How many hurricanes will hit the U.S. this year?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


AccuWeather.com, a private weather forecasting organization, has released its predictions for this year's impending hurricane season. The good news?  Half as many tropical storms in the Atlantic as last year are expected to slam U.S. shores this year. The bad news? That’s still four tempests making landfall between June 1 and November 30, the annual Atlantic hurricane season.

The projected dip stems from, among other factors, a weak El Nino weather pattern this year caused by warmer water temps in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, Joe Bastardi, AccuWeather's chief long range and hurricane forecaster, told Reuters.

Bastardi’s predictions and other hurricane outlooks can influence prices on the energy market, especially in regard to Gulf Coast storms such as Katrina, Rita, and Ike (three of the biggest storms to roll through the region in recent years). That's because offshore oil and gas production in the Gulf region account for 25 and 15 percent of U.S. domestic output, respectively, Reuters reports, and 43 percent of U.S. oil refining capacity is in states ringing the Gulf.


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.


In total, Bastardi predicts that 13 named storms – those that reach tropical storm status with 63 mile-per-hour (101 kilometer-per-hour) sustained wind speeds – will roil the Atlantic this year. Of that, eight will cross the 74 mile- (199 kilometer-) per-hour threshold and become full-fledged hurricanes. Two of those are expected to be major storms of Category 3 or above on the Saffir-Simpson Scale, meaning sustained winds of at least 111 miles (179 kilometers) per hour.

Wondering what monikers this year’s slew of storms will be given? Not sure. But names you won't hear this year or any other include those originally bestowed on hurricanes that ended up causing widespread damage. (Think: Katrina and Rita – but not Ike, at least not yet.) Others on the list of retired names kept by the World Meteorological Organization: Floyd (set aside in 1999); the trio of 2007 storms, Dean, Felix, Noel; Hattie (retired in 1961); Fifi (hung up in 1974); and Roxanne (1995).

Also off limits: Ivan, which was stripped from the storm names list after a destructive 2004 hurricane with that appellation. Perhaps that's for the best: After all, according to recent study published in Social Science Quarterly, Ivan is associated with an increased likelihood of juvenile delinquency.

 

A hurricane swirls in the Gulf of Mexico. Image Credit: NASA

 

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