A New Era??? This season will tell us a lot.

[mempho]

Is anyone here in agreement with me about the possibility that last year was the biggest indicator to date that we could be in a new era? When I look at the records, yes, I am shocked at the sheer number of storms, however, I am much more alarmed by the intensities of the storms that we had. In addition, the structure of these storms is quite concerning in that Katrina and Rita could be classified as annular hurricanes. Also, we had two storms clip close to Cat V status in July.

The science proves it, too. A lot of people on here state that once the water reaches 82F or so, each additional degree doesn't have that big of an effect on intensity. If that is the case, then why are hypercanes hypothesized to form at around 120F? These storms would have winds of 500mph or so. Would that hypothesis, if true, not indicate an [exponential] increase in maximum intensity rather than a linear increase, much less a plateau?

Consider some other disturbing but less thought about facts:

-Several of the hurricanes formed despite considerable shear
-Wilma restrengthened to a major hurricane despite having virtually no core intact after the Yucatan and despite being under heavy shear.
-The only thing weakening most of these hurricanes from the 2005 was land and dry air intrusion. Shear, which used to be a big hurricane killer, only served to keep the storms from becoming absolute monsters when the storms were over the extremely warm areas.
-Most of the storms from last year did not have the slow steady progression through the ranks of TS, H1, H2... that prior storms normally had. No, these storms literally blew up over the course of a few hours...many times skipping 1 or 2 categories between recon flights.

This is all alarming to me but I sincerely hope that this is not the beginning of something new. It appears that the water temps are again back on track, so we shall see if this appears. While everyone seems concerned about the number of storms, I think that intensity is that much more important. If we had a year like 25/7/0, I think you could call it a good year, however, if we have a year like 15/10/7, it is likely to be a very bad year (even though the total number is below must forecast guidance).

Intensity is all that matters While this is not entirely correct, it is, for all intents and purposes, what matters the most. Remember what most climatologists say..."Global (ocean) warming does not cause more storms, it causes the ones we have to be more intense."

Dennis (record intensity July storm)
Emily (breaks Dennis's record)
Katrina (large, monstrous Cat V at her peak)
Rita (see Katrina)
Wilma (lowest pressure ever recorded...peak winds will likely never be known)
Also, 2 additional major storms

Forget 1 zillion named storms...this could be the real problem. Also, why were there so many storms that broke climatological rules?

P.S. I could be and hope to be wrong. This is merely for discussion purposes.

[gatorcane]

We could be entering a new ERA BUT years like 1933 could mean it was just an anomaly.

[MiamiensisWx]

Let the show begin! I'll just sit back and watch the, well, active discussion begin!

[Derek Ortt]

Wilma was not under strong shear. The shear only was reaching the outflow, which is VERY favorble for intensification

[skysummit]

Derek, at what level does shear have to be to considered favorable for outflow?

[mempho]

Wilma was not under strong shear. The shear only was reaching the outflow, which is VERY favorble for intensification

So as Wilma crossed the southern Gulf from the Yuk to Fl, the shear was only reaching her outflow....correct?

[sponger]

Good point Derek!

Tenacity was the theme of 2005. TD 10 held on forever and evenutually became katrina. (Some may dispute, but that is my opinion.) I think warmer temps are the only plausible explantion for tenacity, allowing for suriving systems to explode when conditions improved. In some cases, (TD 10 again), several weeks later.

[BayouVenteux]

While this "new era" may seem new to us, the current -- and so far, brief -- level of increased activity and power of Atlantic basin storms may only be new to the 21st-century. As all the technology for monitoring hurricanes and recording data has only existed for a brief time, we simply don't have definitive scientific information back beyond the last 25-45 years as to the number and severity of storms that occured. Even in relatively modern times, say the last 200-400 years, other than anecdotes from sailors and journal accounts of the day, there's just not enough information to absolutely conclude whether one particular era experienced storms of greater number and magnitude than another. Who's to say that 10,000-50,000 years ago there wasn't one period or more that experienced an equal or even greater degree of major hurricanes than we may be right now in this fleetingly brief period of Earth's natural history?

There was a documentary shown here on the state public broadcasting system a few years ago that featured some interesting research done by a paleogeologist at Louisiana State involving sediment core samples taken from along various sites on the Gulf Coast. In the geologic record, he found evidence of multiple major hurricane strikes -- BIG storms -- having occured in relatively brief periods of time. The gist of the story was that "hyperactive" hurricane periods have likely happened before throughout natural history and would likely happen again, that they've been a part of natural long-term cycles long before we were even a blip on the screen.

So "new" to you and me? Yep. To ol' Mama Gaia? Probably not.

[gatorcane]

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 12:58 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While this "new era" may seem new to us, the current -- and so far, brief -- level of increased activity and power of Atlantic basin storms may only be new to the 21st-century. As all the technology for monitoring hurricanes and recording data has only existed for a brief time, we simply don't have definitive scientific information back beyond the last 25-45 years as to the number and severity of storms that occured. Even in relatively modern times, say the last 200-400 years, other than anecdotes from sailors and journal accounts of the day, there's just not enough information to absolutely conclude whether one particular era experienced storms of greater number and magnitude than another. Who's to say that 10,000-50,000 years ago there wasn't one period or more that experienced an equal or even greater degree of major hurricanes than we may be right now in this fleetingly brief period of Earth's natural history?

There was a documentary shown here on the state public broadcasting system a few years ago that featured some interesting research done by a paleogeologist at Louisiana State involving sediment core samples taken from along various sites on the Gulf Coast. In the geologic record, he found evidence of multiple major hurricane strikes -- BIG storms -- having occured in relatively brief periods of time. The gist of the story was that "hyperactive" hurricane periods have likely happened before throughout natural history and would likely happen again, that they've been a part of natural long-term cycles long before we were even a blip on the screen.

So "new" to you and me? Yep. To ol' Mama Gaia? Probably not.

yes I agree, great post

[sponger]

Bayou, I saw his research and it was fascinating. It seemed from my memory that there are longer term cycles of 1000 year plus in addition to the well documented 25-40 year we know today.

[MiamiensisWx]

I tend to agree as well, sponger.

[terstorm1012]

great posts all around

I tend to agree with the idea that we'll see more intense storms as warm water appears to be pooling in the Atlantic and Gulf moreso than what appears to be normal, and not just more storms in frequency in general. I don't really want to touch the GW debate, but I do want to say just that.

[mempho]

One thing I do want to clarify is that I am not sure about the causes of any global warming that might be occurring. I do know that the water has been getting warmer in the tropical zones of the basin for whatever reason but, like I said, I don't know whether this is a 20-40 year cycle, a millennial cycle, or if this is a increase caused by "global warming" as it is known to environmentalists. If this is a trend, whether caused by natural cycles or by humans, then I would expect tropical cyclone intensities to rise exponential with each marginal increase in water temperature given the same set of parameters in the atmosphere. One thing that could counteract this is a change in the upper level winds creating either high shear areas (such as some spots in the S. Atlantic or creating drought in N. Africa. Of course, the opposite could happen as well creating more storms and more favorable environments. This, of course, would be most devastating.

[Steve]

>>Bayou, I saw his research and it was fascinating. It seemed from my memory that there are longer term cycles of 1000 year plus in addition to the well documented 25-40 year we know today.

yeah, it's good stuff. There are currently hypotheses floating around that we may be into a 1,500 year cycle as well as a 25-40 year Alantic warming cycle. Whether the two overlap or not is anyone's guess as is what that 1,500 year cycle may actually show. I'm not that good.

Steve

[Derek Ortt]

shear at any level over the core is bad, but if it is only affecting the outflow, it can enhance the outflow, setting up conditions where intensification, even over land, like Allison did in 2001 is possible due to the very rapid removal of air mass from the column of air

[CHRISTY]

The 2005 hurricane season was truly an amazing year it broke records left an right and caused severe damage in the U.S. I honestly feel that because last year turned out the way it did people now have a strong respect and are more aware of what these monsters can do.As the 2006 season gets closer by the day i truly hope people take the time to prepare and have a hurricane plan in place come june 1. 2004 and 2005 have been very active season's with multiple landfalls in florida.I think we have entered a new era of more frequent and stronger hurricanes,at the same time i think its unlikley we will see another season with 28 storms.its very important to note that this year we might have less number of storms ,but truly that doesn't mean anything, i think more intence hurricanes meaning major hurricanes will be on the increase.hurricanes like KATRINA,WILMA, and RITA are prime examples of what might be instore for years to come.Where they strike no one knows but in my opinion everyone has to be ready for what very well could be another very active hurricane season with severe impacts on the U.S.


PS!IT ONLY TAKES ONE.

CHRISTY

[mike815]

thats right we could have 30 storms again but only very few make land and there historic sorms or well below amount and have a historic storm

[mempho]

Thinking about this a little bit more....if 120F water produces a 500mph hypercane and 82F water produces a 125mph hurricane, then we can look at the possible effects. If the relationship were exponential...we would be looking at something that might look like this (according to mean water temperature; also shown with environment supporting a "low" Cat V):

82F 120mph 160mph
87F 131mph 171mph (First 5 degree increase; =11mph per 5 degrees)
92F 153mph 193mph (Second 5 degree increase=22mph per 5 degrees)
97F 186mph 226mph (Third 5 degree increase=33mph per 5 degrees)
103F 230mph 270mph (Fourth 5 degree increase=44mph per 5 degrees)
108F 285mph 325mph (Fifth 5 degree increase=55mph per 5 degrees)
113F 351mph 391mph (Sixth 5 degree increase=66mph per 5 degrees)
117F 428mph 468mph (Seventh 5 degree increase=77mph per 5 degrees)

While the upper echelons of this exhibit are not really relevant, they do show a possible exponential increase towards the hypothesized "hypercane." The 87F and 92F are the only relevant levels for what we are seeing, but they are very scary. Basically, this could mean that a low-end Cat III in the past could be competing for Cat V status with just a 10 degree increase in the water temps. A marginal Cat V becomes Gilbert/Mitch/Camille.

One thing to note is that the stronger these storms get, the more powerful they seem to become....i.e., the rich get richer. You see very few "marginal Cat Vs....usually they blow up to extremes once they reach that level. Andrew is a big exception, but it hit land while still strengthening.

EDIT: If this holds true...we should expect increased intensities of 11-33mph over this period of warmer waters.

[Audrey2Katrina]

113F 351mph 391mph (Sixth 5 degree increase=66mph per 5 degrees)
117F 428mph 468mph (Seventh 5 degree increase=77mph per 5 degrees)

I'm not 100% certain; but I don't believe the wind speeds in the Giant Red Spot of Jupiter reach these levels.

A2K

[cheezyWXguy]

whats CAT V?