Lorenzo and Climate Change

[Hypercane_Kyle]

Wanted to open up this can of worms because I believe it's worth discussing with the tropics quiet now.

Was the fact that Lorenzo achieved Category 5 status as far east as it did a direct result of climate change? Personally, I think it was. While it's true a storm like Lorenzo would have been missed years previously, Lorenzo's incredible strength + the dramatic rise in intense storms further east and north in the Atlantic the last 10 years suggests to me that increased sea-surface temperatures outside of the MDR/GOMEX/Caribbean is resulting in stronger storms in locations that would be historically highly unlikely.

[DioBrando]

Definitely. Never seem storms like this before, especially this late in the season.

[EquusStorm]

I feel that we can't know for absolute certain because our period of record is extremely short, and that these have quite possibly happened before in the distant past, but Lorenzo, Ophelia, etc are unprecedented for our period of record regardless and the measurable trend is for warmer oceans; thus very much possible.

[SconnieCane]

I'm certainly not a climate change denier, but I am loath to attribute individual storms to climate change. That is to say "This storm would definitely not have happened the way it did if not for climate change." The atmosphere has been doing incredible things for millennia before humans came around, and we've only recently had the ability to observe it in places like the part of the Atlantic where Lorenzo occurred.

While individual storms should not be attributed to climate change, things like warmer oceans that make intense hurricanes more likely certainly can, as can the increasing sharp swings between drought and excessive rainfall and more pronounced temperature extremes (both hotter in the summer, and colder in the winter).

[abajan]

Warmer oceans don't necessarily equate to more powerful hurricanes. Just the other day, I was watching a panel of scientists explain how it's far more complex than that.

[Hypercane_Kyle]

Warmer oceans don't necessarily equate to more powerful hurricanes. Just the other day, I was watching a panel of scientists explain how it's far more complex than that.

Sure. Wind shear, dry air, et cetera all play a huge factor. But if you've got none of that around and storm sitting over waters that are significantly hotter than usual then the result is going to be pretty obvious strengthening.

[EquusStorm]

I also feel like a lot in the Atlantic is going to hinge on Sahara precipitation trends; if the ocean were ten degrees warmer it wouldn't matter at all if the whole basin is covered in deep dust layers constantly so that every tropical wave withers in the MDR and never gets a chance. So many complex factors going into it. Also, in Ophelia's case helped tremendously by extremely frigid upper tropospheric temperatures; if tropospheric temperatures also rise significantly with AGW, that's another potential fly in the ointment for storms well outta the tropics. Sure, the heat energy in warmer water would be massively greater and storms potentially more intense and further north at the very upper end of potential, but only if other mitigating factors don't get in the way.

For the AGW argument can o worms, obviously the earth has been dramatically warmer in past eras for sure (and boy what I'd give to see some of the tropical cyclones that spawned in those distant epochs) but the warming the last two hundred years have brought is on the scale of what should probably be taking millennia or at least MANY centuries without major cataclysmic natural events; coming out of the Little Ice Age doesn't help either. The world would be slowly warming anyway as we are now in a warming phase, but not as rapidly as it's happening now without some help. Which, we are apparently rather eagerly doing as a species. Glacier and sea ice loss rates makes the unnaturally rapid warming most poignant, IMO.

[tolakram]

There's a reason we usually shut down climate change threads. Stick to the subject or this will have to be shut down as well. No name calling or opinions of why people have opinions, this is about Lorenzo and if it was a result of the changes in climate we have been witnessing.

I had to remove some posts that while good contained off topic opinions that should not be part of this thread. If your post is missing feel free to repost but please leave out anything not related to Lorenzo. We don't have to debate why the climate is changing here (and we don't want too!), what we can do is debate how the current climate is affecting hurricane seasons.

My personal opinion on Lorenzo echo's what others have said. While it makes sense that warming oceans played a role in Lorenzo's location and strength we really don't have enough data to know how common it was in the past. My hunch is that it's unusual and climate change is playing a role, but it's just a hunch.

[abajan]

Warmer oceans don't necessarily equate to more powerful hurricanes. Just the other day, I was watching a panel of scientists explain how it's far more complex than that.

Sure. Wind shear, dry air, et cetera all play a huge factor. But if you've got none of that around and storm sitting over waters that are significantly hotter than usual then the result is going to be pretty obvious strengthening.

Once again, not necessarily. Because if both the water and air are heating by the same amount, the net effect will be zero. It's not how warm the water is per se, but the difference in temperature between the water and air that's important.

[Hypercane_Kyle]

Warmer oceans don't necessarily equate to more powerful hurricanes. Just the other day, I was watching a panel of scientists explain how it's far more complex than that.

Sure. Wind shear, dry air, et cetera all play a huge factor. But if you've got none of that around and storm sitting over waters that are significantly hotter than usual then the result is going to be pretty obvious strengthening.

Once again, not necessarily. Because if both the water and air are heating by the same amount, the net effect will be zero. It's not how warm the water is per se, but the difference in temperature between the water and air that's important.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make -- water and air aren't going to heat by the same amount as water has a different specific heat capacity than air. Perhaps you could provide a link to the panel for clarity?

[abajan]

Sure. Wind shear, dry air, et cetera all play a huge factor. But if you've got none of that around and storm sitting over waters that are significantly hotter than usual then the result is going to be pretty obvious strengthening.

Once again, not necessarily. Because if both the water and air are heating by the same amount, the net effect will be zero. It's not how warm the water is per se, but the difference in temperature between the water and air that's important.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make -- water and air aren't going to heat by the same amount as water has a different specific heat capacity than air. Perhaps you could provide a link to the panel for clarity?

It's a video on YouTube with a panel of scientists, including a well known meteorologist, debunking anthropogenic climate change. But I'd rather not delve any further into that. (Actually, I think I may have already delved too far, considering what has been stated above!) But I do see your point about the specific heat capacity of water versus air.

[Hypercane_Kyle]

Once again, not necessarily. Because if both the water and air are heating by the same amount, the net effect will be zero. It's not how warm the water is per se, but the difference in temperature between the water and air that's important.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make -- water and air aren't going to heat by the same amount as water has a different specific heat capacity than air. Perhaps you could provide a link to the panel for clarity?

It's a video on YouTube with a panel of scientists, including a well known meteorologist, debunking anthropogenic climate change. But I'd rather not delve any further into that. (Actually, I think I may have already delved too far, considering what has been stated above!) But I do see your point about the specific heat capacity of water versus air.

Yea, best not to. But it's surprising that a panel of scientists forgot to mention that water has a specific heat capacity of 4184 J/kg and air at the same temperature has one of ~1000 J/kg.

[GSBHurricane]

I wouldn’t say no but you kind of have to see if Lorenzo even remains a C5 in reanalysis plus 1961-1999 have to be reanalyzed so that could lead to some interesting results, particularly in the 60s and 70s.