Greenhouse Gases Made West Coast Drought Worse

Excessive warmth, not lack of precipitation, drove low snowpack in Spring 2016

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A new study teasing out the causes of the West Coast’s historic drought finds that anthropogenic climate change may have been more of a culprit than in previous dry spells.

The study, published yesterday in Geophysical Research Letters, examined the reasons why 81 percent of Western snow-survey sites last year had the lowest recorded snowpack in 40 years of records. That occurred even though precipitation levels were nearly normal in Oregon and Washington and unusually, but not exceptionally, low in California.

Researchers at Oregon State University and the University of California, Los Angeles, modeled simulations of last year’s conditions, then varied the levels of greenhouse gases and sea surface temperatures. They found that in all three states, higher temperatures played more of a role than they did in the previous worst drought on record, from 1976 to 1977, when dry weather was the primary driver.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“Historically, droughts in the West have mostly been associated with dry winters, and only secondarily with warmth,” said UCLA geography professor and study co-author Dennis Lettenmaier. “But 2015 was different, especially in California, but in Oregon and Washington, as well—the primary driver of the record low snowpacks was the warm winter.”

In California, greenhouse gases added about 1 degree Celsius to 2014-15 temperatures, while sea surface temperatures had little effect. In Oregon and Washington, by contrast, modeling showed that high sea surface temperatures—which are associated with a ridge of high-pressure air over the Pacific Northwest that kept storms away—had more of an effect on snow accumulation than general warming trends associated with man-made greenhouse gases.

While earlier studies have hypothesized that the high-pressure ridge created the warm-water patch, known colloquially as “the blob,” yesterday’s study finds that the blob itself accounted for about twice the warming effect of greenhouse gases in Oregon and Washington.

“Some recent studies suggest that a high pressure ridge that caused warmer temperatures over land also created the blob, but our results suggest that the blob itself may also have contributed to the warm winter here,” said the study’s lead author, Philip Mote, director of OSU’s Oregon Climate Change Research Institute.

Reprinted from ClimateWire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. E&E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net. Click here for the original story.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe