Question: Will the oil in the gulf cause it to absorb more heat this summer

[CanonRay]

thereby warming the water excessively and strengthening the hurricanes?

I've not seen anything on this.

[glinda]

1. I have thought of that also and seems to me it would.

[tavalon]

2. A distinct possibility

Which will also allow for hurricanes to gain force as they swirl into the hotter water.

[guardian]

6. Just the 5 years post-Katrina

This old canard was rolled out right after Katrina by doomers. As usual they were wrong then and this is wrong now.

[hlthe2b]

7. I believe you are misstating the issue...

totally. But, then, I suspect that is your intent.

[guardian]

9. Oh....I'm mistaken

There actually were more hurricanes and stronger hurricanes blasting us in the years since Katrina? Is that what you are saying?

[hlthe2b]

10. None of the scientific experts suggested there would be more

hurricanes as a result of global warming. So, that is number one RW talking point you've been discredited on. Number 2, there is evidence of stronger hurricanes when water temperatures are warmer. That is a long term consequence we can expect to see over the next decades. Your straw man five year look at the trend is as disingenuous as your entire post.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. Wind Shear is the key.

If the air above the water warms, hurricane strength goes down, because the water and the air are closer in parity. If the water warms more than the cool air above, then you get the differential in temperatures that increases the power of a forming hurricane.

So IF the color of the oil causes more sunlight to absorb as heat in the water, and actually heats the water, then yes, we could see a reverse in the 'weaker hurricane' trend we've been seeing since Katrina. Meaning: stronger hurricanes.

Edit: On the 'right wing talking point' piece, I disagree with you. Talking heads like Al Gore, and some supporting papers have been saying exactly that.

"Now, the scientific community is warning us that the average hurricane will continue to get stronger because of global warming."
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0912-32.htm

But they say so specifically on the point of the water warming. If the water doesn't warm appreciably, and the atmosphere does, we can see the opposite effect. So, they DO say that, but for factual reasons.

[hlthe2b]

14. You are confusing what I said...

perhaps you read too quickly. I stated the scientific community DID NOT say there would be MORE hurricanes because of global warming, as the poster I was responding to claimed. That is fact. You responded on the point that some hurricanes would be STRONGER as a result of climate change and I agree that that has been the scientific consensus, whether you agree or not.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. Strength has a correlation to frequency.

Many tropical disturbances that do not reach a positive feedback loop to be referred to as a tropical depression/hurricane may now have the available energy to cross that threshold.

[petronius]

15. What you describe isn't wind shear - wind shear refers to a difference in

wind speed and/or direction between different levels (for example, if surface winds are easterly and winds at 1000 m up are westerly, that would be wind shear). Shear is bad for hurricanes because it tends to move the upper part of the storm in a different direction than the lower part - the hurricane is fueled by the latent heat released when water vapor condenses, and this energy is lost when the upper layers of the storm are sheared off.

The temperature difference between air and water really doesn't matter, as long as the water is warm. Warm water leads to increased evaporation, and so the air above the water is warmed by latent heat as well as sensible heat - the warmed air becomes unstable and the storm is enhanced...

[guardian]

16. Well it sure is comforting to know

that no organization with any credibility is promoting the link between global warming and hurricanes. Where o where could have I ever gotten the idea that there was a link?????

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0801-06.htm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0804_050804_hurricanewarming.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/22/global-warming-to-bring-s_n_471227.html
http://www.onlykent.com/20100222/global-warming-hurricanes-will-get-stronger/
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1839281,00.html
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/61675
http://www.slate.com/id/2150919
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/hurricanes-and-climate-change.html
http://mediamatters.org/research/200509260004
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070619125716.htm

and thousands of others

[petronius]

19. The hypothesized link is between sea surface temperature and hurricane intensity,

not hurricane frequency. The first three articles in your list all clearly state this.

Hurricanes are fueled by the latent heat released by condensing water vapor. Higher SSTs means more evaporation and thus more vapor rising into the storm. More vapor to condense means more energy and thus stronger storms.

[guardian]

17. I also noticed how you jumped right in

this thread to immediately dispel this "RW talking point" and tell the other posters that they are spreading falsehoods as "none of the scientific experts suggested there would be more hurricanes as a result of global warming."

Or is it okay to let people spread misinformation as long as it is concert with the holy Kool-Aid doctrine?

[NNadir]

3. That's a good question, but I would expect that the effects on evaporation will negate

any such effect, although high waves will tend to form nasty toxic emulsions that may expose more surface area.

It's probably difficult to predict, although the damage from the oil spill may dwarf hurricane damage.

Have a rec for asking the question.

[petronius]

4. Oil on the surface could absorb more heat by being darker, but I'd

guess that sheens of oil would increase reflectivity. Also, if the surface sludge trapped energy it would prevent radiation from warming lower depths, leaving colder water below the surface (when colder water gets churned up from below, it weakens hurricanes). Finally, oil on the water should reduce the evaporation rate, which is why the surface temperature is important in the first place - it doesn't matter how warm it is below the storm if there's no water vapor rising into the system.

So, I think a major spill could have a number of complex and opposing impacts on hurricanes, and nobody really knows what will dominate. If there are some major storms in the Gulf this summer, you can bet there will be a pile of dissertations on the topic...

[glitch]

8. I wondered this too, so thank you for your thoughtful answer. nt

[bananas]

18. Apparently albedo of an oil slick = .57, albedo of open water = .7

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q745521451n11762/

Abstract Values of sea surface albedo estimated from a 3-day data set agree reasonably well with the findings of Payne (1972). However, when an oil slick moved over the observational site, the value of albedo suddenly jumped to 0.57. The effect of turbidity on the albedo over a lake has already been reported (Sadhuram et al., 1988).

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI3489.1

3. Spectral albedo measurements
a. Snow-free ice

Figure 1 shows the spectral albedo measurements for snow-free ice and open water. The broadband solar albedo, α, is also given on each curve; its computation is explained below. On most of the curves, the ice thickness is also given. Measurement of ice thickness was possible by lowering the basket to the ice surface and collecting a sample; this was not possible from the helicopter.

The albedo of open water is due almost entirely to Fresnel reflection from the surface. The value is 0.07, independent of wavelength, as expected for diffuse incident radiation on water with a refractive index of 1.33, and in agreement with measurements by others (Katsaros et al. 1985; Kondratyev 1969; Payne 1972; Briegleb and Ramanathan 1982; Pegau and Paulson 2001).

[petronius]

20. Your second link says 0.07 (7%) rather than .7 (70%)

The smaller value is reasonable for open ocean with a directly overhead sun, although the ocean gets a lot more reflective with lower sun angles.

The 0.57 (57%) for the oil slick is surprisingly high - I didn't make it clear in my other post, but I'm guessing that there is a substantial difference between a dense, dark, sludgy slick and the thin sheens of oil that give that are common in marinas. I suspect that the higher albedo value is for the sheens (which I'm sure are present in the Gulf), but sludgier areas (which are also present) have a lower albedo.

There will probably also be a time-of-day difference between oil slick and water - the slick may be more reflective at high sun angles and less reflective with lower angles. So, the difference in energy absorbed by clean versus oiled water will be the sum of the full diurnal cycle - what that total will be I can't guess.

All in all, I think the effect of the slick on hurricanes will be an academic matter for the future and won't make much difference either way during the season. A storm through the Gulf is going to suck so much that a little more or less suckage will be trivial...

[bananas]

21. Yes, .07, typo! nt

[OnlinePoker]

5. I saw this on CNN

The expectation is the oil will cause the Gulf to heat up somewhat, but they actually think it will dampen the hurricane season because the oil won't allow as much water to evaporate. The result will be less energy into the atmosphere to allow the hurricanes to strengthen.

I don't know if I explained it right, but that is my recollection from the report.

[Dead_Parrot]

11. Now that is a very good question

Wish I had a very good answer. I'd probably go with petronius and say yes, but offset by the sheen: Have a k&r for thinking of it, either way.

[phantom power]

12. I'm guessing not -- the albedo of open water is already quite low.