'The
UK faces fines of up to £300m a year and embarrassing court appearances
after the European commission launched legal proceedings against it for
failing to reduce "excessive" levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
air pollution from traffic, despite 15 years of warnings and several
extensions and postponements granted to the government', stated the
opening paragraph of a recent Guardian article on the UK's poor record on air pollution.
Since the 'Great Smog'
of London claimed over 4000 lives back in 1952, regulations have been
tightened ever since. But today's pollution is different from the smoke
induced smog's of the past, which resulted from the burning of coal -
the predominant fuel back then.
In
this article I'll examine the types of air pollution that typically
affects a country such as the UK and what's being done to improve it and
what the health affects are. The current regulatory framework will also
be considered.
The EU legal action stems from a Supreme Court ruling that the UK is in breach of the EU Air Quality Directive and “the way is open
to immediate enforcement action at national or European level”.
So what are the effects of NO2 on health and what is the source of
NO2 and other pollutants? The EU lists the following urban air pollutants:
Exposure times can vary for different pollutants. This is reflected in the Average period.
*Member state can apply for 5 year extension.
**Specific extension criteria available at discretion of EU Commission.
***New standard.
The Air Quality Directive (Directive 2008/50/EC
) was adopted in 2008 and came into force in 2010. But as noted above
states can apply for an extension. The problem with the UK is that it
has failed to take steps to implement the Directive, hence the legal
action.
I'm not going to delve into the specifics of the Directive here (see below). But the first two paragraphs set the scene:
- The
Sixth Community Environment Action Programme adopted by Decision No
1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July
2002 establishes the need to reduce pollution to levels which minimise
harmful effects on human health, paying particular attention to
sensitive populations, and the environment as a whole, to improve the
monitoring and assessment of air quality including the deposition of
pollutants and to provide information to the public.
In
order to protect human health and the environment as a whole, it is
particularly important to combat emissions of pollutants at source and
to identify and implement the most effective emission reduction measures
at local, national and Community level. Therefore, emissions of harmful
air pollutants should be avoided, prevented or reduced and appropriate
objectives set for ambient air quality taking into account relevant
World Health Organisation (WHO) standards, guidelines and programmes.
The next step in the legislative process is for member states to implement domestic legislation. In England The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 came into force, with equivalent regulations established by the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
As the EU Directive has stated, the international regulatory framework is based on WHO standards and guidelines. It is this source that I will focus my analysis on.
Although the main emphasis of this article will be on the UK, the WHO guidelines apply on a global extent.
The key pollutants
There
are two types of air pollution; Primary (emitted direct into the
atmosphere) and Secondary (formed within the atmosphere). Primary air
pollutants include sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide,
volatile organic compounds, and carbonaceous and noncarbonaceous
primary particles. Secondary air pollutants arise from chemical
reactions of primary pollutants in the atmosphere, often involving
natural components of the environment such as oxygen and water.
Secondary pollutants include ozone, oxides of nitrogen and secondary PM.
PM10,PM2.5, and ultrafine particles (PM1
or less) are typically measured within the atmosphere and monitored.
The following diagram shows the size range of airborne particles (WHO):
Oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
are prevalent in high concentrations in urban areas - especially during
busy periods. These are formed during high temperature combustion. From
a human health perspective nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is of concern. This is formed via a reaction of nitric oxide (NO) with ozone (O3):
NO + O3 → NO2 + O2.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is formed from the incomplete combustion of petrol. Full combustion would generate CO2.
The
WHO report sums up the issues: 'Emissions from road vehicles are
typically thought of in terms of the exhaust, though this is only part
of the story (see below). Combustion of petrol or diesel fuel leads to
the production of exhaust gas containing a range of potentially harmful
pollutants. In many modern vehicles this passes through a control
device, such as a three-way catalytic converter, before emission to the
atmosphere. Pollutants emitted from the combustion of petrol or diesel
fuels typically include carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, VOC and
suspended particles. Some countries still use lead additives in petrol
and this generates an important air pollutant emission.
Exhaust
emission standards are set as limits in grams per kilometre or grams
per mile of pollutant emitted over a standard driving cycle...
'While
exhaust emissions are often the most important emissions from a
vehicle, they are far from being the only ones. Evaporative fuel
emissions can also be important, especially from petrol vehicles, and
these are measured and included in inventories of emissions. Far more
difficult to account for, however, are the
other
non-exhaust emissions of PM from road vehicles that arise from sources
such as the wear of brake components and tyres and the attrition of the
road surface itself. Crude estimates have been made of the magnitude of
these sources, which are included in many emissions inventories.
However, road vehicles also cause the emission of particles by
suspending particles from the road surface into the air, either through
the turbulence in the wake of the vehicle or by the shear forces between
the tyre and the road surface. These are far more difficult to account
for and are not widely included in emissions inventories'.
Emissions
inventories are compiled by countries from air pollution data that has
been measured and collected from relevant sources. WHO explains the
general process: 'In the case of road vehicles, the vehicle fleet will
need to be subdivided according to the type of vehicle, the fuel it
uses, and its age or any abatement technology fitted. Emission factors
are developed specifically for each of these elements. In conducting
calculations for an inventory, it will be necessary not only to know the
type of vehicle in each category but also the annual mileage of that
type of vehicle or the proportion of the total mileage that it
represents on a given road link. Inventories are becoming increasingly
sophisticated in disaggregating vehicles according to their age and
mileage, and also in allowing for high-emission vehicles with faulty
abatement devices. It is not feasible to take data directly from type
approval testing and assume that a vehicle that has been operating for,
say, 100 000 km produces the same emissions as a new vehicle on a
dynamometer test. Test cycles, although aiming to reflect the real
world, do not always do so very well'.
Receptor
modelling is another method of analysing air quality. 'This method uses
the measurements of air quality itself, often in combination with
simultaneously measured meteorological data, to recognize and quantify
the contributions of specific characteristic source types to air
pollutant concentrations. In the case of PM, multi-component chemical
analyses of consecutively collected air samples allow recognition of
components that co-vary in time and therefore have the same source.
Typically some 6–10 individual source types can be identified through
their chemical profiles'.
Exposure to air pollution
WHO
defines exposure as 'the event when a person comes into contact with a
pollutant of a certain concentration during a certain period of time'.
This follows a distinct pollution pathway:
Source → Emissions → Concentrations → Exposure → Dose → Health effects.
Exposure
also depends on location. Pollution can form in micro-environments,
which may not be picked up by a stationary air monitor. So levels of
exposure can vary depending on the place and time and how long the
exposure lasts for. The effects of the later will depend on the
pollutant and the health effect under consideration.
It
should be particularly noted that exposure levels can be much higher in
vehicles. For example, 'in a study of taxi drivers in Paris, the average
nitric oxide concentration in the taxi was more than 11 times higher
than at a city background measuring site, whereas the level of nitrogen
dioxide was only twice as high. Black smoke concentrations (8-hour
average) in taxis were on average almost four times higher than those at
a city background site. In general, cyclists and pedestrians tend to be
somewhat less exposed than people in buses and cars, although this
difference can be offset by longer journey times. In addition, increased
breathing rates while bicycling and walking may mean that larger
volumes of pollutants are inhaled'.
PM exposure tends to be lower indoors because of the physical barriers to the outside.
There
are several ways to determine pollution levels and exposure.
Effectiveness and accuracy can vary. The following table summarises the
approaches to exposure assessment:
The use of personal air monitors can offer a more representative estimate of individual exposure to pollutants.
Historical
monitoring of individuals and/or sites may reveal a pattern of
pollution levels and exposure and might be useful in determining disease
patterns related to exposure to air pollution. It is therefore
important that policy makers respond accordingly to air pollution data.
The following table details possibilities for policy action in relation
to indoor and outdoor sources and personal activity:

It
is incumbent on policy makers to establish air quality standards that
take account of potential impacts on public health and the environment.
However WHO notes that 'For most air pollutants, no “safe” levels have
been found whereby no health effects are observed following exposure. In
fact, for many pollutants, adverse effects have been associated with
low, almost background levels of exposure. Since the process of setting
air quality guidelines and standards aims at defining levels that do not
pose adverse effects on health, how can such levels be determined when
the scientific evidence indicates that no thresholds exist?'. In other
words it boils down to risk assessment and what should be regarded as an
'acceptable' range of standards. Here in the UK that is determined by
the EU.
WHO
observes that 'Public opinion can be an important factor in influencing
decisions, as the political capability of decision-makers is directly
proportional to the interests and concerns of their constituents.
Research has found that resources will often be directed to where the
public perceives risks to be large, whether or not they represent the
most serious hazards to society. When people understand the importance
of air quality, they can demand action and be more receptive in
complying with control measures. It is therefore in the interest of
environmental and health authorities to ensure that the public is
informed and educated about air pollution levels, sources, health
impacts and possible solutions.
Maintaining
an active communication strategy throughout the whole air quality
management process may also help prevent crises, conciliate interests,
provide advance notice for the implementation of control measures and
inform stakeholders on compliance status. For these reasons, the
development of communications tools that are understandable and
accessible to the public is an important part of air quality
management'. So the message is - if policy makers aren't getting it then
its time to put the pressure on.
I'll now examine how the UK is implementing air pollution policy within the context of the WHO report and the EU Framework.
The Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) website offers guidance and links
to air pollution monitoring. As part of this process, DEFRA along with
the devolved administrations use air quality projections. These are
models that attempt to predict future patterns of air quality. These
comprise of background maps up to the year 2030. The maps consist of
Excel datasets and can be referenced to any local authority in the UK.
The Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system is used to forecast daily projections of air pollution. It
was developed by the U.S. EPA Atmospheric Science Modelling Division.
Other models are used, which are defined on the DEFRA website.
Other useful sites include:
The Health Effects of Air Pollutants
The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants
(COMEAP) is an expert Committee that provides advice to government
departments and agencies, via the Department of Health's Chief Medical
Officer, on all matters concerning the effects of air pollutants on
health.
They have produced several publications in recent years on air pollution and health. Cardiovascular Disease and Air Pollution
is an important paper published in 2006, which I'll go through briefly
here. Its worth noting that there is a lot of medical based information
and data detailed within the report.
In
defining cardiovascular disease (CD) the report states that it 'includes
all diseases of the heart and blood vessels including stroke. It
accounts for 40% of deaths in the United Kingdom and a large proportion
of hospital admissions.
'The
most common [form] ...is coronary artery disease (CAD), also known as
ischaemic or atherosclerotic heart disease. Coronary artery disease is
the most frequent single cause of death in the UK and is caused by
atheromatous plaques occurring in the walls of the coronary arteries,
the arteries which supply blood to the heart. These plaques appear first
in young people and are widely distributed in the large and medium
sized arteries of the body. The occurrence of plaques in the coronary
arteries is particularly important as growth of these lesions can lead
to progressive narrowing and eventually obstruction of the vessels in
some cases. In addition, the plaques may rupture or fissure leaving an
ulcer in the wall of the artery on which a thrombus (blood clot) forms.
This may lead to complete blockage of the artery (coronary thrombosis or
heart attack)'.
The report followed two research criteria:
- A
time-series approach, 'investigates whether air pollution is
accompanied by short term changes in the incidence of cardiovascular
events such as heart attacks. This method generally uses available data
on daily counts of deaths or hospital admissions and relates these to
ambient concentrations of air pollution on the same or previous days,
measured by monitors situated in the study area – usually a city.
Evidence from a large number of time-series studies show very clearly
that, with few exceptions, all of the commonly measured pollutants
(particles, ozone, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon
monoxide) are positively associated with increased mortality and
hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease.
- 'Compar[ing]
the incidence of cardiovascular diseases between populations with
different long-term exposures to pollution. These studies usually follow
groups of subjects (cohorts) for a number of years and provide
important information about the amount of life lost due to air
pollution. Because large numbers of subjects are required and because
the cohorts must be followed up for a number of years, few cohort
studies have been done. The evidence from two American studies suggests
that cardiovascular deaths are increased by living in areas with higher
levels of particulate air pollution. This effect seems to be modified by
socio-demographic and regional factors'.
Here
I'll present a brief summary of the mechanisms involved after a subject
is exposed to air pollution. The following diagram outlines the
toxicological process:
The above diagram considers two mechanisms that may contribute to CD. The report explains each in more detail:
- Inhaled
particles, especially very small particles, may set up inflammation in
the lung and that this can trigger changes in the control of blood
clotting. It is also suggested that changes in chemical factors in the
blood can affect the stability of the fatty deposits (atheromatous
plaques) found in the walls of arteries in many people – especially
those in the walls of the arteries which supply blood to the muscle of
the heart itself. If this is true then a link between inhalation of
particles and the likelihood of, for example, heart attacks will have
been established.
- The
inhalation of particles and perhaps some pollutant gases may trigger a
reflex that leads to a subtle change in the rhythm of the heart. The
triggering of a reflex begins when some stimulus is detected by a
receptor, a message is sent along nerves to the spinal cord or brain and
a response follows. Well known reflexes include the production of
saliva on smelling appetising food and the forward kick of the leg when
the tendon below the knee-cap is tapped smartly. Coughing is also a
reflex: in this case the receptors are in the airways and the trigger is
an irritant: perhaps a crumb of food. Air pollutants may stimulate
receptors in the airways and though coughing may not be produced, reflex
changes in the rhythm of the heart may occur. Such changes may lead to
the heart being more susceptible to dangerous changes in rhythm: such
changes can cause sudden death. Evidence for and against this theory is
also presented in this chapter. Interestingly, this hypothesis links
with the one above: inflammation may be involved in the early stages of
both.
The
above is a very brief summary of the mechanisms involved in CD. There
are other health effects related to air pollution including asthma and
other respiratory diseases. To engage with the overall topic in greater
depth would require two separate posts. But I hope I've covered the
necessary ground in this article. If I've missed anything, do let me
know!
I'm
sure wherever you are in the world, you're probably thinking the weather
has been going crazy lately. In the northern hemisphere in particular
we have been enduring some very unusal weather.
Here
in the UK, we've been battered by one storm after another almost
relentlessly since December, whilst in North America, Siberia arrived.
The
one thing that stands out - certainly here in the UK - is the total lack
of preparedness. In part that's due to the remarkably nonchalant
inclination to build on flood plains without due consideration to the
blatantly obvious fact that flood plains actually flood!
With climate change heralding even worse flooding of the sort we're
witnessing now it would appear that the current Government has been caught with its pants down.
But there's more. The Guardian reports that 'The
money spent on preparing the UK for the impacts of global warming has
almost halved since the environment secretary, Owen Paterson – widely
regarded as a climate change sceptic – took office. Critics called the
cuts "shocking" and "complacent".
Figures
released under freedom of information rules show annual spending
falling from £29.1m in 2012-13 to £17.2m in 2013-14. The drop in funding
follows a previous slashing of staff working on the issue from 38 to
six in May 2013'.
Paterson has always been blasé about climate change, so he must have been surprised when he found his boss recently saying 'Colleagues
across the House can argue about whether that [the floods] is linked to
climate change or not. I very much suspect that it is'.
But
as the crisis verges on the catastrophic, the Government has been found
wanting. It has been exposed for what it is - anti-environment,
negligent and effectively hopeless. An article from a world to win sums up the sentiment nicely: 'The
current weather crisis has shown up the illegitimacy of politicians in
charge of a system that is unable and unwilling to act for the common
good. They greatly fear this exposure – it's the reason for the tide of
government rhetoric about "money no object" and promises of future help.
In
2010, government chief scientist Sir David King warned of the need to
plan for increased floods resulting from climate change. He proposed
pulling flood defences inland, sacrificing some areas to the sea,
establishing flood plains at the heads of rivers, modernising weirs,
widening bridges and replacing sewers to separate sewage and floodwater.
This
is the current policy of the Environment Agency and it has a backlog of
hundreds of measures based on this approach. It can't complete them
because of cuts and a Treasury rule
that they can't invest more than £400,000 in any one project. The
government's fantasy was that business and the insurance industry would
step up as co-funders. As a result, of course, nothing happened'.
The
fact that nothing has happened is a sad reflection on the fact that over
25 years of warnings have been totally ignored and that political
ideology is paramount to science. Indeed the script was written in 1987
with the release of the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. This document formed the foundation for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, 1992 (the Earth Summit). This led to the formation of The
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). And
since then the UNFCCC Conferences of the Parties have been taking place
on a regular basis. It led to the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in
1997, but since then nothing concrete has emerged from negotiations.
Now, nearly 30 years after a common future,
it appears that we have stepped backwards rather than forwards. We are
now witnessing the sort of extreme weather that we have been waiting
for, for the past 25 years or so.
So how are the floods and the other weather events around the globe linked to climate change?
The
answer lies in the melting Arctic sea ice and its effects on the jet
stream. Although the science behind this is relatively cutting edge is
does offer insights into the extreme weather we are witnessing.
The
following excellent video looks at recent extreme weather events and
features Prof. Jennifer Francis from Rutger University, Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences:
To
give a brief explanation of the phenomonon, essentially the jet steam is
a current of air that marks the boundary between warm air masses to the
south and cold air from the north. The confluence of these air masses
coupled with the spin of the Earth drives a river of air around the
globe. There is a southern equivalent. The spin of the Earth creates a
force known as the Coriolis effect, which causes winds to deflect to the right in the northern
hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere. This is why the
wind-flow around low and high-pressure systems circulates in opposing
directions in each hemisphere.
Typically
the temperature gradient between north and south of the jet stream is
considerable. However to due accelerated warming in the Arctic, the
gradient has been diminishing causing the jet stream to slow down. This
causes the jet stream to meander. In so doing it forms ridges and
troughs.
One
of the effects of a slow meandering jet stream is a tendency for weather
patterns to get stuck in a rut. This means that a pattern of weather
may persist for a number of months. This is precisely what has been
happening over the UK during the past couple of months.
However due to the high temperature gradient over North America, the jet stream has accelerated over the Atlantic,
increasing the severity of the storm systems heading towards the UK.
This can make the dynamics of the jet stream difficult to predict.
Depending on location it can speed up, slow down or disappear
altogether. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
has an excellent introductory article on the topic.
Within
the jet stream there are ribbons of accelerated winds called jet
streaks. These tend to form the boundary's of low pressure zones. The winds leaving the jet streak are rapidly diverging, creating a lower pressure
at the upper level (tropopause) in the atmosphere. The air below rapidly
replaces the upper outflowing winds. This in turn creates the low pressure at
the surface. This surface low pressure creates conditions
where the surrounding surface winds rush inwards. The Coriolis effect creates
the cyclonic rotation that is associated with depressions. The strongest surface
winds in any developing depression are normally seen at the left exit point of the
jet streak, where the jet streak is strongest:
The black oval indicates a jet streak, the purple square indicates entry
winds into the jet streak and black box indicates rapidly diverging exit winds (Source, netweather.tv).
In The Big Chill,
I detailed the wider dynamics of atmospheric change in the Arctic
relative to circulation patterns elsewhere around the globe. The
following diagram from the NOAA article simplifies the circulation
patterns that are present reletive to the northern hemisphere:
It's the Polar Jet that affects our weather. According to the IPCC AR5 Working Group 1 report,
there is evidence of a polar shift in the jet stream with a likely
intensification of North Atlantic storm systems. In addition, blocking
activity is more frequent at the exit zones of the jet stream and shows
appreciable seasonal variability in both hemispheres, reaching a maximum
in winter - spring and a minimum in summer - autumn. Blocking is caused
by persistent areas of high pressure. There is also evidence that there
may be links with the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and other
global oscillations.
At the time of writing, the UK Met Office has just released a new report The Recent Storms and Floods in the UK.
The report examines the statistics and evidence of the recent flooding
events. It then considers the Global context of weather patterns and
whether climate change is a contributing factor.
One
of the key issues pointed out in the report is the combined
vulnerability of the south of England to sea level rise caused by global
warming and isostatic adjustment, i.e. 'the rise of land masses that
were depressed by the weight of ice during the last glacial maximum. For
the UK this is seen in increasing land heights over Scotland and
northern England and falling land heights (sinking) over southern
regions'.
The
report notes that 'UK rainfall is increasing in intensity. This increase
in the frequency/intensity of extreme daily rainfall events, as the
planet warms and the atmosphere can hold more water, has been discussed
in the literature for a number of years, and robust evidence for this is
increasingly seen around the world.'
Climate models form a vital role in determining climate change attribution
- the science of
determining the causes of unusual climate trends and
climate-related events. Models are becoming increasingly powerful and
more reliable. The current climate model used by the Met Office is the HadGEM3. A modified version of Met Office climate models have been used successfully in a project designed for PC use.
How
does this all fit in with global patterns? Well, the report covers the
issues already noted above with regards to the unusual jet stream
patterns being observed and the impacts of this here in the UK and
elsewhere. It links the storms in the UK with the exceptionally cold
weather in North America: 'These extreme weather events on both sides of
the Atlantic were embedded in a persistent pattern of perturbations to
the upper tropospheric jet stream. The climatological distribution of
the winter jet streams shows the well-known Asian-Pacific jet stream,
which extends across North Africa and out into the North West Pacific,
close to Japan. A second jet stream forms over the US, extending in a
north-easterly direction across the North Atlantic towards the UK. The
North Atlantic jet stream acts to steer weather systems towards the UK,
but there also exists a symbiotic relationship between the jet stream
and the depressions that form on its flanks. The jet stream provides the
atmospheric conditions that are favourable for cyclogenesis (the
formation of depressions), but it also depends on the momentum from the
depressions to maintain its own strength. So it is possible on occasions
to observe a strengthening of the jet stream when there is a
particularly active sequence of depressions, as was the case in December
2013 and January 2014.
During
December and January 2013/14 the pattern of winds over the North East
Pacific and North America was very disturbed. The North Pacific jet was
deflected a long way north, with a secondary branch extending southwards
into the tropical Pacific accentuating the separation of the Pacific
and Atlantic jet streams. The effects of this over North America and
into the North Atlantic were profound. The deflection of the jet to the
north led to colder air being carried south over Canada and the northern
US to enter the North Atlantic jet and establish a stronger than normal
temperature gradient at the entrance of the North Atlantic Jet. This
acted to strengthen the jet and provide the conditions for active
cyclogenesis, which in turn led to a sequence of strong storms across
the UK throughout December and January'.
Certain
weather patterns tend to be associated with ENSO events. However the
report points out that 'neither El Nino nor La Nina were active, with
temperatures in the equatorial East Pacific Ocean being close to normal.
The West Pacific remains anomalously warm, as it has done for much of
the past decade. Elsewhere in the Pacific the patterns of sea surface
temperature anomalies still display elements of the negative phase of
the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) that has contributed to the recent
pause in global surface warming.
Likewise the very warm waters in the North Pacific are a result of the
systematic weakening of the Aleutian Low during the last decade, driven
by the negative phase of the PDO'.
The
higher temperatures in the West Pacific have caused higher than normal
rainfall in the region. These anomalies appear to be feeding into the
wider climate system as 'the ‘buckling’ of the jet stream over the
Pacific and North America became much more pronounced during January
2014, as the precipitation anomaly over Indonesia and the West Pacific
strengthened. A notable feature of this anomalous area of tropical
precipitation is its northwards extent into the winter hemisphere where
it is able to interact with the North Pacific jet and generate Rossby
waves that propagate along the jet and act to reinforce the huge meander
of the jet stream off the west coast of North America. At the same
time, Rossby waves propagate along the southern branch of the jet stream
and enter the tropical East Pacific through the westerly duct, creating
weather disturbances that can then get caught up in the entrance region
of the Atlantic jet stream'. Rossby waves describe the large scale
meanders in the jet stream, and are due to the variation in the Coriolis
force as air moves north and south. They are fundamental to
understanding the global circulation and its natural variability. It has
been known for some time that variations in tropical heating associated
with anomalous rainfall acts as a source of Rossby waves. Furthermore,
theory says that Rossby waves can only propagate where the ambient flow
is westerly. It seems that Rossby wave patterns are a crucial influence
in the weather patterns that have unfolded this winter.
In
addition to terrestrial weather influences, new research is revealing
stratospheric influences on weather. The report states that 'westerly
winter winds in the polar night jet stream were very strong during
December and January. The polar night jet exceeded twice its normal
strength at times during the winter, reaching speeds in excess of
100ms-1 in the upper stratosphere. A strengthening of the polar night
jet often precedes periods of a strong Atlantic jet stream below and a
positive North Atlantic Oscillation pattern, as was seen during the
whole December to January period and consistent with the increased
winter storminess this year.
Although
internal fluctuations in the strength of the polar night jet cannot be
excluded, there has also been an external factor in the current winter,
again in the tropics, that has helped to precondition the system for a
strong polar night jet. In the tropical stratosphere the winds circulate
around the globe from west to east in some years and from east to west
in others. This cycling of the tropical winds occurs roughly every two
years - hence its name, the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO). Although
it may seem remote from the North Atlantic, historical records show that
when the QBO winds are westerly, this increases the chance of the
positive phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation and a strong jet
stream. The QBO has been in an unusually strong westerly phase
throughout this winter, and this factor was cited in the Met Office
October long-range outlook for the November to January period, which
pointed out the risk of increased storminess in early winter this year'.
The
Polar night jet is a river of strong winds that form around the polar
vortex in the upper atmosphere, due to the strong thermal gradient
created by the large cooling over the pole during the polar night. As
such, it is only present during winter. With
respect to the recent cold spell in
North America, the jet stream formed a trough which flowed around the
southern US before turning north again. This caused frigid air from the
Arctic to move south. This was due to a stronger than normal Polar
vortex. This caused 'the increased winds in the polar night jet; the
structure of the vortex has also been stretched with the core of the
vortex extending southwards over Canada. The extent to which this
temporary deformation of the polar vortex played a role in the recent
extreme cold temperatures over North America is unclear at present. In
terms of the UK weather, the stronger than normal polar vortex
throughout the winter is an indication of a less variable and colder
stratosphere than normal and a strong polar night jet. This predisposes
the circulation towards the positive phase of the Arctic Oscillation
with more stormy weather conditions over the North Atlantic'. Combined
with continental cooling the result was Siberian like conditions. The
following diagram shows the phenomenon:
Further research on this topic by Jennifer Francis, was presented at the annual meeting
of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in
Chicago. Although scientists are not totally committing to saying that
climate change is the definite cause of recent weather anomalies, they
do however fit the pattern. What ever way you look at it the evidence is
pointing towards climate change and it is highly likely that
challenging weather patterns in the future will become the 'new
normal'.
If you want to monitor atmospheric air currents yourself, the picture at the top of the page is a snapshot of a real time interactive earth-wind map. The background to the project can be found here.