Global Heat Leaves 20th Century Temps ‘Far Behind’ — June Another Hottest Month on Record

We’ve left the 20th century far behind. This is a big deal. — Deke Arndt, head of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information

*****

One of the top three strongest El Ninos on record is now little more than a memory. According to NOAA, sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the Central Equatorial Pacific hit a range more typical to La Nina conditions last week. This cool-pool formation follows a June in which ocean surfaces in this zone had fallen into temperatures below the normal range.

El Nino Gone

(El Nino had faded away by June and turned toward La Nina-level temperatures by late June and early July. Despite this Equatorial Pacific cooling, June of 2016 was still the hottest June on record. Image source: NOAA.)

But despite this natural-variability related cooling of the Equatorial Pacific into below-normal ranges, the globe as a whole continued to warm relative to previous June temperatures. According to NASA, last month was the hottest June in the global climate record.

NASA figures show the month was 0.79 degrees Celsius warmer than the 20th century baseline (1951 to 1980) average, edging out June of 2015 (when El Nino was still ramping up) by just 0.01 degree C to take the dubious position of the new hottest June ever recorded by human instruments. June 2016 was also about 1.01 C hotter than temperatures in the 1880s, at the start of NASA’s global climate record.

January to June — Anomalous Warmth Centers Over Arctic

June marks the 9th consecutive hottest month on record in the NASA data. In other words, on a month-to-month comparison, each month since October of 2015 was the new hottest of those months ever recorded. In addition, the six-month 2016 climate year period of January to June showed an average global temperature of about 1.31 C above 1880s averages — perilously close to the 1.5 degree C global climate threshold.

Record warm Earth

(Arctic heat dominated the first half of 2016 which is likely to end up being the hottest year ever recorded in the global climate record. Image source: Berkeley Earth.)

Distribution of this anomalous heat during this six-month period, despite the Equatorial warming pulse related to El Nino, was focused on the Arctic, as we can see in this Berkeley Earth graphical composite of the NASA temperature series above.

Warmest temperature anomalies for the period appear above the Barents and Greenland Seas boundaries with the Arctic Ocean and approach 12 C for the six-month period. During this period, this region has hosted numerous warm-wind invasions of the Arctic from the south. A second, similar slot of warm south-to-north air progression appears over Alaska.

Record June Warmth Most Apparent at Northern Continental Margins

During June, the Arctic as a whole remained much warmer than average, with the region from latitudes 80° to 90° North seeing a +0.8 C temperature departure in the NASA measure. The highest anomaly regions globally, however, were near the continental margins bordering the Arctic Ocean in the region of latitudes 70° to 75° North. Here temperatures ranged near 2 C above average.

June Zonal Anomalies

(According to NASA’s zonal anomaly measure, the northern continental margins showed the highest temperature anomalies globally. Image source: NASA GISS.)

Some parts of this region were particularly hot. These included the region of Russian Siberia near the Yamal Peninsula, which saw 4-8 C above average temperatures for the month, the Bering Sea and Northeastern Siberian region adjacent which saw 2-8 C above average temperatures, and the Canadian Archipelago which saw 2-4 C above average temperatures for the month.

Odd Warm-Air Slot Runs from Equator to West Antarctic Peninsula

Notable is that visible warm-air slots running from Tropics to Pole appear to remain intact in the Northeastern Pacific and over Central Asia in the Northern Hemisphere during early Summer. Meanwhile, an odd Southern Hemisphere warm-air slot appears to have developed during June in the region of the Southeastern Pacific.

June of 2016 Anomaly Map

(June of 2016 was the hottest June on record. This is what the anomaly map looked like. Image source: NASA GISS.)

This particular Equator-to-Pole heat transfer appears to have run as far south as the West Antarctic Peninsula and assisted in producing a 4-8 C above-average temperature spike there.

As the majority of the world remained hotter than normal during June of 2016, the only noted outlier cool region was Central and Eastern Antarctica which, in spots, saw 4 to 7.1 C below-average temperatures.

2016 is Blowing All Previous Years Away

Overall, as El Nino continues to shift toward neutral or La Nina states, global temperatures should remain lower than during peak periods seen earlier this year. It’s likely that over the coming six months, the very long period of new monthly global record temperatures we’ve seen will eventually be broken by a top-five- or top-10-hottest month.

Blowing heat records away Climate Central

(2016 is on track to blow all previous record hot years out of the water. See related article here.)

However, it appears that global heat has in total taken a big step up. As such, 2016 appears to be set to average near 1.14 to 1.25 C above 1880s levels. That would beat out previous hottest year 2015 by a big margin. To this point, Deke Arndt, head of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, recently noted in The Scientific American:

“It’s important to keep perspective here. Even if we aren’t setting [monthly] records, we are in a neighborhood beyond anything we had seen before early 2015. We’ve left the 20th century far behind. This is a big deal.”

In other words, that’s about a decade’s worth of typical human-forced warming in just one year. If it shapes up that way, it basically blows all previous years out of the water. Pretty nasty to say the least.

Links/Attribution/Statements

NASA GISS

Berkeley Earth

NOAA

NOAA Also Found June 2016 to be the Hottest on Record

Japan’s Meteorological Agency Also Found June 2016 to be the Hottest on Record

First Half of 2016 Blows Away Global Temperature Records

Hat tip to Zack Labe

Hat tip to DT Lange

 

Leave a comment

104 Comments

  1. climatehawk1

     /  July 19, 2016

    Tweet scheduled.

    Reply
  2. John McCormick

     /  July 19, 2016

    It is a terrible truth that the future will never be better than today. When do we confront ourselves and then tell our children we have the wealth to invest in their energy future?
    If we refuse to do what must be done they will be the last generation to have grandchildren.

    Reply
  3. Jay M

     /  July 20, 2016

    (7/19)Eastern US getting retrograde moving moisture blotchiness as the heat dome builds:

    Reply
    • We had a very heavy downpour here last night. Lasted all of five minutes and seemed to have dumped about a half inch of rain in that short period.

      Reply
  4. Abel Adamski

     /  July 20, 2016
    Reply
  5. Jeremy

     /  July 20, 2016

    Yesterday, I took the Montenvers train in Chamonix up to see what remains of the glacier “Mer de Glace”.

    Used to look like this.

    Now there’s almost no ice.

    It was sad and scary to see how far the glacier had retreated.

    Reply
  6. Abel Adamski

     /  July 20, 2016

    Thought you might like this one RS, for those that question your lifestyle choices.
    http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/21/hottest-vegans-of-2016-will-make-you-question-your-life-choices-5958171/

    P.S the Grand Masters we spent some time with in China all promoted and were Vegan, respect of life, earth and its brethren too are alive, but not in a way that our science can measure and evaluate

    Reply
    • It would certainly help a lot if we had more vegans. The innate respect for life a vegan lifestyle entails does help to promote positive action overall. It’s also a great way to help cut carbon emissions. That said, most vegans also know that to protect life here on Earth we need an energy switch as well.

      Reply
  7. – The Berkeley Earth graphic scares the hell out of me. Six months of rapid polar warming is not something we want.
    But there it is.

    – Thanks for the Hat Tip.
    I’m just glad to be able to contribute.🙂

    Reply
  8. News | July 19, 2016
    Science flights target melting Arctic sea ice
    NASA’s Earth Science News Team

    This summer, with sea ice across the Arctic Ocean shrinking to below-average levels, a NASA airborne survey of polar ice just completed its first flights. Its target: aquamarine pools of melt water on the ice surface that may be accelerating the overall sea ice retreat.

    NASA’s Operation IceBridge completed the first research flight of its new 2016 Arctic summer campaign on July 13. The science flights, which continue through July 25, are collecting data on sea ice in a year following a record-warm winter in the Arctic.

    The summer flights will map the extent, frequency and depth of melt ponds…

    -A large pool of melt water over sea ice, as seen from an Operation IceBridge flight over the Beaufort Sea on July 14, 2016. During this summer campaign, IceBridge will map the extent, frequency and depth of melt ponds like these to help scientists forecast the Arctic sea ice yearly minimum extent in September. Credit: NASA/Operation IceBridge.

    Reply
    • Hell of a shot there. That big melt pool in the center is in the process of drilling through the ice.

      Some things to consider, though, are that now that the ice sheet is less contiguous during summer that melt ponds overall tend to play less of a role. We should be clear that it’s not the sun’s rays that are melting the ice. The sun’s been nearly constant (if even cooling by a very small margin due to low solar activity) in its RF output. The added heat is coming from the Arctic Ocean itself and from energy transfers (warm wind events) which primarily occur over the Arctic Ocean during winter.

      So though it’s good to understand this particular dynamic, it’s important to not that there’s a lot at play here.

      Reply
      • Bill H

         /  July 20, 2016

        …. and from reduced albedo due to reduced ice cover and darkening of the ice.

        Reply
  9. fluencyofthought

     /  July 20, 2016

    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/20160

    In the “hey everyone, we’ve just had another warmest-on-record June” report is a part about how June 2016 marks the 378th consecutive month with temperatures [at least nominally] above the 20th century average.

    Three hundred and seventy-eight months in a row.

    Simply staggering. I weep for this earth.

    Reply
    • Mulga Mumblebrain

       /  July 20, 2016

      Three hundred and seventy-eight? Proves nuthin’. Most Trumpistas deny the existence of any number greater than their own IQ, ie 60. So there!

      Reply
  10. Kalypso

     /  July 20, 2016

    If we have another strong El Nino in a few years, it looks like we may blow past 1.5 C sooner rather than later. The area of abnormal warmth around the Antarctic Peninsula looks especially worrying.

    Reply
    • So if we don’t get a handle on carbon emissions soon, it’s possible that warming will accelerate and we’ll hit the 2 C mark by the mid 2030s (Mann). More likely and more difficult to avoid is hitting the 1.5 C mark (annual) by or before that time.

      Reply
  11. Reply
  12. Reply
  13. Andy_in_SD

     /  July 20, 2016

    Reply
  14. great article, but just wondering about the discrepancy: according to The Guardian “June 2016 marks the 14th consecutive month of record-breaking heat” (not 9). What am I missing? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/20/june-2016-14th-consecutive-month-of-record-breaking-heat-says-us-agencies

    Reply
    • 14th Consecutive month in the NOAA record, 9th Consecutive month in the NASA record. May through September 2015 were pretty close and they edged into new records according to NOAA. According to NASA, the new monthly records didn’t start until October.

      Reply
  15. Shawn Redmond

     /  July 20, 2016

    Question? Is the beginning of the industrial revolution really 1880 or 1750? Because this often confuses me mostly with the global average temperature. There is .3C missing from the total rise if you use the 1880’s as the starting point? If 1.31C for the first six months of 2016 is from 1880 .3C puts us well beyond 1.5C. Is this technically correct or am I lost in the myriad of different starting points. .3C seems like a lot to leave out especially at the moment when we are approaching the limits set as lines in the sand we shouldn’t cross.

    Reply
    • If you start at 1750 you also start near the Little Ice Age which is a more deeply negative average Holocene temperature value than the 1880s figure I use. That said, yes, you could start there to illustrate warming since the Industrial revolution began.

      It’s worth noting that from 1750 to before 1880 carbon emissions were marginally rather small when compared to the big ramp up that started during the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. So the +0.2 C temperature increase since 1750 has a bit more to do with the Little Ice Age ending than with carbon’s influence on the atmosphere at that time.

      That said, here’s a good example of a graph that captures the full 1750 to 2015 temperature rise:

      NASA uses 1881 to 1900. I’ve been using 1880s because it’s basically the same. The Climate Central graph uses 1881 to 1910 (which includes a cooler 1900s period).

      It’s worth noting that the 1881 to 1890 measure I use is approximately 0.2 C below the Holocene average. If we hit +1.2 C above 1880s this year, we’ll be about + 1 C above the Holocene average and we’ll be well in the range of Eemian temps (though probably not hitting maximum global Eemian temps). The Arctic will arguably be warmer as a significant amount of the extra warming is centered over that region. The other issue is that the energy imbalance situation is far worse than during the Eemian as the total GHG forcing current of around 490 ppm CO2e is roughly enough to warm the Earth by 2 C this Century and by 4 C long term. Carbon feedbacks are uncounted in this measure. So the geophysical stability of the current picture is arguably worse than that of the Eemian.

      Reply
      • Shawn Redmond

         /  July 20, 2016

        Thanks for that helps a lot.

        Reply
      • Greg

         /  July 20, 2016

        Thanks for the great synopsis Robert. You’ve stated Middle Miocene (~17 million years ago) to describe current CO2e recently, if I recall correctly.

        Reply
        • Middle Miocene lower CO2 boundary is 405 ppm according to paleoclimate proxy data. So, yeah, I think we are entering that range now.

  16. Shawn Redmond

     /  July 20, 2016

    Okay if you look at http://www.arctic.io/explorer/4Xa5A//4-N90-E0 most of northern Russia is under clear skies, except for the smoke. It is see through just enough to get good zooms of the fires. The smoke filled skies are what struck me. It covers an area about the size of Greenland! The cloud free skies above probably mean higher temps as well. What madness. Is this the equivalent of a buffalo jump? Are we going to be pushed over the cliff? We all must start yoga classes so that we can kiss our own derrière’s good bye.

    Reply
    • Bill H

       /  July 20, 2016

      Shawn , that’s an incredible image. Has there ever been a larger smoke cloud/

      Reply
  17. Shawn Redmond

     /  July 20, 2016

    Clearly PB is more than a little pissed at the WP. Clearly, almost no one in our society is connecting the dots on all the pieces, who has a loud enough voice and impact in educating the public, policy makers and global leaders on what it all means, in terms of the absolutely enormous risks to society. Obviously, the existing system of knowledge transfer from science to mainstream media to political decision makers and world leaders is completely dysfunctional and broken as far as addressing the grave threats that humanity faces from climate change. This is obviously a separate topic of discussion. We all need to fix this, and immediately. I am trying, with great passion to fill this gap in education. He has a lengthy rebuttal at his blog about this.

    Reply
    • Spike

       /  July 20, 2016

      He became a target of a real feeding frenzy, though I could see some merit in the criticisms. Here in the UK there is a fairly strong tendency of the climate experts to couch their message in really quite reticent and conservative terminology,to be extremely circumspect in language, and to publish reports which are designed to inform government whilst sailing over the heads of the populace. I can see why – the “alarmist” label has done what the right wanted and demonised those who try to alert the public to the threat, and the scientists don’t want to lose “credibility”. Others have tried to “reach out” to the deniers and find common ground, only to discover that this is a mirage. But the pendulum has swung so far that I now get most of my info from US and continental European sources, and the UK public are largely uninformed – same as the Brexit debacle. Looked at from the viewpoint of denialists it has been a very successful piece of manipulation of the agenda.

      Reply
      • ClimateTruth

         /  July 20, 2016

        Interesting; and I commonly look to UK sources rather than the US for straight climate info.

        Reply
    • Dave Person

       /  July 20, 2016

      This link suggests education will be very difficult with some members of our society:
      http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/06/boomerangs-versus-javelins-the-impact-of-polarization-on-climate-change-communication/

      Also, Shawn, I urge you to read Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking Fast and Slow”. It helps to bring us down to earth with respect to human capacity to think about complex problems.

      dave

      Reply
      • Shawn Redmond

         /  July 20, 2016

        Interesting paper thanks and the book has been added to this winters reads.

        Reply
    • So I think the important thing to remember here is that the quest for perfect knowledge and the effort to get a decent big picture view of risk can often generate conflicts. Scientific effort is often aimed at honing and refining information. The knowledge bases are often deep and narrow. If you’re trying to put climate risk in context, your view will necessarily be pretty broad. In some of these explorations, you’re bound to run into situations where some of the risk avenues you point out do not agree with the currently accepted science — and you’ll end up generating a backlash.

      That said, it’s a useful process if you can manage to retain a degree of resiliency and an understanding that criticism (and even apparently personal attacks) is not personal. The effort is aimed at developing knowledge, awareness, and effective responses — not taking credit for knowledge (at least that’s the effort here).

      So what have we learned?

      1. We learned that during June air flows (parcels) can tend to cross the Equator and mix the hemispheric subtropical jets.

      That’s the whole big deal. The foundation for the entire furball. And we accepted corrections from the scientific community and fixed that in editing. In my opinion, PB probably would have been best served to also accept corrections. What generated the big backlash with him was what appeared to me to be a doubling down on a point that was pretty much accepted as incorrect.

      Now, there’s a sensitive issue that still exists. And it’s this issue of increasing energy transfer from the tropics to the poles. And, in my view, there’s also this issue of a possible increasing energy transfer from hemisphere to hemisphere. Neither of these questions were addressed by the criticisms which looked, from the receiving end, a lot more like an ad hominem attack than of an actual exploration of the issues involved.

      What’s the best response in this situation?

      1. Fix problems.
      2. Don’t double down on incorrect information.
      3. Continue work.
      4. Continue effective communications.
      5. Ignore the BS.

      For this reason, continuing to revisit the WaPo article is probably a bad idea. There’s a lot of important work to do. A lot of generating ideas that specialists may eventually find useful and expand upon. A lot of effort necessary to actually work to help people by talking about things that actually really do need to be talked about.

      OK, so there’s one more point here to consider that in a perfect world would not be a problem. And it’s this issue that the issue of climate change has been intentionally suppressed by a number of entities and political parties with ties to the fossil fuel industry. Media suppression of climate change information is rampant and media coverage does tend to play to scientific reticence where it does exist. An example of this is the fact that a number of scientists, in an effort to not appear ‘alarmist’, were goaded into the trap of making fossil fuel industry supporting statements like ‘no single extreme weather event can be fully attributed to climate change.’

      This is reticence in action. And though it may be technically true, it generates the incorrect impression. That being that climate change does not generate extreme weather — which it absolutely does and it does this with increasing frequency and force of late.

      So it is true that the media has broadly not been helpful in raising awareness on climate risks. That some scientists have been played in such a way as to downplay risks. A handful of scientists who deny climate risks have given much broader coverage and respect than they deserve. And the resulting overall impression from the public is one of less risk than the risk that actually exists.

      This is the state of play as is. And it’s pretty crappy. And it’s one we’d like to try to change. But you can’t do that if you’re too proud to accept a correction and in an attempt to protect your image you double down on bad information. One thing does not justify the other.

      In the end, adversity can serve to refine your message — IF you accept corrections from experts, that is. If you’re wise enough to fight on ground of your choosing and not be goaded into defending a technicality that’s basically incorrect and, in the process, sacrifice the broader truth of your overall message.

      Reply
      • Shawn Redmond

         /  July 20, 2016

        Wow incredible insight, changes the way I’ll read things. You’re a gifted word smith thanks one and all for this blog.

        Reply
    • Mulga Mumblebrain

       /  July 20, 2016

      Shawn, when I survey the rise of deranged denialism and hatred of renewable energy under Frau May in the UK, the totally evil and morally insane Republican platform, and the rising tide of denialist fanaticism and hatred of renewable energy, and a concerted political campaign to destroy it in favour of fossil fuels, here in Australia, I am strongly reinforced in my opinion that the Right want humanity to be destroyed. When I see the only new Minister, Canavan (a moron with it written all over his face)smarmily asserting that he does believe in greenhouse gases, but that the problem is overblown, and not mining coal will make people poor(as if the Right EVER worried about impoverishing people!)and then read an article he, supposedly, wrote, in the Murdoch cancer’s denialist flag-shit, the ‘Australian’, where he compared the belief that CO2 emission cause climate change to the medieval belief that witches cause storms, I despair. Evil imbecility is on the march, egged on by the Murdoch diabolism, and these creatures either possess a death-wish so hypertrophied as to defy belief, or they think that only their Eternal Enemy, other people, will die, and they will be mysteriously spared. Or they are all religious fanatics who want to destroy the world to hasten the Rapture.

      Reply
  18. John B Davies

     /  July 20, 2016

    June 2016 was a very warm June, despite the El Nino having ended. Nevertheless this is what is to be expected, the same thing happened in 1998, the warmth caused by an El Nino lasts beyond the El Nino by a few months. In September 2016 the world will be much cooler just as it was in September 1998. Despite this it is true that the world is warming quite rapidly and we are facing an existential crisis.

    Reply
  19. I don’t understand certain anomalies in your heat graph labelled “Blowing away heat records”. At the end of 2014 the temperature shows slightly above 1.0 degrees, yet at the beginning of the next year, it inexplicably jumps to 1.1 overnight, and then again on Dec. 2015, it reads just slightly above 1.1, yet the very next day, on Jan 1, 2016, it has jumped to a fraction under 1.4. How is this possible? It’s as though the weather knows you’re starting a new year, and so starts at some arbitrary value, but the weather doesn’t know a new year has started, so why does January of the new year not begin where December of the preceding year left off?

    Reply
    • So it’s pretty easy to figure out once you understand that graph measures average temperatures for a given year which is the total average of that year’s months. So the end 2014 measure is the average for the entire year (including all 12 months) which compares to the January 2015 (where the jump you see occurs) measure which was the single month measure beginning of the 12 month 2015 aggregate that smooths more and more as you add in months.

      In other words, the 2014 yearly average temperature was + 1 C while the January 2015 average temperature was +1.12 C — an average which basically carried on through to the end of 2015 as more and more months were added.

      In any case, the month to month difference between Dec 2014 and January 2015 was +0.03 C as you can see here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

      But this graph does not compare month to month differences between start and end years. It’s a graph that tracks the yearly trend and compares past years with the current.

      Reply
  20. Kalypso

     /  July 20, 2016

    Looks like world leaders really want a climate change apocalypse- UK and Germany, despite having pledged to end fossil fuel subsidies, still are planning to have subsidies in place to 2020 (possibly longer). These subsidies have got to end. It’s ironic, we are giving money to the very companies that are destroying the climate.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/18/un-criticises-uk-and-german-for-betraying-the-spirit-of-the-paris-climate-deal?utm_content=bufferc52fd&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

    Reply
    • You’re also basically paying them by proxy to suppress climate change knowledge through their various climate change denial PR and political campaigns. It’s kind of a vicious circle.

      Reply
    • Mulga Mumblebrain

       /  July 20, 2016

      And the new death-squad capo in the poor old Philippines, Duterte, has just simply repudiated Paris in its entirety. I guess he’ll just send some of his killers to shoot typhoons in the head. That’ll show ’em.

      Reply
      • Amazing how climate change denial and despotism appear to be shaking hands across the globe. Although I guess we shouldn’t be surprised. They both originate from the same form of base reaction.

        Reply
  21. Greg

     /  July 20, 2016

    Russian fires today at 2km resolution:

    Reply
  22. June

     /  July 20, 2016

    Ancient rocks reveal how Earth recovered from mass extinction

    The study provides fresh insight into how Earth’s oceans became starved of oxygen in the wake of the [Permian-Triassic] event 252 million years ago, delaying the recovery of life by five million years.

    The finding suggests that iron-rich, low oxygen waters were a major cause of the delayed recovery of marine life following the mass extinction.

    Professor Simon Poulton, of the University of Leeds, who co-authored the study, said: “The neat point about this study is that it shows just how critical an absence of oxygen, rather than the presence of toxic sulphide, was to the survival of animal life. We found that marine organisms were able to rapidly recolonise areas where oxygen became available.”

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160719123023.htm

    Reply
    • Anoxic conditions are basically required to support the organisms that produce deadly hydrogen sulfide gas. If oxygen returns, then those organism die off. That said, the production of hydrogen sulfide in anoxic regions generates additional stress on top of the ocean anoxic environment.

      In other words, anoxia produces the environment that supports the hydrogen sulfide producing organisms, which then produce the toxin which then generates an additional powerful killing mechanism. But when oxygen returns, it’s toxic in its own right to the ancient microbes that produce hydrogen sulfide.

      The issue is that Permian seas lost oxygen, ocean organisms suffered mass death, the ocean in this process also filled up with hydrogen sulfide which added to the ocean killing pressure. Eventually, in this understanding of the killing mechanism, hydrogen sulfide vented into the atmosphere and provided an additional lethal impact to land animals which during the Permian lost about 75 percent of the representative species.

      Reply
  23. Reply
  24. – There’s more:

    Reply
  25. Reply
  26. Reply
    • Reply
      • Mulga Mumblebrain

         /  July 20, 2016

        Obama briefed-did NOTHING.

        Reply
        • He raised public awareness RE a heatwave that’s basically now a public health threat considering its intensity.

      • The photo itself of the President holding the NOAA graphic is important.
        Plus it did come from the White House.
        A GOP controlled Congress is the biggest obstacle to our collective survival.

        Reply
    • 115 F near St Louis?? Holy hell.

      Reply
      • On Thursday through Sunday, July 21 through 24, the NWS excessive heat watch expands to include areas across the US:

        In Phoenix, Arizona, highs of 110-113°F and lows near 90 are forecast late Thursday night through Friday evening.
        In Chicago, Illinois, temperatures will quickly rise into the middle 90s both Thursday and Friday along with dew points approaching the upper 70s. The combination is expected to produce heat indices between 105 to perhaps 115°F. Overnight lows will remain in the 70s, offering limited relief at night.
        In Milwaukee, the heat index will rise to between between 100 and 110°F on Thursday and 93 to 103°F on Friday.
        In Quad City, Iowa, heat index values are expected to peak between 100 to 110°F. The heat watch is in effect from Thursday morning through Saturday evening. Nighttime heat indices will likely only drop to the 75 to 80°F range.

        According to the NWS, this may be “one of the worst heat waves in the last few decades.”[1] During the heat wave, some 130 million Americans could endure heat indexes of at least 100°F.[2]

        – NWS via climatesignals
        http://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=usa&wwa=Excessive%20Heat%20Watch

        Reply
      • ” … 130 million Americans could endure heat indexes of at least 100°F.”

        – And in the air conditioned political auditoriums …?

        Reply
    • Nice to see that POTUS is paying attention. At least someone is.

      Reply
  27. Potential Vorticity Streamers

    Reply
  28. Reply
  29. – Lightning will do incredible damage to your arteries…

    Reply
  30. Reply
  31. Colorado Bob

     /  July 20, 2016

    The most ironic headline of the week –

    Trees Can Limit Climate Change—Unless It Kills Them First

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-20/trees-can-limit-climate-change-unless-it-kills-them-first

    Reply
  32. Ailsa

     /  July 20, 2016

    Really good report from the BBC:

    Last June was the hottest June around the world in modern history, marking the fourteenth month in a row that global temperature records have been broken. Climate experts say we are now close to dangerous levels of climate change.

    … scientists are the surprised at the scale of the increase. They say this is partly driven by the weather driven by the El Nino… but also by the greenhouse gases from our pollution.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07ksb9q/bbc-news-at-six-20072016

    watch from 24.15

    Reply
    • Ailsa

       /  July 20, 2016

      This report is on the main 6 o’clock nationwide bulletin. Really good to see, feels like the reporter (David Shukman) is really sticking his neck out!

      Reply
    • Josh

       /  July 20, 2016

      Thanks for pointing this out – yes very good to see by comparison to the normal lack of attention to climate change given by the BBC.
      Even an interview with a scientist using words like “scarily close”. They could’ve done more to highlight the various other consequences of climate change too but yeah, good to see something at least!

      Reply
  33. Colorado Bob

     /  July 20, 2016

    Watch the shocking moment the Earth WOBBLES: Remarkable footage shows weird phenomenon caused by leaking methane

    Tundra is trembling in extraordinary video footage from the Arctic
    Phenomenon caused by the same reason giant holes suddenly appear
    These are formed by ‘methane explosions’ caused by the release of gases

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3699516/Watch-shocking-moment-Earth-WOBBLES-Remarkable-footage-shows-weird-phenomenon-caused-leaking-methane.html#ixzz4EywZSIys

    Reply
  34. Via climatehawk1:

    Study role of climate change in extreme threats to water quality

    19 July 2016

    Record-breaking harmful algal blooms and other severe impacts are becoming more frequent. We need to understand why, says Anna M. Michalak.

    With concerns about climate ‘extremes’ growing1, water is often the focus — either too much or too little. That is no coincidence: climate and the hydrological cycle are tightly coupled, and water is essential to ecosystems and societies. But it is not just the quantity of water that matters. So does its quality.
    http://www.nature.com/news/study-role-of-climate-change-in-extreme-threats-to-water-quality-1.20267

    Reply
  1. Large Sections of Greenland Covered in Melt Ponds, Dark Snow | robertscribbler
  2. Extreme Events Escalating World Wide – Food Assets Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: