Get used to record-breaking heat: bureau

THE heatwave that has scorched the nation since Christmas is a taste of things to come, with this week’s records set to tumble again and again in the coming years, climate scientists said.


‘‘The current heatwave – in terms of its duration, its intensity and its extent – is now unprecedented in our records,’’  the Bureau of Meteorology’s manager of climate monitoring and prediction, David Jones, said.

‘‘Clearly, the climate system is responding to the background warming trend. Everything that happens in the climate system now is taking place on a planet which is a degree hotter than it used to be.’’

As the warming trend increases over coming years, record-breaking heat will become more and more common,

Dr Jones said.

‘‘

We know that global climate doesn’t respond monotonically – it does go up and down with natural variation.

That’s why some years are hotter than others because of a range of factors.

But we’re getting many more hot records than we’re getting cold records. That’s not an issue that is explained away by natural variation.’’

Australia’s climate is based on an interplay of many factors including regional and local weather patterns, El Nino and La Nina climate cycles and the Indian Ocean dipole, all superimposed on the greenhouse gas-driven warming trend.

While temperatures vary on a local and regional scale, globally it has now been 27 years since the world experienced a month that was colder than average.

The impacts of the rising heat on farming, food, water and human health have been studied closely for years, and the trends being played out now mirror those laid out years ago in projections by the Bureau of Meteorology, the CSIRO and the Garnaut climate change review.

They include heightened bushfire risk, rising sea levels affecting infrastructure and houses all along the coast and, by the end of the century, massive cuts in food production in the Murray-Darling Basin.

According to a peer-reviewed study by the Australian-based  Global Carbon Project, global average temperatures are on a trajectory to rise a further four to six degrees by the end of this century, with that rise felt most strongly over land areas. It would be enough to tip Tuesday’s over-40 temperatures over much of mainland Australia very close to 50 degrees in some parts.

“Those of us who spend our days trawling – and contributing to – the scientific literature on climate change are becoming increasingly gloomy about the future of human civilisation,’’ said Liz Hanna, convener of the human health division at the Australian National University’s Climate Change Adaptation Network.

‘‘We are well past the time of niceties, of avoiding the dire nature of what is unfolding, and politely trying not to scare the public. The unparalleled setting of new heat extremes is forcing the continual upwards trending of warming predictions for the future, and the timescale is contracting.’’

Around the world, 2013 could be the hottest ever recorded by modern instrumentation, according to a recent study by Britain’s Met Office.

It said that, based on the rising background warming trend, 2013 will be 0.43 degrees to 0.71 degrees hotter globally than the average temperature between 1961 and 1990, with a ‘‘best fit’’ of 0.57 degrees warmer.

If that turns out to be accurate, 2013 would surpass the previous record, held jointly by 2005 and 2010.
The Met Office findings are considered telling in the climate science community, because 2013 is set to be a relatively ‘‘neutral’’ year, without a strong El Nino warming cycle to push temperatures up.

The Australian heatwave, which is exceptional, is a continuation of the record-breaking temperatures seen across much of Australia since September, according to the special climate statement issued by the bureau on Tuesday.

The last four months of 2012 were the hottest on record, albeit by just 0.01 of a degree. ‘‘This event is ongoing with further significant records likely to be set,’’ the statement said.

Link -
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/get-used-to-recordbreaking-heat-bureau-2013010...
================================
This is not about who wins some BS argument, it's about following a standard business practice, of mitigating against likely/probable/possible adverse outcomes, by taking insurance against those adverse outcomes AND THESE CLIMATE CHANGE OUTCOMES ARE ABOUT AS ADVERSE AS YOU COULD THINK OF!

I told my 84 year old mother to go to the library for the day. She was going to drive around in her car with the aircon on. She lives in a place that is relatively cold. She doesnt even have a fan because she doesnt normally need one because it doesnt get this hot. Yesterdays 43C was the hottest she has ever experienced there.

SOB

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 9^th, 2013 at 12:24am:


Well that is a foolish statement.

Last night on the Teev, a BOM 'expert' explained why this heat was occurring,  and detailed why BOM has increased it's spread of temp increments ... and has added two additional colours, representing higher temperatures, in its visual modelling of the climate facts.

We now have -  above deep red...  Purple and Black... for temps 50.C and above.
He explained it really well,  and cleverly avoided being dragged into an unequivocal statement about the correlation with Climate Change.

Quite excellent actually.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 9^th, 2013 at 5:23am:

Some librarys have crap air-con: some others are top-notch however!

Imagine being 84 and going to the library to cool down and experiencing the noise-fest that they allow these days!!

Librarys are no longer a place of peace and quiet....

Yes INDEED DRAY   

It IS the rate of change... that is quite frankly..... alarming.

this is true...

other than the thread on democracy aka Newman!!Yuk...  i find his approach
bombastic 
and right of centre ... and not well -informed...or..blind to facts... 

I guess every one is likely to agree with SOMEONE at SOME TIME. 
How does it go??

You can fool some of the people ALL the time , and
You fool all of the people SOME of the time,  but
You can't fool ALL of the people ALL of the time.


....

BOM = guess work

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 9^th, 2013 at 11:20pm:



Oh dear, you've resorted to Hitler.

The AGW alarmist camp is really getting desperate now.



I suppose we can't blame you though: you certainly don't have much reliable science on your side.

Hyperbole, data manipulation, lies, colourful graphs, fear-mongering, and now Godwin's Law.  The alarmists' "argument" gets weaker every day.

look who's talking.

But seeing as we are being bombarded with stats and discussions on all media,
and actually ARE ( you know, here,, now?) going through unprecedented weather extremes,  your argument, GP, is looking more and more ridiculous....  hypothesis,shnipothesis,  you keep trying to make this about an unproven theory.....
realistic ?  linguistic irrelevancy....  IMO.

'ALARMISTS'  hahaha  oh no,, you can't win the argument so you call all your opponents ignorant alarmists.  You do it all the time.

you are a hypocrit.... ...

do you? really? 
either you're really  'hot'     or you live in FNQ. 

yeah baby yeah... 

While the US West Coast (Los Angeles) has just had its coldest day (34F) for some 22 years, the Australian West Coast (Perth) has just had its warmest January overnight minimum (27.3C) for some 24 years & we recently had our warmest December overnight minimum (27.3C) for some 24 years - Correlations ???
http://www.komonews.com/home/related/186866102.html
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/15839035/hot-night-chases-a-temper...

Btw, we have also had the heat, for a while -

date      minimum      maximum      °C

     
Mon 24/12/2012      17.3            32.7      
Tue 25/12/2012      19.0            39.6      
Wed 26/12/2012      23.0            37.5      
Thu 27/12/2012      20.2            38.3      
Fri 28/12/2012      24.3            39.3      
Sat 29/12/2012      27.3            40.5      
Sun 30/12/2012      21.5            37.5      
Mon 31/12/2012      20.9            42.1
http://www.weatherzone.com.au/station.jsp?lt=site&lc=9225&list=ds&of=of_a&ot=ot_...
Tue 01/01/2013      25.1            30.8            
Wed 02/01/2013      21.6            28.5            
Thu 03/01/2013      18.9            27.3      
Fri 04/01/2013      18.3            25.6            
Sat 05/01/2013      14.0            36.9      
Sun 06/01/2013      22.0            35.3      
Mon 07/01/2013      24.0            37.8            
Tue 08/01/2013      25.2            39.1            
Wed 09/01/2013      22.3            26.4            
Thu 10/01/2013      15.6            26.2            
Fri 11/01/2013      16.7            29.4            
Sat 12/01/2013      20.4            34.9            
Sun 13/01/2013      22.2            28.1      
Mon 14/01/2013      21.7            37.3      
Tue 15/01/2013      27.3            33      
http://www.weatherzone.com.au/station.jsp?lt=site&lc=9225&list=ds&of=of_a&ot=ot_...

Of course, anyone looking for a decidedly hot place, should look no further than a couple of little towns called Marble Bar (N/West WA) &/or Oodnadatta (Northern SA) -
http://www.weatherzone.com.au/wa/pilbara/marble-bar
http://www.weatherzone.com.au/sa/ne-pastoral/oodnadatta

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 10:00pm:


Ok, I just ignored your post, as it was irrelevant, to what was being discussed!

damien wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 7:00am:


The devil is in the detail.  The argument you use is the deconstructionist one. You can deny just about anything using that formula. eg "Jews have died in the past, what's so different about the fact that they died in Germany between 1939 and 1945?"

damien wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 9:12am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 1:39pm:


The schoolyard bully speaks again. Little person has to use a loud voice.
   

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 1:49pm:

I repost this here because it is more than relevant.

Its a shame they took the temperature next to such a small concrete and bitchumen block.

We al know that they used to have big massive major concrete airports in the past. A bit of like for like please. But going hand in hand with deleting past records in order to create new records, creating new stations in order to create instant records, then I suppose we can let this through as well. Keeps the cult happy.

damien wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 1:50pm:



WHEN YOU SMOKE CRACK YOU MUST HAVE EVERYONE MESMERISED!!

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 1:59pm:


Much of those same buildings have been there, for decades and that station does seem to be in a fairly open area.

Many other centres, in & around Sydney, also had record Temps!

Usually, records are very minor increments. In the case of Temperatures something like 0.1c would be usual, BUT now we are seeing new records going up by 0.5c & 1.0c.

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 4:08pm:


So, are you trying to tell me that much of those same Sydney buildings, haven't been there, for decades?

Isn't that where the reading is taken, at the big park, at Observation Hill, right near the cooling waters?

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 6:28pm:


Because the last 7-8 decades are when most movement has taken place?

Co2, Temperatures & Population gain.

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 8:01pm:


No, just a very small blip, which should tell us that unless we pay attention, we will go the same way as untold other extinct species!

that's a good one Muso...

urban schmurban   

Emma wrote on Jan 19^th, 2013 at 11:11pm:




Who is denying climate change?

Seriously?

I've never heard of anyone denying climate change.

What on Earth are you talking about?

Emma wrote on Jan 19^th, 2013 at 11:11pm:

You want dead animals as proof to climate change. Here is a weather event in Australia in 1790's, but because weather is climate to the cult, we will just call it climate event.

Quote:

More snow doesn't necessarily equate to "colder". Don't fall for that one. 

More snow is a consequence of more precipitation, if it's cold enough - and it doesn't have to be much colder than say 0 deg C for snow. I've seen it snow at +2 C.

In fact, it can sometimes be too cold to snow, as anybody who has spent some time in a cold climate would know.

Fair enough Muso...  that's understood..

I was using the term as shorthand to reference extreme cold.. 
not very accurate sorry about that.. it's poetic licence 

Emma wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 11:24pm:



Then you must be very young...

2010, 2011 and twice ( 8 months apart) in 2012

Emma wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 2:03am:


Ok, then we'll try it this way.

1992:
Oakhurst tornado
Early in the afternoon, another supercell developed around the town of Maryborough, around 300 km north of Brisbane. It developed rapidly also, and at 2:30pm a number of reports sent to the Bureau of Meteorology reported a tornado had touched down in Oakhurst, a rural area 80 km south of Maryborough. However, due to the low population density in the area the reported damage was sparse, with one house destroyed, several others unroofed and hundreds of trees were snapped.
Upon investigation and analysis of measurements and the damage caused by the tornado, it was given a rating of 'F3' on the Fujita scale. This was one of the most powerful tornadoes ever recorded in Australia, and the scale indicated the tornado may have produced winds of between 252 and 300 kilometres per hour.

Bucca tornado
Only minutes after the Oakhurst tornado, another supercell developed to the south-west of Bundaberg, around 400 km north of Brisbane and 150 km north of the Oakhurst tornado. It strengthened and moved in a north-east direction, causing severe damage to Bullyard and Bucca areas with giant hailstones, described as the size of a "cricket ball".
The supercell then spawned a tornado in the Bucca and Kolan area. According to reports by meteorologists, the tornado was so strong and the effects caused on the area it hit were so extreme that household appliances were displaced, small objects were embedded in trees and house walls, and "a 3-tonne truck body was carried 300 metres across the ground". However, as with Oakhurst, the rural nature of the area affected limited the damage caused by the tornado.
Examination by a severe weather team from the Bureau of Meteorology examined the damage in the Bucca and Kolan region and recorded it as an 'F4' on the Fujita scale. This corresponds to the tornado being able to produce winds between 331 and 417 kilometres per hour and of 'devastating' intensity. This is the first tornado ever to be recorded as an F4 in Australian history

"A tornado passes near the far north Queensland town of Atherton
Posted Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:47am AEDT"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-17/a-tornado-passes-near-the-far-north-queens...

"Townsville - Tornado EF2 March 20th 2012 Ch7News"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhEjTiPtps

Darling Downs November 17th 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFeLkNtpF5c&feature=player_embedded

Is that enough, or would you like me to mention 1968, when the town of Killarney QLD was hit by a tornado???


Just because you can't remember tornadoes in QLD, doesn't mean they've never happened there..

Emma wrote on Jan 20^th, 2013 at 8:36pm:

Yeh, science has to be more careful tho: that's why there is something called NOMENCLATURE-->> NAMING SYSTEMS!

The free-market liars argue black is white by playing with definitions and repeating it until the poor victims of democracy turn away in disgust and confusion!

-->it's a totally natural process,... giving us Kubler Ross's curve to acceptance- over- time!

yahoooooooo

got power back.... three days..no power, no tap water,  no power no water pumps no loo-flushing except by buckets of captured rain water, no showers..
No Computer, no TV... no cooling fans or air con.....


I'm with Muso

We have had three 1in 100 yr weather events in 3 yrs... !!!!

That is EXTREME...

Rider wrote on Jan 31^st, 2013 at 3:20pm:


The only thing extreme in your post is the dial on you denier-meter.

Oh Doctor..... is there no stopping the BS meter today?? 

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jan 31^st, 2013 at 4:01pm:

Weather events are never climate. Weather observed over a large timeframe is climate. Unless you join a doomsday cult, then weather events (hot) are the new climate when it suites. When the weather event doesnt suit (cold), then you call it climate change induced weather event.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jan 31^st, 2013 at 4:32pm:

But you were referring to someone calling out weather events are not the new climate. Play with words, just like you are doing with flannery's words, but it by no means makes you correct.

Climate is weather over a long period of time. You are right. Just wrong to reply to the post you did.

muso wrote on Jan 31^st, 2013 at 9:25pm:


Oh the irony....

oh I like this game..

define unmitigated alarmist claptrap or maybe swindling tax payer funded grant dependent science flunkies

I've got more 

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2013 at 10:37pm:


There is no faith involved. I understand the science. It's my field.

Do you have faith when you believe that the earth orbits the sun?

It's a good theory, but it has not been proven by a long shot.

Maybe you believe that the Earth follows a straight line in distorted space time? That's another good theory, but it hasn't been proven either. 

Maybe you believe that two parallel lines never meet? This time, you'd be wrong. They meet at infinity. Now that can be proven because it's pure mathematics.   

In science, saying that something hasn't been proven is disingenuous. It's not really saying anything useful.

muso wrote on Feb 1^st, 2013 at 4:36pm:

   

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 6^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:


It's also Projective Geometry (but not Euclidean Geometry). I wondered if anybody would bite.

we have every reason to take every press release with contempt and

well deserved sceptism

..LOL --- Ridden.


ooh that sounds painful.

what are the UAH satellites, again??

Do satellites have the ability to disagree??

Emma wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 11:50pm:

The record heat was cause by UHI and poor station location (for BOM). Satelite data says it was not the hottest and that is the most reliable consider there is no poor station location but still has the UHI signiture.

The satellite data shows that the summer of 2012-2013 was close to ordinary, compared with the entire satellite record going back to 1979. Not a record. Not even extreme?



The graph data comes thanks to John Christy, Director, Earth System Science Center, Distinguished Professor, Atmospheric Science
University of Alabama in Huntsville, Alabama State Climatologist and Roy Spencer. It was graphed by Ken Stewart at KensKingdom, and inspired by Tom Quirk at Quadrant. I was very happy to connect them this weekend. The data cover “average lower troposphere temperature anomalies for land grids only for the region 10S-40S by 110E-155E.” UPDATE: The data in the graph above does include Tasmania as well, and does not include PNG or Timor.

Emma wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 1:54am:

You see the 79 temps are equal to 2013 temp. Shame on the AGW loons.

You see the lower temps for the 2012 summer. No spin, just the best data you can get apparently.

P Lolly

surely you can see,  in your OWN graph....

that
- the number of anomalies  ABOVE the line,  = 15 in total    between 1995  and 2013... 
whereas

- in the period 1979 to 1994   ....the number of anomalies  ABOVE the line,  =  4 in total.

An almost 400% increase in recorded anomalous Heat data.??

Is this not the case??? 

Is there another way to view this information
which supports ... your view... ???

I'm sorry??  huh?? 

that is your reply...  ?

so  two yrs  ...1979 and 2013  are the same.??

and everything else is meaningless???

WTF?  I expected better from you than that piece of ...!

Emma wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:28pm:

With the temps not going up as predicted by all AGW loons. Not just up, but up and up, not up then back to the same over many decades. All their failed model predictions wrong, then yes, the temps being the same now as it was in 79 is quite significant.

a much earlier post....  listed temp data... going back centuries  ...  and from all that  said that one extreme heatwave back in ?1700 and something, or was that 1600 and something .. proved that our current heat increase  was nothing unusual..

It would be interesting indeed if some smart person in stats  could extrapolate all that data into your Graph format.....

now THAT would be interesting...


then of course... you'd have to develop a graph for an equal period of time, prior to the first graph, on the same baseline.

now THAT  would be VERY  interesting...

and then  based on scientific records relevant to the subject ,,, a prior graph  again... and so on....

Now that would BE REALLY REALLY  INTERESTING.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53pm:

Why are the oceans warming?
Why are glaciers melting?
Why is the arctic ice cap melting?
Why is sea level rising?

Why do you always run away like a little girl when asked these questions?

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53pm:


It goes up and up with downswings but the ups are getting higher and longer and the lows are higher

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:23am:

So must the downs (as normal climate) because if it hasnt, then 79 wouldnt be the same as 2013. Use logic geez.