Hurricane season is here. NOAA is in shambles. What could go wrong?
is an environmental correspondent at Vox, covering biodiversity loss and climate change. Before joining Vox, he was a senior energy reporter at Business Insider. Benji previously worked as a wildlife researcher.
Hurricane season in the Atlantic has officially begun.
And while this year will likely be less extreme than in 2024 — one of the most destructive seasons ever, with the earliest Category 5 hurricane on record — it's still shaping up to be a doozy.
Forecasters at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predict 'above-average' activity this season, with six to 10 hurricanes. The season runs from June 1 to November 30.
NOAA's 2025 hurricane forecast, by the numbers
60 percent: Chance of an above-normal hurricane season.
6 to 10: Hurricanes expected this season, meaning tropical storms with wind speeds reaching at least 74 mph.
3 to 5: Major hurricanes, or storms with wind speeds reaching 111 mph or higher.
13 to 19: Named storms, referring to tropical systems with wind speeds of at least 39 mph.
NOAA says it will update its forecast in early August.
At least three of those storms will be category 3 or higher, the forecasters project, meaning they will have gusts reaching at least 111 miles per hour. Other reputable forecasts predict a similarly active 2025 season with around nine hurricanes. Last year, there were 11 Atlantic hurricanes, whereas the average for 1991 to 2020 was just over 7, according to hurricane researchers at Colorado State University.
A highly active hurricane season is obviously never a good thing, especially for people living in places like Florida, Louisiana, and, apparently, North Carolina (see: Hurricane Helene, the deadliest inland hurricane on record). Even when government agencies that forecast and respond to severe storms — namely, NOAA and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA — are fully staffed and funded, big hurricanes inflict billions of dollars of damage, and they cost lives.
Under the Trump administration, however, these agencies are not well staffed and face steep budget cuts. Hundreds of government employees across these agencies have been fired or left, including those involved in hurricane forecasting. What could go wrong?
Why forecasters expect more hurricanes than average this year
The primary reason is that Caribbean waters are unusually warm right now, Brian McNoldy, a hurricane expert at the University of Miami, told Vox. Warm water provides fuel for hurricanes, and waters in and around the Caribbean tend to be where hurricanes form early in the season.
If this sounds familiar, that's because the Caribbean has been unusually warm for a while now. That was a key reason why the 2024 and 2023 hurricane seasons were so active. Warm ocean water, and its ability to help form and then intensify hurricanes, is one of the clearest signals — and consequences — of climate change. Data indicates that climate change has made current temperatures in parts of the Caribbean and near Florida several (and in some cases 30 to 60) times more likely.
The Atlantic has cooled some since hitting extremely high temperatures over the last two summers, yet 'the overall long-term trend is to warm,' said McNoldy, a senior research associate at the Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science.
The Caribbean is currently far hotter than average. Courtesy of Brian McNoldy
The other key reason why forecasters expect an ample number of hurricanes this year has to do with a complicated climate phenomenon known as the ENSO cycle. ENSO has three phases — El Niño, La Niña, and neutral — that are determined by ocean temperatures and wind patterns. And each phase means something slightly different for hurricane season.
Put simply, El Niño tends to suppress hurricanes because it causes an increase in wind shear — the abrupt changes in wind speed and direction. And wind shear can disrupt hurricanes. In La Niña years, meanwhile, there's little wind shear, allowing hurricanes to form, and they're often accompanied by higher sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic.
Right now the ENSO phase is, rather unexcitedly, neutral. That means there won't be the high, hurricane-blocking wind shear of El Niño, but the conditions won't be as favorable as they are in La Niña. This all leads to more unpredictability, according to climate scientists.
The government says it's prepared. Is it?
When publishing the NOAA hurricane forecast last month, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who oversees NOAA, said 'we have never been more prepared for hurricane season.'
Climate scientists have challenged that claim.
They point out that, under the Trump administration, hundreds of workers at NOAA have been fired or otherwise pushed out, which threatens the accuracy of weather forecasts that can help save lives. FEMA has also lost employees, denied requests for hurricane relief, and is reportedly ending door-to-door canvassing in disaster regions designed to help survivors access government aid.
'Secretary Lutnick's claim is the sort of lie that endangers the lives of people living along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, and even those further inland unable to escape the extensive reach of associated torrential rains and flooding,' Marc Alessi, an atmospheric scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental advocacy group, told Vox. 'Notwithstanding the valiant efforts of dedicated career staff, this administration has taken to actively thwarting the vital scientific work at agencies including NOAA that communities rely on to stay safe throughout hurricane season.'
According to Alessi, a handful of National Weather Service offices along the Gulf Coast — which is often hit by hurricanes — currently lack lead meteorologists.
'Missing this sort of expertise in the face of a projected above-average hurricane season could lead to a breakdown in proper warning and evacuation in vulnerable communities should a storm strike, potentially leading to more deaths that could have otherwise been avoided,' Alessi said.
As my colleague Umair Irfan has reported, the National Weather Service is also launching weather balloons less frequently, due to staffing cuts. Those balloons measure temperature, humidity, and windspeed, providing data that feeds into forecasts.
'They've been short-staffed for a long time, but the recent spate of people retiring or being let go have led some stations now to the point where they do not have enough folks to go out and launch those balloons,' Pamela Knox, an agricultural climatologist at the University of Georgia extension and director of the UGA weather network, told Irfan in May. 'We're becoming more blind because we are not having access to that data anymore. A bigger issue is when you have extreme events, because extreme events have a tendency to happen very quickly. You have to have real-time data.'
The White House is also trying to dramatically shrink NOAA's funding, proposing a budget cut of roughly $2 billion. In response to the proposed cuts, five former directors of the National Weather Service signed an open letter that raises alarm about what funding and staffing losses mean for all Americans.
'Our worst nightmare is that weather forecast offices will be so understaffed that there will be needless loss of life,' the former directors wrote in the letter. 'We know that's a nightmare shared by those on the forecasting front lines — and by the people who depend on their efforts.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
15 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump threatens more strikes against Iran if it doesn't negotiate a deal
President Donald Trump declared the U.S. bombing of Iran's three major nuclear facilities to have been 'a spectacular military success' during a Saturday night address to the nation, and left the door open to engaging in more strikes. 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,' Trump said, and warned that the U.S. could still attack other, less significant targets in Iran if its leaders don't stand down. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' he said. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Standing in the White House Cross Hall to deliver a speech that lasted less than four minutes, Trump stopped short of declaring the U.S. to be at war with Iran, but his words made clear that he was willing to enter a deeper, wider conflict. In fact, the president seemed intent on trying to further intimidate Iran, a dramatic shift from just a few weeks ago, when Trump sounded confident that he was close to a diplomatic agreement with Tehran to further constrain its nuclear program. Trump asserted Saturday that there are 'many targets left' in Iran for U.S. forces to attack and vowed to go after them in short order if Iran didn't relent. 'There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,' he said. The remarks came a couple hours after the president's TruthSocial post announcing that the U.S. had struck three nuclear sites inside Iran. For several days, Trump had been dangling the threat of the U.S. assisting Israel's military, which does not have the kind of 'bunker-buster' bombs that were deployed in the operation Saturday night, to take out Iran's nuclear facilities once and for all — a consequence, he suggested, for Tehran's failure to reach a deal to curb its nuclear program. But the news that U.S. forces had carried out the strikes still came as a surprise, given the White House's statement on Thursday that Trump might take as long as two weeks to decide whether to take military action. With Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth standing behind him, Trump offered his congratulations to the military generals who helped plan the attack, the warfighters who carried it out and to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom he said he 'worked as a team.' Trump made no effort to justify his decision to a MAGA base that has largely opposed intervening in foreign wars. Nor did he address his decision to act without consulting Congress, a move, many Democrats on Capitol Hill have pointed out, that is unconstitutional. Rather, he announced that the Pentagon would hold a press conference at 8 a.m. on Sunday before ending his remarks with a word of appreciation. 'I want to just thank everybody. And in particular God, I want to just say, we love you, God, and we love our great military.'
San Francisco Chronicle
18 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's move against Iran may draw more criticism from MAGA's anti-interventionists
President Donald Trump's decision to strike three nuclear sites in Iran could deepen a divide among some of the Republican's supporters, including high-profile backers who had said any such move would run counter to the anti-interventionism he promised to deliver. Notably though, immediately following Trump's Saturday announcement of the strike, some of those who had publicly spoken out against U.S. involvement voiced their support. The lead-up to the move against Iranian nuclear sites had exposed fissures within Trump's 'Make American Great Again' base as some of that movement's most vocal leaders, with large followings of their own, expressed deep concern about the prospect of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war. With the president barred from seeking a third term, what remains unknown is how long-lasting the schism could be for Trump and his current priorities, as well as the overall future of his 'America First' movement. Among the surrogates who spoke out against American involvement were former senior adviser Steve Bannon, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., commentator Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point. Part of their consternation was rooted in Trump's own vocalized antipathy for what he and others have termed the 'forever wars' fomented in previous administrations. As the possibility of military action neared, some of those voices tamped down their rhetoric. According to Trump, Carlson even called to 'apologize.' Steve Bannon On Wednesday, Bannon, one of top advisers in Trump's 2016 campaign, told an audience in Washington that bitter feelings over Iraq were a driving force for Trump's first presidential candidacy and the MAGA movement. "One of the core tenets is no forever wars,' Bannon said. But the longtime Trump ally, who served a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, went on to suggest that Trump will maintain loyalty from his base no matter what. On Wednesday, Bannon acknowledged that while he and others will argue against military intervention until the end, 'the MAGA movement will back Trump.' Ultimately, Bannon said that Trump would have to make the case to the American people if he wanted to get involved in Iran. 'We don't like it. Maybe we hate it,' Bannon said, predicting what the MAGA response would be. 'But, you know, we'll get on board.' Tucker Carlson The commentator's rhetoric toward Trump was increasingly critical. Carlson, who headlined large rallies with the Republican during the 2024 campaign, earlier this month suggested that the president's posture was breaking his pledge to keep the U.S. out of new foreign entanglements. Trump clapped back at Carlson on social media, calling him 'kooky.' During an event at the White House on Wednesday, Trump said that Carlson had 'called and apologized' for calling him out. Trump said Carlson 'is a nice guy.' Carlson's conversation with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that day laid bare the divides among many Republicans. The two sparred for two hours over a variety of issues, primarily about possible U.S. involvement in Iran. Carlson accused Cruz of placing too much emphasis on protecting Israel in his foreign policy worldview. 'You don't know anything about Iran,' Carlson said to Cruz, after the senator said he didn't know Iran's population or its ethnic composition. 'You're a senator who's calling for the overthrow of a government, and you don't know anything about the country.' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene The Georgia Republican, who wore the signature red MAGA cap for Democratic President Joe Biden's State of the Union address in 2024, publicly sided with Carlson, criticizing Trump for deriding 'one of my favorite people.' Saying the former Fox News commentator 'unapologetically believes the same things I do,' Greene wrote on X this past week that those beliefs include that 'foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction.' 'That's not kooky,' Greene added, using the same word Trump used to describe Carlson. 'That's what millions of Americans voted for. It's what we believe is America First.' About an hour before Trump's announcement, Greene posted on X that, 'Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war.' 'This is not our fight,' she added. 'Peace is the answer.' In another post following Trump's announcement, Greene urged, 'Let us all join together and pray for peace." Alex Jones The far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars host posted on social media earlier in the week a side-by-side of Trump's official presidential headshot and an artificial intelligence-generated composite of Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush. Trump and many of his allies have long disparaged Bush for involving the United States in the 'forever wars' in Iraq and Afghanistan. Writing 'What you voted for' above Trump's image and 'What you got' above the composite, Jones added: 'I hope this is not the case…' Charlie Kirk Kirk is among those who seemed to have made a quick about-face. About an hour after Trump's announcement, Kirk posted a series of messages on social media supportive of Trump, saying Iran had given the president 'no choice.' Kirk praised Trump for acting 'with prudence and decisiveness" and 'for the betterment of humanity.' Kirk also reposted a 2011 tweet in which Trump had written that 'Iran's quest for nuclear weapons is a major threat to our nation's national security interests. We can't allow Iran to go nuclear.' 'When Trump speaks, you should listen,' Kirk added. It was a different tone from the start of the week, when Kirk said in a Fox News interview that 'this is the moment that President Trump was elected for.' But he had warned of a potential MAGA divide over Iran. Days later, Kirk said that 'Trump voters, especially young people, supported President Trump because he was the first president in my lifetime to not start a new war.' He also wrote that 'there is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East. We must work for and pray for peace.'
CNBC
23 minutes ago
- CNBC
World leaders react after Trump says U.S. has bombed 3 nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordo
World leaders reacted to President Donald Trump's announcement Saturday that the U.S. had carried out a "very successful attack" on three nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordo."This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR," Trump posted on Truth Social. Here's how world leaders reacted after the attack. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said "Trump's bold decision will change history. Speaking minutes after the attack, Netanyahu said, "President Trump and I often say: 'Peace through strength.' First comes strength, then comes peace. And tonight, Donald Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength," Meanwhile, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Saturday warned that the U.S. strikes on Iran represent a dangerous escalation in an already volatile region, posing a serious threat to global peace and security. "There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world," Guterres said in a statement as reported by Reuters. "At this perilous hour, it is critical to avoid a spiral of chaos. There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy. The only hope is peace," he said. Reactions across the globe are slowly coming in as leaders weigh the impact of the attack. According to Reuters, South Korea's presidential office is set to host an emergency meeting to discuss the attack.
