ABSTRACT

Few meteorological terms have caused such debate as Atmospheric Rivers (ARs). ARs were proposed in 1992, but a formal definition for ARs was only developed in 2015 following the observational campaigns of the 2000s that led to a deeper physical understanding. ARs can cause extreme rainfall, flooding, landslides, damaging winds, glacier melt, and even polar heatwaves. Despite their well-documented global impacts, there has been relatively little research on this phenomenon in Australia. Compound events involving ARs led to the devastating 2021 and 2022 flooding in eastern Australia. The media were drawn to the metaphor of a ‘river in sky’ but the term has not been embraced by our national weather service, and some scientists still question their existence. This essay explores the controversy of the name Atmospheric River and highlights what could be achieved if we focused less on the name and more on the science.

摘要

很少有气象术语能像大气河流（AR）这样引起如此大的争论。AR 于 1992 年提出，但在 2000 年代的观测活动带来了更深入的物理理解之后，直到 2015 年才制定了 AR 的正式定义。AR 可能导致极端降雨、洪水、山体滑坡、破坏性大风、冰川融化，甚至极地热浪。尽管其全球影响有据可查，但澳大利亚对这一现象的研究相对较少。涉及 AR 的复合事件导致澳大利亚东部 2021 年和 2022 年发生毁灭性洪水。媒体被“天空之河”的比喻所吸引，但我们的国家气象部门并未接受这个术语，一些科学家仍然质疑它们的存在。本文探讨大气河名称的争议并强调如果我们少关注名称，多关注科学，可以取得什么成就。