Unprecedented Arctic ozone hole in 2011; a Florida tropical storm next week?

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:01 PM GMT on October 04, 2011

Share this Blog
32
+

An unprecedented ozone hole opened in the Arctic during 2011, researchers reported this week in the journal Nature. Holes in the Antarctic ozone layer have opened up each spring since the early 1980s, but the Arctic had only shown modest springtime ozone losses in the 5% - 30% range over the past twenty years. But this year, massive ozone destruction of 80% occurred at altitudes of 18 - 20 kilometers in the Arctic during spring, resulting in Earth's first known case of twin ozone holes, one over each pole. During late March and portions of April, the Arctic ozone hole was positioned over heavily populated areas of Western Europe, allowing large levels of damaging ultraviolet rays to reach the surface. UV-B radiation causes skin damage that can lead to cancer, and has been observed to reduce crop yields in two-thirds of 300 important plant varieties studied (WMO, 2002.) The total loss of ozone in a column from the surface to the top of the atmosphere reached 40% during the peak of this year's Arctic ozone hole. Since each 1% drop in ozone levels results in about 1% more UV-B reaching Earth's surface (WMO, 2002), UV-B levels reaching the surface likely increased by 40% at the height of this year's hole. We know that an 11% increase in UV-B light can cause a 24% decrease in winter wheat yield (Zheng et al., 2003), so this year's Arctic ozone hole may have caused noticeable reductions in Europe's winter wheat crop.


Figure 1. Left: Ozone in Earth's stratosphere at an altitude of approximately 12 miles (20 kilometers) in mid-March 2011, near the peak of the 2011 Arctic ozone loss. Right: chlorine monoxide--the primary agent of chemical ozone destruction in the cold polar lower stratosphere--the same day and altitude. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech.

What caused this year's unprecedented Arctic ozone hole?
Earth's ozone holes are due to the presence of human-emitted CFC gases in the stratosphere. The ozone destruction process is greatly accelerated when the atmosphere is cold enough to make clouds in the stratosphere. These polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) act like ozone destruction factories, by providing convenient surfaces for the reactions that destroy ozone to occur. PSCs only form in the 24-hour darkness of unusually cold winters near the poles; the atmosphere is too warm elsewhere to support PSCs. Stratospheric temperatures are warmer in the Arctic than the Antarctic, so PSCs and ozone destruction in the Arctic has, in the past, been much less than in the Antarctic. In order to get temperatures cold enough to allow formation of PSCs, a strong vortex of swirling winds around the pole needs to develop. Such a "polar vortex" isolates the cold air near the pole, keeping it from mixing with warmer air from the mid-latitudes. A strong polar vortex in winter and spring is common in the Antarctic, but less common in the Arctic, since there are more land masses that tend to cause large-scale disruptions to the winds of the polar vortex, allowing warm air from the south to mix northwards. However, as the authors of the Nature study wrote, "The persistence of a strong, cold vortex from December through to the end of March was unprecedented. In February - March 2011, the barrier to transport at the Arctic vortex edge was the strongest in either hemisphere in the last ~30 years. This unusual polar vortex, combined with very cold Arctic stratospheric temperatures typical of what we've seen in recent decades, led to the most favorable conditions ever observed for formation of Arctic PSCs. The reasons for this unusual vortex are unknown.


Figure 2. Global lower stratospheric departure of temperature from average since 1979, as measured by satellites. The large spikes in 1982 and 1991 are due to the eruptions of El Chicon and Mt. Pinatubo, respectively. These volcanoes ejected huge quantities of sulphuric acid dust into the stratosphere. This dust absorbed large quantities of solar radiation, heating the stratosphere. Stratospheric temperature has been generally decreasing in recent decades, due to the twin effects of ozone depletion and the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the lower atmosphere. During Jan - Aug 2011, Earth's stratosphere had its 3rd coldest such period on record. Image credit: National Climatic Data Center.

Greenhouse gases cause stratospheric cooling
When ozone absorbs UV light, it heats the surrounding air. Thus, the loss of ozone in recent decades has helped cool the stratosphere, resulting in a feedback loop where colder temperatures create more PSCs, resulting in even more ozone destruction. However, in 1987, CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances were banned. As a result, CFC levels in the stratosphere peaked in 2000, and had fallen by 3.8% as of 2008, according to NASA. Unfortunately, despite the fact that CFCs are falling in concentration, the stratosphere is not warming up. The recovery of the ozone layer is being delayed by human emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane. These gases trap heat near the surface, but cause cooling of the stratosphere and increased formation of the PSCs that help destroy ozone. We need only look as far as our sister planet, Venus, to see an example of how the greenhouse effect warms the surface but cools the upper atmosphere. Venus's atmosphere is 96.5% carbon dioxide, which has triggered a hellish run-away greenhouse effect. The average surface temperature on Venus is a sizzling 894 °F, hot enough to melt lead. Venus's upper atmosphere, though, is a startling 4 - 5 times colder than Earth's upper atmosphere. The explanation of this greenhouse gas-caused surface heating and upper air cooling is not simple, but good discussions can be found at Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and realclimate.org, for those unafraid of radiative transfer theory. One way to think about the problem is that the amount of infrared heat energy radiated out to space by a planet is roughly equal to the amount of solar energy it receives from the sun. If the surface atmosphere warms, there must be compensating cooling elsewhere in the atmosphere in order to keep the amount of heat given off by the planet the same and balanced. As emissions of greenhouse gases continue to rise, their cooling effect on the stratosphere will increase. This will make recovery of the stratospheric ozone layer much slower.

Greenhouse gases cause cooling higher up, too
Greenhouse gases have also led to the cooling of the atmosphere at levels higher than the stratosphere. Over the past 30 years, the Earth's surface temperature has increased 0.2 - 0.4 °C, while the temperature in the mesosphere, about 50 - 80 km above ground, has cooled 5 - 10 °C (Beig et al., 2006). There is no appreciable cooling due to ozone destruction at these altitudes, so nearly all of this dramatic cooling is due to the addition of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Even greater cooling of 17 °C per decade has been observed high in the ionosphere, at 350 km altitude. This has affected the orbits of orbiting satellites, due to decreased drag, since the upper atmosphere has shrunk and moved closer to the surface (Lastovicka et al., 2006). The density of the air has declined 2 - 3% per decade the past 30 years at 350 km altitude. So, in a sense, the sky IS falling due to the greenhouse effect!

Since any increase in solar energy would heat both the lower and upper atmosphere, the observed drop in upper atmospheric temperatures in the past 30 years argues against an increase in energy coming from the sun being responsible for global warming. The observed cooling of the upper atmosphere is strong evidence that the warming at Earth's surface is due to human-emitted greenhouse gases that trap heat near the surface and cause compensating cooling aloft. It should also give us additional confidence in the climate models, since they predicted that this upper atmospheric cooling would occur. Keep in mind, also, that 2010 was tied for Earth's hottest year on record, and the amount of energy coming from the sun during 2009 - 2010 was the lowest since satellite measurements began in the late 1970s. There has been no long-term increase in energy coming from the sun in recent decades, and the notion that global warming is due to an increase in energy coming from the sun simply doesn't add up.

Commentary
The development of an ozone hole in the Arctic is a discouraging reminder that humans are capable of causing harmful and unexpected planetary-scale changes to the environment. A 2002 assessment of the ozone layer by the World Meteorological Organization concluded that an Arctic ozone hole would be unlikely to occur, due to the lack of a strong Arctic vortex in winter, and the fact CFCs levels had started to decline. However, an Arctic ozone hole may now become a regular visitor in the future. "Day-to-day temperatures in the 2010 - 11 Arctic winter did not reach lower values than in previous cold Arctic winters," said the lead author of this year's Nature study, Gloria Manney, of NASA and the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro. "The difference from previous winters is that temperatures were low enough to produce ozone-destroying forms of chlorine for a much longer time. This implies that if winter Arctic stratospheric temperatures drop just slightly in the future, for example as a result of climate change, then severe Arctic ozone loss may occur more frequently." I might add that its a very good thing CFCs were banned in 1987, or else the Arctic ozone hole would have opened up much sooner and would have been far worse. It turned out that the costs of the CFC ban, while substantial, were far less than the dire cost predictions that the CFC industry warned of. It is highly probable that we will see future nasty climate change surprises far more serious than the Arctic ozone hole if we continue on our present business-as-usual approach of emitting huge quantities of greenhouse gases. Humans would be wise to act forcefully to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, as the cost of inaction is highly likely to be far greater than the cost of action.

References
Manney, G.L., et al., 2011, Unprecedented Arctic ozone loss in 2011, Nature (2011), doi:10.1038/nature10556

Weather Underground Ozone Hole FAQ

World Meteorological Organization (WMO), "Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2002 Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project - Report #47", WMO, Nairobi, Kenya, 2002.

Zheng, Y., W. Gao, J.R. Slusser, R.H. Grant, C. Wang, "Yield and yield formation of field winter wheat in response to supplemental solar ultraviolet-B radiation," Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Volume 120, Issues 1-4, 24 December 2003.


Figure 3. Morning satellite image of Tropical Storm Philippe. Philippe has a Central Dense Overcast (CDO) of high cirrus clouds characteristic of a tropical storm nearing hurricane strength.

Tropical Storm Philippe no threat to land
In the middle Atlantic, Tropical Storm Philippe has managed to grow a bit more organized in the face of high wind shear of 20 - 30 knots. Satellite loops show Philippe is a small system with a modest amount heavy thunderstorm activity, with the surface circulation partially exposed to view by wind shear. Wind shear will remain high today, but is expected to relax to the moderate range on Wednesday as Philippe recurves to the northeast. This may allow Philippe to intensify into a hurricane, as predicted by several of the intensity forecast models. It is unlikely that Philippe will trouble any land areas.

A Florida tropical storm next week?
Recent runs by all of the computer forecast models predict that an area of low pressure will develop near Florida this weekend or early next week. The counter-clockwise flow around this low will bring strong winds and heavy rains to Northeast Florida and the Georgia coast, and it is possible this storm will develop into a tropical or subtropical storm. The situation is similar to Subtropical Storm Four of October 4, 1974, according to the latest extended forecast discussion from NOAA's Hydrometeorological Prediction Center. That storm brought 10 - 14 inches of rain to the east coast of Florida and strong onshore winds of 30 - 40 mph that caused beach erosion and coastal flooding. The exact formation location of this weekend's storm is still in doubt, with the ECMWF and UKMET models predicting the storm will form in the Gulf of Mexico off the west coast of Florida, and the GFS model predicting formation over the Bahamas. We'll have to wait for future model runs before we can get a better handle on where and when this storm will most likely develop.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 140 - 90

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9Blog Index

Quoting FLWeatherFreak91:
You can expect a stronger vortex to form on the western side of a surge of southerly winds.


Given the expected blocking pattern... is possible.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
help4u: abortion is NOT a weather topic. Move elsewhere or change discussion. Reported to admin and POOF.
I am more concerned about Florida and the possible nasty weather that may be on my doorstep in the next few days. Lord, I hope not another Wilma!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12Z ECMWF @120HR:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxLogic:
12Z CMC basically just like GFS but happening in the GOM with an inverse depiction.



GFS has the weaker low E of FL while CMC is on the GOM end. Interesting flip of events with CMC, but looking at the overall picture it appears E GOM is the prime spot as energy lifts from the NW Carib north to the E GOM.
You can expect a stronger vortex to form on the western side of a surge of southerly winds.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
" UV-B radiation causes skin damage that can lead to cancer"

Wrong! Well... Not exactly.

Where do we get vitamin D from? UVB. How many IU of vitamin D? For caucausians, 10,000-20,000 IU of vitamin D after 30 minutes of sunbathing without sunblock during warm months. Compare that to only 100 IU of vitamin D in a cup of milk. For blacks, it takes 6-10 times longer to produce same amount of vitamin D so that's why practically every one of blacks is deficient in vitamin D. Even CDC knows this but is ignoring it anyway. http://naturalnews.com/032202_vitamin_D_deficiency _disease.html

The key is moderation. The problem is that everything we know is vastly outdated and thanks to sun scare, we now have a widespread vitamin d deficiency.

Sorry Dr. Masters but you should visit www.vitaminDcouncil.org and www.grassrootshealth.net for much more accurate information on vitamin D and UVB.

Oh by the way, are anyone aware that proper dosage of vitamin D greatly cut down risk of getting at least one of 18 different cancers including melanoma skin cancer? Ironic, isn't it? It also cuts down flu, cold, asthma, allergies, and many, many more.

Keep it in mind... Vitamin D isn't really a vitamin but a prohormone produced in the skin when exposed to the sun. Much more than you'd ever find in food. Your body converts vitamin D into a powerful steroid hormone that acts as gene regulator or maintenance/repair DNA hormone.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
134. Bogon
Quoting help4u:
Post 128 maybe the government(UN) could require mandatory abortions world wide for 5 years that would decrease alot of people and possibly save mankind.We can only hope we can continue down this path.

Your suggestion would be a step in the right direction, except that the UN has no power to impose or enforce such an action. People wouldn't stand for it in any case.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
this is what I say about this possible tropical development. Yes it goin ta happen, track wise I say it would be something like Paloma '08 and Michelle '01, except for that right turn that they did. with this one I expect it to continue to move N to S Fl strength I think this may become another major so I will also say anyone from: Honduras, Cayman Islands, Jamaica, Yucatan, Cuba, Florida, and NW Bahamas should keep a very close eye on this
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12Z CMC basically just like GFS but happening in the GOM with an inverse depiction.



GFS has the weaker low E of FL while CMC is on the GOM end. Interesting flip of events with CMC, but looking at the overall picture it appears E GOM is the prime spot as energy lifts from the NW Carib north to the E GOM.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
The only reason I said major is if the system moved W-NW through the straits into the gulf. Which is possible. I should have worded differently..:)


:) if it avoids land interaction it could get pretty deep.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxLogic:


I wouldn't go with major but a TD/minimal STS.
The only reason I said major is if the system moved W-NW through the straits into the gulf. Which is possible. I should have worded differently..:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
128. Bogon
Quoting help4u:
Post 122 you are right on over 40 million abortions a year! We will kill ourselves off.

Nope, that's not even a drop in the bucket. The population continues to rise, which is a big part of the problem.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SteveDa1:


All of these are natural and not under our control. The release of CO2 from cars, the production of oil, harmful gases from factories worldwide, coal-fired power plants and others are all under our control however and should be frowned upon. I'm pretty sure, and I think most can agree that we have the resources and technology to significantly reduce emissions. Why is not happening? Money mostly. Money is worth more than our precious earth? seems to be that way. Quite sad when you think about it...


In some areas I definitely agree. But everything we buy requires OIL and its products to get from one place to another. Battery powered or solar powered, vehicles, of any kind, are not efficient enough to be practical.

Does any one know of a fully electric combine out there?
What I am trying to say is that we definitely should be looking for other alternatives to fossil fuels. But you cannot get rid of oil at the snap of your finger whether we like it or not.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
A possible major hurricane in the Florida Straits?..GFS..Link


I wouldn't go with major but a TD/minimal STS.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
To look on the bright side of things... Ozone is also an insulator. With the loss of ozone, won't the arctic be cooler this winter and increase the sea ice faster?

If the arctic was so cold this year to covert the chlorine molecules to ozone eaters, why didn't the sea ice recover to average areas, instead of starting summer below 2007 areas? It is still very low but less ridiculously low (near 2007 areas). There is less September ice in 2011 than 2010. Were the cold temperatures and vortex only aloft?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxLogic:
12Z NGP

Starting to shift W... more in line with ECMWF and now GFS.
A possible major hurricane in the Florida Straits?..GFS..Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
122. Bogon

Humans would be wise to act forcefully to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, as the cost of inaction is highly likely to be far greater than the cost of action.

Humans would be wise to heed this message, but most of them won't. Silly humans.

Does the human species deserve the sobriquet "intelligent life"? That remains to be seen. If humans don't drive themselves to extinction within the next few generations, it won't be for lack of trying.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting carcar1967:


Also methane bubbles up from the sea bed in the Bahamas constantly. But cows also produce methane.

Every animal produces carbon dioxide and well as Volcano's. Man and their machines do it as well.

So who is to blame the most?

But consider this, without the rockets putting satellites up into space, would we know as much as we do about the atmosphere? Even though what we do know is miniscule.


All of these are natural and not under our control. The release of CO2 from cars, the production of oil, harmful gases from factories worldwide, coal-fired power plants and others are all under our control however and should be frowned upon. I'm pretty sure, and I think most can agree that we have the resources and technology to significantly reduce emissions. Why is not happening? Money mostly. Money is worth more than our precious earth? seems to be that way. Quite sad when you think about it...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Actually, number one generator of methane is the oceans. All that decarying organic matter (fish leftovers, plant biomass, etc.) is a methane factory. But this also gets into that discussion of global temperatures and the ability for the oceans to retain atmospheric CO2 disolved into the waters. Warmer oceans hold less CO2. The decomposition process produces (roughly) 40% CO2 and 60% CH4, but recall that as a greenhouse gas that CH4 has 22-24 times the greenhouse potential of CO2.

If I recall, volcanoes are more likely to contribute sulfur oxides which are bad for the atmosphere but they also contribute particulate matter which does a very good job of cooling the atmosphere.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting carcar1967:


Also methane bubbles up from the sea bed in the Bahamas constantly. But cows also produce methane.

Every animal produces carbon dioxide and well as Volcano's. Man and their machines do it as well.

So who is to blame the most?

But consider this, without the rockets putting satellites up into space, would we know as much as we do about the atmosphere? Even though what we do know is miniscule.


In the long run, I think tundra loss may be the biggest culprit in methane production. Atmospheric methane sources: Alaskan tundra bogs, an alpine fen, and a subarctic boreal marsh.

Tellus B

Volume 38B, Issue 1, pages 1–10, February 1986
and, as you can see this is not new information but 25 years old.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:
I have one question, Methane is produced by Volcanoes, Right. How many Volcanoes erupted last year? What about the eruptions in Iceland, would they contribute methane into the atmosphere?

Just putting it out there.


Also methane bubbles up from the sea bed in the Bahamas constantly. But cows also produce methane.

Every animal produces carbon dioxide and well as Volcano's. Man and their machines do it as well.

So who is to blame the most?

But consider this, without the rockets putting satellites up into space, would we know as much as we do about the atmosphere? Even though what we do know is miniscule.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The Iceland volcano that stopped all the air traffic for a week or two was the first carbon neutral volcano eruption. So that gives you an idea of the volume of carbon emitted. About two weeks of transatlantic air travel.
A fraction of that would be methane. Does that bring it down to a human scale?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The consequences of our release of huge quantities of greenhouse gases just keep piling up. We are learning more and more about what these gases are directly and indirectly doing to the atmosphere and surface of the earth and yet no action is being undertaken. This is haunting to say the least...

Is it because the information isn't making its way to political leaders? Is it because the education of climate change in schools is not forcefully pressed enough?
I'd say both.

Sadly, action will probably only be taken when much damage has been caused. However, to think that we will only step up when it's too late is irrational in my opinion. No matter how much damage is caused, it will never be irreversible. Still, this is great cause for concern for anyone with shreds of logistics.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:
I have one question, Methane is produced by Volcanoes, Right. How many Volcanoes erupted last year? What about the eruptions in Iceland, would they contribute methane into the atmosphere?

Just putting it out there.


I don't know about the volcanoes, but cow flatulence has been cited as a source of atmospheric methane. Maybe we can tell the cows to stop farting so we can save the ozone layer! :-0
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:
I have one question, Methane is produced by Volcanoes, Right. How many Volcanoes erupted last year? What about the eruptions in Iceland, would they contribute methane into the atmosphere?

Just putting it out there.


Probably much more methane produced by cows and loss of tundra than one volcano.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12Z NGP

Starting to shift W... more in line with ECMWF and now GFS.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
what is with the drastic u-turn of phillippe? and will his outflow possibly effect the coming low being predicted?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:

Do the Soviet Union ,Japan, China, United Kingdom, India, Israel, Russia, Ukraine and Iran use the same technology to launch there satellites? That number would add up to 100's
True..Those factories we have around the world belch out all kinds of toxic garbage. It is a shame to think that space programs that teach us so much could be responsible for so much damage to the atmosphere.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The NAM at 84 hours has a low forming in the FL Straits.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Levi,

good morning and thanks as always for your update.

so, I know it is too early to say if something sub tropical or tropical occurs in nature, but by looking at the upper air environment and the dynamics currently and in the future 6-7 days from now, would you say storm formation is more likely around the Bahamas (as depicted by the GFS) or EGOM, near west coast of Florida (shown by Euro)?

I ask because I am scheduled to fly into Tampa around 9:00 at night on Monday, October 10 and am little nervous my flight could be delayed or cancelled.

thanks!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I always listen to this website. This is from yesterday, explaining the tropics. He will have another one this afternoon. He has a good forecast for the expected systems.


Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
23.7n56.4w has been re-evaluated&altered for TS.Phillipe's_4Oct_12pmGMT_ATCF
23.8n56.5w, 23.7n57.7w, 23.7n588w are now the most recent positions*
Starting 3Oct_12pmGMT and ending 4Oct_12pmGMT

The 4 eastern line-segments represent TropicalStormPhillippe's path,
the westernmost line-segment is the straightline projection for 4Oct_12pmGMT*,
the island dot at 21.832n71.799w-MDS is the endpoint of the 4Oct_6amGMT*
straightline projection connected to its nearest airport,
the island blob at 18.231n65.593w-FAJ is the same for the 4Oct_12amGMT*,
and the island blob at 18.254n63.024w-AXA is the same for the 3Oct_6pmGMT*.

Using straightline projection of the travel-speed&heading derived from the
ATCF coordinates spanning the 6hours between 6amGMT then 12pmGMT :
TS.Phillipe's travel-speed was 11.7mph(18.8k/h) on a heading of 270.2degrees(W)
TS.Phillipe was headed toward passing ~1.4miles(2.2kilometres) north of CrookedIsland,Bahamas ~3days8hours from now

To see the full tree of staightline projections and other info, copy&paste 24.9n54.8w-24.3n55.6w, 24.9n54.8w-18.254n63.024w, axa, 24.3n55.6w-23.8n56.5w, 24.3n55.6w-18.231n65.593w, faj, 23.8n56.5w-23.7n57.7w, 23.8n56.5w-21.832n71.799w, mds, 23.7n57.7w-23.7n58.8w, 23.7n57.7w-22.85n74.346w, pwn into the GreatCircleMapper for more info

The previous mapping for 4Oct_12amGMT

* Since there is a 12hour gap since the last mapping, all straightline projections have been freshly derived from the newest set of ATCF position coordinates.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good morning.

Blog update:

Tropical Tidbit for Tuesday, October 4th, with Video
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
GW-------- get out the check book and you can give the people what they want... if not we can make it the way you want it sad very say and the tax payers money goes for all the BS
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
104. Skyepony (Mod)
Ecologic~ NASA has done some studies on shuttle & rocket exhaust. One took measurements of the shuttle launch it just launched on. Another was a rocket launched from Va that also dove into why launches can cause Noctilucent cloud. There was some others. I could have followed it alot better, was a big problem environmentally. But even to a rocket launch junky it's pretty obvious they've already changed up some fuels & as far as the shuttle..it's been done away with.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

GFS has done better than the EURO this year.

Last year Euro was better.
Quoting reedzone:


In terms of track, it's excellent! Though the EURO has convective feedback issues. GFS hasn't done well tis year.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
west of VA at 228 and fast mover on this run
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4066
Quoting WxLogic:


Indeed... as its energy gets absorbed by the GOM low as ECMWF is hinting:



Based on obs from ECMWF and GFS runs... looks like ECMWF might be leading in depicting the evolving event.


yup in the panhandle at 204 hrs
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4066
Quoting will40:



drops the low east of fla at 174 hrs tho


Indeed... as its energy gets absorbed by the GOM low as ECMWF is hinting:



Based on obs from ECMWF and GFS runs... looks like ECMWF might be leading in depicting the evolving event.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
So question...

Could tat high east of Philippe catch it and make the system move westward for a longer period of time than previously thought?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Could anyone comment on Figure 2 in Dr M's post? To me it looks totally wrong. There is a footnote stating that the base period for the data is 1981 to 2010, so as the graph runs from 1979 to 2010, there should be pretty much equal negative deviation as positive, but there are 21 years with below average temperature and only 8 (including 1979 and 80) above it. Visually, it appears that the baseline average should be lower. Have I missed anything?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxLogic:
At 18Z Monday (150HR) is where GFS start getting challenged as to where the SFC low would move or relocate.

You can see a low attempting to close off the E GOM (as depicted by ECMWF) with another weak low E of FL:




drops the low east of fla at 174 hrs tho
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4066
At 18Z Monday (150HR) is where GFS start getting challenged as to where the SFC low would move or relocate.

You can see a low attempting to close off the E GOM (as depicted by ECMWF) with another weak low E of FL:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
12Z GFS (Monday AM):



Low develops in the Bahamas region.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thank Aussie,80. hcubed. EcoLogic.Everybody.
There's quite a bit to think on with this lot,this has got to be highly complex stuff and to think that its getting emitted above everything so it percolates downwards into the upper ozone layer, there might be some nasty catalysts in that lot I bet.People here are talking a lot about con trails and chem trails but this has got to be the rocket trail variety.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
yup, nicely said
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
thanks will
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting kshipre1:
will,

would you mind sharing the time frame of these two systems? sorry, I do not have the model run to look at.

I wonder if the euro also shows two different systems. if they both do, that is pretty freaky



the 06z run showed ont about 200hrs out and one about 300 hrs out the euro showed only one system
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4066

Viewing: 140 - 90

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9Blog Index

Top of Page

About JeffMasters

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.