Depending on where you look, last year was the hottest on record, in some places it was the wettest and in others, this coming winter may be on track to be one of the colder. You may wonder who is behind the “climate change superlatives”. It’s nothing like the high school popularity rankings the word may bring to mind. In the world of climate science, measuring and defining superlatives like the “hottest” and “wettest” years on record is a meticulous process. Behind these seemingly simple declarations lie complex methodologies, measurement, and data collection which require global collaborations between several national and international organizations.
How We Collect And Understand Data Matters
Climate scientists employ advanced techniques to measure and analyze climate data. From ground-based stations to satellite observations, a network of instruments continuously monitors temperature, precipitation, and other climatic variables. The meticulous data collection process involves quality control measures to ensure accuracy. Collaborative efforts among scientists worldwide contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the Earth’s climate. These collaborations help us understand how climate and weather interact, such as why in the same month one place can have record heat while another has record cold. “When the Arctic is off-the-charts warm (like now), we’re more likely to see frigid cold invade places like Texas that are ill-equipped to deal with it,” said Jennifer Francis, a Woodwell Research Center climate scientist explained to the Associated Press. “Rapid Arctic warming is one of the clearest symptoms of human-caused climate change, making winter extremes more likely even as the globe warms overall.” A group of ocean researchers noted that rapidly warming ocean temperatures could push 2024 to also have some of the hottest spring and summer temperatures on record.
Who Decides the “Hottest” and “Wettest” Years?
The determination of the “hottest” and “wettest” years involves a collaborative effort. Scientists analyze vast datasets, considering temperature anomalies and precipitation patterns. In the United States, NASA’s earth observation and NOAA’s atmospheric data and measurement capabilities both go into understanding the relationship between heat from year to year as well as rainfall. When you read an article about the “hottest” or “record rainfall” years, that declaration is usually supported by research and data from one or both of these agencies.
The responsibility for measuring climate superlatives also falls on the shoulders of international organizations dedicated to climate research. Institutions like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) play pivotal roles in coordinating global climate assessments. The IPCC is responsible for regular assessments of the climate as well as the scientific process. The WMO is the coordinator for meteorological, or weather, information sharing around the globe. These organizations aggregate data from various sources, providing a unified and authoritative perspective on climate trends. Working with NASA and NOAA, this is where we get the “climate superlatives.”
When it comes to categorizing and naming different kinds of disasters, another organization EM-DAT is responsible for deciding whether an event is a natural hazard or a technological disaster. The scientists work on phenomena at the country level to identify and inventory events. EM-DAT researchers also add new terminology to help us describe events, like heat or cold “domes” and “bomb cyclones.” When you see this language on TV or in news headlines, the presenter is likely tracking EM-DAT.
It’s Not Always Right
While climate measurements are invaluable, they are not without challenges and criticisms. Factors like changing technology, evolving measurement methodologies, and the inherent complexity of climate systems introduce uncertainties. For example, NASA scientists were surprised by record heat in 2023. They explained that an unusual La Niña event could be the cause, but also cautioned that short term data points are not always the best predictors. The prediction mixup did spark online debates, with some critics questioning the accuracy and reliability of climate superlatives. Acknowledging these challenges, as NASA did, and continuing to monitor and evolve the data is essential for maintaining transparency and refining measurement techniques.
The superlatives associated with climate change are not arbitrary proclamations but outcomes of rigorous scientific endeavors. International organizations, through collaborative efforts, provide a global perspective on climate trends. Acknowledging the challenges and criticisms inherent in climate measurement processes is crucial for refining methodologies and maintaining public trust. Understanding the science behind climate superlatives is key to informed decision-making in the face of a changing climate.
