Study: Global warming doubled hurricanes

Perhaps we can now start making "global warming causes hurricanes" more than a flimsy shock tactic:

Global warming's effect on wind patterns and sea temperatures have nearly doubled the number of hurricanes a year in the Atlantic Ocean over the past century, says a new study by US scientists.

Excerpts from the study by Greg Holland of the National Center for Atmospheric Research and Peter Webster of Georgia Institute of Technology were released in the United States late Sunday.

[...]

"These numbers are a strong indication that climate change is a major factor in the increasing number of Atlantic hurricanes," Holland was quoted by AFP as saying in a
statement.

Surely this must gain us traction in Florida, a battleground'08 state?

If Gore runs and was nominated, the fact that he already "won" Florida once, combined with a strong link between global warming and hurricanes, should bag him Florida.  That, in turn (especially with the recent news about North Carolina's proportional electoral votes), means he should win the general.

•  Do you have a link to the study?

  by quaoar on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 12:08:16 AM PDT

  •  Here'a a link to the AP report

    http://www.nytimes.com/...

    I believe this is the one.

    by Dianna on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 12:38:18 AM PDT

•  It is a little scary, the reality of it.

  When I was in the Pacific Northwest, once last month too, we've had these really intense windstorms.  I don't remember having them like that before.

  It's warming up up there too.

  I hope things don't get out of control.

  by Dianna on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 12:19:50 AM PDT

•  NOAA disputed the study

  Chris Landsea, science and operations officer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Hurricane Center, said the study is inconsistent in its use of data.

  The work, he said, is ''sloppy science that neglects the fact that better monitoring by satellites allows us to observe storms and hurricanes that were simply missed earlier. The doubling in the number of storms and hurricanes in 100 years that they found in their paper is just an artifact of technology, not climate change.''

  Sounds reasonable, but an MIT hurricane expert disagreed with NOAA here. I'd be interested to know if NOAA is letting the White House do their talking or if they really think it's a flawed study.

  by Oxy Moron on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 01:06:23 AM PDT

  •  There's a legitimate dispute here

    as per my dad, who works at NOAA, both sides have a point and it's going to take some work to create any sort of consensus because the analysis can go both ways. There's some internal argument within NOAA - it's not just NOAA vs. MIT.

    The study's clearly flawed for the reasons Chris states but the question is essentially how badly flawed it is and what that means for the conclusions: are they invalid or do they merely overstate the extent of the problem?

    by kyril on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 02:30:51 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for the insight, kyril.

      It's pretty sad that we live in a time when we have to be suspicious of our own government scientists. Bush has politicized the government so much, we can't tell who to believe.

      by Oxy Moron on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 08:51:33 AM PDT

      •  It is sad

        I know my dad's been afraid for his job for some time now because he just so happens to work in a field whose very existence threatens the Rethug cabal (sea ice climatology). Ever since the government shutdowns his branch has been scared that it'll be defunded - luckily, forecasting sea ice is also pretty useful for various special interest groups who are involved in fishing and oil drilling in Alaska and the Bering Sea.

        But you can generally believe most of what comes out of NOAA (or at least believe that the people who are saying it probably believe it). There are a ton of honest scientists there who pay a lot of attention to each other's work, and even if the top levels wanted to lie I seriously doubt they would be able to prevent the truth from leaking out via the channels of academia. Bush would have had his hands full trying to politicize NOAA - he managed NASA, which was quite a feat, but NOAA would be harder. Climatologists don't operate in secrecy.

        by kyril on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 09:36:06 AM PDT

•  Hmmm...

  This is worth keeping in mind, and deserves CONSIDERABLE attention from a research point of view, but my understanding is that the link between warming and hurricanes, though a legitmate hypothesis, is quite controversial at this point. This is according to my wife who is a climatologist. Keep in mind, she and I consider global warming to be real and to be happening now. And we both believe the link to increased storminess in recent years is likely to be real. But as a theory, that link remains quite uncertain. For now, anyway.

  by mole333 on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 03:22:07 AM PDT

•  Gore was talking about storm intensity

  not the number of tropical and subtropical stroms.

  The former is about the connection between global warming,  sea surface temperature and storm intensity. The later I think is still an open question and I wouldn't jump to conclusions based on this study.

  by elender on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 11:02:44 AM PDT