Global Hurricane Activity lowest in 30 years

[jasons2k]

http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Based on ACE. Interesting article.

[Ed Mahmoud]

http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Based on ACE. Interesting article.

I saw that earlier and thought of posting it. I don't think that particular doctoral candidate in meteorology is a big believer in AGW.

[hurricanetrack]

Yep, kind of helps to shoot holes in the whole "global warming causes more hurricanes and more severe hurricanes at that" theory.

Still, consider this- with the numbers down to their lowest in 30 years, tropical cyclones that is, not necessarily hurricanes in particular, the U.S. has had their worst hurricane strikes of all time, damage wise. From Andrew to the 04-05-08 seasons, the U.S. has had its fair share- as have other nations, especially Cuba and Mexico.

[wxman57]

Yep, kind of helps to shoot holes in the whole "global warming causes more hurricanes and more severe hurricanes at that" theory.

Still, consider this- with the numbers down to their lowest in 30 years, tropical cyclones that is, not necessarily hurricanes in particular, the U.S. has had their worst hurricane strikes of all time, damage wise. From Andrew to the 04-05-08 seasons, the U.S. has had its fair share- as have other nations, especially Cuba and Mexico.

The increased damage is mostly due to more people living on the coast and more expensive property to destroy, not to more severe impacts.

[caneman]

Interesting report.
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

[cycloneye]

Interesting report.
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

You made a thread about this same topic,and because of that I merged yours with this one that was made earlier today.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

Fascinating....appears that hurricane activity has really been cyclical....

[hurricanetrack]

57: your statement makes sense to a point. Obviously if there were fewer people and little property to destroy then it would not matter how strong or how often the hurricanes were. However, if the only hurricanes to have struck the U.S. over the last 30 years were all cat-1s or 2s, then the property damage would be significantly less. So I would argue that it is indeed because of stronger hurricanes, and more of them, hitting the U.S. that we have seen an increase in damage as of late. I think though that we are both right- no population, no risk. But at the same time- no hurricanes making landfall and 5 billion people can live along the coast with no worries.

Just look at 2004 and 2005- had no hurricanes hit those years but still had formed but remained out at sea, then big deal- those seasons would have been moot in terms of how they are remembered in history. I guess you can't have one without the other- but my point was that even though global activity may be down, the ones that have hit the U.S. in particular have had devastating consquences.

[Ed Mahmoud]

57: your statement makes sense to a point. Obviously if there were fewer people and little property to destroy then it would not matter how strong or how often the hurricanes were. However, if the only hurricanes to have struck the U.S. over the last 30 years were all cat-1s or 2s, then the property damage would be significantly less. So I would argue that it is indeed because of stronger hurricanes, and more of them, hitting the U.S. that we have seen an increase in damage as of late. I think though that we are both right- no population, no risk. But at the same time- no hurricanes making landfall and 5 billion people can live along the coast with no worries.

Just look at 2004 and 2005- had no hurricanes hit those years but still had formed but remained out at sea, then big deal- those seasons would have been moot in terms of how they are remembered in history. I guess you can't have one without the other- but my point was that even though global activity may be down, the ones that have hit the U.S. in particular have had devastating consquences.

Perhaps because since the 1990s the Pacific has cooled, and the Atlantic has warmed, a repeat of the 1930s through 1950s cycle.


A Labor Day Hurricane hitting the Keys now would do a lot more damage than 70 years ago, and since it apparently underwent RI before landfall, a repeat now might find people in Monroe County ignoring evacuation orders.

The 1938 New York/New England storm would be better forecast, so loss of life should be lower, but Suffolk County isn't mainly farmland anymore.

[cycloneye]

So far 2009 has been with low activity globally.

3 questions for the members who have the stats about the 3 basins ATL,EPAC and WPAC in terms of the averages.

1-As we know the North Atlantic basin has not seen any named system so far.How is the North Atlantic doing in terms of activity as of July 23rd vs the normal average?

2-Four named systems haved formed so far in the North Eastern Pacific basin.How is the EPAC doing in terms of activity as of July 23rd vs the normal average?

3-The North Western Pacific basin so far has seen six named systems.Same question,how is the WPAC doing in terms of activity as of July 23rd vs the normal average?

[DanKellFla]

Fascinating....appears that hurricane activity has really been cyclical....

HA
Interesting article, but we still have a few more months of the season left. But, I will gladly take a quiet season.

[cheezyWXguy]

Fascinating....appears that hurricane activity has really been cyclical....

who wouldve guessed...

[margiek]

The increased damage is mostly due to more people living on the coast and more expensive property to destroy, not to more severe impacts.

It's not that simple. In MS, 2005 Katrina was a more severe impact than 1969 Camille, regardless of the damage figures, with the entire MS coast inundated by surge well inland, not just the Waveland/BSL/Pass Christian area that was primarily affected by Camille's surge.

In western LA, 2005 Rita and 2008 Ike produced extreme surge in Vermilion and Cameron Parishes.

[P.K.]

So far 2009 has been with low activity globally.

3-The North Western Pacific basin so far has seen six named systems.Same question,how is the WPAC doing in terms of activity as of July 23rd vs the normal average?

A little behind average. The mean number of TSs to 23rd July is 7.3 from 1950-2008 per Digital-Typhoon.

[HurricaneBill]

One thing I've noticed, is the lack of intense storms in the WPAC, despite it being an El Nino year. Only one (Kujira) has reached Category 4 status. Looking back at 1997, 2002, 2004, and 2006, the WPAC usually has had at least one super typhoon by now along with a couple major storms.

I'm beginning to wonder if this season will end up like 1977 for the Northern Hemisphere.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

Fascinating....appears that hurricane activity has really been cyclical....

Looking back on that post- I must have been sleep deprived or something- NO DUH it's cyclical!

[KWT]

Well I don't think its going to be as slow as 1977 because I think the El Nino should be stronger then that season but the whole globe is still slower then normal...hardly surprising given this now very extended solar min we are in, stands to reason. I'll be shocked though if we are as slow as 2007 which is the modern benchmark for a slow year.

EPAC is rather unimpressive as well given an El Nino is present, I suspect the recent string of +SOI must have kept conditions on the whole not as favorable as they could be.

[wxman57]

Well I don't think its going to be as slow as 1977 because I think the El Nino should be stronger then that season but the whole globe is still slower then normal...hardly surprising given this now very extended solar min we are in, stands to reason. I'll be shocked though if we are as slow as 2007 which is the modern benchmark for a slow year.

EPAC is rather unimpressive as well given an El Nino is present, I suspect the recent string of +SOI must have kept conditions on the whole not as favorable as they could be.

2007 a slow year? There were 15 named storms, including two Cat 5s that both made landfall as Cat 5s. I'd say that was somewhat of a record season. "Slow" can't be defined as a season where one is not hit by a hurricane. True, ACE was only about 71 for 2007. I think we have to define what a "slow year" is.

[KWT]

Slow in terms of *global* ACE wxman57. Very slow actually!

EPAC had one of its slowest ever seasons, despite a lot of activity in terms of NS and the 2 cat-5s the Atlantic also came in below average in terms of ACE as did the WPAC. Therefore it is the truth that we had a very slow worldwide season.

Therefore overall it is the slowest since 1977...and ACE is probably the best way to measure the overall output of a season we have, Numbers of storms and that sort of stuff isn't always at all reflective of how active a season is.

I do agree that the 2007 season in the Atlantic was a very noteable one indeed, mainly for the two category-5 systems but in terms of ACE...which this study uses, it still came out below average, indeed Dean accounts for nearly half of the overall ACE!

[jinftl]

Keep in mind the report is talking about global activity...the north atlantic overall accounts for less than 20% of the total ACE of the Northern Hemisphere (106 ACE annually for north atlantic out of 564 ACE annually for N. Hemisphere). Throw in the Southern Hemisphere, and the N. Atlantic accounts for about 13% of ACE annually on average. The Pacific Ocean...east and west...is the main driver of the data...accounting for over 50% of the annual ACE on earth.

And the report speaks nothing of tracks, damage, landfalls, etc.

Well I don't think its going to be as slow as 1977 because I think the El Nino should be stronger then that season but the whole globe is still slower then normal...hardly surprising given this now very extended solar min we are in, stands to reason. I'll be shocked though if we are as slow as 2007 which is the modern benchmark for a slow year.

EPAC is rather unimpressive as well given an El Nino is present, I suspect the recent string of +SOI must have kept conditions on the whole not as favorable as they could be.

2007 a slow year? There were 15 named storms, including two Cat 5s that both made landfall as Cat 5s. I'd say that was somewhat of a record season. "Slow" can't be defined as a season where one is not hit by a hurricane. True, ACE was only about 71 for 2007. I think we have to define what a "slow year" is.