Fact check: Was Hurricane Matthew a climate-related event?
December 23, 2016
By Amée LaTour
According to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety, flooding from Hurricane Matthew is estimated to have caused $1.5 billion in damage to structures in the state.[1] In a Christian Science Monitor commentary, Ben Lilliston, director of climate strategies at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, noted the “rapidly rising costs to governments of dealing with climate-related events like Hurricane Matthew.” Some of those costs, Lilliston argued, should be borne by “corporations who invested in, and profited from, systems of production that are clearly risky.”[2]
Is Lilliston correct that Hurricane Matthew was a “climate-related” event?
To characterize Hurricane Matthew as a “climate-related event” is speculation, not fact. There has not been a tested determination of its precise cause, and research is inconclusive about whether storms have increased in either number or severity due to climate change.[3] [4] [5] [6]
Background
Hurricane Matthew traveled close to the shore of the southeastern United States between October 7 and 9, making landfall in South Carolina on October 8. Storm surges and severe flooding impacted Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, along with wind speeds varying from 60 to 107 miles per hour.[7] RMS, a catastrophe risk modeling company, estimated that insured losses from the storm within the United States will range from $1.5 billion to $5 billion, with wind and storm surge flooding as primary causes of damage.[8]
Some activists contend that the frequency and intensity of hurricanes is increasing because of global warming. The Environmental Protection Agency notes that hurricanes are linked to warmer ocean temperatures. However, the agency also cautions that “the link between ocean temperature and hurricanes is complex, and other factors can also play a role in the formation and intensity of these storms.”[9]
Storm frequency
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has compiled data on the number of tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean dating back to 1851.[10] (Data on pre-1966 storms has been adjusted to reflect reduced observational capabilities prior to that time period as well as current enhanced understanding of hurricanes.)[11]
A study published in 2008 by Knutson et al, cited by NOAA, found that “the evidence for a significant increase in Atlantic storm activity” from 1878 to 2006 is mixed, even though sea surface temperature has “warmed significantly.”[3]
The data provided by NOAA from 2006 to 2015 shows wide year-to-year variability in the number of storms, ranging from eight to 19.[10]
Hurricane intensity
NOAA also reports on “accumulated cyclone energy” (ACE), an index representing the strength, duration, and number of systems involved in tropical cyclones (which are classified as hurricanes if they reach wind speeds of 74 miles per hour or greater).[10] [12] Analysis of the data by the Environmental Protection Agency found “cyclone intensity has risen noticeably over the past 20 years,” but notes that “relatively high levels of cyclone activity were also seen during the 1950s and 1960s.”[4]
Costs
The increased cost of disasters may influence the perception that storms are more frequent or severe, according to Roger Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado Boulder, who has studied storm damage.[5] He points to data from German insurance company Munich RE, which shows that annual global losses from natural catastrophes increased from about $50 billion in 1980 to nearly $200 billion in 2012.[13] However, in his research, Pielke attributes increased costs to greater global wealth and not to more frequent or severe storms, noting that “the overall trend in disaster costs proportional to GDP since 1990 has stayed fairly level."[5] That is, wealthier countries have more goods and property that incur damage, which raises costs following storms. “We’re seeing ever-larger losses simply because we have more to lose — when an earthquake or flood occurs, more stuff gets damaged,” Pielke said.[5]
In 2014, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reached a similar conclusion:
“Economic growth, including greater concentrations of people and wealth in periled areas and rising insurance penetration, is the most important driver of increasing losses.”[6]
Conclusion
In a recent commentary calling for corporations to cover some of the costs of climate-related catastrophes, Ben Lilliston claimed that Hurricane Matthew was a “climate-related” event.[2] However, there is no scientific consensus about whether climate change is increasing the number or intensity of storms, nor any credible determination that Hurricane Matthew was a “climate-related event.”[3] [4] [5] [6]
See also
Launched in October 2015 and active through October 2018, Fact Check by Ballotpedia examined claims made by elected officials, political appointees, and political candidates at the federal, state, and local levels. We evaluated claims made by politicians of all backgrounds and affiliations, subjecting them to the same objective and neutral examination process. As of 2025, Ballotpedia staff periodically review these articles to revaluate and reaffirm our conclusions. Please email us with questions, comments, or concerns about these articles. To learn more about fact-checking, click here.
Sources and Notes
- ↑ North Carolina Department of Public Safety, “Technology Helps Matthew Recovery Efforts,” October 15, 2016
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Christian Science Monitor, “Climate Risk, Loss, and Damage in North Carolina,” November 15, 2016 Article originally appeared in Food Tank.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 American Meteorological Society, “On Estimates of Historical North Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Activity,” July 15, 2008
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Climate Change Indicators: Tropical Cyclone Activity,” accessed December 22, 2016
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Five Thirty Eight, “Disasters Cost More than Ever, But Not Because of Climate Change,” March 19, 2014
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 International Panel on Climate Change, “10: Key Economic Sectors and Services,” 2014
- ↑ The Weather Channel, “Hurricane Matthew Recaps: Destruction from the Caribbean to the United States,” October 10, 2016
- ↑ RMS, “RMS Estimates Hurricane Matthew Insured Losses for the U.S. Will Be Between $1.5 billion and $5 billion,” October 21, 2016
- ↑ United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Understanding the Link between Climate Change and Extreme Weather,” accessed December 22, 2016
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “North Atlantic Hurricane Basin (1851-2015) Comparison of Original and Revised HURDAT,” accessed December 22, 2016
- ↑ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Frequently Asked Questions,” accessed December 22, 2016
- ↑ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “What is the Difference between a Hurricane, a Cyclone, and a Typhoon?” accessed December 22, 2016
- ↑ Munich RE, “Economic Consequences of Natural Catastrophes: Emerging and Developing Economies Particularly Affected—Insurance Cover is Essential ,” October 9, 2013
Contact
More from Fact Check by Ballotpedia
 December 14, 2016 |
 December 14, 2016 |
 December 12, 2016 |
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter
