Hurricanes and tropical storms will become less frequent by the end of the century as a result of climate change, US researchers have suggested.
But the scientists added their data also showed that there would be a "modest increase" in the intensity of these extreme weather events.
The findings are at odds with some other studies, which forecast a greater number of hurricanes in a warmer world.
The researchers' results appear in the journal Nature Geoscience.
The team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (Noaa) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) said its findings did not support the notion that human-induced climate change was causing an increase in the number of hurricanes and tropical storms.
Considering that there hasn't been an increase (see here and here for details) in such storms this should come as no surprise. ("But Al Gore said..." Oh, shut up. If you haven't learned by now that particular appeal to "authority" is garbage you are beyond help.)
What is more heartening than this particular study, which is just another in a long line of "what if" computer models (as in "What if we understood perfectly the mechanics of hurricane generation...), is the fact that a base assumption I have been arguing for from day one seems to have won the day.
In a concluding statement, the researchers said that although there was evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record, no firm conclusion could be made.
One reason for the uncertainty is the changes in observation methods used to record Atlantic hurricanes - a record that dates back to 1850.
From 1944, air reconnaissance flights were used to monitor tropical storms and hurricanes. This development allowed researchers to monitor a much greater area and not rely on ships' logs and storms reaching land.
And from the late 1960s, satellite technology has been used to monitor and track hurricanes.
Therefore, a reliable record of past hurricane activity only stretches back about 35 years. [emphasis added]
Since the bulk of, to pick an example, Kerry Emanuel's work is dependent upon hurricane data collection being almost entirely consistent over time (and I can think of few assumptions dumber than that one), this is significant. It means Emanuel (and his ilk) has lost the scientific war. In order for their work to stand they needed researchers to be content in the "Best Track" data as is. Obviously, researchers are more than willing to question the data's limitations.
Here is the money quote from the BBC story:
"The main point that we want to emphasise is that there is no evidence in this study that we are seeing large greenhouse-gas-driven increases in Atlantic hurricane or tropical storm frequencies."
You don't say.
No comments:
Post a Comment