Damage losses and climate change

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 10:58 PM GMT on January 03, 2012

Share this Blog
35
+

During 2011, a series of violent tornado outbreaks hit the Plains and Southeast U.S., bringing an astonishing six billion-dollar disasters in a three-month period. The epic tornado onslaught killed 552 people and brought three of the five largest tornado outbreaks on record in a six-week period, including the largest and most expensive tornado outbreak in U.S. history--the April 25 - 28 Super Outbreak, which did $10.2 billion dollars in damage. Insured losses due to thunderstorms and tornadoes in the U.S. were at least $25 billion in 2011, more than double the previous record set in 2010. Damages from thunderstorms and tornadoes since 1980 have shown a clear increase since 1980 (Figure 2.) Disaster losses world-wide from weather-related natural disasters have also shown a significant increase in recent years, as has the number of these disasters. But how much of this is due to a change in the climate, and how much might be due to increases in population, wealth, and other factors?


Figure 1. Damage in Tuscaloosa, Alabama after the April 27, 2011 EF-4 tornado. Image credit: NOAA.


Not enough evidence to judge if climate change is affecting tornadoes
As I discussed last week in my post, 2011: Year of the Tornado, as far as we can tell, the number of damaging tornadoes has not increased in recent years, though the quality of the data set is to poor to know for sure. This is largely due to the fact that we never directly measure a tornado's winds--a tornado has to run over a building before we can make an EF-scale strength estimate, based on the damage. As tornado researcher Chuck Doswell said in a 2007 paper, "I see no near-term solution to the problem of detecting detailed spatial and temporal trends in the occurrence of tornadoes by using the observed data in its current form or in any form likely to evolve in the near future." My 2008 post, Are tornadoes getting stronger and more frequent?, discussed how a better way to assess how climate change may be affecting tornadoes is to look at how the large-scale environmental conditions favorable for tornado formation have changed through time. The most important ingredients for tornado formation are usually high atmospheric instability (as measured by the Convective Available Potential Energy, or CAPE), and high amounts of wind shear between the surface and 6 km altitude. Not enough work has been done on the subject to judge whether or not climate change is affecting severe thunderstorms and tornadoes, though.


Figure 2. Insured losses due to thunderstorms and tornadoes in the U.S. in 2011 dollars. Data taken from Property Claims Service MR NatCatSERVICE. Image credit: Munich Re.

Are the number of weather-related disasters increasing?
At a talk given last month at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, Mark Bove of Munich Re insurance company examined trends in both damages and number of natural disasters since 1980. These numbers have shown significant increases since 1980. After we take out the increase in disasters reported due to an increasing population, greater wealth, and more advanced communications, is there a trend due to climate change? One way to check is to compare natural disasters due to geophysical events--earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions--to weather-related disasters. Geophysical disasters should remain relatively constant in number in a changing climate (unless sea level rise is occurring so rapidly that it is causing significant changes in stress on earthquake faults, something that is theoretically possible, but has not yet been observed.) If we then look at trends in the number of geophysical disasters versus weather-related disasters reported, it should give us an idea of how much of the recent increase in weather-related disasters may be due to climate change. Between 1980 and 2010, geophysical disasters increased by about a factor of 1.5, while weather-related disasters increased by a factor of 2.7 to 3.5 (Figure 3.) Bove stated that he thought weather-related disasters were likely subject to a higher increase in reporting rate than geophysical disasters, but not enough to account for the huge difference. Climate change was the likely reason for a large portion of the increase in weather-related disasters in recent years, he argued. His talk concluded, "there is quite some probability that natural catastrophe losses are driven already by human-caused climate change."


Figure 3. The number of natural disasters reported has increased markedly worldwide since 1980, particularly for weather-related disasters. Image credit: Munich Re.

However, this conclusion is controversial. A 2010 paper in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society by Netherlands researcher Laurens Bouwer titled, "Have disaster losses increased due to anthropogenic climate change?", looked at 22 disaster loss studies world-wide, published between 2001 and 2010. All of the studies showed an increase in damages from weather-related disasters in recent decades. Fourteen of the 22 studies concluded that there were no trends in damage after correcting for increases in wealth and population, while eight of the studies did find upward trends even after such corrections, bringing up the question whether or not climate change could be responsible for the increased disaster losses. However, Bouwer found that "studies that did find increases after normalization did not fully correct for wealth and population increases, or they identified other sources of exposure increases or vulnerability changes or changing environmental conditions." In all 22 studies, increases in wealth and population were the "most important drivers for growing disaster losses." He concluded that human-caused climate change "so far has not had a significant impact on losses from natural disasters."

Using storm surge to evaluate damage normalization studies
Damage from landfalling storms can be used to estimate if hurricanes are growing stronger with time, but damage estimates must first be corrected to account for changes in wealth and population over time. A 2008 study by Pielke et al. found that although hurricane damages had been doubling every ten years in recent decades, there were no increases in normalized hurricane damages in the U.S. from 1900 - 2005. They used census and economic data to adjust for how increases in populations and wealth may have affected hurricane damages over time. However, Grinsted et al. (2012) questioned whether or not this was done correctly. They found that storm surge heights of U.S. hurricanes and tropical storms correlated very well with metrics that looked at storm intensity, when looking at many decades of data to see long-term trends. However, the researchers found that while short-term trends in normalized hurricane damage estimated by Pielke et al. (2008) did correlate well historical storm surges, these normalized damages had poor correlation with the storm surge record, when looking at decades-long time scales. This implies that the corrections were biased. Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky of the University of Western Australia makes the case that efforts such as the one done by Pielke et al. (2008) to normalize disaster losses are probably biased too low, since they only look at factors that tend to increase disaster losses with time, but ignore factors that tend to decrease disaster losses. These ignored factors include improvements in building codes, better weather forecasts allowing more preparation time, and improved fire-fighting ability. He writes, "Most normalization research to date has not accounted for those variables because they are extremely difficult to quantify. (And most researchers have been at pains to point that out; e.g., Neumayer & Barthel, 2011, pp. 23-24.) In effect, normalization research to date largely rests on the oddly inconsistent pair of assumptions that (a) we have built up enormous wealth during the 20th century but (b) did so without any technological advance whatsoever." For example, during a severe October 2013 windstorm that did over $1 billion in damage to France, England, Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark, "The insured losses for the St. Jude's Day storm would have been significantly higher but for the accuracy in weather forecasting several days ahead of the storm's formation", said financial information services company Fitch Services, since "policyholders have more time to protect their property from potential damage, while government agencies, utility firms and transport companies can make logistical arrangements to minimize disruption to power supplies and transport networks."

Conclusion
Studies showing no increase in normalized damage from storms have high uncertainty, and it is possible that higher economic damages due to stronger storms is indeed occurring, though the current research does not show this. Looking at disasters losses to make an argument that climate change is affecting our weather is difficult, due to the rarity of extreme events, and the changes in wealth and population that also affect disaster losses. We are better off looking at how the atmosphere, oceans, and glaciers are changing to find evidence of climate change--and there is plenty of evidence there.

References
Tornado researcher Dr. Harold Brooks has a May 2012 op-ed in New Scientist that discusses the difficulty in predicting how climate change will impact tornadoes.

Bouwer, L, 2010, "Have disaster losses increased due to anthropogenic climate change?", BAMS, January 2011, DOI:10.1175/2010BAMS3092.1

Doswell, C.A., 2007, "Small Sample Size and Data Quality Issues Illustrated Using Tornado Occurrence Data", E-Journal of Severe Storms Meteorology Vol 2, No. 5 (2007).

Del Genio, A.D., M-S Yao, and J. Jonas, 2007,
Will moist convection be stronger in a warmer climate?, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L16703, doi: 10.1029/2007GL030525.

Grinsted, A., J. C. Moore, and S. Jevrejeva, 2012, "A homogeneous record of Atlantic hurricane surge threat since 1923," PNAS 2012, doi:10.1073/pnas.1209542109

Marsh, P.T., H.E. Brooks, and D.J. Karoly, 2007, Assessment of the severe weather environment in North America simulated by a global climate model, Atmospheric Science Letters, 8, 100-106, doi: 10.1002/asl.159.

Neumayer, E. & Barthel, F. (2011). Normalizing economic loss from natural disasters: A global analysis Global Environmental Change, 21, 13-24.

Pielke et al., 2008, "Normalized Hurricane Damage in the United States: 1900–2005", Natural Hazards Review, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp. 29-42.

Riemann-Campe, K., Fraedrich, K., and F. Lunkeit, 2009, Global climatology of Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) and Convective Inhibition (CIN) in ERA-40 reanalysis, Atmospheric Research Volume 93, Issues 1-3, July 2009, Pages 534-545, 4th European Conference on Severe Storms.

Trapp, R.J., N.S. Diffenbaugh, H.E. Brooks, M.E. Baldwin, E.D. Robinson, and J.S. Pal, 2007, Severe thunderstorm environment frequency during the 21st century caused by anthropogenically enhanced global radiative forcing, PNAS 104 no. 50, 19719-19723, Dec. 11, 2007.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

Sign In or Register Sign In or Register

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: 390 - 340

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
o_O O_o



Oh no the Polar Vortex! Yikes! Looks as if Old Man Winter is going to make up for lost time over the coming weeks.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormTracker2K:


Thanks for the heads up Pat!


It was just posted on the Wunderground FB page.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
Quoting Patrap:
from Weather Underground

Dr. Jeff Masters will be on World News Tonight with Diane Sawyer this evening at 6:30PM EST to look into this winter's record warmth and dryness. Make sure to tune in!


Thanks for the heads up Pat!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting washingtonian115:
If this is refering to my post well I love to track storms.No one loves seeing the destruction they bring but when their out over the water doing there thang then they can be one of the most beautiful things you've ever seen on earth.


AMEN!
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
from Weather Underground

Dr. Jeff Masters will be on World News Tonight with Diane Sawyer this evening at 6:30PM EST to look into this winter's record warmth and dryness. Make sure to tune in!
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
o_O O_o

Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 34164
Quoting hydrus:
This will be an interesting system to watch...


Hi Hydrus, Look what the GFS wants to bring toward the West Coast of FL a squall line. it was about this time last year we had a vicious squall line tear thru here.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Remember that with the list that is going to be use for this hurricane season something always or most of the time  happens and we always get below numbers of name storms we have never reach Oscar or Patty with this list and is the only to not use his O letter
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormTracker2K:
Boy the SOI values are tanking this week. It looks as if La-Nina peaked just before Christmas. What this means is normal winter conditions for the US. Even though December was warm it looks as if we are going into a cold and stormy pattern for much of the country. The Enso values went from 49 before Christmas to 2 today! That is impressive.

and with it the storms will come after the 15th of the month a more normal winter pattern returns to finish the season and take us towards spring
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 191 Comments: 59070
Quoting bappit:
That's not a good thing?
If this is refering to my post well I love to track storms.No one loves seeing the destruction they bring but when their out over the water doing there thang then they can be one of the most beautiful things you've ever seen on earth.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
This will be an interesting system to watch...
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
That's not a good thing?
Member Since: May 18, 2006 Posts: 10 Comments: 6184
Quoting hydrus:
2009 was nothing short of awesome..
. Besides maybe Bill and Ida nothing really stood out.Through out most of the hurricane season it was DEAD!.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xyrus2000:


The laws of thermodynamics.

Remove all the complexities for a moment and just look at the simple system.

Where does the Earth's surface get its heat? The sun. How does the Earth keep it's heat? The atmosphere. Basic middle school science. Nothing fancy.

The Earth has been warming over many decades. Every single temperature data set shows warming. So this indicates one of the follow is occurring:

1. The Earth is receiving more energy from the sun.
2. The Earth is trapping more energy from the sun.
3. A combination of both 1 and 2.

The most obvious premise is that the Earth would be warming as a result of increased solar output. However, solar output is meticulously tracked and has been for several decades. There hasn't been any noticeable increase in solar output.

But another way to increase solar energy received by the planet is changes in orbit and/or orbital tilt. However, neither of those have happened either (not recently at any rate). That pretty much rules out 1 and 3.

If more energy isn't reaching the Earth, then that implies the Earth is trapping more energy. It just so happens that over the past 100 years or so the amount of greenhouse gases (the ones that keep our planet from being a snowball to begin with) has gone up significantly as a result of human activity (verified by isotope analysis).

The planet does not spontaneously get warmer just because it wants to. In the absence of increased solar irradiance, the ONLY way for the planet to warm up is by increasing absorption. This has happened through a combination of human activities, though atmospheric changes are the biggest contribution at the moment.

However, if you're talking about physical manifestations of climate change, I'd have to say the arctic. From sinking towns to melting permafrost to melting glaciers to vanishing pack ice to clathrate dissolution to encroaching tree lines to species invasions to weather pattern changes. The arctic is a veritable climate change war zone. The coming years will be most interesting.
This is a great post too..Thanx Xyrus. I am reading and catching up with the posts.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
Quoting washingtonian115:
Hopefully we have neutral conditions.I don't want another hurricane season like 09 again.God no.
2009 was nothing short of awesome..
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
For those who are members and subscribers to stratfor.com
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
Quoting SPLbeater:


aww....that means no more above average hurricane season...
Hopefully we have neutral conditions.I don't want another hurricane season like 09 again.God no.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:


if he said giorni days then he wuld basically be saying days days lol.

hey pat, what are you counting down to?


Welcome to Lake Lake. We hope you enjoy your swim.
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2840
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
The Climate Prediction Center January update headline is La Nina Dissipates between March and May.

Link


Yep, makes sense as the SOI (Southern Oscillation Index) #'s have plummeted this week basically signaling the beginning of the end of this La-Nina. Hopefully with La-Nina weaking we will finally start getting some needed rain & snow across California.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
The Climate Prediction Center January update headline is La Nina Dissipates between March and May.

Link


aww....that means no more above average hurricane season...
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
The Climate Prediction Center January update headline is La Nina Dissipates between March and May.

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TampaSpin:


Only if you wanna go very fast and why do we need all the horsepower for an energy efficient vehicle.....I am not talking race cars.


It doesn't matter. You're not going to beat the laws of thermodynamics. Adding a wind generator anywhere on a car is going to introduce additional drag. To overcome that additional drag more fuel will need to be burned. Given that the typical ICE is at best 30% efficient, adding a wind generator will decrease the efficiency of the vehicle.

Trying to harness the power from the wind caused by a moving vehicle takes away from the energy used to move the vehicle itself. This is why things like regenerative braking are used in hybrid vehicles instead. Regenerative braking takes energy that is normally wasted as heat and converts it into electricity to store in batteries.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Here's my hypothesis. The ice age CO2 fluctuations DO come after the temperature changes, and amplify the existing perturbations caused by the Milankovic cycles


Actually, it's beyond just being your hypothesis, it's a well-established theory that is commonly used to describe climate feedbacks and climate sensitivity. Those past long-term temperature fluctuations were larger in magnitude than can be explained by the Milankovich cycles alone - it is strong evidence that the warming effect (and other related feedback effects) of greenhouse gases has happened before and is happening again.
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 3477
Quoting 1911maker:
I seldom post images. how do I make this smaller?
Most of the time, Zero or lower is the norm here this time of year, I "Just had to Share this". So strange.

The link will get you to the NWS page below
Link

img src="Photobucket">

That's warm, alright. In fact, about 30 degrees above normal; the average high in Grand Forks for this date is 14. The end of next week should have things back to normal, however. At least for a while.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14442
Quoting 1911maker:
I seldom post images. how do I make this smaller?
Most of the time, Zero or lower is the norm here this time of year, I "Just had to Share this". So strange.

The link will get you to the NWS page below
Link

img src="Photobucket">


Enjoy it now because your highs may only be in the single digits later next week.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
OK, never mind on making it smaller. I see it loaded correctly, it just looked wrong in the preview.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I seldom post images. how do I make this smaller?
Most of the time, Zero or lower is the norm here this time of year, I "Just had to Share this". So strange.

The link will get you to the NWS page below
Link

img src="Photobucket">
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Interesting interview here--boingboing.net/2012/01/05/forecast-uncertain -chaos-theo.html--with some dude on numerical modeling as used in weather forecasting and applying it to brain cancer treatments.

"MKB: I think most lay people operate under the assumption that weather prediction like this isn't very accurate, beyond a day or so ahead of time. You're wanting to do cancer prediction over 60-day cycles. Why would that kind of time frame be reliably accurate enough to matter?

"EK: Weather service looks hard and long at that question. One way in which you can assess the goodness or lack thereof of the forecast is to say, "I'm going to predict the weather two, three, four days out. Then you go out and measure on those days and compare the reality to the forecast. The bigger the difference, the worse the forecast. By that measure, forecasts today made 3-4 days out are as accurate as a 36-hour forecast was 30 years ago. So the weather forecasts are more accurate than people give them credit for. It's just that when you blow it that's what people remember."
Member Since: May 18, 2006 Posts: 10 Comments: 6184
AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW ORLEANS LA
1132 AM CST THU JAN 5 2012

IN THE WAKE OF THIS SYSTEM...A MID/UPPER LEVEL TROUGH/LOW OVER
NORTHERN MEXICO AND WESTERN TEXAS MOVE EASTWARD ACROSS THE NORTH
GULF AND WEAKEN THROUGH THE END OF THE WORK WEEK. THIS WILL BRING A
CHANCE OF SHOWERS TO THE AREA FRIDAY INTO FRIDAY NIGHT. ALTHOUGH
ONLY SHOWERS WILL BE MENTIONED AT THIS TIME...MODELS DO FORECAST
SOME INCREASE IN INSTABILITY AS THIS SYSTEM APPROACHES FRIDAY...SO
AN ISOLATED THUNDERSTORM OR TWO CANNOT BE RULED. EVEN AS THIS
SYSTEM IS BEGINNING TO PUSH TO THE EAST FOR THE WEEKEND...A
NORTHERN STREAM SHORT WAVE TROUGH MOVING ACROSS THE GREAT LAKES
REGION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE WEEKEND WILL PUSH A SLOW MOVING COLD
FRONT INTO THE REGION OVER THE WEEKEND. THIS FRONT WILL LIKELY
STALL OUT ACROSS NORTHERN SECTIONS OF THE FORECAST AREA OR ACROSS
LOCATIONS JUST TO THE NORTH AS THE BOUNDARY BECOMES MORE OR LESS
PARALLEL TO THE DEVELOPING WESTERLY AND THEN SOUTHWESTERLY FLOW
ALOFT. SOME CONVERGENCE IN THE VICINITY OF THE FRONTAL BOUNDARY
ALONG WITH A WEAK SHORT WAVE MOVING ACROSS THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI
VALLEY WILL YIELD SOME CHANCES FOR RAIN THROUGHOUT THE WEEKEND
WITH THE BEST CHANCE BEING ON SATURDAY.

MODEL ARE IN BETTER AGREEMENT WITH ENERGY DROPPING ACROSS THE
PACIFIC NORTHWEST AND ROCKIES OVER THE WEEKEND DEVELOPING INTO A
CLOSED LOW OVER TEXAS AT THE BEGINNING OF NEXT WEEK. THIS SYSTEM
IS THEN FORECAST TO MOVE EAST ACROSS THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY
AND WESTERN AND CENTRAL GULF COAST REGIONS TUESDAY AND TUESDAY NIGHT.
ALTHOUGH THERE ARE SOME TIMING DIFFERENCES...RAIN CHANCES WILL BE
ON THE INCREASE EARLY NEXT WEEK. THIS SYSTEM IS LOOKING FAIRLY
POTENT WITH AT LEAST SOME CHANCE OF A SEVERE WEATHER THREAT ON
TUESDAY AS THE SURFACE LOW TRACKS EAST NORTHEAST ACROSS THE
FORECAST AREA
. BEHIND THIS SYSTEM...A RETURN TO COOLER AND DRIER
CONDITIONS WILL BE IN THE OFFING DURING THE MID AND LATE PORTION
OF NEXT WEEK. 11

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Using Logic, one can deduce that the countdown is counting down to the Winter Solstice.

A Astronomical/Terrestrial yearly occurrence.


Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
perfect ASCAT of ex-Benilde
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
Recent (preliminary) Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) values

Tahiti = Barometric pressure (daily reading)
Darwin = Barometric pressure (daily reading)
30 day Av.SOI = Average daily SOI value for the previous 30 days.
90 day Av.SOI = Average daily SOI value for the previous 90 days.

Note: Calculated using the 1887-1989 base period. This information is usually updated every weekday at 2:00pm (AEST), public holidays excluded.
** Daily values are not the SOI but contribute to the calculation of the monthly SOI. Daily values are presented for research purposes only. 30 day (or larger) average SOI values are the key indices for forecast purposes.

If you are looking for data prior to that given below, see SOI data files.

Date Tahiti Darwin Daily** 30 day avg SOI 90 day avg SOI
7 Dec 2011 1014.38 1006.15 23.40 15.86 11.89
8 Dec 2011 1013.37 1005.15 23.35 16.20 12.02
9 Dec 2011 1012.06 1005.10 16.81 16.30 12.07
10 Dec 2011 1010.93 1006.80 2.13 16.07 12.03
11 Dec 2011 1010.80 1007.70 -3.22 15.90 12.04
12 Dec 2011 1012.95 1007.75 7.68 15.92 12.24
13 Dec 2011 1014.96 1007.20 20.97 16.27 12.56
14 Dec 2011 1014.79 1006.00 26.31 16.65 12.84
15 Dec 2011 1014.61 1005.55 27.71 17.23 13.07
16 Dec 2011 1015.28 1005.10 33.52 18.33 13.21
17 Dec 2011 1014.33 1005.15 28.34 19.43 13.25
18 Dec 2011 1012.70 1005.45 18.32 20.12 13.27
19 Dec 2011 1013.06 1005.55 19.67 20.20 13.29
20 Dec 2011 1013.25 1005.00 23.51 20.44 13.40
21 Dec 2011 1012.64 1004.55 22.68 20.76 13.60
22 Dec 2011 1011.46 1002.50 27.19 20.68 13.87
23 Dec 2011 1011.39 1001.05 34.36 20.77 14.11
24 Dec 2011 1012.85 1000.50 44.79 21.60 14.34
25 Dec 2011 1013.80 1000.60 49.20 22.63 14.64
26 Dec 2011 1012.87 1001.25 41.00 23.32 14.82
27 Dec 2011 1012.94 1003.40 30.20 23.44 14.92
28 Dec 2011 1012.55 1003.55 27.40 23.19 15.00
29 Dec 2011 1011.96 1004.65 18.63 22.79 14.98
30 Dec 2011 1011.69 1006.15 9.44 22.86 14.88
31 Dec 2011 1011.99 1007.90 1.92 22.60 14.68
1 Jan 2012 1012.46 1007.75 0.48 22.09 14.54
2 Jan 2012 1014.28 1007.65 9.52 21.95 14.56
3 Jan 2012 1015.20 1008.85 8.20 21.54 14.66
4 Jan 2012 1015.26 1009.20 6.84 20.91 14.86
5 Jan 2012 1013.90 1008.80 2.31 20.09 15.05
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:
All have missed the mark but are on the Dartboard in a way.

Until the driving force of the Earth is changed from the accumulation of Wealth and Power by Men and Nation's, NOTHING will change in the big scheme of things.

We need a epiphany in a way.

All of history has brought us to this point in time.

We are nearing a moment that will never happen again, and has never happened before.






Most wisdom exhibited on the board for many a day.

However, I do hope for a change that doesn't require such strenuous pre-conditions. I believe "fear" is also a big motivator and the day that a great number of people realize the value of their at or near sea-level property is actually "zero" due to man-made global warming, change will be demanded. A California without drinking water in the summer might also be a significant driver for basic change. I'd love to see Patrap's conditions met, but I hope we don't have to wait quite that long.
Member Since: August 23, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 99
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:
We had light snow yesterday and last night. And dust. Tan snow. Takes the fun out of snow when it falls already dirty.

Reminds me of mud falling from the sky once when I was in Kansas. Just a light drizzly rain with topsoil.
Member Since: May 18, 2006 Posts: 10 Comments: 6184
Boy the SOI values are tanking this week. It looks as if La-Nina peaked just before Christmas. What this means is normal winter conditions for the US. Even though December was warm it looks as if we are going into a cold and stormy pattern for much of the country. The Enso values went from 49 before Christmas to 2 today! That is impressive.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I looked at the weather forecast for tomorrow and it said 4C (~38F?)! It's going to be so warm tomorrow! :D
Member Since: November 19, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 1286
Quoting SPLbeater:


if he said giorni days then he wuld basically be saying days days lol.

hey pat, what are you counting down to?


I wondered. I bid all of you buon giorno. It's my bedtime now.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:


I'll give you one reason why,,,, Oil. Until we come less oil dependent, then nothing will change.

Back in the 90's GM made electric cars and sold about 5-10k of them, then an oil company bought the rights and did a force recall and destroyed them all. Oil companies have so much might they can buy out patents and rights and shelve them.


I thought GM recalled all the leased vehicles and GM destroyed all but a few museum pieces. Can you provide a link to the oil company comment?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:


What happened to the Giorni Days?


if he said giorni days then he wuld basically be saying days days lol.

hey pat, what are you counting down to?
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
Quoting Patrap:
Letting go of one's EGO is the first step,,,
This is true..Destroying egoism, the enemy, with the mighty sword of realization. Then enjoy freely and directly the bliss of your own true empire which is the majesty of the self that is the All in all........lol...This Objective Universe. Sanskrit text.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
Quoting Patrap:
There are 350 Days until the Winter Solstice.

Enjoy your Thursday.


What happened to the Giorni Days?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Here's my hypothesis. The ice age CO2 fluctuations DO come after the temperature changes, and amplify the existing perturbations caused by the Milankovic cycles (and no, I'm unable to find the images). While this may suggest that human-manufactured carbon is not causing current climate change, the opposite conclusion also holds validity.

The CO2-feedback mechanism is not negative evidence for humancaused climate change. In fact, it is only a small sample of evidence indicating that carbon dioxide can be released given higher temperatures (ocean --> worse carbon sink), and absorbed given lower temperatures (ocean --> better carbon sink). What this means is that if current emissions are contributing to climate change (there is NO evidence to indicate otherwise, unless you count the existence of other mechanisms such as cosmic rays or chaotic complexity, a way of explaining away evidence, rather than compile, which is what science is apparently meant to do, to be negative evidence to the contrary of the 18th century greenhouse hypothesis), then there is a real possibility of GHG-amplification via ocean CO2, ocean methane, land methane, land CO2, and yet-undiscovered mechanisms.

Of course, the water vapour negative feedback may prove to be very significant in minimizing effects of manmade emissions, or it may prove temporary - time will tell.
Good post Astro....With solid, relevant information too..
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
Quoting yqt1001:


Well, writing correctly works.


but i dont write correctly
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
Letting go of one's EGO is the first step,,,
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
Quoting SPLbeater:
anybody know how to take the spell check off google chrome? all deez red lines underneath my writin is gettin anoying lol


Well, writing correctly works.
Member Since: November 19, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 1286
Quoting Patrap:
All have missed the mark but are on the Dartboard in a way.

Until the driving force of the Earth is changed from the accumulation of Wealth and Power by Men and Nation's, NOTHING will change in the big scheme of things.

We need a epiphany in a way.

All of history has brought us to this point in time.

We are nearing a moment that will never happen again, and has never happened before.




Sounds ominously prophetic Pat..I know with the help of the almighty, the W.U. bloggers will conquer and purify the world...Maybe the Universe...I am exited..ppfft.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 24732
anybody know how to take the spell check off google chrome? all deez red lines underneath my writin is gettin anoying lol
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
.....this comment has absolutely no meaning at all. i mean, i know your bored because your reading wat i am typing now
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4488
All have missed the mark but are on the Dartboard in a way.

Until the driving force of the Earth is changed from the accumulation of Wealth and Power by Men and Nation's, NOTHING will change in the big scheme of things.

We need a epiphany in a way.

All of history has brought us to this point in time.

We are nearing a moment that will never happen again, and has never happened before.




Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 434 Comments: 133258
Quoting Xyrus2000:


You don't seem to be getting what he's saying.

In order to accomplish anything on a country-wide level, you have to overcome ignorance AND inertia. You have to convince the population that there is a problem and then you need to convince them that something needs to be done about it.

Right now, billions of dollars in PR and campaign contributions are focused on keeping the population ignorant and complacent (or at the very least apathetic). That neither aids in the recognition that there is problem and certainly doesn't encourage any actions.

Until the population realizes that there is a problem and becomes WILLING to do something about it, expect the status quo to continue.


I just figured this out how to quote. The first part was Neapolitans quote then my reaction.
I did not miss the point. My point is past the debate over whether there is or isn't global warming going on. We NEED to move as quickly as we can to cleaner energy for so many other reasons. We cannot burn fossil fuels forever. This should not even be a point of contention. We shouldn't burn them at all in a perfect world. We are not there, but advances are being made in those alternative energy. But the change over is not easy. As it is, with the political polarization-we are not going anywhere at all in the right direction. So my question is-Do we retain status quo and go nowhere, or try to get Congress to get their collective heads out of their other end and get some things going? Both sides are holding up any advancements for political reasons (and the lining of their own reelection coffers) and it has to stop. Oil companies should be enticed to work toward alternative energy. My goodness, they have the resources to be a leader in that direction. But, it is easier to 'entice' the votes to keep the status quo.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AtHomeInTX:
ST2K, I hope you're right. It got real ugly this morning...


Over 50 taken to hospital in huge pileup


At 9:30 a.m. officials tell 12NewsNow.Com the westbound lanes of Highway 73 are open and they hope to open the eastbound lanes soon following a chain-reaction accident involving dozens of cars and trucks.

The first call came into emergency dispatchers at 5:45 a.m.

Officials say the accident was caused by low visibility due to fog and smoke from a marsh fire. The accident happened on Highway 73 just west of the Veolia plant.

Marc Shepherd with the Texas Department of Transportation tells 12NewsNow.Com 41 vehicles were involved in the accident.

Jefferson County Sheriff's Deputy Rod Carroll says 53 People have been taken to area hospitals as of 9 a.m. The hospitals include St. Marry Hospital, Winnie Community Hospital, Bayside Community Hospital in Anahuac, Baptist Hospital and Christus Hospital St. Elizabeth.

There are no fatalities reported.

Resources to work the accident came from across the region. 1 medical helicopter responded out of Lufkin and 2 out of Houston. Department of Public Safety Trooper Stephanie Davis says 4 of the people hurt in the accident were taken to area hospitals by medical helicopter. She said those people were listed in critical condition.

Port Arthur Fire, DPS, Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, Labelle-Fannett Volunteer Fire Department and other agencies are working the accident.

Chief Charles Sonnier with the Labelle-Fannett Fire Department says 2 cars were on fire when he arrived at the accident site. One tanker truck was turned over on its side He says at least 4 people had to be removed from their car using a jaws of life.



Yikes. Are these marsh fires common in Texas? Last winter I recall a forest grass fire in Oklahoma that hit just before they got 10 inches of snowfall from that Groundhog Day blizzard!
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2840

Viewing: 390 - 340

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Dr. Masters co-founded wunderground in 1995. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990. Co-blogging with him: Bob Henson, @bhensonweather

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Dunham Lake Sunset
Carrot Nose in Danger
Deep Snow in Brookline, MA
Sunset at Fort DeSoto