Damaging Katrina-level storm surges are twice as likely in warm years
Perhaps the most stunning images in the wake of Hurricane Sandy were the sight of the roller coaster from the Casino Pier in Seaside Heights, New Jersey lying in the Atlantic Ocean. The images reminded us that hurricane storm surges are capable of causing tremendous destruction along the coast, and one of the main concerns on how global warming might affect hurricanes is the potential for stronger hurricanes to create larger storm surges. We expect that global warming should make the strongest hurricanes stronger, since hurricanes are heat engines that take heat energy out of the ocean and converts it to wind energy. These stronger winds will be capable of piling up higher storm surges. However, it is controversial whether or not we have observed an increase in the strongest hurricanes, since hurricane winds are hard to observe. Our long-term hurricane data base is generally too low in quality and covers too short a period of time to make very good estimates of how climate change may be affecting hurricane winds. However, a new 2012 paper, "Homogeneous record of Atlantic hurricane surge threat since 1923" by Grinsted et al., looked at storm surge data from six tide gauges along the U.S. coast from Texas to New Jersey, and concluded that the number of moderately large hurricane and tropical storm surge events has increased since 1923. Moderately large storm surge events are on pace to nearly double by the year 2100, compared to 20th century levels. Moreover, 1-in-9 year to 1-in-30 year Katrina-level storm surge events are twice as likely to occur in warm years compared to cool years, and thus global warming may be able to dramatically increase the frequency of highly damaging extreme storm surge events. Since sea level is steadily rising due to global warming, these future storm surges will also be riding in on top of an elevated ocean surface, and will thus be able to do even greater damage than in the past. Expect to see many more shocking storm surge damage photos in the coming decades, unless we wise up, retreat from areas highly vulnerable to storm surge, and invest in increased shoreline protection measures.
Figure 1. The Casino Pier in Seaside Heights, N.J. taken during a search and rescue mission by 1-150 Assault Helicopter Battalion, New Jersey Army National Guard on Oct. 30, 2012. Image credit: U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Mark C. Olsen.
Figure 2. Top: Observed long-term frequency of moderately large storm surge events from hurricanes and tropical storms measured at six tide gauges along the U.S. East Coast (inset map). The thick line is a 5-year moving average. These type of surge events occurred an average of 5.4 times/year between 1923 - 2008, and are on pace to increase to 9.5 events per year by 2100. Bottom: Departure of Earth's annual mean surface temperature from average, shaded to show warmer and colder than median temperatures. Large storm surge events increase in probability during warmer than average years. Image credit: Grinsted et al. 2012, "A homogeneous record of Atlantic hurricane surge threat since 1923."
Using storm surge to evaluate damage normalization studies
Damage from landfalling storms can be used to estimate if hurricanes are growing stronger with time, but damage estimates must first be corrected to account for changes in wealth and population over time. A 2008 study by Pielke et al. found that although hurricane damages had been doubling every ten years in recent decades, there were no increases in normalized hurricane damages in the U.S. from 1900 - 2005. They used census and economic data to adjust for how increases in populations and wealth may have affected hurricane damages over time. However, Grinsted et al. (2012) questioned whether or not this was done correctly. They found that storm surge heights of U.S. hurricanes and tropical storms correlated very well with metrics that looked at storm intensity, when looking at many decades of data to see long-term trends. However, the researchers found that while short-term trends in normalized hurricane damage estimated by Pielke et al. (2008) did correlate well historical storm surges, these normalized damages had poor correlation with the storm surge record, when looking at decades-long time scales. This implies that the corrections were biased. Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky of the University of Western Australia makes the case that efforts such as the one done by Pielke et al. (2008) to normalize disaster losses are probably biased too low, since they only look at factors that tend to increase disaster losses with time, but ignore factors that tend to decrease disaster losses. These ignored factors include improvements in building codes, better weather forecasts allowing more preparation time, and improved fire-fighting ability. He writes, "Most normalization research to date has not accounted for those variables because they are extremely difficult to quantify. (And most researchers have been at pains to point that out; e.g., Neumayer & Barthel, 2011, pp. 23-24.) In effect, normalization research to date largely rests on the oddly inconsistent pair of assumptions that (a) we have built up enormous wealth during the 20th century but (b) did so without any technological advance whatsoever." Grinsted et al. (2012) suggest that it may be possible to use their storm surge data to correct biased hurricane damage estimates, though. Take home message: studies showing no increase in normalized damage from storms have high uncertainty, and it is possible that higher economic damages due to stronger hurricanes are indeed occurring.
References
Grinsted, A., J. C. Moore, and S. Jevrejeva, 2012, "A homogeneous record of Atlantic hurricane surge threat since 1923," PNAS 2012, doi:10.1073/pnas.1209542109
Pielke et al., 2008, "Normalized Hurricane Damage in the United States: 1900–2005", Natural Hazards Review, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp. 29-42.
Links
In this remarkable home video, 15-year-old Christofer Sochacki captures the evening high tide on the day Superstorm Sandy struck Union Beach, New Jersey. The later part of the video shows how high waves on top of a 8-foot storm surge can lead to a punishing assault on beach-front structures.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 — Blog Index
That HPC image is incredible. Now if only the jet stream would move south and spread some of that precip love across the rest of the US. The Northern Sierras and Cascades do a good job blocking/making an eastern rain shadow. Good for the ski resorts out West though.
They actually fared quite well if you ask me The only real only two noticeable differences were the below average anomalies in the Southeast U.S. that were not picked up in the 11/13-11/19 outlook.
Also the previous forecast 11/09-11/15 did not pick up on the cool anomalies over the Rockies, outside of that they show a good bit of accuracy.
(P.S. I know I have been guilty of jabbing others too so I am admitting my guilt and asking for forgivness)
Hey Luisport,
I see your keeping up with the storm and thats great,
But who is this " RyanMaue@RyanMaue " ?
I'm having trouble posting anything.. :(
Slow here...waiting for the ban hammer to drop on me once more LOL...46 and still cloudy in NOLA
pointing to the PDO as the culprit is like me pointing to my pregnant wife's belly getting bigger and bigger over the course of nine months, and arguing 'no, it's not a baby, it's just that her stomach gets full after she eats dinner and then shrinks back after she's done digesting'.
My local WU weather
Webcam from my area..
He's a meteorologist named Ryan Maue. :)
I don't see why ,I dont see anything wrong with what you said ...
Anyways BOPHA RAMMB image
Thanks ScottLincoln.. :)
But he is not very popular with some folk around here . But I think he is good but that's only my opinion
Atmospheric river moisture for Fri/Sat over NorCal is still associated w/low near Int'l Dateline, +36 hrs... http://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/273813925039050 753/photo/1/large
Yes, depending on the context and the situatuation, it is possible for comparing quantities where one quantity can be larger than 100% of another.
For climate change - attribution of global warming, in particular - evidence has suggested that humans may be responsible for more than 100% of the observed warming since the 1900-1950 timeframe.
How can this be possible? If climate change only had two possible modes, stable or warming, this wouldn't be possible. But global temperatures can remain roughly stable, warm, or cool. If non-human factors are causing a net cooling effect of 0.25C/century and human factors are causing a net warming effect of 1.25C/century, then human factors would be contributing 125% to the observed warming of 1.00C/century.
I wouldn't know him from Adam..
If he is a good met. maybe some here threatened by him/her..
and that may be the popularity prob..
Anyway I always give someone a chance..not everyone is right 100% of the time..
Eureka,Cali...
Nice big Cyclone...
[b]4-day forecast rainfall from GFS 12z, San Fran northward could see 4-6'' inches or more. Higher elevations > 1 foot.[/b]
http://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/273820258400346 113/photo/1/large
You might want to read this article, just saying.
http://natpo.st/TvKCcL
Viewing: 801 - 830
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 — Blog Index