Certain parts of this conversation seem to be on a tape loop. Especially sentence one concerning a certain commenter.

About that...when one posts a real idea that doesn't fit the scripted response, well, you'll get none. At least not one that addresses what was said. (This is when the abrasiveness really comes out.)

Good luck, Levi...
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Levi32:
217. AstroHurricane001 3:52 PM AKST on March 01, 2010

We are about to enter our first cold cycle which will continue for the next 20-30 years. You say we don't have time to wait. I say no matter what people will keep looking for clean energy and ways to clean up our atmosphere, which is a noble cause with or without global warming to worry about, so I'm not at all concerned about us not making enough effort even if GW does exist. People will continue to advance those projects to improve our negative effects on the environment and I support those efforts.



Skeptic

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is a temperature pattern in the Pacific Ocean that spends roughly 20-30 years in the cool phase or the warm phase. In 1905, PDO switched to a warm phase. In 1946, PDO switched to a cool phase. In 1977, PDO switched to a warm phase. In 1998, PDO showed a few cool years. Note that the cool phases seem to coincide with the periods of cooling (1946-1977) and the warm phases seem to coincide with periods of warming (1905-1946, 1977-1998).

Climate Science

PDO as an oscillation between positive and negative values shows no long term trend, while temperature shows a long term warming trend. When the PDO last switched to a cool phase, global temperatures were about 0.4C cooler than currently. The long term warming trend indicates the total energy in the Earth's climate system is increasing due to an energy imbalance.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Pacific-Decadal-Oscillation.htm
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
230. Skyepony (Mod)
Quoting TampaSpin:


I wonder when the point will be that us mean old humans combust into flames....is it coming soon?


So you expect us to bust into flames? NOAA figures we'll kill our ocean as a food source by 2050 from us not mean but polluting people making the oceans too acidic.. sea level rise is already forcing people from their homes..lowest sea rise projections put 10% of the world population out of a home in less than 90 years... There are so many reasons we need to stop burning & polluting to get by even if you remove AGW from the situation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Man if you ever read anything I said you'd know that I said the oceans have been warm for the last 30 years due to natural cycles and so DUH it's warm. I never deny that fact. It's also a fact that the oceans are about to cool as we enter a cold PDO and eventually cold AMO as well. My children won't be growing up with a lot of "warm energy in the pipeline". By 2030 it will be quite cold ocean-wise, and I betcha the IPCC's insane predictions of 1F warming by 2011 and 2F warming by 2038 will crash and burn. There is no evidence to support the oceans staying in warm cycles for the next 30 years outside of the norm.


Hate to say it but, this years Hurricane season might just cool the Atlantic a good bit.......But, boy i hope not!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

Nobody says it wasn't way warmer back in earth history.
Humans evolved much later with a total diffrent climate.
And we speaking here of about 90 million years back in earth history. Humans and relatives evolved much later, with an colder climate. And if you look at todays climate you see that we already have a lot of problems with only slight warming.
Another big diffrence to past climate shifts is, that today it happen much faster. We have a lot of species going extinct and with further warming humans could face this too.

It will only become worse as there is a lot of warm energy in the pipeline (ocean). So a great place for your children to grow up? Or do you think that in 10 years suddently it will get colder? (Like Levi told us earlyer next year he guaratees it will be colder) Explain ;)


Man if you ever read anything I said you'd know that I said the oceans have been warm for the last 30 years due to natural cycles and so DUH it's warm. I never deny that fact. It's also a fact that the oceans are about to cool as we enter a cold PDO and eventually cold AMO as well. My children won't be growing up with a lot of "warm energy in the pipeline". By 2030 it will be quite cold ocean-wise, and I betcha the IPCC's insane predictions of 1F warming by 2011 and 2F warming by 2038 will crash and burn. There is no evidence to support the oceans staying in warm cycles for the next 30 years outside of the norm.

We're coming off a strong El Nino now....January and February global temps are going to be really really warm...that's OBVIOUS, it's not unexpected warming. After this El Nino a La Nina will likely follow (supported by the models) and temps will cool slightly. As long as another strong El Nino doesn't develop next winter, which I think very unlikely, then next February will definitely not be warmer.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


there you go you admitted it, its been way warmer before thats all i wanted to hear.

Nobody says it wasn't way warmer back in earth history.
Humans evolved much later with a total diffrent climate.
And we speaking here of about 90 million years back in earth history. Humans and relatives evolved much later, with an colder climate. And if you look at todays climate you see that we already have a lot of problems with only slight warming.
Another big diffrence to past climate shifts is, that today it happen much faster. We have a lot of species going extinct and with further warming humans could face this too.

It will only become worse as there is a lot of warm energy in the pipeline (ocean). So a great place for your children to grow up? Or do you think that in 10 years suddently it will get colder? (Like Levi told us earlyer next year he guaratees it will be colder) Explain ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
217. AstroHurricane001 3:52 PM AKST on March 01, 2010

Read above on Bastardi. I am a witness to everything he said and video-taped about this El Nino. He expected this temperature spike, and you should know that the ocean-atmospheric relationship lags both ways. The maximum increase in global heat isn't going to occur when the strongest warm SST anomalies occur....just like the warmest part of the day isn't when the sun's incoming radiation is the strongest.

The average of everything since 1977 is going to be warmer than "normal" based on mid-20th century climatology, obviously because we've been in a warm PDO since then. If this spike is bigger than 1998, then so be it, it's not that big of a deal. The major energy centers of the earth (eastern USA, Europe, and the far east) were outrageously cold this winter, but the world as a whole is very warm. Why? Excessive blocking in the high latitudes, enhanced to some degree by polar volcanic activity last year, warmed the arctic and drove all the cold air into the mid-latitudes. This is also why your east-ocean boundary currents are having issues, because air pressure oscillations (AO, NAO, etc) have all been insanely negative all winter, slowing down the ocean gyres and therefore the boundary currents. The east-ocean boundary currents are the weakest and most susceptible to being overwhelmed by warmer water for a time.

And there may be other ways to figure out what temperatures were before satellites, but they are not complete global records that cover all the grid points, and there is so much controversy about the accuracy of the data which is prone to error and manipulation. The best way to go is with the hard-core unbiased data that we know for a fact is true. All we have truly observed so far in history is one warm cycle of the PDO. We are about to enter our first cold cycle which will continue for the next 20-30 years. You say we don't have time to wait. I say no matter what people will keep looking for clean energy and ways to clean up our atmosphere, which is a noble cause with or without global warming to worry about, so I'm not at all concerned about us not making enough effort even if GW does exist. People will continue to advance those projects to improve our negative effects on the environment and I support those efforts.

Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

Well if the sun kicks in again, we could have 0.1-0.2C more to accelerate the great human induced warmth from fossil fuel combustion.


I wonder when the point will be that us mean old humans combust into flames....is it coming soon?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Skyepony:


I was discussing the '08-'09 sunspot minimum..you beg to differ like how? You think it was normal? Yeah I think we all know it is over.. Told ya'll a year ago when it ended & we hit an El Nino peak we should cycle up to really warm..by sat measurements that is exactly what has happened. SST are really beginning to reflect it.

The sun has much a longer cycle than the 11 year that plays way more with the temps of the earth. We've had blogs on this where Dr Masters explained how that is also in a negative phase when we would expect cooling, not this.. It's stupid to blame the sun, knowing what we do.

Well if the sun kicks in again, we could have 0.1-0.2C more to accelerate the great human induced warmth from fossil fuel combustion.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

It was much hotter back then. A climate we going for. Sea level been much higher too.


Climate

The Berriasian epoch showed a cooling trend that had been seen in the last epoch of the Jurassic. There is evidence that snowfalls were common in the higher latitudes and the tropics became wetter than during the Triassic and Jurassic.[7] Glaciation was however restricted to alpine glaciers on some high-latitude mountains, though seasonal snow may have existed farther south.

After the end of the Berriasian, however, temperatures increased again, and these conditions were almost constant until the end of the period.[8] This trend was due to intense volcanic activity which produced large quantities of carbon dioxide. The development of a number of mantle plumes across the widening mid-ocean ridges further pushed sea levels up, so that large areas of the continental crust were covered with shallow seas. The Tethys Sea connecting the tropical oceans east to west also helped in warming the global climate. Warm-adapted plant fossils are known from localities as far north as Alaska and Greenland, while dinosaur fossils have been found within 15 degrees of the Cretaceous south pole.[9]

A very gentle temperature gradient from the equator to the poles meant weaker global winds, contributing to less upwelling and more stagnant oceans than today. This is evidenced by widespread black shale deposition and frequent anoxic events.[10] Sediment cores show that tropical sea surface temperatures may have briefly been as warm as 42 °C (107 °F), 17 °C (31 °F) warmer than at present, and that they averaged around 37 °C (99 °F). Meanwhile deep ocean temperatures were as much as 15 to 20 °C (27 to 36 °F) higher than today's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous

See this image and think of earthquakes and volcanoes.


there you go you admitted it, its been way warmer before thats all i wanted to hear.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
221. Skyepony (Mod)
Quoting Skepticall:


I beg to differ.

February, 2010, was the first month since 2007 with sunspots every day according to Spaceweather.com for February 27. A quick check of February 28 confirms the streak. So far there have been only 2 spot-free days in 2010. By comparison there were 260 spot-free days in 2009, and there have been 772 spot-free days since 2004. What this means is that one of the quietest periods of solar activity in recent history may be coming to an end.


I was discussing the '08-'09 sunspot minimum & how it wasn't normal (conflicting Levi:)..you beg to differ like how? You think it was normal? Yeah I think we all know it is over.. Told ya'll a year ago when it ended & we hit an El Nino peak we should cycle up to really warm..by sat measurements that is exactly what has happened. SST are really beginning to reflect it.

The sun has much a longer cycle than the 11 year that plays way more with the temps of the earth. We've had blogs on this where Dr Masters explained how that is also in a negative phase when we would expect cooling, not this.. It's stupid to blame the sun, knowing what we do.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Image infos:
Global paleogeographic reconstruction of the Earth in the late Cretaceous period 90 million years ago.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


there were no polar caps during the cretaceous period... did humans cause that too?

It was much hotter back then. A climate we going for. Sea level been much higher too.


Climate

The Berriasian epoch showed a cooling trend that had been seen in the last epoch of the Jurassic. There is evidence that snowfalls were common in the higher latitudes and the tropics became wetter than during the Triassic and Jurassic.[7] Glaciation was however restricted to alpine glaciers on some high-latitude mountains, though seasonal snow may have existed farther south.

After the end of the Berriasian, however, temperatures increased again, and these conditions were almost constant until the end of the period.[8] This trend was due to intense volcanic activity which produced large quantities of carbon dioxide. The development of a number of mantle plumes across the widening mid-ocean ridges further pushed sea levels up, so that large areas of the continental crust were covered with shallow seas. The Tethys Sea connecting the tropical oceans east to west also helped in warming the global climate. Warm-adapted plant fossils are known from localities as far north as Alaska and Greenland, while dinosaur fossils have been found within 15 degrees of the Cretaceous south pole.[9]

A very gentle temperature gradient from the equator to the poles meant weaker global winds, contributing to less upwelling and more stagnant oceans than today. This is evidenced by widespread black shale deposition and frequent anoxic events.[10] Sediment cores show that tropical sea surface temperatures may have briefly been as warm as 42 °C (107 °F), 17 °C (31 °F) warmer than at present, and that they averaged around 37 °C (99 °F). Meanwhile deep ocean temperatures were as much as 15 to 20 °C (27 to 36 °F) higher than today's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous

See this image and think of earthquakes and volcanoes.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MsBlanch:
Storm you share allot here, gives me peace of mind and is much appreciated.

I agree with the others we want you to be present at the conference.

TampaSpin - thank you for setting everything up!



You are more than welcome....StormW's expertise is needed here and anything more he can learn to protect us all is needed. He is the "The Man" we need in this community to help us all!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Lol....oh crap we're burning up (rolls eyes)

We were coming out of a strong La Nina last February....we're coming out of a strong El Nino now....what else do you expect the temperature to be but way higher than last year at this time? It's not gonna keep going up like this until 2013. We're going into another La Nina this winter....compare again next February I guarantee you it won't be up another 1C.

Notice the drop in '07-08 because of La Nina, then the rise this winter because of El Nino.....venture to take a guess if there's any correlation between the ocean temperatures and the air temp for the last 3 years? Hmmm...



According to that graph, it looks like the departures from running averages for the 2006 El Nino and 2007-08 La Ninas, respectively, were +0.3C and -0.23C. No big +0.4C leaps, especially not in one month. It looks like the biggest one-month change was 0.25C, which is little compared to the recent increase. But remember that El Nino peaked on Boxing Day, and so December's El Nino was stronger than January's on average, yet global temepratures soared. It's possible that the El Nino's declining warmth simply flooded over the continents, but remember that the cold temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere were as strong as ever (which means that the southern hemisphere and ocean-based air temperatures would have to have been even warmer than otherwise). Since the main El Nino warm pool weakened, the heat must have spread out into the global oceans, clogging the thermohaline, especially in cold currents such as the Humboldt, Aghulas and Canary. I have observed this from SST maps collected from WeatherUnderground, but have yet to release any compilation, although Plymouth has some good archives for SSTs and anomalies, as does climate4you for daily SSTs. Also, remember the huge increase in February SSTs for the Atlantic this year compared to last year. February 2009 was actually quite warm (0.19C up from the running average), and we actually got 0.57C warmer this year than last year for February. No, I'm pretty sure we won't have a +1C temperature rise every year, or we'd all be dead. But exceeding the +1C mark since whenever in the 20th century temperature average is highly likely in a few years, if it hasn't occurred already. We're going into a La Nina in the summer this year, but that forecast is uncertain as some predictions show it returning to an El Nino or remaining neutral. If strong La Nina conditions do not develop in the winter, which I doubt they will due to the new suceptibility for the Humboldt to be disrupted by warm anomalies from its root at 40S, then we will likely not get back to the old flat baseline we've been enjoying for the past ten years. Around 2012-2013, solar activity is expected to peak, so we'll likely see rising average temperatures based on the sun alone until at least 2015. After that, positive feedbacks will take over, and economic recovery and recoveries will only add to that, because there was a mixed blessing during the economic crisis in that our CO2 emissions declined. Methane clathrate releases will likely increase, and they just started between 2004 and 2008 (during the flatline period), and that wasn't supposed to happen until the end of the century.

Quoting tornadodude:


how?

its normally cold in winter, and it was cold this winter.


I can tell you that here in S. Ontario we got TWO major snowstorms all year. My definition of a major snowstorm is more than 20 cm (8 in) of snow in under 48 hours. Our first storm was in early January, our second just last week by late February. Subtract those two storms from the total snowfall we've had all season, and that's about 45 cm (18 in) so far this season, and 100 cm (39 in) with the snowstorms. I agree with the forecasts that are predicting more snowfall coming large storms all at once, and the flooding in Madeira was a clear example of that (at one location, nearly twice the average monthly rainfall in five hours). At Toronto Pearson, the lowest winter snowfall on record was the winter of 52-53, with about 55 cm of snow. Usually we see closer to 135 cm each winter, and the winter of 2007-2008 was one of the snowiest on record, with about 210 cm of snow in Toronto. This variation from high and low records for winter precipitation has been astounding.

Quoting whipster:


Just like any other supposed data the pseudo-scientists post here, most don't believe it any more. Like always, gotta follow the money, and I surely wonder if the fearless leader here at WU is being compensated by the AGW psuedo-science crowd. I think this is the first update that didn't blame everything on AGW.

Some more tidbits for your reading pleasure:

"Prof Jones today said it was not 'standard practice' in climate science to release data and methodology for scientific findings so that other scientists could check and challenge the research...He also said the scientific journals which had published his papers had never asked to see it"...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254660/Climategate-expert-tells-MPs.html#ixzz0gxGJ6K2M


If your method is to "follow the money", then most of the money that you seek comes from ExxonMobil to fund the climate deniers. The denial industry gets funded fourteen times more than the environmental groups, remember? Also, I'm going to address an earlier post that accused another blogger of being funded by Al Gore: although he does train "mini-Gores" to give presentations all over the world, I highly doubt that he personally pays any of them to do that because then he'd be out of money, and a blogger here being funded by the fossil fuel industry to spread denial is far more likely.

Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


dude, im predicting the temps to rise as we head into the may and june months.... just a prediction but global warming will happen trust me...


Global average temperatures do usually get highest around July, but this year I'm thinking that we'll get a big anomaly in global monthly temperatures around May as the warmth in the oceans is still present over the southern hemisphere and the Northern hemisphere recovers from the cold spell and warm oceanic air floods into continents.

Quoting Seastep:


And, Astro, we are at +0.25C as of 2009 since 1900, not +1.32C. Trend is only at +0.15C 1880-2009. Even the Raw GISS says only +0.45C.

Any way you look at it we're not +1.32C.


What I did was addition based on three different graphs. The GISS up to 2009 at this point does not matter until 2010 is passed, as this year will likely persist to have above-normal temperatures even as a neutral 3.4 zone or a La Nina sets in. I concluded that based on the numbers given by climateprogress that February average temperatures this year were roughly 0.57C warmer than last year (+1.03F). I added that to February 2009's average temperatures given by the UAH graph (used by both sides in the debate; unless I chose the wrong dot for that), which was 0.38C above the 1979-1998 average. That makes for +0.96C from the average. I next added that number to what the average for that timeperiod looked like according to the graph I posted. I estimated that this was +0.18C above the average for that graph, which has a base average period of 1961 - 1990. Add this figure to the previous one, and you get +1.14C. Since 1900 was about 0.2C below the base average period for the third graph, that corresponds to a +1.34C rise since 1900. Let's be conservative here and assume I overestimated and go with +1.3C since 1900. Although I agree that this is not a purely scientific method, I do not have a single graph to go on that shows both the recent spike and the 1900 base value. This is why I'm asking for a better way to find the temperature increase. If I use your raw figures for GISS data, which was acutally not established until 1961, I get a value of 0.76C above 1900 levels, which is still above what was observed throughout the 20th century (0.74C). Or did you use data from 1961?

Quoting Levi32:


Good job on the graphs, but I don't put much stock in any graph that goes back before accurate global satellite temperature measurements began in 1979. There's too much controversy (your new adjusted graphs are a testament to that) on the accuracy of the data, and the reality is that reconstructed data is just too fuzzy and prone to manipulation. I am greatly looking forward to the next 30 years as our new technology allows us to observe the climate during the first completely-observed cold PDO and AMO cycles.


There are other ways of obtaining a temperature record than from satellites. Proxy data and temperature stations, for example. The AMO and PDO combined cold cycles will by my estimates lower global average temperatures by a net 0.15, and that's still not enough to undermine the underlying trend. Either way, we do not have thirty years of time to wait before we decide if we want to do something about global warming. The scientific evidence, other than a small proportion of scientists (but a very large proportion of the fossil fuel industry), is strong enough to justify immediate action. It's been strong enough for the last twenty years, in fact, and that's before the denial machine kicked in. By the way, let's not let this debate get out of hand...again.

Quoting Levi32:


Well obviously the oceans have warmed a great deal since last year due to this quite potent El Nino. This temperature spike was expected, and it doesn't mean something in the ocean has "flipped", this isn't an unheard of warming spike...it's still smaller than the 1998 spike due to the '97-98 El Nino. It just shows us the strong influence that ocean temperatures have on the atmosphere. There's nothing crazy going on here.


The temperature spike may have been predicted, but did you read the climateprogress link about Bastardi's predictions? And actually, we don't know yet if this winter is a bigger anomaly than 1998 yet. The SST patterns suggest huge fluctuations recently within the thermohaline pattern, and the fact that the ENSO warm pool weakened, expanded, and had a large portion of its warm anomaly diverted to the south by cyclones (and later farther east), probably had a great deal to do with the warming temperatures, but even that could probably not fully explain the full spike, so if you ask me I'd say that global warming is accelerating and that the 10-year lull is over.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Storm you share allot here, gives me peace of mind and is much appreciated.

I agree with the others we want you to be present at the conference.

TampaSpin - thank you for setting everything up!

Quoting StormW:


Thanks WU community...you're awesome! Heck, maybe I can get Bill Read to hire me! LOL!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:



Hiya msgambler,lotsa wind behind that squall line as well.

Be wary of that too.

Ya, you guys are getting that wind I mentioned: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KNEW.html

No more than 15 mph, gusts to 25 up here...a function of both where the low is and our thickly forested landmass for most of the northshore.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Patrap:



Hiya msgambler,lotsa wind behind that squall line as well.

Be wary of that too.
I'll be in your backyard tomorrow. You better hope I don't see anything too bad...lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
StormW FundRaiser for Hurricane Conference

We need to raise funds to send StormW to Orlando for the Hurricane Conference.

2010 Hurricane Conference

We have now collected $170 so far and climbing.....YOU ALL ARE GREAT! Those of you that have donated a special thanks and you know you who are!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

What percentage of global warming is due to human causes vs. natural causes?

Over the last 40 or so years, natural drivers would have caused cooling, and so the warming there has been … is caused by a combination of human drivers and some degree of internal variability. I would judge the maximum amplitude of the internal variability to be roughly 0.1 deg C over that time period, and so given the warming of ~0.5 deg C, I’d say somewhere between 80 to 120% of the warming. Slightly larger range if you want a large range for the internal stuff.
http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/01/accuweather%E2%80%99s-joe-bastardi-admits-earth-continues-war mest-winter-since-satellite-measurements-started-and-feb-should-be-warmest-on-record/#comments


there were no polar caps during the cretaceous period... did humans cause that too?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
211. Skyepony (Mod)
CIMSS Satellite Blog has a write of an interesting mystery anomaly solved by a local..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

What percentage of global warming is due to human causes vs. natural causes?

Over the last 40 or so years, natural drivers would have caused cooling, and so the warming there has been %u2026 is caused by a combination of human drivers and some degree of internal variability. I would judge the maximum amplitude of the internal variability to be roughly 0.1 deg C over that time period, and so given the warming of ~0.5 deg C, I%u2019d say somewhere between 80 to 120% of the warming. Slightly larger range if you want a large range for the internal stuff.
http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/01/accuweather%E2%80%99s-joe-bastardi-admits-earth-continues-war mest-winter-since-satellite-measurements-started-and-feb-should-be-warmest-on-record/#comments


ROFL I'm sorry but that is the stupidest thing I've heard yet. The last 40 years of natural drivers are what have WARMED US UP since 1977! What the heck are they talking about? Do they think warmer oceans are going to cool the earth? And don't you dare try to tell me they were talking about sunspots.

And Joe Bastardi?? Hello he's not gonna falsify data, unlike some other people. He jumped right on reporting the 2nd warmest January on record the very morning when Dr. Spencer's temp graph was updated. He said a long time ago it would warm with this El Nino, which is natural, and will cool after the El Nino, which is also a natural result. And NOW they talk about since "satellite" estimates began? NOW they talk about it because it's to their advantage to not include anything from BEFORE 1979. That's utterly ludicrous.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26701
Quoting tornadodude:


that's because the world is ending in 2012! LOL


well according to patrap the date is off by 1 year, it's suppose to 2011.

oh shoot i wasn't suppose to say anything! lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 259 - 209

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Overcast
43 °F
Overcast

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Effort Snow Shower Over Windsor, Ontario
Sunset on Dunham Lake
Pictured Rocks Sunset
Sunset on Lake Huron