• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

Meteorologist: Climate Change Won’t Drive Future US Hurricane Damage Losses

by Anthony Watts
March 01, 2023, 1:49 PM
in News and Opinion
A A
3
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

hurricane damageAn article in Axios, written by Andrew Freedman, claims increased hurricane winds due to rising temperatures driven by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations may result in more hurricane damage losses along the US East Coast, Florida Coasts, and the Gulf Coast.

The article is misleading. [emphasis, links added]

The article cites climate model projections to support its claims, rather than data because data does not show that the number or intensity of hurricanes have increased during the recent period of modest global warming.

The study is also misleading because it fails to consider more germane factors responsible for rising hurricane costs.

The Axios article, titled “More than 13 million people to see new hurricane wind risks,” is based on research from the First Street Foundation, a group formed to define the risk to people and property from climate change in the United States.

The study uses a “…property-specific and climate-adjusted hurricane wind model that calculates the likelihood of a property being exposed to and damaged from a hurricane’s winds.”

The study, by retired MIT meteorology professor Kerry Emanuel, neither provides nor creates new findings, but rather uses historical data combined with computer models to make guesses on how coastal and other properties would be more “at risk” in the future.

The non-profit group even created a slick interactive website to hawk the model results as if they were evidence-based to an unsuspecting public, as seen in the screen capture below from riskfactor.com:

As explored in Climate Realism here and here, for example, climate models are seriously flawed.

The basic projection they make is the global average temperature is in response to additional carbon dioxide concentrations, and after more than 30 years and six generations of models, the model projections still run too hot.

On top of basic physics, models also incorporate different modelers’ assumptions about how various features of the Earth will respond to rising temperatures and CO2, referred to as “feedback mechanisms” or “feedback loops,” tending to enhance or diminish temperature increases.

Model simulations are tested for accuracy against simulations from other models, rather than available data, in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. It amounts to 30 years of Garbage In-Garbage Out or GIGO. Nowhere is this clearer than in climate projections of hurricanes.

For example, after Category 5 Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in late August 2005, scientists and pundits alike began claiming that sort of devastation was the “new normal” and that hurricane frequency and intensities were only going to get worse.

Climate model projections were cited as “proof” for such claims. Former Vice President Al Gore exploited the Katrina disaster in a call for climate action.

In a speech at Sierra Club’s National Environmental Convention and Expo in San Francisco on 9 September 2005, Gore said, “The era of procrastination, of half measures, of soothing and baffling expedience of delays, is coming to a close. In its place, we are entering a period of consequences.”

In Katrina’s aftermath, climate activists beat a steady drumbeat warning of hurricane doom.

Here are just a few examples:

“Warming seas cause stronger hurricanes“, Nature, 2006
“Are Category 6 Hurricanes Coming Soon?“, Scientific American, 2011
“Global warming is ‘causing more hurricanes’“, The Independent, 2012
“A Katrina hurricane will strike every two years“, Science Nordic
“‘Katrina-Like’ Hurricanes to Occur More Frequently Due to Warming” in US News & World Reports
“Hurricanes Likely to Get Stronger & More Frequent“, Climate Central, 2013 – using a study in PNAS by Kerry Emanuel et al.

Note the last one is from the same author, Kerry Emanuel, the [author of the] current study being touted by Axios.

Yet, after Katrina, the United States entered a hurricane drought. Between October 24, 2005, and August 17, 2017, a 4,323-day (142-month, 12-year) period, the United States entered its longest recorded period of no major hurricanes of category three or higher making landfall within the country.

Climate models failed to simulate the hurricane drought.

Indeed, in direct contrast to the evidence, throughout the drought, as seen above, climate alarmists continued to cite climate model projections to claim climate change was making hurricanes either more frequent, more powerful, or both.

Real-world data refutes the claims of worsening hurricanes in the United States. Below, in Figure 1A/1B, two graphs of data from Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. show that both major hurricanes and hurricanes per se have experienced a declining trend for more than a century during the period of modest warming:

Figure 1A and 1B – Major (Cat 3-5) right, and all hurricanes, left, making landfall on the continental United States since 1900. Dotted red line is the trend.

Pielke points out that the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirms his findings, writing, “[t]he IPCC has concluded that since 1900 there is ‘no trend in the frequency of USA landfall events.’

This goes for all hurricanes and also for the strongest hurricanes, called major hurricanes.”

Also, it is not just the United States that has experienced a declining hurricane trend, there has been a downtrend globally:

Figure 2: Global Hurricane Frequency (all & major) — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached at least hurricane force (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 64 knots). The bottom time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached major hurricane strength (96-knots+). Adapted from Maue (2011) GRL. By Dr. Ryan Maue.

The data and the position of the IPCC fly in the face of the claims made in the Axios article and the computer climate model projections behind it, predicting a dire future for U.S. coastal residents, as seen in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Map from the Axios article suggesting climate-driven hurricane wind losses will increase in U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coasts.

With hurricanes and major hurricanes either trending slightly downward over the past century of modest warming, or exhibiting “no trend” per the IPCC, any increase in hurricane losses must be due to factors other than climate change—yet Axios’ article, and the study it references, downplay or ignore entirely other likely factors.

Indeed, Axios writer Freedman and the study’s author Emanuel, miss the real driving force behind disaster losses on U.S. coasts: basic economics.

Fact: many people like living on coastlines, evidently considering the threat of hurricanes worth the risk to get the benefits of a view and pleasant lifestyle provided by the ocean.

According to a U.S. Census Bureau report from 1960 to 2008, the coastal U.S. population more than doubled with a measured increase of 124.7 percent.

Along with more people living on the coasts comes more development of property, and with more development and people, come higher property prices. Any realtor can tell you this.

Yet, both Freedman and Emanuel ignored the fact that regardless of hurricanes’ responses to climate change, more people and more expensive properties are located in areas historically prone to hurricane impacts, so when hurricanes strike, the damage costs will be significantly higher now than in the past.

This is an effect of demographic and economic trends, not changes in hurricane behavior.

Once again, rather than exercising a little journalistic fact-checking of the available data, Axios, CNN, USA Today, and other mainstream media outlets prone to hyping the climate crisis narrative put alarming headlines above the truth.

Data on hurricane trends and widely recognized, though not as widely publicized weaknesses in the climate models undermine any attempts to link higher damage costs from hurricanes to climate change.

Demographics and economics explain the increase in hurricane-related costs, not climate change. This bogus combination of shoddy science and even shoddier journalism has done a disservice to their readers.

Read more at Climate Realism

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related Posts

Energy

Newsom’s War On Oil Could Send California Gas Prices To $9, Analyst Warns

May 9, 2025
Energy

The Climate Scaremongers: More Lies From The UK’s Crackpot Climate Change Committee

May 9, 2025
Energy

UK’s Green Agenda Blows Up As Ørsted Kills Massive Offshore Wind Project

May 9, 2025

Comments 3

  1. Spurwing Plover says:
    2 years ago

    They tried to claim Hurricane Katrina back in 2005 was proof of Global Warming then Hurricane Sandy and then Hurricanes Harvey and Irma without anything to back them up other than false data and fake graphs and Media Hype

  2. Auru K says:
    2 years ago

    The purpose for the fluctuation of temperature high and low is an unnatural weather change. These an Earth-wide temperature boost issue are happening a direct result of people recklessness towards wellbeing and climate and the craving and eagerness of money. The discharge of hurtful gas and synthetics from the enterprises waste and smoke like carbon dioxide, nitrogen and so on.
    For more data visit us on Energy Environmental Solutions http://sourcetester.org/

    • David Lewis says:
      2 years ago

      The earth has been naturally warming since the end of the mini ice age. This started before the industrial revolution so can’t be due increased emissions from mankind. There is a very poor correlation between the level of CO2 and temperature. One of the most compelling is that 40% of the warming blamed on man occurred between 1910 and 1941 when the carbon dioxide levels were relatively low and raising very slowly. Yet, the warming pause earlier in this century happened at a time when CO2 level were rising rapidly. This poor correlation is also consistent with theory. The CO2 warming effect is well into its saturation zone so addition levels can not have significant impact. Check out Joining Battle Over The “Science” Of Global Warming — Manhattan Contrarian

      The UN IPCC is the primary advocate for action on climate change in the world. Yet, its fifth assessment report states that extreme weather events such as hurricanes are not increasing. Don’t you remember the “hurricane drought,” starting in 2005, where for nine years not a single hurricane as large as category three made US landfall?

      In 2022 the Antarctic saw the coldest temperature since records started being kept in the 1950’s. The prediction of extreme warming comes from the average of IPCC computer models. This is also seen in the UN IPCC AR5 report. The prediction of a high level of warming from computer models is 2-4.5°C, with an average of 3.2°C for doubling CO2. Yet the same report has projections based on real world data, called observational data of temperature range of 1.25–3.0°C, with a best estimate of 1.75°C, for a doubling of CO2. The computer model that most closely matches real world data is INMCM5. It predicts 1.4 degrees of warming by 2100.

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • newsom presser gas pricesNewsom’s War On Oil Could Send California Gas Prices To $9, Analyst Warns
    May 9, 2025
    Refinery closures and Newsom’s hostility to energy companies could push California gas prices from $6 to $9 a gallon, analyst warns. […]
  • protest time is upThe Climate Scaremongers: More Lies From The UK’s Crackpot Climate Change Committee
    May 9, 2025
    The UK’s Climate Change Committee is ramping up the panic, but real-world data shows no rise in floods, heat deaths, or costs—just more failed predictions. […]
  • yorkshire offshore windUK’s Green Agenda Blows Up As Ørsted Kills Massive Offshore Wind Project
    May 9, 2025
    Orsted scrapped the Hornsea 4 offshore wind project, dealing a massive blow to Ed Miliband’s green vision and raising questions about UK net zero targets. […]
  • ev charging station16 States, DC Sue Trump Admin Over EV Charger Funds, Most Have Built None
    May 9, 2025
    17 states sue the Trump administration for access to $5 billion in EV charger funding, despite most failing to build a single charger. […]
  • weather montageNOAA Quietly Kills Its Billion-Dollar Disaster Database And Report After Years Of Criticism
    May 9, 2025
    NOAA has quietly retired its Billion-Dollar Disaster list after years of criticism over transparency, accuracy, and scientific integrity. […]
  • german wind farmHow Wind And Solar Sent Energy Prices Sky-High in ‘Green’ Countries
    May 8, 2025
    Adding more green energy makes power more expensive, not cheaper—due to unreliable output, required fossil fuel backup, and taxpayer subsidies. […]
  • bernie sanders fox newsBernie Sanders Defends Private Jet Use, Says ‘He’s Too Important’ To Fly Coach
    May 8, 2025
    Bernie Sanders and AOC are facing criticism for using private jets while promoting their climate-focused “Fighting Oligarchy” tour. […]
  • blackout stationGreen Energy Suicide: The West Pays The Price For Its Net-Zero Delusions
    May 8, 2025
    Green energy policies clash with reality as Europe and the U.S. face blackouts, soaring costs, and a collapsing power grid. […]
  • wright trump exec orderDOE Scraps $4.5M Website And Logo Project Meant To Showcase Green Agenda
    May 8, 2025
    The DOE canceled a $4.5 million contract the Biden admin awarded for a new agency website and logo that highlighted the green energy transition. […]
  • desantis bill signing‘Dead On Arrival’: DeSantis Signs Law Banning Geoengineering And Weather Modification In Florida
    May 7, 2025
    DeSantis has signed legislation shutting down geoengineering and weather modification projects in Florida amid rising voter concerns. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books We Like

very convenient warming

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch