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: 90 - 40

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

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: 4111
Deleted as redundant
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
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
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting kshipre1:
that is pretty scary. I guess as of now, eventhough it is too early, the west coast of florida should prepare for at least a tropical storm


this time of season Fla should always be prepared
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4111
86. 7544
gem shows 2 sep systems also looks like it could be a lot of rain in the coming weeks

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
that is pretty scary. I guess as of now, eventhough it is too early, the west coast of florida should prepare for at least a tropical storm
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting rmbjoe1954:


Thank you.



anytime
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4111
Quoting hcubed:


Start here:

Studies on effects of rocket emissions on climate and ozone


Thanks...this confirms at least part of our 1990 conversations. All these studies are recent, there were none 21 years ago.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting will40:



the 06z run showed two different systems


Thank you.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
thanks
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PlazaRed:

Not my field this but I am itching to know more.
Does anybody know or have access to what the chemical by products of rocket motor fuels are apart from possibly water. What do these things run on?Is it a 2 liquid chemical system injected into the engine?
The by products of the combustion I would think would be fairly heavy gases that should mainly sink down through to the lower levels of the atmosphere.
If there is provable truth in this (idea,)then millions of tons of these gases must have been injected into the upper atmosphere over the last 50 years or so.


Start here:

Studies on effects of rocket emissions on climate and ozone
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The fuel we discussed was nitrogen. The compelling part of the theory was the fact that the rocket engine penetrated the ozone layer allowing direct reaction between the fuel and the ozone versus whatever attenuation happens in the miles of atmosphere surface pollution must interact with.

Another tidbit in his theory is that models of the ozone hole show that the origin of the hole in time correlates with the beginning of the space race!

Dr. Masters brought ozone up...sorry. However, I am interested in weather aspect of how upper atmosphere circulations concentrate ozone depletions originating from northern hemisphere emissions (either rockets or industry)over the south pole.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting rmbjoe1954:
Is the GFS showing two separate storms forming 'around' Florida, or is it one that criss crosses the peninsula?



the 06z run showed two different systems
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4111
Is the GFS showing two separate storms forming 'around' Florida, or is it one that criss crosses the peninsula?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PlazaRed:

Not my field this but I am itching to know more.
Does anybody know or have access to what the chemical by products of rocket motor fuels are apart from possibly water. What do these things run on?Is it a 2 liquid chemical system injected into the engine?
The by products of the combustion I would think would be fairly heavy gases that should mainly sink down through to the lower levels of the atmosphere.
If there is provable truth in this (idea,)then millions of tons of these gases must have been injected into the upper atmosphere over the last 50 years or so.


Rocket Propellant-1 or Refined Petroleum-1 is a highly refined form of kerosene,Liquid oxygen,Liquid hydrogen, ammonium perchlorate, Monomethylhydrazine, Dinitrogen tetroxide, aluminium, iron oxide, Polybutadiene acrylonitrile or Hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
75. 7544
in the meantime the cmc shows a cat 1 for fla .at day 5
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bswigg:


Not disputing that fact...and not religious...just know weather patterns and history of the same weather patterns ;)


Then you're either in denial, or not paying attention.

Google these: Northwest & Northeast Passages opening, Arctic Dipole, Cyclone Gonu (2007), 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season, 2011 Spring Tornadic Outbreak (US), 2011 Heat Wave in Texas/OK/LA, 2005 Heat Wave in Europe, 2010 Heat Wave in Russia, and 2010 & 2011 Flooding in Pakistan.

You'll notice the words, "unprecedented" and "anomaly" a lot as you read about them. And the first three, which occurred over the last five years, never happened in recorded history.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting will40:
its hard to read intensity on a model anyways



let me refrase that not hard to read it but hard to believe what it is showing.
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4111
its hard to read intensity on a model anyways
Member Since: September 19, 2005 Posts: 2 Comments: 4111
Quoting Stormchaser2007:


That's not convective feedback...


Oh, ok.. Thanks.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
Quoting cchsweatherman:


It could make sense considering the chemicals being burned by the rocket fuel are injected directly into the upper atmosphere and don't have to rise miles into the atmosphere like greenhouse gases.

Not my field this but I am itching to know more.
Does anybody know or have access to what the chemical by products of rocket motor fuels are apart from possibly water. What do these things run on?Is it a 2 liquid chemical system injected into the engine?
The by products of the combustion I would think would be fairly heavy gases that should mainly sink down through to the lower levels of the atmosphere.
If there is provable truth in this (idea,)then millions of tons of these gases must have been injected into the upper atmosphere over the last 50 years or so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting reedzone:


EUROS been blowing up storms too much this year.. If the EURO would have been correct on intensity, we would have had four category 5 storms lol.


That's not convective feedback...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Only the GFS and NAM suffer from convective feedback.

The ECMWF is much more sophisticated than both those models combined.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nrtiwlnvragn:
From previous blog:



I posted the preliminary yesterday, they should update that link this afternoon. They don't show the preliminary on the HTML webpage, it is hidden in the image directory.


Thank you for the clarification.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
That sounds extreme. 135 shuttle launches, not counting all the other Saturn 5, Apollo, Gemini, Mercury and routine satellite missions would equal at least 150 years of man made damage from pollution. I would like to see those equations.

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
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Experimental EnKf GFS from 00Z last night showed the storm developing at 144 hours:



Up the East Coast of Florida, 168 hours:



Experimental FIMY shows it in the GOM at 192 hours:





Somewhat long range models, so take it at what you think about that sort of time frame.
Member Since: September 23, 2005 Posts: 14 Comments: 10909
Quoting cchsweatherman:


The GFS tends to be the one with the convective feedback issues; not the ECMWF.


EUROS been blowing up storms too much this year.. If the EURO would have been correct on intensity, we would have had four category 5 storms lol.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
12Z GFS Init



Let's see if it keeps up the sheared system or consolidates more.

One thing to note.. since the 00Z run, GFS has been resembling ECMWF in attempting to move the system into the extreme SE GOM (from the Bahamas region) before moving NW to N to NE.
Member Since: August 14, 2008 Posts: 4 Comments: 4934
Quoting reedzone:


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


The GFS tends to be the one with the convective feedback issues; not the ECMWF.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting kshipre1:
ok, thanks reed but how much stock do you put in the GFS versus the ECMWF? please correct me if I am wrong but hasn't the Euro been more reliable than the GFS this hurricane season?


In terms of track, it's excellent! Though the EURO has convective feedback issues. GFS hasn't done well tis year.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
And can i just say, via Water vapor loop, the front is starting to dissipitate, so this is where we find out if/what is going to happen, or if indeed anything does cut off or get left behind.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting weathermanwannabe:
Thanks Dr. M. Safe to say that we do not know what will exactly happen with the Arctic ozone hole in the coming years, or, the medium term model runs for a Florida storm over the next week. We are just along for the ride with Mother Nature and can only watch and wait.

I don't think that we're "just along for the ride". Rather, it seems we've got both feet on the accelerator, and we're rapidly jerking the steering wheel from side to side.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
That sounds extreme. 135 shuttle launches, not counting all the other Saturn 5, Apollo, Gemini, Mercury and routine satellite missions would equal at least 150 years of man made damage from pollution. I would like to see those equations.


It could make sense considering the chemicals being burned by the rocket fuel are injected directly into the upper atmosphere and don't have to rise miles into the atmosphere like greenhouse gases.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
am waiting for Levi's blog
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting reedzone:


So the "L" for low, is a hint? Give it up already, i'm not wishcasting, heck I won't even be in Florida if it happens, just observing.


Well yes because L stands for area of LOW pressure, or closed low, not tropical storm, or hurricane, so your telling me all those L's over the whole US are tropical storms?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting EcoLogic:
I was presented with an interesting theory by a chemistry professor that the in-situ oxidation of O3 by rocket fuel formed a chain reaction (he actually did the equations for me) that consumed an enormous amount of ozone. He calculated (this was in 1990)that a single shuttle launch could consume more ozone than the annual global industrial output. Further he suggested that stratospheric flow patterns concentrated the depleted ozone from typical rocket flight patterns over the Antarctic.

The conclusion was that NASA was a major contributor to ozone depletion but that, since it was the darling of the federal government, no research exploring these observations was ever funded. How's that for a conspiracy theory?

That sounds extreme. 135 shuttle launches, not counting all the other Saturn 5, Apollo, Gemini, Mercury and routine satellite missions would equal at least 150 years of man made damage from pollution. I would like to see those equations.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
If a subtropical storm does indeed form near or over Florida, then much of Florida would suffer from severe beach erosion and flooding issues since, given the pattern, such a system would linger around for at least a few days continuously pounding the area with gale force winds and waves of heavy rainfall.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
From previous blog:

Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
nrtiwlnvragn, you posted yesterday the graphic of tropical cyclone formation probabilities for the next two weeks,but I dont see the latest at link. When will it update?

Link


I posted the preliminary yesterday, they should update that link this afternoon. They don't show the preliminary on the HTML webpage, it is hidden in the image directory.
Member Since: September 23, 2005 Posts: 14 Comments: 10909
ok, thanks reed but how much stock do you put in the GFS versus the ECMWF? please correct me if I am wrong but hasn't the Euro been more reliable than the GFS this hurricane season?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting kshipre1:
reed,

please give me your insight. if a tropical storm does form, do you think the west coast of florida would get it? Or the east coast/bahamas?


I think the East Coast of Florida makes more sense, but we'll see. Still a bit far out right now.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
If anything develops near the Bahamas, Florida, or even in the eastern Gulf is going to be heavily sheared due to the strong NE fetch up and down the SE US coast. A subtropical system looks much more likely with next weeks set up. Now if something gets spinning down near the Yucatan or southern Caribbean, then we may see a full warm core system, but for anything to happen, it needs to be far enough south of this strong fetch. Right now, it just looks like an extended period of rain and gusty winds for Florida. Not much organization, I saw the word "sloppy" thrown around the blog, and thats a good description of what we'll be dealing with.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Given the pattern starting to establish itself with strong high pressure building and entrenching itself over the Eastern United States and an upper trough over the Western Atlantic cutting off around Florida, subtropical development does indeed make sense near or over Florida in about 5 to 7 days.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
reed,

please give me your insight. if a tropical storm does form, do you think the west coast of florida would get it? Or the east coast/bahamas?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting FatPenguin:


I used to get angry over statements like that because they are not fact based, but emanate from a preconceived bias based on politics and/or religion. There is zero science behind them.

Now, I just feel sorrow for the lack of objectivity.

CO2 as a heat-trapping gas. NOBODY disputes that. If anyone thinks that there are no consequences to increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, then they are blind to science.


Not disputing that fact...and not religious...just know weather patterns and history of the same weather patterns ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
ok, thanks. I was just asking because Dr. Masters indicated in his blog that the EURO is showing tropical storm formation on the west coast of florida.

has the euro been more accurate this year than the GFS? just wondering, thanks
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
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.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15932
Thanks Dr. M. Safe to say that we do not know what will exactly happen with the Arctic ozone hole in the coming years, or, the medium term model runs for a Florida storm over the next week. We are just along for the ride with Mother Nature and can only watch and wait.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
2011 Atlantic season reaches 100 ACE Units making it an above normal season in terms of accumulated energy.

Season totalStorm Type ACE (104 kt2)
01L (Arlene) Operational 1.6275
02L (Bret) Operational 2.9450
03L (Cindy) Best Track 2.3125
04L (Don) Operational 1.4975
05L (Emily) Operational 1.9875
06L (Franklin) Operational 0.4050
07L (Gert) Operational 1.6025
08L (Harvey) Operational 1.2350
09L (Irene) Operational 20.3425
11L (Jose) Operational 0.5275
12L (Katia) Operational 24.8375
13L (Lee) Operational 1.7050
14L (Maria) Operational 8.7375
15L (Nate) Operational 3.8325
16L (Ophelia) Operational 18.3550
17L (Philippe) Operational 8.3100
Total 100.26
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I was presented with an interesting theory by a chemistry professor that the in-situ oxidation of O3 by rocket fuel formed a chain reaction (he actually did the equations for me) that consumed an enormous amount of ozone. He calculated (this was in 1990)that a single shuttle launch could consume more ozone than the annual global industrial output. Further he suggested that stratospheric flow patterns concentrated the depleted ozone from typical rocket flight patterns over the Antarctic.

The conclusion was that NASA was a major contributor to ozone depletion but that, since it was the darling of the federal government, no research exploring these observations was ever funded. How's that for a conspiracy theory?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KUEFC:


I would hardly call it a "storm" it hints at something but doesnt develop a fully blown storm!


So the "L" for low, is a hint? Give it up already, i'm not wishcasting, heck I won't even be in Florida if it happens, just observing.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
Quoting reedzone:
Storm forms in 150 hours on the GFS... 150 hours isn't long range.


I would hardly call it a "storm" it hints at something but doesnt develop a fully blown storm!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 90 - 40

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

Top of Page

About

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