Superstorm Sandy delivers a devastating blow to the U.S.

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:23 PM GMT on October 30, 2012

Share this Blog
63
+

In a stunning spectacle of atmospheric violence, Superstorm Sandy roared ashore in New Jersey last night with sustained winds of 90 mph and a devastating storm surge that crippled coastal New Jersey and New York. Sandy's record size allowed the historic storm to bring extreme weather to over 100 million Americans, from Chicago to Maine and from Michigan to Florida. Sandy's barometric pressure at landfall was 946 mb, tying the Great Long Island Express Hurricane of 1938 as the most powerful storm ever to hit the Northeast U.S. north of Cape Hatteras, NC. New York City experienced its worst hurricane since its founding in 1624, as Sandy's 9-foot storm surge rode in on top of a high tide to bring water levels to 13.88' at The Battery, smashing the record 11.2' water level recorded during the great hurricane of 1821. Damage from Superstorm Sandy will likely be in the tens of billions, making the storm one of the five most expensive disasters in U.S. history.


Figure 1. Morning satellite image of Superstorm Sandy taken at 10 am EDT Tuesday, October 30, 2012. Image credit: NASA GSFC.


Figure 2. Sandy's storm surge (green line) at New York City hit 9' near 9 pm EDT, right when water levels due to high tide (blue line.) The total storm tide (red line) reached 13.88 above Mean Lower Low Water, an all-time record for NYC. Image credit: NOAA Tides and Currents.


Figure 3. Storm surge forced the Delaware River in Philadelphia to a crest of 10.62 feet at 4 a.m. EDT this morning, breaking the previous record of 10.50 feet set Apr. 17, 2011 and Nov. 25, 1950. Image credit: NOAA.

Sandy sets all-time low pressure records
Sandy's impact has been so severe over such a wide area that it is difficult to adequately document the event. I'll start with some of the major cities that set all-time low pressure records during Sandy, with the new record followed by the old record and date of occurrence (thanks go to wunderground weather historian Christopher C. Burt for putting this list together):

Atlantic City, NJ: 28.01"/948mb 28.37"/961mb 3/6/1932

Philadelphia, PA: 28.12"/953mb 28.43"/963mb 3/13/1993

Harrisburg, PA: 28.46"/964mb 28.62"/969mb 1/3/1913

Scranton, PA: 28.69"/971mb 28.72"/973mb 2/25/1965

Trenton, NJ: 28.31"/958mb 28.43"/963mb 3/13/1993

Baltimore, MD: 28.49"/965mb 28.68"/971mb 3/3/1932

Harrisburg, PA: 28.46"/964mb 28.62"/969mb 1/3/1913

Cities that came close to setting their all-time low pressure record:

Newark, NJ: 28.51"/965mb 28.45"/963 3/13/1993

New York, NY: 28.53"/966mb 28.38"/961mb 3/1/1914

Washington D.C. 28.63"/969mb 28.54/966mb 3/13/1993

Lynchburg, VA: 29.12"/986mb 28.84"/977mb 3/6/1932

Elkins, WV: 29.22"/989mb 28.85"/977mb 2/25/1965

Sandy's snows
Sandy's snows have clobbered the town of Davis, WV with an estimated 26 - 28" of snow. Most of the town is without power, and winds are blowing 20 - 30 mph with 40 mph gusts. Sandy brought the snowiest October day on record to both Elkins, WV (7" of snow) and Bluefield, WV (4.7".)


Video 1. Multiple trees fall during powerful gusts during Superstorm Sandy's landfall in New Jersey Monday evening (warming: foul language.)

There's so much more to say about Sandy--including how the storm may have been influenced by climate change--but I'll save this for later posts, as it's time to get something posted.

Angela Fritz has a 2:30 pm EDT post that discusses the latest on Sandy's impact and forecast.

Jeff Masters

Hurricane Sandy (Biskitten)
Amazing waves at high tide and the storm is just beginning here in Seacoast NH!
Hurricane Sandy
Downed Sycamore (deltabird)
Weehawken NJ
Downed Sycamore
Davis, West Virginia - 4 PM (beaudodson)
Snow increasing in intensity.
Davis, West Virginia - 4 PM
Corn Neck Road, Block Island, RI (JudyGray)
Corn Neck Road, Block Island, RI
Harlem, NYC (ArsenalNYC)
Part of the roof of my building ripped off during Hurricane Sandy and landed on two cars across the street
Harlem, NYC

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: 656 - 606

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20Blog Index

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
All recon flights into the Superstorm otherwise known as Sandy.



how many millions of dollars spent to save lives...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hey everybody I was read the blogs yesterday and decided to join, wow sandy was an awesome storm and i hope we as a nation can bounce back quickly and my condolences to the families who lost love ones... the only good thing for me is no school
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
It was a large Cat 1 hurricane at landfall. The insurance guys just need to pay as policy says. What is the issue?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jeffs713:

Tropical cyclone warnings trigger the higher deductibles (tropical storm or better). These were covered under a high wind advisory, which may or may not trigger the higher deductible. IMO, it was the right call by the NHC, as Sandy was post-tropical upon landfall.

When the insurance industry starts controlling when watches and warnings are posted... we are going to have incredible issues.


Jeffs read the language in the link in my previous post. It states "hurricane warnings" pretty consistently state-by-state, not tropical cyclone warnings.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

TROPICAL STORM ROSA DISCUSSION NUMBER 4
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP172012
800 PM PDT TUE OCT 30 2012

SATELLITE IMAGERY SHOWS THAT THE CONVECTIVE PATTERN OF ROSA HAS NOT
CHANGED MUCH OVER THE PAST FEW HOURS. THE COLDEST CLOUD TOPS ARE
SEEN IN A CDO-LIKE FEATURE EAST OF THE LOW-LEVEL CENTER...WHILE
THERE IS LITTLE CONVECTIVE BANDING ELSEWHERE. DVORAK ESTIMATES
REMAIN 45 KT FROM SAB AND 35 KT FROM TAFB...AND THE INITIAL
INTENSITY REMAINS 40 KT BASED ON A BLEND OF THESE VALUES. WESTERLY
FLOW ALOFT TO THE NORTH OF ROSA APPEARS TO BE ENHANCING THE OUTFLOW
IN THAT SEMICIRCLE...BUT THE SHEAR IS DISPLACING THE CONVECTION
EAST OF THE LOW-LEVEL CENTER. GLOBAL MODEL FIELDS AND THE SHIPS
GUIDANCE SHOW WESTERLY SHEAR INCREASING OVER THE NEXT 24 HOURS...
WHICH SHOULD ALLOW FOR ONLY LIMITED STRENGTHENING IN THE SHORT
TERM. AFTER 24 HOURS...A CONTINUED INCREASE IN SHEAR SHOULD LEAD TO
WEAKENING AND REMNANT LOW STATUS IN ABOUT 4 DAYS.

A 2231 UTC AMSU PASS SHOWED THAT ROSA IS LOCATED A LITTLE TO THE
EAST OF EARLIER ESTIMATES...AND THE INITIAL MOTION ESTIMATE IS
275/04. ROSA IS CURRENTLY SITUATED ON THE SOUTHEASTERN FLANK OF A
MID-LEVEL RIDGE....WHICH SHOULD RESULT IN A SLOW WESTWARD MOTION
FOR THE NEXT DAY OR SO. THEN...AS A DEEP-LAYER TROUGH MOVES INTO
THE EASTERN PACIFIC TO THE NORTH OF THE TROPICAL CYCLONE...THE
TRACK MODEL GUIDANCE BECOMES QUITE DIVERGENT. THE ECMWF...UKMET...
AND NOGAPS SHOW A WEAKENING ROSA TURNING WEST-SOUTHWESTWARD BY DAY
4. ALTERNATIVELY...THE GFS AND GFDL SHOW A DEEPER REPRESENTATION OF
ROSA TURNING NORTHEASTWARD AT DAYS 4 AND 5 IN RESPONSE TO A MID-
LEVEL CUTOFF LOW THAT FORMS OFF THE COAST OF THE BAJA PENINSULA.
GIVEN THAT ROSA IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE IN AN ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE
FOR MUCH STRENGTHENING...THE GFS/GFDL SEENARIO SEEMS A LITTLE
LESS LIKELY...ALTHOUGH THIS SOLUTION NOW HAS THE SUPPORT OF A FEW
OF THE GEFS ENSEMBLE MEMBERS. GIVEN THAT THE TVCE MULTI-MODEL
CONSENSUS AND THE GEFS ENSEMBLE MEAN SHOW VERY LITTLE MOTION AT
DAYS 3 THROUGH 5...THE NHC FORECAST HAS BEEN SLOWED DOWN
CONSIDERABLY...BUT STILL SHOWS A WEST-SOUTHWESTWARD MOTION TO
PROVIDE SOME CONTINUITY WITH THE PREVIOUS NHC FORECAST. FURTHER
ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TRACK MAY BE NECESSARY IN THE NEXT CYCLE.

FORECAST POSITIONS AND MAX WINDS

INIT 31/0300Z 14.5N 117.0W 40 KT 45 MPH
12H 31/1200Z 14.6N 117.6W 45 KT 50 MPH
24H 01/0000Z 14.7N 118.3W 45 KT 50 MPH
36H 01/1200Z 14.8N 118.8W 40 KT 45 MPH
48H 02/0000Z 14.9N 119.3W 40 KT 45 MPH
72H 03/0000Z 14.5N 120.5W 35 KT 40 MPH
96H 04/0000Z 14.2N 121.7W 30 KT 35 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW
120H 05/0000Z 14.0N 123.0W 25 KT 30 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW

$$
FORECASTER BRENNAN
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 13337
Quoting Autistic2:
I read the news and then I stop and think.

Yes our climate is changing. Of this I am sure.

But why is it changing?

Science tells me we had three previous ice ages; did it not warm between them? We were not here then but were volcanoes or other co2 emissions? I do not know, not sure anyone does.

Everything I see says yes. The climate is changing but I am not sure it is us doing it.

I think the amount of heat released in nuclear tests (American, Russian, Chinese, South African, British, North Korean, etc) dwarf anything our cars can do. How much did we burn and explode in WW2 Korea, Vietnam, those are only American conflicts, there have been many others.

I think the climate change is really a BIG PICTURE that goes well beyond c02.

My 2 cents
Interesting you would mention nuclear blasts. Did you know the oceans are currently heating up at the rate of more than two Hiroshima "Little Boy" atomic bomb detonations per second, every second? And that they've been doing so for more than the last 50 years? (Source)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Quoting sfranz:



If they were really using that rationale wouldn't the insurers just sue them?


Tropical cyclone warnings trigger the higher deductibles (tropical storm or better). These were covered under a high wind advisory, which may or may not trigger the higher deductible. IMO, it was the right call by the NHC, as Sandy was post-tropical upon landfall.

When the insurance industry starts controlling when watches and warnings are posted... we are going to have incredible issues.
Member Since: August 3, 2008 Posts: 16 Comments: 5793
Quoting sfranz:



If they were really using that rationale wouldn't the insurers just sue them?



Sue who? The federal government? Good luck with that. Property insurers have in countless instances utilized their very well-crafted verbiage in this very same manner. remember the great debate over Katrina and flood damage vs. wind damage? Nope, the policies all pretty clearly state hurricane warnings as the key trigger for the higher deductibles. Don't get me wrong, there will be tons of lawsuits. Some of the insurers will do the right thing upfront and some won't.

http://www.iii.org/issues_updates/hurricane-and-w indstorm-deductibles.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
All the reports of storms tonight remind me- we had thunder snow last night
during Sandy. I promise, I didn't react like Jim Cantore. It was only the second timeI have seen this, the other being back in the 70's as a child.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I seem to recall in the notices the said the NWS would be handling the wind warnings.

Without a hurricane designation wouldn't that leave no one handling the storm surge communications?

This is complex and I hope it gets some scrutiny in the post season. If a communication is widely ineffective then it's technical correctness is just part of the story.

Some tough calls on an unusual storm.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I read the news and then I stop and think.

Yes our climate is changing. Of this I am sure.

But why is it changing?

Science tells me we had three previous ice ages; did it not warm between them? We were not here then but were volcanoes or other co2 emissions? I do not know, not sure anyone does.

Everything I see says yes. The climate is changing but I am not sure it is us doing it.

I think the amount of heat released in nuclear tests (American, Russian, Chinese, South African, British, North Korean, etc) dwarf anything our cars can do. How much did we burn and explode in WW2 Korea, Vietnam, those are only American conflicts, there have been many others.

I think the climate change is really a BIG PICTURE that goes well beyond c02.

My 2 cents
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ingram01:


Hurricane warnings were never officially announced above North Carolina I believe. NWS hurricane warnings are the trigger for for the larger property insurance deductibles in that region.



If they were really using that rationale wouldn't the insurers just sue them?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ingram01:


Hurricane warnings were never officially announced above North Carolina I believe. NWS hurricane warnings are the trigger for for the larger property insurance deductibles in that region.
Maybe we should take this to the supreme court and get a ruling in 10 years. That will help them.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting centex:
I thought hurricane force winds were issued in warnings.


Hurricane warnings were never officially announced above North Carolina I believe. NWS hurricane warnings are the trigger for for the larger property insurance deductibles in that region.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Barkeep1967:
Anyone who tries to claim--even discounting Sandy--that the more than 3.4 million metric tons of long-lasting, heat-trapping, fossil fuel-based CO2 we humans pump into the atmosphere each and every hour of each and every day has no effect on the weather or the climate is in absolute denial of reality. Period. The climate is changing far faster than scientists predicted even a few short years ago, and there's no sign of that trend reversing.


Yet in temps have not risen in the last 16 years ? hmmmmmmmmmmm


See I can pick and choose what I believe also. And no I do not really give that report about steady temps credit. Just my sarcasm is all
Fair enough. At least you have the honesty to admit that your opinions are unchangeable and shaped not by scientific fact but by preconception and ideology. That's more than many will admit to.

Take care...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Sandy was a "one and only" storm - it was the first (Atlantic) storm to be given that name and will undoubtedly be the last. I went thru the records (Warning: I used the NHC compilations rather than go back to the original data; I have found that databases (regardless of subject) are almost always loaded with errors) and found 35 one and only storms. On the other hand, Frances was retired after being used 8 times. Here's the full list of how many times each retired name was used:
Audrey 1, Agnes 1, Anita 1, Allen 1, Alicia 1, Andrew 2, Allison 3
Betsy 3, Beulah 3, Bob 3
Connie 1, Carla 2, Cleo 3, Carol 3, Camille 1, Celia 3, Carmen 1, Cesar 3, Charley (not to be confused with Charlie) 5
Diane 1, Donna 1, Dora 2, David 1, Diana 2, Dennis 5, Dean 5
Edna 3, Eloise 1, Elena 3
Flora 3, Fifi 2, Frederic 1, Fran 4, Floyd 4, Fabian 4, Frances 8, Felix 4
Gracie 1, Gloria 3, Gilbert 1, Georges 2, Gustav 5
Hazel 2, Hattie 1, Hilda 2, Hugo 1, Hortense 3
Ione 1, Inez 1, Iris 3, Isidore 4, Isabel 2, Ivan 3, Ike 1, Igor 1, Irene 5
Janet 1, Joan 1, Juan 2, Jeanne 3
Klaus 2, Keith 2, Katrina 3
Luis 1, Lenny 1, Lili 2
Marilyn 1, Mitch 1, Michelle 1
Noel 2
Opal 1
Paloma 1
Roxanne 1, Rita 1
Stan 1
Tomas 1
Wilma 1
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KarenRei:


How about the explanation that that never happened?

Here's a peer-reviewed reference to that regard (not that you care about the scientific process!)

Link

Do explain other reports that temp gain has been relatively flat?


They're not.

And don't quote the frauds in England that were caught manipulating numbers as evidenced through their emails.


They were resoundingly cleared of wrongdoing by many subsequent investigations from a wide range of different bodies

It has been shown that temp rose first before co2 rose in the past.


On geological scales, CO2 is feedback. On human scales, it's forcing. That is to say, it's average atmospheric residency time is hundreds of years. On scales of hundreds of thousands of years, it will equalize to whatever is natural given the other factors driving the climate; it is merely a (major) amplifying response**. But we're directly injecting it now. The changes are not a "response" to other factors, it's being directly put there by us. Quite obviously; we can even see the isotopic ratio changing, as we're burning "old" (radioisotope-depleted) carbon. And while whatever we inject will be gone after several hundreds to a few thousand of years, which is the blink of an eye from a planetary perspective, it's many dozens of generations from a human perspective.

** The primary driver of the ice ages is the "Milankovitch" orbital cycles. However, the forcing from the orbit alone is a small fraction of what is actually experienced during the ice ages. The rest is amplification from feedback factors, mainly CO2 and water vapor. Water vapor is an even faster feedback, with an average atmospheric residency of only a few weeks. Even on a human scale, water vapor is a feedback.


Then you have it all figured out, don't you....excellent science that is irrefutable. You know exactly how the climate works as well as the earth and it rotation relevance and orbits and let me include the sun. I'm impressed. Do tell me the next tropical storm, it's development, intesity and direction. My saying that is despite your explination, that was indeed nice, you dont have a clue and are theorizing like the others. Unfortunatly, those theories may cost trillions for the the US while china, India, et al continue on. And 30 years from now, the theory will be about thee next ice age and global cooling.

But again, nice explanation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ingram01:
NWS never did issue hurricane warnings for Sandy north of North Carolina did they?
I thought hurricane force winds were issued in warnings.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Anyone who tries to claim--even discounting Sandy--that the more than 3.4 million metric tons of long-lasting, heat-trapping, fossil fuel-based CO2 we humans pump into the atmosphere each and every hour of each and every day has no effect on the weather or the climate is in absolute denial of reality. Period. The climate is changing far faster than scientists predicted even a few short years ago, and there's no sign of that trend reversing.


Yet in temps have not risen in the last 16 years ? hmmmmmmmmmmm


See I can pick and choose what I believe also. And no I do not really give that report about steady temps credit. Just my sarcasm is all
Member Since: June 26, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 207
Quoting Neapolitan:
--The toll in the Breezy Point blaze is 111 homes.

--The U.S. death toll from sandy has reached 50.


I think that number of dead will increase more as the clean up swings into high gear. Very unfortinate. I think alot of those people died from falling trees. I saw the video earler of the trees falling down, thinking, put the camera down and get to the middleof you house!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pirate999:


Then do explain scientist in the 1970's that were screaming about the earth entering another ice age? Do explain other reports that temp gain has been relatively flat? And don't quote the frauds in England that were caught manipulating numbers as evidenced through their emails.

Many of us will never agree the cause. It has been shown that temp rose first before co2 rose in the past. If you or I, or these "scientists" say we can explain this then we are all naive idiots.

We will be at other spectrums and that's what makes the world go round.


Pirate, nature doesn't give a hoot if you agree or not. That should be rather obvious today. We'll never be able to say whether or not GW directly caused Sandy but we can sure say GW made the conditions for Sandy to occur more likely.

BTW, all the things you mention in your first paragraph have been debunked dozens of times. Go to RealClimate or SkepticalScience to read what the climatologists have to say. Or listen to Rush. As I said before, Nature doesn't care. At this point, neither do I.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pirate999:


Then do explain scientist in the 1970's that were screaming about the earth entering another ice age?


How about the explanation that that never happened?

Here's a peer-reviewed reference to that regard (not that you care about the scientific process!)

Link

Do explain other reports that temp gain has been relatively flat?


They're not.

And don't quote the frauds in England that were caught manipulating numbers as evidenced through their emails.


They were resoundingly cleared of wrongdoing by many subsequent investigations from a wide range of different bodies

It has been shown that temp rose first before co2 rose in the past.


On geological scales, CO2 is feedback. On human scales, it's forcing. That is to say, it's average atmospheric residency time is hundreds of years. On scales of hundreds of thousands of years, it will equalize to whatever is natural given the other factors driving the climate; it is merely a (major) amplifying response**. But we're directly injecting it now. The changes are not a "response" to other factors, it's being directly put there by us. Quite obviously; we can even see the isotopic ratio changing, as we're burning "old" (radioisotope-depleted) carbon. And while whatever we inject will be gone after several hundreds to a few thousand of years, which is the blink of an eye from a planetary perspective, it's many dozens of generations from a human perspective.

** The primary driver of the ice ages is the "Milankovitch" orbital cycles. However, the forcing from the orbit alone is a small fraction of what is actually experienced during the ice ages. The rest is amplification from feedback factors, mainly CO2 and water vapor. Water vapor is an even faster feedback, with an average atmospheric residency of only a few weeks. Even on a human scale, water vapor is a feedback.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
--The toll in the Breezy Point blaze is 111 homes.

--The U.S. death toll from sandy has reached 50, including 18 in NYC alone.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Quoting avthunder:
Looks like New England is getting some weather tonight! Weather Channel just showed some very strong storms in MA/NH. And Chicago is getting strong windstorms. Sandy is still massive and not done yet. Never seen anything like this.


I just got back from seeing "Cloud Atlas" (very good movie, IMO) and we are getting the most powerful t-storms I've seen here in Yarmouth, NS in at least 12 years. A power surge knocked out the projector about 20 minutes in. After it was fixed we watched the rest of the movie, then came out into a wicked downpour and continuous lightning right overhead. Not a fun drive home. And there's more on the way. Sandy is finally landing a punch on us. Power is holding up well, for now.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pirate999:


Interesting. I didn't hear him mention FEMA or disaster relief. In fact he said give the money to the states and then he mentioned the overall debt. Your point is?



The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Sound familer? If you are American it should.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pirate999:


Then do explain scientist in the 1970's that were screaming about the earth entering another ice age? Do explain other reports that temp gain has been relatively flat? And don't quote the frauds in England that were caught manipulating numbers as evidenced through their emails.

Many of us will never agree the cause. It has been shown that temp rose first before co2 rose in the past. If you or I, or these "scientists" say we can explain this then we are all naive idiots.

We will be at other spectrums and that's what makes the world go round.
Sigh. For the thousandth time:

1) The majority of climate scientists and science papers--in the 1970s talked of warming, not cooling.

2) Temps haven't been flat; warming continues apace once natural variability is accounted for.

3) After nearly a dozen thorough subjective investigations, not a trace of fraud or manipulation was ever found.

You are certainly free to "not agree the cause". But 97% of climate scientists know what's going on, and they know why.

I do wish people would take the time to learn before spouting nonsense such as the above comment; it would make the world a more productive place.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13306
Quoting Pirate999:


Interesting. I didn't hear him mention FEMA or disaster relief. In fact he said give the money to the states and then he mentioned the overall debt. Your point is?



You decide.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:
I report...You decide...



Interesting. I didn't hear him mention FEMA or disaster relief. In fact he said give the money to the states and then he mentioned the overall debt. Your point is?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting airmet3:


They did not. The forecast was for the storm to become post-tropical or extra-tropical before landfall.


None of the coastal states affected allow hurricane deductibles on property insurance claims unless the NWS issues warnings for their area.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting greenengineer:


No there wasn't. Pollution control devices can reduce soot, NOx, SOx, etc, but they don't stop CO2 production - more fossil fuel consumption = more CO2 production.



More CO2 production = higher CO2 levels





Now much c02 is then released due to ice melting?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Manhattancane:


In 1900, 112 years of carbon dioxide had not been released yet, almost all of which is still there.

Do you really believe that 2 billion persons with low technology could mine as much coal as 7 billion people now with heavy machinery? (and it was mostly coal, now we just drill deep enough and the oil is pumped automatically) The industrialized world population has also grown.

And notice how the temperature seems to rise several decades after the CO2.


Then do explain scientist in the 1970's that were screaming about the earth entering another ice age? Do explain other reports that temp gain has been relatively flat? And don't quote the frauds in England that were caught manipulating numbers as evidenced through their emails.

Many of us will never agree the cause. It has been shown that temp rose first before co2 rose in the past. If you or I, or these "scientists" say we can explain this then we are all naive idiots.

We will be at other spectrums and that's what makes the world go round.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Autistic2:
OK Sandy was and is very bad.

There was talk of a second storm forming in the carb. Are the models still showing that?


GFS dropped it.
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 13337
OK Sandy was and is very bad.

There was talk of a second storm forming in the carb. Are the models still showing that?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
On Rachel Maddow, the mayor of Hoboken said that there were currently still 20,000 people in Hoboken that they couldn't reach and that needed to be rescued because of the flooding.
Here's a youtube video of flooded Hoboken.
Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
NBC News

Watch live at 10 p.m. ET: Sandy's Fury
- a special report on the storm's toll and recovery efforts.

http://nbcnews.to/Yl7dc6
Member Since: July 12, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 5984
618. BDAwx
Quoting sar2401:

Yes, that transition from tropical cyclone to non-tropical was very confusing to a lot of users. I thought the NHC was going to post updates on the storm until winds dropped below tropical storm strength, but it seems like there are some clear lines of responsibility that the local NWS offices felt belong to them, and the NHC shouldn't keep posting updates. Maybe this will prompt the NWS to think about the idea of a single site resource to track serious storms over land rather than have to hunt through each individual NWS site for details. Once it devolves to individual NWS offices, you are trapped with some offices that do really good updates and others that are marginal at best. Don't know what the answer is but I clearly see it as a problem.


Yes there are some clear lines of responsibility, but it has more to do with the meteorology than NWS office politics. When the storm became post-tropical/extra-tropical, the responsibility for issuing updates no longer fell to the National Hurricane Center. Regardless, they did provide links to the Hydrological Prediction Center's updates once the storm became extra-tropical. Additionally, I don't understand how its possible to have to "hunt through the NWS site for details", click on your region and read the local warnings.

But I agree, it could be useful to have some sort of unit that issues advisories/updates on extra-tropical storms. I doubt they have the budget for it and because this type of storm doesn't have meaningful quantifiable characteristics that you can put into the form of an advisory, other than central pressure, it makes more sense to have the local units of the national weather service handle it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
It's to early but the forecast of Enso for 2013 aren't very encouraging
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pirate999:


there was arguably more raw co2 ejected with the pollution then than there is now.


No there wasn't. Pollution control devices can reduce soot, NOx, SOx, etc, but they don't stop CO2 production - more fossil fuel consumption = more CO2 production.



More CO2 production = higher CO2 levels



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ingram01:
NWS never did issue hurricane warnings for Sandy north of North Carolina did they?


They did not. The forecast was for the storm to become post-tropical or extra-tropical before landfall.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ingram01:
NWS never did issue hurricane warnings for Sandy north of North Carolina did they?


There is a fair amount of financial significance to that decision for all the homeowners.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Hey, I've been analyzed this blog 24/7 and decided to join now (well yesterday..). I've been hearing that the storm might return to NYC, wondering if you guys think it might?
Also how badly is New Hampshire gonna be affected as of now? I got some friends up there...and they are getting hit really hard and I was hoping of some good news. Thanks.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NatureIsle:
Good night All- Observation:

I have been looking intently at the wind/ intensity analysis for Sandy just Prior to Landfall at Santiago de Cuba and noted that there was an Intermediate advisory (about 1:30a.m.EDT)which indicated that the storm had attained maximum sustained winds of 115mph which would have designated Sandy as a low end Category three Storm at Landfall. This advisory was issued shortly after the first critical intensity update which put top winds intially at 110mph. Therefore It is puzzling as to why -it seems to have been disregarded and consensus seems to be holding on to Sandy's top sustained winds at 0nly 110mph rather than 115mph before imminent landfall in Cuba...


I was watching that night and there were many commnets on this blog, most of them in favor of CAT 3 status. Many were angry when it did not happen. At this point it is history. As I stated that night does it really matter if they said strong CAT 2, which they did, or weak CAT 3, which they did not. It was only a small area that had CAT 3 indications which does not in itself change the catagory of the storm.

We should let this one go and let this be part of the post season process. It still could be changed later. For the damage that was just done this issue just does not make any difference.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
NWS never did issue hurricane warnings for Sandy north of North Carolina did they?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
All recon flights into the Superstorm otherwise known as Sandy.



Excellent graphic.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MAweatherboy1:
Watching some pretty nasty storm roll through a little ways east of me:

Looks like New England is getting some weather tonight! Weather Channel just showed some very strong storms in MA/NH. And Chicago is getting strong windstorms. Sandy is still massive and not done yet. Never seen anything like this.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NEwatcher:


We saw the lightning but it was never close enough to hear the thunder. Glad those 60 mph winds will bo north of us. We still do not have power.



the line of storms that moved through Boston just now were pretty awesome. several strong lightning strikes. very heavy down pour. it moved really fast but I still have power. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:

Yes, that transition from tropical cyclone to non-tropical was very confusing to a lot of users. I thought the NHC was going to post updates on the storm until winds dropped below tropical storm strength, but it seems like there are some clear lines of responsibility that the local NWS offices felt belong to them, and the NHC shouldn't keep posting updates. Maybe this will prompt the NWS to think about the idea of a single site resource to track serious storms over land rather than have to hunt through each individual NWS site for details. Once it devolves to individual NWS offices, you are trapped with some offices that do really good updates and others that are marginal at best. Don't know what the answer is but I clearly see it as a problem.


I have no doubt that TWC has some lobbyists in Washington working this angle in their favor right now.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
That advisory was soon corrected to 110 mph. Note that there are two updates shown as issued at 130 AM.

Quoting NatureIsle:
Good night All- Observation:

I have been looking intently at the wind/ intensity analysis for Sandy just Prior to Landfall at Santiago de Cuba and noted that there was an Intermediate advisory (about 1:30a.m.EDT)which indicated that the storm had attained maximum sustained winds of 115mph which would have designated Sandy as a low end Category three Storm at Landfall. This advisory was issued shortly after the first critical intensity update which put top winds intially at 110mph. Therefore It is puzzling as to why -it seems to have been disregarded and consensus seems to be holding on to Sandy's top sustained winds at 0nly 110mph rather than 115mph before imminent landfall in Cuba...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 656 - 606

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20Blog 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.