January 2012 the globe's 19th warmest

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:18 PM GMT on February 16, 2012

Share this Blog
29
+

January 2012 was the globe's 19th warmest January since record keeping began in 1880, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and NASA. January 2012 global land temperatures were the 26th warmest on record, and ocean temperatures were the 17th warmest on record. Global satellite-measured temperatures for the lowest 8 km of the atmosphere were colder than average, the 9th or 14th coldest in the 34-year record, according to Remote Sensing Systems and the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH). Eurasia had its ninth largest snow cover extent in the 46-year period of record. Cold and snowy conditions dominated across central and Eastern Europe, as well as much of China. North America had its third smallest January snow cover extent, since much of the United States and southern Canada were warmer and drier than average, limiting snow cover. Wunderground's weather historian, Christopher C. Burt, has a comprehensive post on the notable weather events of January in his January 2012 Global Weather Extremes Summary.




Figure 1. Departure of temperature from average for January 2012. Image credit: National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) .

La Niña conditions continue
A borderline weak/moderate La Niña event continues in the equatorial Pacific, where sea surface temperatures were approximately 1.0°C below average during January and the the first half of February. The majority of the El Niño computer models predict that La Niña will weaken this spring, and will likely be gone by summer.

Arctic sea ice extent fourth lowest on record
Arctic sea ice extent was at its fourth lowest on record in January, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The growth rate for Arctic sea ice in January was the slowest in the satellite record. Satellite sea ice records date back to 1979.



No billion-dollar weather disasters in January
The globe had no billion-dollar weather disasters in January 2012, reported insurance broker Aon Benfield. The most expensive weather disaster of the month was winter storm Ulli in the UK and Scandanavia, which did $306 million in damage and killed three people. Severe winter weather in Japan killed at least 56 people in January, but damage estimates are not available yet. The most expensive U.S. disaster in January was the winter storm that hit Oregon and Washington January 17 - 22, causing major flooding on several Oregon rivers. The only month during the two-year period 2010 - 2011 without a billion-dollar weather disaster was March 2011, so last month's relatively quiet weather comes as a welcome relief.

Next post
The Tuesday release of leaked documents from a non-profit group active in attacking climate change science is creating a ruckus in the blogosphere, as reported by the New York Times. I'll have more to say on this Friday. Also, I'll have an update on a possible Saturday severe weather outbreak over the Southeast U.S.

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: 356 - 306

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

Late update to the main post, here:

Note: Due to a processing error, the January 2012 Global report originally reported incorrect temperature anomalies for the land-surface components for the globe and each hemisphere. These caused the combined land and ocean surface temperatures to be incorrect as well. This error did not affect the historical rank for the January combined land and ocean temeprature, which remains 19th warmest. However, it did affect the rank of the land-only component. With the corrected data, the land only component is now the 28th warmest on record (rather than 26th warmest, as originally reported). The corrected data are reflected in this report as of 17 February 2012. We regret the error and any issues it may have raised for users.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting trunkmonkey:


Specific Gravity for Nitrogen is .937 and air being=1

any wind aloft would push this stuff around and couldn't be contained.


Uhh...the specific gravity of water is 1.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
New blog!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I don't know about the system next weekend but the GFS(my favorite model by the way) has consistently shown this system around this time frame:
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9475
Quoting Xyrus2000:


a) Liquid nitrogen requires refrigeration, which would no longer work without power.

b) Liquid nitrogen would vaporize very quickly, causing rapid pressurization of whatever vessel it was in.

c) Reactors stay hot for a LONG time, and there is no real way to store the amount of liquid nitrogen required to keep reactors cool for any serious amount of time.

d) In order for cooling to be effective, there has to be a mechanism for heat transfer. Nitrogen is not very good for this. Once it has been vaporized it is a poor medium for moving heat out of the reactor, and there's no way to re-condense it without refrigeration. Water works great for this (with liquid sodium working even better, but harder to work with).

There are other reasons, but those are some off the top my head. :)


Specific Gravity for Nitrogen is .937 and air being=1

any wind aloft would push this stuff around and couldn't be contained.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
When do you suppose those cold shots may come? None of the five-day forecasts I'm seeing call for one, both the CPC's 6-10 and 8-14 day outlooks call for above-normal temps across the east and southeast, and the March outlook calls for the warmth to continue (except along the West Coast):

Warm


A cold shot would only last a day or two, nothing long, and wouldn't happen for at least another week, but beyond 7 days, nothing is certain.
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9475
Quoting Neapolitan:
I read this morning that the chances for a possible Nor'easter have dwindled to practically zero. That's bad news for those wishing for one, but good news for those not prepared for the havoc they wreak...

Meanwhile, the abnormal warmth is expected to continue for much of the contiguous US until at least next week. The following maps from HAMweather show low temperature anomalies forecast for the next five days across the continental U.S.:

Warm

Warm

Warm

Warm

Warm


Thanks for the temp maps!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting DoctorDave1:


Pray to your weather god for the outcome that fits your agenda.
With respect to the election, I have no agenda. I'm resigned to the status quo, unless something dramatic happens, but it very well could. If we see even an moderately more dynamic earth, there are close to seven billion souls on this planet who are relatively unprotected.

The most interesting thing about this curious forecast I made, if you're paying close attention to the link at the bottom of post 202, is that I made the specific comment "Titanic Disaster" only one day before just such a disaster occurred, and in Roman waters.

I did a search of my posts for the past five years on various forums, and found only one hit for the phrase "Titanic Disaster," out of about 10,000 total, published the day before that cruise ship sank.

There's no question that we need a better crew and captain, because clearly no one at the helm of this ship can see past his own nose.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Good morning.

Tomorrow's Severe Weather Threat Level:



Sunday's Severe Weather Threat Level:



What location are you from, to shows these conditions?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:

Why don't you go to Chasercon? Starts Today.
Saturday and Sunday will be streamed Live for FREE.
Sean Casey and Brandon Ivey as Keynote Speakers

Andy Gabrielson Tribute

Dr. Howie Bluestein
Dr. Greg Forbes
Tim Marshall
Chris Novy
Rich Thompson, SPC
Jon Davies
Dr. Jason Persoff


Where on the URL is a link to watch the streams?
I've looked and can't see anything, also is their a cost to streaming their conference? didn't see that either!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
SEVERE WEATHER ALERT UPDATE

This has the potential to become very nasty!
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 177 Comments: 20430
Lots of snow for VA:

Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5713
Quoting yqt1001:
I was looking for the periodic table in my science textbook to do my chem homework and I came across something that shocked me. Now, it wouldn't be shocking if I thought about it logically, but the blog has taken all logic away from the AGW debate that when I heard the benefits of AGW I nearly fainted.

Apparently:
-AGW is good for the growing seasons in the northern rural areas of Ontario, increasing the economy of the north and increasing crop output.
-AGW is good for tourism and the economy in Northern Canada. Once the Northwest passage becomes fully ice free in the summer (might have already? the textbook is rather old) the amount of cargo traffic will increase exponentially on route to China and Asia, and super huge cruise ships will start passing through there and the northern towns.

So maybe AGW isn't all that bad? Or are the benefits limited to northern regions (which would be here)?



Good point, I for one, am not someone who pretends climate change doesn't exist, rather I am highly apposed to those who think they know exactly what climate change will bring in the future.

The fact is there has been too much support to show climate change exists, at least some of which is being caused by people. However where things get very tricky is how it will actually affect the future. There is far too much surety in the claims of many on the future of climate change.


People who are convinced their political support field really cares about the environment need to start thinking for themselves. When we start panicking about climate change is when we start making stupid decisions that result in American liberties being stripped away at a sugar coated claim that will only end in stripped freedom and won't really be about helping the environment in the end, only centralized control.

I'm not naming names just stating a principle of truth and everyone here knows what I speak of by now of course.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow.... to the 12z NAM:

54hrs:


57 hrs:
Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5713
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:


Couple of good cold shots look to be coming. Plus they tend to happen before it gets very warm in march and april.
I hope there not too bad.. We are still picking up from the last couple years of rough weather.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:


Couple of good cold shots look to be coming. Plus they tend to happen before it gets very warm in march and april.
When do you suppose those cold shots may come? None of the five-day forecasts I'm seeing call for one, both the CPC's 6-10 and 8-14 day outlooks call for above-normal temps across the east and southeast, and the March outlook calls for the warmth to continue (except along the West Coast):

Warm
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
This will be interesting..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Good morning G.S. Why do you think we will get one of those.?


Couple of good cold shots look to be coming. Plus they tend to happen before it gets very warm in march and april.
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9475
Quoting RTSplayer:


Too expensive, and believe it or not, liquid nitrogen is not as effect as a coolant as water anyway.

"Despite its reputation, liquid nitrogen's efficiency as a coolant is limited by the fact that it boils immediately on contact with a warmer object, enveloping the object in insulating nitrogen gas. This effect, known as the Leidenfrost effect, applies to any liquid in contact with an object significantly hotter than its boiling point." - Wiki.


It's better for applications where you are super-cooling something that is already near or below room temperature.

Not so good for cooling hot equipment or reactors.

Morning, Just to add to the point. I use nitrogen every day where i work. One truck load is alittle over 620,00 SCF or about 140 inches. It cost about 2,700 dollars a truck. Just my 2 cents.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
GOOD MORNING, overcast and a slight drizzle rain this morning, good news for us with whatever rain we get, weather guy says tomorrow we could get more along with windy conditions with a cool front approaching, hope you all have a great day
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33491
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
why not use liquid nitrogent to cool those reactors in a hurry maybe keep an emerg. suppy of that around in case of a run away reactor would that not cool it really fast


Too expensive, and believe it or not, liquid nitrogen is not as effect as a coolant as water anyway.

"Despite its reputation, liquid nitrogen's efficiency as a coolant is limited by the fact that it boils immediately on contact with a warmer object, enveloping the object in insulating nitrogen gas. This effect, known as the Leidenfrost effect, applies to any liquid in contact with an object significantly hotter than its boiling point." - Wiki.


It's better for applications where you are super-cooling something that is already near or below room temperature.

Not so good for cooling hot equipment or reactors.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
Good Morning
From the SPC Day 2 Convective outlook:


Based of the GFS, late February may soon also bring us one of these:

Good morning G.S. Why do you think we will get one of those.?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good Morning
From the SPC Day 2 Convective outlook:


Based of the GFS, late February may soon also bring us one of these:

Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9475
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
why not use liquid nitrogent to cool those reactors in a hurry maybe keep an emerg. suppy of that around in case of a run away reactor would that not cool it really fast


a) Liquid nitrogen requires refrigeration, which would no longer work without power.

b) Liquid nitrogen would vaporize very quickly, causing rapid pressurization of whatever vessel it was in.

c) Reactors stay hot for a LONG time, and there is no real way to store the amount of liquid nitrogen required to keep reactors cool for any serious amount of time.

d) In order for cooling to be effective, there has to be a mechanism for heat transfer. Nitrogen is not very good for this. Once it has been vaporized it is a poor medium for moving heat out of the reactor, and there's no way to re-condense it without refrigeration. Water works great for this (with liquid sodium working even better, but harder to work with).

There are other reasons, but those are some off the top my head. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I read this morning that the chances for a possible Nor'easter have dwindled to practically zero. That's bad news for those wishing for one, but good news for those not prepared for the havoc they wreak...

Meanwhile, the abnormal warmth is expected to continue for much of the contiguous US until at least next week. The following maps from HAMweather show low temperature anomalies forecast for the next five days across the continental U.S.:

Warm

Warm

Warm

Warm

Warm
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Good morning.

Tomorrow's Severe Weather Threat Level:



Sunday's Severe Weather Threat Level:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
This was Auckland Harbour on 02-15-2012.






Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yqt1001:
I was looking for the periodic table in my science textbook to do my chem homework and I came across something that shocked me. Now, it wouldn't be shocking if I thought about it logically, but the blog has taken all logic away from the AGW debate that when I heard the benefits of AGW I nearly fainted.

Apparently:
-AGW is good for the growing seasons in the northern rural areas of Ontario, increasing the economy of the north and increasing crop output.
-AGW is good for tourism and the economy in Northern Canada. Once the Northwest passage becomes fully ice free in the summer (might have already? the textbook is rather old) the amount of cargo traffic will increase exponentially on route to China and Asia, and super huge cruise ships will start passing through there and the northern towns.

So maybe AGW isn't all that bad? Or are the benefits limited to northern regions (which would be here)?
No one ever said every effect of AGW would be negative, of course. The problem is that any positives it brings will be vastly outnumbered by the negatives. Yes, the growing season in Canada will be lengthened, allowing for more and cheaper produce here--but that will be offset by the loss of tens of millions of acres of cropland in the US and elsewhere. And it's not just the loss of the current cropland that's an issue; the infrastructure to support the present agricultural situation for those acres will need to be relocated at a cost of many billions of dollars. And all the cities and towns that exist to support that infrastructure will be decimated. And all the people who live in those cities and towns that support that infrastructure on which that agriculture relies will be uprooted and/or forced to change their way of life and means of making a living. And so on; the ripples are practically endless.

And, mind you, this is just one small part of the picture.

Texas just released a sobering report on what lies ahead for that state--The Impact of the 2011 Drought and Beyond. Unfortunately, the Big Energy-loving governor ensured that the report makes no mention of climate change (or fracking), but it nevertheless paints a grim and sobering picture for the future.

Suppose that Texas receives half of its "normal" average annual rainfall for two decades. The state's semi-tropical regions would become arid, while its semi-arid regions would become desert. This would create tremendous social consequences:

--Texas agriculture would change dramatically, and might end in some areas. Drip irrigation and other techniques pioneered in desert areas would become essential.

--Remaining agriculture might become dependent on "water markets," in which the rights to draw groundwater are bought, sold, and traded.

--Food prices, particularly beef prices, would increase significantly.

--Turf grass lawns and all outside watering might be banned.

--Low-flow water appliances would become mandatory.

--Wastewater would become quite valuable, and would be reclaimed for reuse in irrigation and perhaps treated to make it suitable for human consumption.

--Desalination of brackish (salty) groundwater and seawater would become common, at first for industrial and agricultural uses and then for drinking water.

--Utility rates would skyrocket due to the increased expense of water obtained through desalination or reuse, and the higher costs faced by energy plants that rely on water for cooling.

I suppose that an obese man who just found out he has terminal bowel cancer could take some solace in the fact that, on the plus side, he's finally going to be able to lose weight. But that's a very high price to pay, if you ask me...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Quoting trunkmonkey:
I'm attending a conference on severe weather by the NWS.
in a few weeks.
All of the folks from Normal Oklahoma will be there providing information and predicting what's to come this spring regarding Tornado's and flooding for the Midwest United States, this conference should be interesting!

Why don't you go to Chasercon? Starts Today.
Saturday and Sunday will be streamed Live for FREE.
Sean Casey and Brandon Ivey as Keynote Speakers

Andy Gabrielson Tribute

Dr. Howie Bluestein
Dr. Greg Forbes
Tim Marshall
Chris Novy
Rich Thompson, SPC
Jon Davies
Dr. Jason Persoff
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I'm attending a conference on severe weather by the NWS.
in a few weeks.
All of the folks from Normal Oklahoma will be there providing information and predicting what's to come this spring regarding Tornado's and flooding for the Midwest United States, this conference should be interesting!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yqt1001:
I was looking for the periodic table in my science textbook to do my chem homework and I came across something that shocked me. Now, it wouldn't be shocking if I thought about it logically, but the blog has taken all logic away from the AGW debate that when I heard the benefits of AGW I nearly fainted.

Apparently:
-AGW is good for the growing seasons in the northern rural areas of Ontario, increasing the economy of the north and increasing crop output.
-AGW is good for tourism and the economy in Northern Canada. Once the Northwest passage becomes fully ice free in the summer (might have already? the textbook is rather old) the amount of cargo traffic will increase exponentially on route to China and Asia, and super huge cruise ships will start passing through there and the northern towns.

So maybe AGW isn't all that bad? Or are the benefits limited to northern regions (which would be here)?


Didn't you see the commercials on TV? The Polar bears were drowning, there wasn't any ice for them, and as a result they drowned!
AGW is very harmful for the Polar bears, the commercial made it look like ALL the Polar bears were drowning, and commercials are always truthful?
Right?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HadesGodWyvern:
Japan Meteorological Agency
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #1
TROPICAL DEPRESSION 01
15:00 PM JST February 17 2012
==================================

SUBJECT: TROPICAL DEPRESSION IN SOUTH CHINA SEA

At 06:00 AM UTC, Tropical Depression (1006 hPa) located at 9.4N 116.0E has 10 minute sustained winds of 30 knots with gusts of 45 knots. The depression is reported as moving west slowly.

Dvorak Intensity: T2.0

Forecast and Intensity
========================

24 HRS: 9.4N 114.0E - 35 knots (CAT 1/Tropical Storm)

The next tropical cyclone advisory from Japan Meteorological Agency will be issued at 9:50 AM UTC..

They are not serious. It's a disorganized mess.



Yesterday 2012/02/16/09z winds knots 1000mb



Today 2012/02/17 09z winds knots 1000mb


2012/02/17/09z temp 1000mb

It's going to be drawn into the cold front that's sweeping south out of China.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BobWallace:


Sure, in the short term some parts of the world will get more livable. And agriculture conditions will improve. We're already seeing hardiness zones moving north which means that things which couldn't be grown in some places will now be possible.

The downside of that is conditions are going to get worse in other parts of the planet. Look at what has happened in the Southwest US during the last few years. Major droughts have significantly damaged the cattle industry as graze and hay production failed. Farmers are running short of water needed to keep their crops going.

The Southwest is running out of water.

Furthermore we'll loose agriculture lands because it will simply get too hot to grow typical crops in a hotter climate. The California wine industry is already facing a future in which the Napa and Sonoma Valleys will become too hot for better quality wine grapes. Vineyards are buying land further north for their more delicate grapes.

In really hot weather some crops just quit growing.

For a while we can chase the climate toward the poles. As we write off places close to the equator we will see places further pole-ward open up. But that comes with problems.

As you move northward on this side of the equator in North America you leave the productive prairies and find yourself in the rocky forest lands of Canada. Not much topsoil there. Think about trying to farm a melted off Greenland. There's no soil underneath that ice.

As you move southward on the other side of the equator both continents taper. Going to be crowding more people into smaller areas. (Australia seems to be on its way to being a write-off already.)

Only upper Europe might remain as productive farm land.

If you want to talk about tourism start with writing off all the world's sandy beaches. It's not going to take much sea level rise to wipe them out.

Sure, we could pump some sand up to the new coast line, but that's going to be expensive. Only the "1%" and their better paid employees are going to be going to those resorts.

Then write off lots of cities like Miami, New York, Bangkok, Sacramento, New Orleans. They're headed under water. Not going to be much tourism there except for a few curious divers.

Write off most of the Caribbean Islands. And the Maldives. And lots of other exotic places where people like to go.

Write off Bangladesh, Southern Florida, the Netherlands.

It's not that things are likely to get impossible in the next 10 - 20 years. We can likely adjust and adapt.

The real problem is that we are kicking forces into gear that are going to take over and move on their own and we will not be able to turn things around. Once the permafrost starts to melt in significant amounts and methane begins to bubble out then we're in deep, deep trouble.

Folks like me, I've got another good 20-40 years most likely, we'll dodge the big bullet. But you guys who are still in school, who are teensters or twenty-somethings, you could have some real nasty things to deal with when you grow up and hit middle age or older. Your kids are almost certainly going to be taking it in the shorts if we keep on doing what we're doing.

It's like the doctor has finished the tests and is reporting back to you....

Good news, you're going to be OK for a while. You might even feel somewhat better.

But then, you die. A slow, painful death.

very interesting, H2 cable channel had on yesterday, this very scenerio, called earth 2100, population growing, cropland, meat production and water all slowly vanishing, whole populations moving into smaller and smaller livable land area's...the future doesnt look to bright for mankind
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33491
322. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Japan Meteorological Agency
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #1
TROPICAL DEPRESSION 01
15:00 PM JST February 17 2012
==================================

SUBJECT: TROPICAL DEPRESSION IN SOUTH CHINA SEA

At 06:00 AM UTC, Tropical Depression (1006 hPa) located at 9.4N 116.0E has 10 minute sustained winds of 30 knots with gusts of 45 knots. The depression is reported as moving west slowly.

Dvorak Intensity: T2.0

Forecast and Intensity
========================

24 HRS: 9.4N 114.0E - 35 knots (CAT 1/Tropical Storm)

The next tropical cyclone advisory from Japan Meteorological Agency will be issued at 9:50 AM UTC..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
321. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Seychelles Meteorological Services
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #33
TEMPETE TROPICALE MODEREE GIOVANNA (09-20112012)
10:00 AM RET February 17 2012
================================

At 6:00 AM UTC, Moderate Tropical Storm Giovanna (996 hPa) located at 25.5S 42.5E has 10 minute sustained winds of 40 knots with gusts of 60 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving east at 3 knots.

Gale Force Winds
==================
40 NM radius from the center extending up to 60 NM in the southwestern quadrant

Near Gale Force Winds
======================
70 NM radius from the center extending up to 100 in the northeastern quadrant and up to 120 NM in the southern semi-circle

Dvorak Intensity: T2.5/3.0/W1.0/24 HRS

Forecast and Intensity
========================

12 HRS: 25.7S 42.7E - 45 knots (Tempête Tropicale Modérée)
24 HRS: 25.6S 43.1E - 50 knots (Forte Tempête Tropicale)
48 HRS: 25.6S 45.1E - 60 knots (Forte Tempête Tropicale)
72 HRS: 25.1S 46.3E - Depression sur Terre

Additional Information
=====================

Deep convective activity is very fluctuating and ASCAT 1832 PM UTC shows a strong winds crown rather far from the center. Last 0546 AM UTC ASCAT swath covers partially the circulation but confirms this maximum winds radii at about 75 km away from the center.

Track forecast keeps a large uncertainty despite last numerical weather prediction models become in a better agreement for a globally eastwards motion. Last night upper level constraint (refer to cirrus arc in the west on infrared imagery) is expected to progressively relax, system should therefore intensify again. Within the next 36 hours, Giovanna is expected to remain oversea and should reach back severe tropical storm stage. On and after this range, track uncertainty impact strongly intensity forecast, depending on an oversea or inland track. Despite last ECMWF numerical weather prediction run shows an oversea track, RSMC's one forecast a landfall in the region of Sainte-Marie Cape and then a weakening to dissipation.

Inhabitants of southern Malagasy areas are invited to closely follow the progress of this system.

Given the current high spread amongst the guidance, inhabitants of the Mozambican coasts should continue to follow the progress of Giovanna.

The next tropical cyclone advisory on TC GIOVANNA issued by Seychelles Meteorological Services will be issued at 12:30 PM UTC..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:


I'm really starting to get concerned with what's shaping up for the central Gulf states Saturday. I'll be interested to see what Dr. Masters thinks. Here in south central Alabama, we are right in the bullseye for the 30% zone, which I suspect will be raised to 45% on the next update. Our one hope is that the warm front moving back north will bring enough clouds and overrunning rain with it to block the sun Saturday morning. If we do get sun before about 1300, the atmosphere will rapidly destabilize and I fear we are in for big trouble...again. :(
As per the 0z GFS, it appears to me that wind damage will be the more substantial threat farther south, but in your area, isolated strong tornadoes do seem possible.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
why not use liquid nitrogent to cool those reactors in a hurry maybe keep an emerg. suppy of that around in case of a run away reactor would that not cool it really fast
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting chimera245:


I was once told by a friend who worked at Dungeness back in the day that one of the reasons was that in an absolute emergency there was a free supply of last resort cooling water always available - i.e. Sea Water.

If Fukushima had been land locked and the generators had been taken out (perhaps due to direct quake damage) - there would have been no way to flood the reactors with water to keep them cool - and then things would have been far worse . . . remember, you haven't got days to re-establish a supply of coolant - you have minutes and/or hours.


Correct. Nuke plants not only have be built close to a source of alternate cooling water but they have an elaborate pumping system to make sure the reactors are kept cool. Building them next to the ocean or a big inland reservoir or river is absolutely necessary for safety. The mistakes made at the plant in Japan was two-fold. The first was that all the emergency generators were mounted on a pad that faced the ocean, so they were destroyed by the tsunami. The second was not having an in-plant substation, so that the power went to the grid and to the plant's own power supply. Even if the generators were lost, having a substation that fed power to the plant directly still would have worked as long as there was enough steam in the boilers to spin the generators. There are lots of lessons to be learned from this disaster.

I'm really starting to get concerned with what's shaping up for the central Gulf states Saturday. I'll be interested to see what Dr. Masters thinks. Here in south central Alabama, we are right in the bullseye for the 30% zone, which I suspect will be raised to 45% on the next update. Our one hope is that the warm front moving back north will bring enough clouds and overrunning rain with it to block the sun Saturday morning. If we do get sun before about 1300, the atmosphere will rapidly destabilize and I fear we are in for big trouble...again. :(
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
why they put the plant so close to the shore in the first place kinda stupid when you know you are in a hig earthquake zone to do that should be a law that all future plants be at least 20 miles inland from the sea to avoid tidal wave over running


They didn't need to go 20 miles inland, but they did need to go higher and/or put in a higher seawall.

They knew that. Government and company officials were informed that there had been a similarly large tsunami many years back so the possibility existed. They simply cut corners in order to save money and it blew up in their faces.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
why they put the plant so close to the shore in the first place


I was once told by a friend who worked at Dungeness back in the day that one of the reasons was that in an absolute emergency there was a free supply of last resort cooling water always available - i.e. Sea Water.

If Fukushima had been land locked and the generators had been taken out (perhaps due to direct quake damage) - there would have been no way to flood the reactors with water to keep them cool - and then things would have been far worse . . . remember, you haven't got days to re-establish a supply of coolant - you have minutes and/or hours.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sunlinepr:
3-quakes-in-fukushima-over-4-hours centered-15km-from-plant-at-depth-of-10km

Title: Earthquake Information
Source: Japan Meteorological Agency
Date: Feb 17, 2012

04:29 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M2.9 1
02:42 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M3.7 2
00:30 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Nakadori M3.1 2
14:22 JST 16 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M3.6 1

why they put the plant so close to the shore in the first place kinda stupid when you know you are in a hig earthquake zone to do that should be a law that all future plants be at least 20 miles inland from the sea to avoid tidal wave over running
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
3-quakes-in-fukushima-over-4-hours centered-15km-from-plant-at-depth-of-10km

Title: Earthquake Information
Source: Japan Meteorological Agency
Date: Feb 17, 2012

04:29 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M2.9 1
02:42 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M3.7 2
00:30 JST 17 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Nakadori M3.1 2
14:22 JST 16 Feb 2012 Fukushima-ken Oki M3.6 1

Member Since: August 2, 2010 Posts: 21 Comments: 9656
Quoting yqt1001:
I was looking for the periodic table in my science textbook to do my chem homework and I came across something that shocked me. Now, it wouldn't be shocking if I thought about it logically, but the blog has taken all logic away from the AGW debate that when I heard the benefits of AGW I nearly fainted.

Apparently:
-AGW is good for the growing seasons in the northern rural areas of Ontario, increasing the economy of the north and increasing crop output.
-AGW is good for tourism and the economy in Northern Canada. Once the Northwest passage becomes fully ice free in the summer (might have already? the textbook is rather old) the amount of cargo traffic will increase exponentially on route to China and Asia, and super huge cruise ships will start passing through there and the northern towns.

So maybe AGW isn't all that bad? Or are the benefits limited to northern regions (which would be here)?


Sure, in the short term some parts of the world will get more livable. And agriculture conditions will improve. We're already seeing hardiness zones moving north which means that things which couldn't be grown in some places will now be possible.

The downside of that is conditions are going to get worse in other parts of the planet. Look at what has happened in the Southwest US during the last few years. Major droughts have significantly damaged the cattle industry as graze and hay production failed. Farmers are running short of water needed to keep their crops going.

The Southwest is running out of water.

Furthermore we'll loose agriculture lands because it will simply get too hot to grow typical crops in a hotter climate. The California wine industry is already facing a future in which the Napa and Sonoma Valleys will become too hot for better quality wine grapes. Vineyards are buying land further north for their more delicate grapes.

In really hot weather some crops just quit growing.

For a while we can chase the climate toward the poles. As we write off places close to the equator we will see places further pole-ward open up. But that comes with problems.

As you move northward on this side of the equator in North America you leave the productive prairies and find yourself in the rocky forest lands of Canada. Not much topsoil there. Think about trying to farm a melted off Greenland. There's no soil underneath that ice.

As you move southward on the other side of the equator both continents taper. Going to be crowding more people into smaller areas. (Australia seems to be on its way to being a write-off already.)

Only upper Europe might remain as productive farm land.

If you want to talk about tourism start with writing off all the world's sandy beaches. It's not going to take much sea level rise to wipe them out.

Sure, we could pump some sand up to the new coast line, but that's going to be expensive. Only the "1%" and their better paid employees are going to be going to those resorts.

Then write off lots of cities like Miami, New York, Bangkok, Sacramento, New Orleans. They're headed under water. Not going to be much tourism there except for a few curious divers.

Write off most of the Caribbean Islands. And the Maldives. And lots of other exotic places where people like to go.

Write off Bangladesh, Southern Florida, the Netherlands.

It's not that things are likely to get impossible in the next 10 - 20 years. We can likely adjust and adapt.

The real problem is that we are kicking forces into gear that are going to take over and move on their own and we will not be able to turn things around. Once the permafrost starts to melt in significant amounts and methane begins to bubble out then we're in deep, deep trouble.

Folks like me, I've got another good 20-40 years most likely, we'll dodge the big bullet. But you guys who are still in school, who are teensters or twenty-somethings, you could have some real nasty things to deal with when you grow up and hit middle age or older. Your kids are almost certainly going to be taking it in the shorts if we keep on doing what we're doing.

It's like the doctor has finished the tests and is reporting back to you....

Good news, you're going to be OK for a while. You might even feel somewhat better.

But then, you die. A slow, painful death.

Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Water, gas continue flowing from Alaska blowout
By DAN JOLING | Associated Press – 3 hrs ago

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A blowout at an exploratory well near the coast of the Beaufort Sea underscores the threat to the pristine Arctic Ocean environment if offshore drilling is allowed by the Obama administration, environmental groups said Thursday.

No crude oil spilled onto the tundra and no workers were injured in the incident Wednesday, but an estimated 42,000 gallons of drilling mud was spit out of the well owned by Repsol E&P USA Inc. The blowout on the Colville River Delta, 18 miles northeast of the village of Nuiqsut, also expelled natural gas that could have ignited.

Link
Member Since: August 2, 2010 Posts: 21 Comments: 9656
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
69hr:



Where's my +1000 button, GFS confirms 0Z NAM, all local mets are now being waaaaay conservative with the snow totals now.
Member Since: September 3, 2011 Posts: 13 Comments: 3466

Quoting RTSplayer:

Your story sounds identical to mine, except I emerged atheist.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Let it snow, Let it snow, Let it snow.

Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5713
69hr:

Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5713

Viewing: 356 - 306

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