With below freezing temperatures over wide sections of the country and a new anonymous Twitter account for the unbearable cold, the term polar vortex has entered our popular lexicon.

But the truth is that while we haven’t had temperatures like this in a while, polar vortices are not completely abnormal nor are they a direct result of climate change.

First defined in the mid-19th century, polar vortices are cold air masses that spiral down from polar regions — in our case, the North Pole. Also called polar cyclones or lows, they are common year-round occurrences around the poles. Every so often when their flow is amplified, they make their way south to create the frigid conditions we’ve been experiencing.

This year, the polar vortex caused extremely cold conditions throughout the country, but even some of these temperatures are not as record-breaking as they may seem.  For instance, though Chicago has seen frigid conditions they are similar to the minus 27 degrees and minus 18 degrees recorded in 1985 and 2009 respectively, according to Scientific American.

Some scientists believe that the outcry about below zero temperatures points to the fact that many of our recent winters have been relatively warm.

Other experts have described how the term itself is causing much of the outcry. The term “vortex” has a seemingly negative connotation, but really the word just refers to the rotation of the air mass, which leads to an extreme weather event.

Mark Wysocki, a New York state climatologist quoted in Scientific American, believes the term has caused more confusion about the event.

“It’s a fancy word for saying an intense low pressure that is spinning around up in the Arctic,” he said. “And we like to call it a vortex, because it spins. But it makes it sound evil.”

As the event has caused commotion and confusion throughout the media, groups have been quick to judge the storm as evidence of climate change. Other opposing groups have even asserted that climate change is clearly false. Both views are not correct.

Polar vortices are not caused by climate change. It is not a cause-and-effect scenario. Climate change is causing more erratic weather — that is true — but no one storm is the evidence of climate change.

On the other hand, groups using the cold temperatures as evidence that climate change is not happening are also incorrect. This misconception may stem from the term “global warming,” which, without scientific understanding, may seem to be the opposite of cold temperatures.

The world’s overall temperature is increasing. We have measurements to prove this. But that does not mean that local temperatures are increasing in the same manner. It really comes down to the difference between climate and weather.

Higher global temperatures create more extreme local weather, including the frequency and veracity of storms.

Just because climate change does not cause a polar vortex does not mean that climate change is not happening. Scientific evidence backs up this fact. The groups that deny this evidence are showing a misunderstanding of science or a flat out rejection of inconvenient findings.

Though frigid and dangerous to human health, polar vortices are a fairly normal occurrence. Instead of jumping to conclusions about what it all means, we should take time to learn more about our local and global weather events and trends.

Meg Callaghan is a senior environmental studies major at SUNY-ESF. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at mlcallag@syr.edu.

 

Published on January 30, 2014 at 2:17 am