Go to GCC Discussions forum
Twitter headlines« Sales of Hybrids in the US Up 24% in December; Up 22% in 2006 (corrected) | Main | Ethanex Energy and Eco-Energy Sign Ethanol Agreement »
Forecast: 2007 Likely To Be the Warmest Year Yet on Record
4 January 2007
 |
| Global near-surface temperature anomalies compared to 1961-1990 baseline, for 1850-2006. Red bars represent the global temperature value for each year. The blue line is the 10-year running average. The green bar is the 2006 value (still provisional at this stage). |
The UK’s Met Office, in conjunction with the University of East Anglia, has forecast that 2007 is likely to be the warmest year on record globally, beating the current record set in 1998.
The forecast expects the global temperature for 2007 to be 0.54 °C above the long-term (1961-1990) average of 14.0 °C, and issues a 60% probability that 2007 will be as warm or warmer than 1998, the current warmest year on record (1998 was +0.52 °C above the long-term 1961-1990 average). The 95% confidence range of the global forecast is that the temperature will lie between 0.38 °C to 0.70 °C above normal.
Each January the Met Office issues a forecast of the global surface temperature for the coming year. The forecast takes into account known contributing factors, such as solar effects, El Niño, greenhouse gases concentrations and other multi-decadal influences. Over the previous seven years, the Met Office forecast of annual global temperature has had a mean forecast error size of just 0.06 °C.
The potential for a record 2007 arises partly from a moderate-strength El Niño already established in the Pacific, which is expected to persist through the first few months of 2007. The lag between El Niño and the full global surface temperature response means that the warming effect of El Niño is extended and therefore has a greater influence the global temperatures during the year.
Although 2006 was the sixth-warmest year on record globally according to the World Meteorological Organization (earlier post), the year was the warmest on record yet for the UK.
For the whole of the UK, 2006 had a mean temperature of 9.7 °C, 1.1 °C above the 1971-2000 long-term average and the highest in the series going back to 1914. Ranked warmest years for the UK going back to that date are:
- 2006 (9.73 °C)
- 2003 (9.51 °C)
- 2004 (9.48 °C)
- 2002 (9.48 °C)
- 2005 (9.46 °C)
January 4, 2007 in Climate Change | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00d834d8faa753ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Forecast: 2007 Likely To Be the Warmest Year Yet on Record:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Sort of like this years Hurricane forecast.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz | January 04, 2007 at 09:24 AM
The difference being 06's forecast was made primarily by new anchors and political pundits, with little to no backing from the scientific community, because they knew the El Nino would depress Atlantic hurricane activity. That being said, it was the most active hurricane&El Nino season on record iirc.
Posted by: yesplease | January 04, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Wait, was that eve what you were talking about Robert? If not, my apologies.
Posted by: yesplease | January 04, 2007 at 12:25 PM
When I watched the Allstate commercials from the New Orleans Superdome last night, I figured devastating hurricanes were a thing of the past..
Posted by: fyi CO2 | January 04, 2007 at 01:23 PM
I watched a press conference on CNN the other day. It was some presidential aid talking about how there is no scientific consensus on whether there is global warming...
He said this in the presence of a green lawn. It's friggin January and the White House's lawn is bright green. Anyone else see a problem with that?
Posted by: John | January 04, 2007 at 07:17 PM
The difference being 06's forecast was made primarily by new anchors and political pundits, with little to no backing from the scientific community, because they knew the El Nino would depress Atlantic hurricane activity
Actually the community was predicting a neutral phase of ENSO, much like 2005, hence the dire predictions. El Nino was unexpected.
Of course, the hurricane season was mild only in the Atlantic: Australia got hit by two of the strongest cyclones in their history, and the Phillipine island of Luzon got hit by 5 what we would call major hurricanes (they don't call them hurricanes there), 3 of them Katrina or larger sized supertyphoons.
Posted by: enso | January 04, 2007 at 09:19 PM
Go figure! I suppose that's what I get for running my fingers off. You wouldn't happen to know when they realized ENSO wasn't going to be neutral, while a few TV personalities apparently kept running with the idea?
Posted by: yesplease | January 04, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Stats are a bit like driving looking in the rear view mirror. If you know what is causing the problem, do less of it. If you do it just for economics and security fine, then you can measure other benefits after the fact, if you want to.
Posted by: SJC | January 05, 2007 at 06:56 AM
You wouldn't happen to know when they realized ENSO wasn't going to be neutral
Fairly late, August, I think. You can see for yourself here. It doesn't really become distinguishable until mid August, and even then you couldn't say it would stick. Compare to similar date in 2005 (or other years)
Posted by: enso | January 05, 2007 at 09:54 AM