2020 was Australia’s fourth hottest year on record

The BOM has released its Annual Climate Statement for 2020, headlining the sobering fact that 2020 was the fourth-warmest year on record, with temperature now 1.15 °C above the 1961–1990 average.

Senior Climatologist Dr Lynette Bettio, said that: “The mean temperature for the 10 years from 2011 to 2020 was the highest on record, at 0.94 °C above average, and 0.33 °C warmer than the previous 10 years. Rainfall for Australia was close to average for the nation as a whole at 483.4 mm: 4% above the 1961–1990 average of 466.0 mm.”

Daytime temperatures were especially warm for Sydney, Hobart, and Darwin. The annual mean maximum temperature was above average for Perth, Canberra, and Brisbane; close to average at most sites across greater Adelaide; and close to average or slightly below average in Melbourne.

All of the capital cities, except Adelaide, observed warmer than average annual mean minimum temperatures. Nights were especially warm in Sydney, Darwin, Hobart, Canberra, and Brisbane.

Dr Bettio said: “Globally, every year from 2013 onwards has been among the ten warmest on record, with 2016 and 2019 being the hottest (0.85 ± 0.1 °C and 0.81 ± 0.1 °C above the 1961–1990 average respectively) and 2020 was among the top three, despite the onset of La Niña which has a suppressing effect on global temperatures.”

Australia had its warmest spring on record in 2020.

Thoughts and prayers aren’t going to cut it this decade, deliberate and swift action needs to accelerate to curb these big changes, as extreme heat events continue to rise. This chart is more frightening than any asset or crypto bubble:

Latest posts by Chris Becker (see all)

Comments

    • Hang on, from memory the 1960’s were quite cool, they were teaching in universities then that we could be entering an ice age.

      The oldest highest temperatures in Australia (now no longer officially exist – have been revised downwards) range from the 1890’s to the 1920’s.

      Had a chat with a former colleague, he made the point that the solar minimum effects will start to kick in over the next 12 months and run for at least 15 years. Which could mean we may think we don’t have a CO2 problem, then it really kicks in several decades.

      The whole idea that the earth has a stable climate is a fiction. When Sydney resided where Hobart is today, the world was 5 to 7 degrees C warmer. Technically speaking, having ice at both poles is not a normal thing, over geological time. The ACC is only three to four million years old from memory, and only really kicked in when Patagonia sailed northward..

  1. The Penske FileMEMBER

    I think the good Dr’s mind was already made up before this report –
    https://crspi.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Lynette-Bettio-State-of-the-Climate-April-2019.pdf
    It appears that she hasn’t worked anywhere else but the BOM so if any bias is centered there she would have no doubt caught it. Where else would she work if she didn’t agree?
    And we must also acknowledge the BOM’s past errors –
    https://www.advanceaustralia.org.au/bureau_of_meteorology_s_dec_forecast_of_no_rain_til_may
    I can’t find any info on their site about the actual measuring sites and if they’re changed over time or if the local environment has changed over the recording period. Surely the growing concrete jungles around our cities cause something.
    For the record I’m a climate change believer – with the human race in plague proportions how could we not be doing something? I just think we should all be careful about who is telling us what and why?
    I think we have far more issues with pollution and population growth that we in Australia can address and do something about rather than just panicking over what academics with government pay checks and limited alternative employment opportunities tell us.

    • ..your statement stinks of what-about-ism and pretty-wrapped denial and doubt seeding.
      You probably work in russian internet-troll factory!

      • The Penske FileMEMBER

        I actually work in finance and have to deal with the difference between what people tell me and reality. Hence my rule of “who is telling me what and why?”. Feel free to do whatever a government department tells you to do if you want but I’ll be asking for a second opinion from a non bias source…. if possible.
        I’d be a serious troll though with a subscription and all. I thought they usually just write one or two abusive lines and not argue any points.

        • How do you determine they are a non biased source? do you look to see if it disagrees with your current opinion?

          • The Penske FileMEMBER

            Yes good call. I was probably a bit harsh as I was short of time and a child… I think what a lot of comments show is that everyone knows there’s climate change except the deniers and these BOM (as an example) releases really just preach to the converted. How are we going to set an agenda for change with the deniers? I think firstly you can only control the controllable – what do we produce and how do we fix it? Teach the population ie the one that grinds my gears – to all the dodgy take away places issuing plastic cups for some trendy new way to glorify a flat white… tax it. How do we make recycling and renewables commercially viable? I’m wary of government hand outs which could go to the wrong people so it has to be really viable and baby steps on little items first.

          • How are we going to set an agenda for change with the deniers?

            We can’t. Ignore them.

            There are two types of climate change deniers in positions of influence: quislings and ideologues.

            Neither are going to change outside of – maybe – significant personal loss directly and inescapably linked to climate change.

            I think firstly you can only control the controllable – what do we produce and how do we fix it? Teach the population ie the one that grinds my gears – to all the dodgy take away places issuing plastic cups for some trendy new way to glorify a flat white… tax it. How do we make recycling and renewables commercially viable? I’m wary of government hand outs which could go to the wrong people so it has to be really viable and baby steps on little items first.

            We can’t do these sorts of things because whenever anyone suggests it the “small Government” crowd loses its sh!t and the Murdoch press tries to pretend it’s the end of the world.

    • Your post is is textbook FUD.

      Claims to “believe in climate change” ring hollow in the context of boilerplate denialist talking points.

      I think we have far more issues with pollution and population growth that we in Australia can address and do something about rather than just panicking over what academics with government pay checks and limited alternative employment opportunities tell us.

      How about “panicking” over about what basically every SME on the planet says ?

      • kierans777MEMBER

        I’m not defending @The Penske File however it’s worth pointing out that addressing the issues of pollution and population growth would aid in reducing carbon emissions.

        • Is there someone who disagrees with that ?

          But neither of them can do anything significant about emissions in a meaningful timeframe.

          • And one can do what?
            (beyond posturing and virtue signalling)

            Dense minds like the one that comes regularly here posting lots of emoji’s cannot fathom that the only things that can make a meaningfull change is a shift in paradigm of life habits: death of consumerism, and everything that stems from that and a lifespan like depicted in Logan’s Run.
            In absence of clear delineation of what is antropo input beyond doubt and understanding of limitations of science (once it *validly* claimed that Earth was flat) pushing for extremist views like division into believers and deniers does opposite of help.

    • TheLambKingMEMBER

      Denier 101 – lets discredit a single data point thinking it might somehow discredit the hundreds of thousands of data points that prove that the world is warming.

      Lets assume that the BoM is completely corrupt and we discredit every bit of data, we still have every other temperature records everywhere else in the world, every other measure of temp and weather events (sea temps, sea levels, atmospheric temps, sea ice levels, land ice levels, insect movements, animals movements, crop/plant records, etc) – billions of data points that show the world is warming. EVERY scientific organisation in the world states that the world is warming and that humans are the cause of almost all of it.

      I can’t find any info on their site about the actual measuring sites

      Wow! Amazing! You can’t find anything? So you are either straight out lying, you are so incompetent that you cant google “bureau of meteorology methodology”, or you are being paid to spread denialism?
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ahead/rr70/methodology.shtml
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/events/january-heatwave-methods.shtml

      Surely the growing concrete jungles around our cities cause something.

      If you bothered to look at the methodology you would know that they DO compensate for urbanisation – and if they DIDN’T compensate they would actually show GREATER warming!

  2. Arthur Schopenhauer

    A Wet Bulb Temperature of 35C is lethal to humans. It’s already occurred in some Gulf cities.

    • Gulf of Golf or Arabia?
      Deserts regularly have areas with these temperatures hence the lack of human habitats