The bizarrely active hurricane season of 2012 draws to a close

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:50 PM GMT on November 30, 2012

Share this Blog
45
+

The long and highly destructive hurricane season of 2012 has finally drawn to a close. The hurricane season of 2012 will long be remembered for spawning Hurricane Sandy--a freakish storm that was the largest, most powerful, and second most destructive Atlantic hurricane on record. But this year's hurricane season had a number of unique attributes, making it one of the most bizarre seasons I've witnessed. Despite featuring a remarkable nineteen named storms--tied for the third highest total since record keeping began in 1851--this year's hurricane season had just one major hurricane. That storm was Hurricane Michael, which stayed at Category 3 strength for a scant six hours. This is the least number of major hurricanes in a season since the El Niño year of 1997, which had only Category 3 Hurricane Erika. There were no Category 4 or 5 hurricanes in 2012, for just the 3rd time since the active hurricane period we are in began in 1995. The only two other years since 1995 without a Category 4 or stronger hurricane were the El Niño years of 2006 and 1997. Both of those seasons had around half the number of named storms of 2012--nine in 2006, and eight in 1997. The relative lack of strong storms in 2012 helped keep the Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) down to 128, about 30% above average.


Figure 1. Hurricane Sandy at 10:10 am EDT October 28, 2012. Image credit: NASA/GSFC.

A near-average year for number of tropical cyclones hitting the U.S.
Since the active hurricane period we've been in began in 1995, the U.S. has averaged getting hit by 4 named storms per year, with an average of 1.7 of these being hurricanes, and 0.6 being major Category 3 and stronger hurricanes. This year, we were hit by 3 named storms (Beryl, Debby, and Isaac). One of these was a hurricane (Isaac). Sandy didn't count as a hurricane strike on the U.S., since it transitioned to an extratropical cyclone a few hours before landfall. No major hurricanes hit the U.S., making 2012 the 7th consecutive year without a major hurricane strike. The only other time we've had a streak that long occurred between 1861 - 1868, during the decade of the Civil War.


Figure 2. Vertical instability over the tropical Atlantic in 2004 - 2012 (blue line) compared to average (black line.) The instability is plotted in °C, as a difference in temperature from near the surface to the upper atmosphere (note that the same scale is not used in all the plots, making the black climatological line appear different, when it is really the same for each plot.) Thunderstorms grow much more readily when vertical instability is high. Instability was near average during the August - October peak of hurricane season in 2004 - 2009, but was much lower than average during the hurricane seasons of 2010 - 2012. There was an unusual amount of dry, sinking air in the tropical Atlantic during 2010 - 2012, and the resulting low atmospheric instability reduced the proportion of tropical storms that have intensified into hurricanes. Vertical instability from 2004 - 2011 is taken from NOAA/RAMMB and for 2012 from NOAA/SSD.

Unusually stable air over the Tropical Atlantic in 2012
For the third consecutive hurricane season, 2012 featured an unusual amount of dry, sinking air over the tropical Atlantic and Caribbean Sea. Due to warmer-than-average sea surface temperatures and an active African Monsoon that generated plenty of African waves, a remarkably high number of tropical storms managed to form, but the unusually stable air in the hurricane genesis regions made it difficult for the storms to become strong. When we did see storms undergo significant intensification, it tended to occur outside of the tropics, north of 25°N, where there was not as much dry, sinking air (Sandy's intensification as it approached landfall in Cuba was an exception to this rule.) If we look at the last nine hurricane seasons (Figure 2), we can see that the hurricane seasons of 2010, 2011, and 2012 all featured similar levels of highly stable air over the tropical Atlantic. This is in marked contrast to what occurred the previous six years. The past three seasons all featured a near-record number of named storms (nineteen each year), but an unusually low ratio of strong hurricanes. Steering patterns the past three years also acted to keep most of the storms out to sea. Is this strange pattern something we'll see more of, due to climate change? Or is it mostly due to natural cycles in hurricane activity? I don't have any answers at this point, but the past three hurricane seasons have definitely been highly unusual in a historical context. I expect the steering currents to shift and bring more landfalling hurricanes to the U.S. at some point this decade, though.


Figure 3. Sea water floods the Ground Zero construction site at the World Trade Center, Monday, Oct. 29, 2012, in New York City. Image credit: AP.

Most notable events of the Hurricane Season of 2012
Hurricane Sandy was truly astounding in its size and power. At its peak size, twenty hours before landfall, Sandy had tropical storm-force winds that covered an area nearly one-fifth the area of the contiguous United States. Since detailed records of hurricane size began in 1988, only one tropical storm (Olga of 2001) has had a larger area of tropical storm-force winds, and no hurricanes has. Sandy's area of ocean with twelve-foot seas peaked at 1.4 million square miles--nearly one-half the area of the contiguous United States, or 1% of Earth's total ocean area. Most incredibly, ten hours before landfall (9:30 am EDT October 30), the total energy of Sandy's winds of tropical storm-force and higher peaked at 329 terajoules--the highest value for any Atlantic hurricane since at least 1969. This is 2.7 times higher than Katrina's peak energy, and is equivalent to five Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs. At landfall, Sandy's tropical storm-force winds spanned 943 miles of the the U.S. coast. No hurricane on record has been wider; the previous record holder was Hurricane Igor of 2010, which was 863 miles in diameter. Sandy's huge size prompted high wind warnings to be posted from Chicago to Eastern Maine, and from Michigan's Upper Peninsula to Florida's Lake Okeechobee--an area home to 120 million people. Sandy's winds simultaneously caused damage to buildings on the shores of Lake Michigan at Indiana Dunes National Lake Shore, and toppled power lines in Nova Scotia, Canada--locations 1200 miles apart!


Figure 4. Hurricane Isaac lit up by moonlight as it spins towards the city of New Orleans, LA, on August 26, 2012. The Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP) satellite captured these images with its Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS). The "day-night band" of VIIRS detects light in a range of wavelengths from green to near-infrared and uses light intensification to enable the detection of dim signals. Image Credit: NASA/NOAA, Earth Observatory.

Hurricane Isaac hit Louisiana as a Category 1 hurricane with 80 mph winds on August 28, but the storm's massive wind field brought a storm surge characteristic of a Category 2 hurricane to the coast. A storm surge of 11.1 feet was measured at Shell Beach, LA and higher surges were reported in portions of Louisiana. Fortunately, the new $14.5 billion upgrade to the New Orleans levee system kept the city dry. Isaac killed 9 people in the U.S., and 29 in the Caribbean.

Hurricane Ernesto hit Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula as a Category 1 hurricane with 85 mph winds on August 7. The storm killed 12 and did at least $250 million in damage.

Tropical Storm Debby formed on June 23, the earliest formation date on record for the season's 4th storm. The previous record was Dennis, on July 5, 2005. Debby killed seven and did over $300 million in damage, but helped relieve drought conditions over Northern Florida and Southern Georgia.

Tropical Storm Beryl, which made landfall on May 28 near Jacksonville Beach, FL with 70 mph winds, was the strongest tropical storm to make landfall in the U.S. prior to June 1. Beryl killed two but did minimal damage.

Nadine lasted for 21.75 days as a named storm, the 5th longest-lasting tropical storm in the Atlantic basin.

It was the 3rd year in a row with 19 named storms.

No named storms existed during the month of July and November, but we still managed big numbers.

Only 7 seasons have had more hurricanes than 2012.

The season had two named storm before the official June 1 start of hurricane season, only the 3rd time that has occurred.

Eight named storms formed in August, which tied 2004 for the most to form in that month.

Typhoon Bopha a threat to the Philippines
In the Western Pacific, where typhoon season commonly brings several storms in December, we have impressive Typhoon Bopha. Bopha is expected to head west-northwest and intensify over the weekend, potentially arriving in the Philippines on Tuesday as a powerful Category 3 typhoon. Bopha formed at an unusually low latitude for a tropical cyclone--near 4°N. Storms forming that close to the Equator don't get much help from the Earth's spin to get spinning, and it is rare to see a tropical cyclone forming southwards of 5°N.

The Colorado State University hurricane forecast team, led by Phil Klotzbach and Bill Gray, has a more in-depth summary of the 2012 hurricane season.

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: 120 - 70

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

Quoting JustPlantIt:

I will:)
yes maybe, but what will you be eating?..in an ice age..no plants survive, after that animals vanish..then the glaciers come and scape the earth clean..no buildings nothing left..all scraped clean..yeah we can laugh now..its not happening in real life BUT....be glad we are going into warming..instead of cooling
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33281
Quoting MAweatherboy1:
Doesn't get much better organized than this:



What is the strongest level of typhoon to ever occur near the equator? Or lowest latitudinal value for either side of the hemisphere? I can't find anything on Google yet. #^&$!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Climate Change Threatens National Security, Says CIA-Commissioned Study.


Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JustPlantIt:

What.... 'tornadoes'?????

sorry, what?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
116. VR46L
Quoting VAstorms:


First mention I've seen of this new invest.


And it has model support....

CMC


Euro



GFS



NOGAPS

Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting LargoFl:
everyone is arguing about GW..just imagine..what the future would be..IF..it was the other way around..ICE building towards another ice age..if you think prices alone..for food stuffs etc is high now..just wait..roads impassable, ports frozen solid..power outages all over the place, poles down winter storms so severe, snowfall in feet, never melting,imagine the lay offs..imagine below zero temps everywhere..lasting hundreds of years..global Warming might indeed be bad BUT..a frozen earth most of us wouldnt be here for very long
I will:)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33281
National Geographic:

Polar Ice Sheets Shrinking Worldwide, Study Confirms

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
To 101

I posted a reply. You must have missed it. The reply was:

Either

1) The graph shows there has been no warming since 1998.

2) The graph is a denier hoax.

Here's another graph. Note how global temperature fluctuates. This fluctuation will continue in a warming world. However, with increasing warming, downward fluctuations will be masked by the warming trend.

Member Since: July 20, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2416


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Bielle:


FYI: This is funny? From Wikipedia:
The main hazards posed by smouldering arise from the fact that it can be easily initiated (by heat sources too weak to ignite flames) and is difficult to detect. Fire statistics draw attention to the magnitude of smouldering combustion as the leading cause of fire deaths in residential areas (i.e., more than 25% of the fire deaths in the United States are attributed to smoulder-initiated fires, with similar figures in other developed countries). A particularly common fire scenario is a cigarette igniting a piece of upholstered furniture. This ignition leads to a smouldering fire that lasts for a long period of time (in the order of hours), spreading slowly and silently until critical conditions are attained and flames suddenly erupt;


it's no joke - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15032614
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
everyone is arguing about GW..just imagine..what the future would be..IF..it was the other way around..ICE building towards another ice age..if you think prices alone..for food stuffs etc is high now..just wait..roads impassable, ports frozen solid..power outages all over the place, poles down winter storms so severe, snowfall in feet, never melting,imagine the lay offs..imagine below zero temps everywhere..lasting hundreds of years..global Warming might indeed be bad BUT..a frozen earth most of us wouldnt be here for very long
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33281
Quoting VR46L:
Have A great Friday Folks

Looks like we may have Valerie early next week




and didn't i just see a forecast loop showing it aiming straight at you after a few days?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The peak intensity now is 125kts.

WTPN31 PGTW 302100
MSGID/GENADMIN/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI//
SUBJ/TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING//
RMKS/
1. TYPHOON 26W (BOPHA) WARNING NR 021
01 ACTIVE TROPICAL CYCLONE IN NORTHWESTPAC
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS BASED ON ONE-MINUTE AVERAGE
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
WARNING POSITION:
301800Z --- NEAR 4.4N 143.0E
MOVEMENT PAST SIX HOURS - 280 DEGREES AT 12 KTS
POSITION ACCURATE TO WITHIN 015 NM
POSITION BASED ON EYE FIXED BY SATELLITE
PRESENT WIND DISTRIBUTION:
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 090 KT, GUSTS 110 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 020 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
020 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
020 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 050 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
050 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 080 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
075 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
075 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
080 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
REPEAT POSIT: 4.4N 143.0E
---
FORECASTS:
12 HRS, VALID AT:
010600Z --- 5.1N 140.9E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 105 KT, GUSTS 130 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 030 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
025 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
030 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
030 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 055 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
055 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
055 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
060 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 095 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
085 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
090 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
095 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 24 HR POSIT: 285 DEG/ 12 KTS
---
24 HRS, VALID AT:
011800Z --- 5.8N 138.6E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 120 KT, GUSTS 145 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 035 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
035 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 060 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
060 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
060 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
065 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 100 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
095 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
100 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
105 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 36 HR POSIT: 285 DEG/ 12 KTS
---
36 HRS, VALID AT:
020600Z --- 6.4N 136.3E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 125 KT, GUSTS 150 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 035 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
035 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
040 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 065 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
060 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
060 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
065 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 110 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
105 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
105 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
110 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 48 HR POSIT: 285 DEG/ 11 KTS
---
EXTENDED OUTLOOK:
48 HRS, VALID AT:
021800Z --- 7.0N 134.1E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 125 KT, GUSTS 150 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 040 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
040 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
040 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
040 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 065 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
060 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
065 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
065 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 115 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
105 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
110 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
115 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 72 HR POSIT: 285 DEG/ 12 KTS
---
72 HRS, VALID AT:
031800Z --- 8.4N 129.4E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 115 KT, GUSTS 140 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 064 KT WINDS - 040 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
040 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
040 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
040 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 050 KT WINDS - 065 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
065 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
065 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
065 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 120 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
110 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
115 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
120 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
VECTOR TO 96 HR POSIT: 285 DEG/ 12 KTS
---
LONG RANGE OUTLOOK:
---
96 HRS, VALID AT:
041800Z --- 9.8N 124.7E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 095 KT, GUSTS 115 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
VECTOR TO 120 HR POSIT: 295 DEG/ 10 KTS
---
120 HRS, VALID AT:
051800Z --- 11.3N 121.0E
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 075 KT, GUSTS 090 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
REMARKS:
302100Z POSITION NEAR 4.6N 142.5E.
TYPHOON (TY) 26W (BOPHA) LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 530 NM EAST-SOUTHEAST
OF PALAU, HAS TRACKED WESTWARD AT 12 KNOTS OVER THE PAST SIX HOURS.
MAXIMUM SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT AT 301800Z IS 28 FEET. NEXT WARNINGS
AT 010300Z, 010900Z, 011500Z AND 012100Z.//
NNNN

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 13280

Quoting plutorising:

not only don't they want to listen, but they're wasting your time, and lowering your ability to deal with higher order issues. moms of little kids complain about how dumb they feel after communicating with small minds all day. and they turn into a pack if there's more than a few of them.
What.... 'tornadoes'?????
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting dabirds:
For Largo - 60.6, 41 dew pt, 9mph from SSW, gust to 15 in S C IL - no need to go south yet!
yes indeed, for this time of year thats pretty good for you folks
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 33281
Statement as of 9:48 AM PST on November 30, 2012

The National Weather Service in Reno has issued a

* Flood Warning for
the Truckee River near Truckee.
* From late Saturday night to Monday morning... or until the warning
is cancelled.
* At 8:30 am Friday the stage was 2.8 feet.
* Flood stage is 4.5 feet.
* Major flooding is forecast.
* Forecast... rise above flood stage by early Sunday morning and
continue to rise to near 8.2 feet by late Sunday morning. The river
will fall below flood stage by Sunday evening.
* Impact... at 8.0 feet... major flood damage to homes... roads and
bridges along Truckee River between squaw creek and Truckee. Like
flood of December 23 1955... about 7800 cfs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting schwankmoe:
nice, nasty, they don't want to listen either way.


not only don't they want to listen, but they're wasting your time, and lowering your ability to deal with higher order issues. moms of little kids complain about how dumb they feel after communicating with small minds all day. and they turn into a pack if there's more than a few of them.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


No, that is not the talking points of my post at all. My talking points dealt with the fact that there are segments of the population that will not accept the science no matter how it is presented to them. So, therefore, why should they complain so much about how the science is presented to them? Is this nothing more than just another avoidance of the science itself?


Well, yeah, it is, but those folks are going to avoid the science either way. Doesn't really matter.

The folks who are still picking up on just what's going on, or are at least slightly open to looking at the science, those are the folks I'm more interested in. And for them, presentation does probably matter some, just to cut through the ideology stuff, which gets kind of oddly tribal or something -- often much more about personal relationships than one might think as a rational matter.

People do listen better to ideas from people they generally like and respect.

The other set -- the set you're talking about -- they've got such a deep, personal stake of some kind in their preformed opinion that I do fully predict some of them will be shouting about how it's just another sun spot or some such no matter what level of change we actually witness. But they're not everybody.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Here's graph I posted this morning without making a comment.

Since none of the AGW crowd commented on it I asked about it later and only ScottL replied.

Quoting ScottLincoln

..The graphic in post 782 is not particularly relevant to the current discussion because is comparing two different physical quantities on incorrect timescales.

The hidden claim made by posting that graph is that monthly temperature anomalies should respond in a linear way to linear changes to climate forcings, and those changes will both occur and be noticeable on monthly timestep data. The second hidden claim is that because the first claim does not appear to be occurring (through visual "eye-balling"), the conclusion should be that CO2 is not changing climate. Climate does not behave this way. At all. If you know anything about climate, you would know this.

To do a proper comparison for relevant discussion, the temperature anomaly data should - at a minimum - be averaged over 5yr or 10yr time periods, and put into a bar graph. The same could be done with the CO2 data but it would not be expected. Also required would be information about the source of the temperature data so that proper caveats could be taken knowing the uncertainties and assumptions of that particular data set.

Replace the graph with a proper one and we'll discuss.



Here's the


How to be a good AGW alarmist post From Funnelvortex this morning.


Quoting FunnelVortex:


How to be a good AGW alarmist.

1. Present your theory.

2. When evidence is presented against your theory, say its been debunked. If the opponent demands to see the study, call bullstuff.

3. Give the sceptics a bad name, like "denialist"

4. Generalize the sceptics as conservitive, creationist, radical republicans who dont care about the Earth.

5. If a person presents hard evidence against AGW, say they are "uncredible" because they dont have a PHD. Or if they do have a PHD, call them an idiot.

6. Push all opposing scientists aside.

7. State your opinion like its fact.

8. If all else fails, preach about how much CO2 the average person produces and ask if we should just "ignore it" or if it will just "go away" (even though it does
).



I'd say FV has the right idea.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
100. yoboi
Quoting Bielle:


FYI: This is funny? From Wikipedia:
The main hazards posed by smouldering arise from the fact that it can be easily initiated (by heat sources too weak to ignite flames) and is difficult to detect. Fire statistics draw attention to the magnitude of smouldering combustion as the leading cause of fire deaths in residential areas (i.e., more than 25% of the fire deaths in the United States are attributed to smoulder-initiated fires, with similar figures in other developed countries). A particularly common fire scenario is a cigarette igniting a piece of upholstered furniture. This ignition leads to a smouldering fire that lasts for a long period of time (in the order of hours), spreading slowly and silently until critical conditions are attained and flames suddenly erupt;






25% related deaths.....thanks for debunking your own statement....lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



funny


FYI: This is funny? From Wikipedia:
The main hazards posed by smouldering arise from the fact that it can be easily initiated (by heat sources too weak to ignite flames) and is difficult to detect. Fire statistics draw attention to the magnitude of smouldering combustion as the leading cause of fire deaths in residential areas (i.e., more than 25% of the fire deaths in the United States are attributed to smoulder-initiated fires, with similar figures in other developed countries). A particularly common fire scenario is a cigarette igniting a piece of upholstered furniture. This ignition leads to a smouldering fire that lasts for a long period of time (in the order of hours), spreading slowly and silently until critical conditions are attained and flames suddenly erupt;
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VR46L:
Have A great Friday Folks

Looks like we may have Valerie early next week





First mention I've seen of this new invest.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
This here west coast is feeling a little soggy today, y'all. Not often we get to have any particularly notable weather.

Truckee River prolly going to flood badly just above Tahoe. We'll see.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:


Thunderstorms organizing at the center.

I wouldnt be suprised if this is a TD.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
Last week we argued about fog.....
This week its about should we insult in discussions....
Meanwhile smart people like CybrTeddy and I stayed on the sidelines....
And now Cyber finally brings up an interesting topic...
Typhoon Bopha.
I hope all my friends out there stay safe.
They've weathered every storm out there before safely but you get worried every time another one comes.

Go Dawgs!


No, that is not the talking points of my post at all. My talking points dealt with the fact that there are segments of the population that will not accept the science no matter how it is presented to them. So, therefore, why should they complain so much about how the science is presented to them? Is this nothing more than just another avoidance of the science itself?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting CybrTeddy:
Not every day you see a rapidly intensifying Typhoon at 4.2N! Up to 90kts now, will probably peak around 110kt I suspect.
Oh, she is looking like a biasch!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bappit:

Y'all miss the point. You need to convince the people who read this blog but never post on it.

Nasty doesn't cut it.

Finally someone who gets it...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Not every day you see a rapidly intensifying Typhoon at 4.2N! Up to 90kts now, will probably peak around 110kt I suspect.


That storm looks great, would love it, if it were not heading for land .Sadly it is.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Not every day you see a rapidly intensifying Typhoon at 4.2N! Up to 90kts now, will probably peak around 110kt I suspect.

Yeah, that's a long way south for that kind of action.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Greetings from 11n 61w, Trinidad.

An area of heavy-looking weather has been sitting/lurking just S/E of us for 3-4 days.
Right now it's moving slowly this way.
Dark sky, occasional rumbles, rain falling.

Looks to be a wet night and tomorrow too.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
For Largo - 60.6, 41 dew pt, 9mph from SSW, gust to 15 in S C IL - no need to go south yet!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Have A great Friday Folks

Looks like we may have Valerie early next week



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Last week we argued about fog.....
This week its about should we insult in discussions....
Meanwhile smart people like CybrTeddy and I stayed on the sidelines....
And now Cyber finally brings up an interesting topic...
Typhoon Bopha.
I hope all my friends out there stay safe.
They've weathered every storm out there before safely but you get worried every time another one comes.

Go Dawgs!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Doesn't get much better organized than this:

Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 79 Comments: 7291
Quoting schwankmoe:
the science has been out there for a long time. at this point, if people aren't convinced, it's because they're not interested in being convinced and willfully disbelieve.

there's really no need to coddle those people with niceties. i'm not saying that insults are called for, but the whole 'you'll convince the skeptics if you're just nice about it' shtick makes no sense. nice, nasty, they don't want to listen either way.


Y'all miss the point. You need to convince the people who read this blog but never post on it.

Nasty doesn't cut it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting schwankmoe:
the science has been out there for a long time. at this point, if people aren't convinced, it's because they're not interested in being convinced and willfully disbelieve.

there's really no need to coddle those people with niceties. i'm not saying that insults are called for, but the whole 'you'll convince the skeptics if you're just nice about it' shtick makes no sense. nice, nasty, they don't want to listen either way.



Interesting........


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TomballTXPride:



Good stat.

Good quote.

But was going by wind speed--which ultimately correlates with Barometric Pressure.

That's regarded as the official characterization for Atlantic Basin Tropical Cyclones.



You used the word "powerful" yourself. Power = energy.


See below:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Quoting TomballTXPride:


Gotta concur. Until the Saffir-Simpson scale is revised in a way to dramatically take storm surge into account, Hurricane Sandy was FAR from being the most powerful.

Now the largest and second most destructive, probably. Not gonna argue there. And I also think this has a chance to surpass Katrina in damages by the time all is said and done.
From Dr. Masters:

...the total energy of Sandy's winds of tropical storm-force and higher peaked at 329 terajoules--the highest value for any Atlantic hurricane since at least 1969. This is 2.7 times higher than Katrina's peak energy, and is equivalent to five Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs"

Sandy was 2.7 times more energetic--that is, more powerful--than Katrina. I'd say the former already surpassed the latter. And then some.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I was just reading Andrew Revkin's column in the NYT online, and some of the responses by apparently knowledgeable people about the inability of some climate models to adequately model cloudiness as a response to warming. A couple referred to a hypothetical subsidence causing less cloudiness, and I was struck by the conditions all here have remarked on (as did Dr. Masters above) of dry air inhibiting storm development for the past three years. This seems to me to be evidence that perhaps the models aren't so erroneous -- that subsidence will be a significant factor in limiting cloudiness and thus the associated expected higher albedo that would, it's thought, reduce insolation and atmospheric heating may not occur. And if the subsidence spreads away from the Equator into the primary agriculture areas ...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Not every day you see a rapidly intensifying Typhoon at 4.2N! Up to 90kts now, will probably peak around 110kt I suspect.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Bielle:


If it is "insulting" to point out that a particular statement is, well, silly, then so be it. A smoldering fire is every bit as dangerous (and perhaps more so if it is ignored) than a "5 alarm". Ask a fireman. If I say something silly, that makes you laugh, please feel free to point it out.



funny
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks for the new blog, Dr Masters and also a bigger thanks for being here all season. I take comfort in knowing I can get the best info available right here when I need it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Pipejazz:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/author.cfm?id=3 17 9

Link

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id= antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy

Will any of these work?


Thanks Pipejazz. And on a more meteorological basis and for the California scene there's,

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id= megastorms-could-down-massive-portions-of-californ ia

skyrivers
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Yes indeed ILwthr! 70s in StL Sunday could push records.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



can i start with this statement??


Absolutely. Show me the silly bit. If nothing else, I will know more about your sense of humour.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
In the memory of Sandy: Report on Spiegel (English version) about the end of the new Bounty. Scary to read ...

A Legendary Ship's Final Hours Battling Sandy

By Marc Hujer and Samiha Shafy

As Hurricane Sandy approached the East Coast in late October, Captain Robin Walbridge wanted to save his ship, the legendary Bounty. He set out to sea to ride out the storm -- a decision which ended in disaster. He lost the ship, a crewmember and his own life.

Read more:

Link
Member Since: October 25, 2008 Posts: 43 Comments: 5020
the science has been out there for a long time. at this point, if people aren't convinced, it's because they're not interested in being convinced and willfully disbelieve.

there's really no need to coddle those people with niceties. i'm not saying that insults are called for, but the whole 'you'll convince the skeptics if you're just nice about it' shtick makes no sense. nice, nasty, they don't want to listen either way.

Quoting Neapolitan:
Breed more of 'em, too; maggots love all things sweet and sticky... ;-)

The "battle" over climate change isn't about convincing the unconvinceable; if it were, generous helpings of sugar and spice and everything nice would indeed be called for, and you'd likely see nothing but polite and politically-correct commentary all around. But this isn't that. No, this is a battle between those who support established science and want to see action to prevent a CO2 catastrophe, and those who've proven they will stop at nothing to prevent that science from being heard just so the fossil fuel-only paradigm can be perpetuated. So, yes, there is harsh rhetoric at times, but that's only because opprobium has been earned. And, yes, there is ridicule, but that's only because denialists are deserving of ridicule.

Plutorising makes a great point, and one with which I agree: blunting one's blades in fear that the opponent might get cut works only in favor of the opponent.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 120 - 70

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

Top of Page

About JeffMasters

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