The ARkStorm: California's coming great deluge

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:04 PM GMT on January 28, 2011

For thirty days and thirty nights the rain fell in unending torrents. By the end of the biblical deluge, rivers of water ten feet deep flowed through the streets of Sacramento, and an astounding 29.28 inches of rain had fallen on San Francisco. According to wunderground's weather historian, Christopher C. Burt, in the Sierras, the moist flow of air from Hawaii--often called an "atmospheric river" or the "Pineapple Express"--hit the steeply sloping mountainsides and rose upwards. The air expanded and cooled, causing truly prodigious rains, with the mining town of Sonora receiving 8.5 feet of rain over a 2-month period. The resulting floods inundated California's Central Valley with a lake 300 miles long and 20 miles wide.

The above event occurred in January 1862, and similar extreme rain events have deluged in California seven times in the past 2,000 years--about once every 300 years. Great storms like the flood of 1862 will happen again. If the planet continues to warm, as expected, the odds of such an event will at least double by 2100, due to the extra moisture increased evaporation from the oceans will add to the air. A group of scientists, emergency managers, and policy makers gathered in Sacramento, California earlier this month to discuss how the state might respond to a repeat of the 1862 rain event--the ARkStorm Scenario. The "AR" stands for "Atmospheric River", the "k" for 1,000 (like a 1-in-1000 year event), and of course "ARkStorm" is meant to summon visions of biblical-scale deluge, similar to the great flood of 1862. The team's final report envisions the most expensive disaster in world history, with direct damages and loss of economic activity amounting to $725 billion.

"Atmospheric Rivers" was a term coined in the 1990s to describe plumes of moisture that ride up out of the subtropics into the mid-latitudes along the axis of a cold front. Traditional water vapor satellite imagery does not show these plumes very well, and it was only when microwave satellite imagery from polar orbiting satellites became available in the late 1990s that the full importance of these Atmospheric Rivers came to be revealed. Atmospheric Rivers account for a significant portion of California's cold season rainfall and snowfall, and an entire session was devoted to them at the December 2010 American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting in San Francisco, the world's largest Earth Science meeting.


Figure 1. The total amount of rainfall one could get if all the moisture in the air were condensed and fell out as rain is called the Total Precipitable Water (TPW). Here, TPW values from microwave satellite measurements are plotted, and show a plume of very moist air connecting the subtropics near Hawaii with Southern California. TPW vales in excess of 20 mm (about 0.8 inches, blue and warmer colors) are "Atmospheric Rivers", and are often associated with heavy rainfall events capable of causing flooding. This Atmospheric River occurred on December 21, 2010, and brought very heavy flooding rains to Southern California. Image credit: University of Wisconsin CIMSS.

California's Delta Region levees at high risk of failure
Much of Central California's water supply and agricultural areas are protected by an antiquated and poorly maintained set of levees along the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers that are in serious danger of failure during an extreme flood or major earthquake. The 1,600 miles of levees protect 500,000 people, 2 million acres of farmland, and structures worth $47 billion. Of particular concern is the delta at the confluence of California's Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, about 80 miles inland from San Francisco Bay. The Delta Region receives runoff from more than 40% of California, and is the hub of California's water supply system, supplying water to 25 million people and 3 million acres of farmland. Key transportation and communication lines cross the region. The Delta Region is home to dozens of islands with highly productive farms that have subsided to elevations as much as 25 feet below sea level. Jeffrey Mount, director of the Center for Integrated Watershed Science and Management at the University of California at Davis, said in a recent interview with MSNBC, "The chances of a catastrophic flood occurring in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta sometime in the next 50 years are about two out of three." He called Sacramento, which is only protected to a 1-in-80 year flood by its levees, "the most at-risk large metropolitan area in the country, with less than half the protection that New Orleans had. It is at extreme risk due to levee failure and subsidence."" The most serious catastrophe for the levees in the Delta Region would be a major earthquake occurring during the dry season. Such a quake would allow salt water to intrude from San Francisco Bay, shutting off the fresh water supply for millions of Californians for months. Collapse of the levees during the wet season would be less devastating, as water pressure from the relatively high flow rates of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers would keep salt water from intruding into the Delta Region. There are no good solutions to California's Delta Region water vulnerabilities, but a new $10 billion dollar canal that would route fresh water around the region is being proposed as a possible way Califoria could avoid losing its fresh water supply if a catatrophic failure of the Delta Region levees allowed salt water intrusion to occur.

A 2009 study by the California Department of Water Resources concluded:

The Delta Region as it exists today is unsustainable. Seismic risk, high water conditions, sea level rise and land subsidence threaten levee integrity. A seismic event is the single greatest risk to levee integrity in the Delta Region. If a major earthquake occurs, levees would fail and as many as 20 islands could be flooded simultaneously. This would result in economic costs and impacts of $15 billion or more. While earthquakes pose the greatest risk to Delta Region levees, winter storms and related high water conditions are the most common cause of levee failures in the region. Under business-as-usual practices, high water conditions could cause about 140 levee failures in the Delta over the next 100 years. Multiple island failures caused by high water would but could still be extensive and could cause approximately $8 billion or more in economic costs and impacts. Dry-weather levee failures [also called sunny-day events] unrelated to earthquakes, such as from slumping or seepage, will continue to occur in the Delta about once every seven years. Costs to repair a single island flooded as the result of a dry-weather levee failure are expected to exceed $50 million. The risk of flooding in the Delta Region will only increase with time if current management practices are not changed. By the year 2100, Delta levee failure risks due to high water conditions will increase by 800 percent. The risk of levee failure from a major earthquake is projected to increase by 93 percent during the same period.


The ARkStorm scenario and Great Flood of 1862 are discussed in much more detail by weather historian Christopher C. Burt in his latest post.


Figure 2. Levee failure on the Upper Jones Tract in the Delta Region on June 4, 2004. Image credit: California Department of Water Resources. A 1997 flood in the Delta Region did $510 million damage, damaged or destroyed 32,000 homes and businesses, and left 120,000 homeless.

Wilma pounding New Zealand; Australia eyes two potential new tropical cyclones
With February nearly upon us, the traditional peak of the Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season is here. Activity has picked up markedly this week, with the formation of the year's first two Category 4 tropical cyclones, Tropical Cyclone Wilma and Tropical Cyclone Bianca. Wilma passed over American Samoa as a strong tropical storm, and hit Tonga as a Category 3 storm, causing substantial damage to the islands, but no deaths or injuries. Wilma is currently pounding New Zealand's North Island with heavy rains and strong winds, and is the strongest tropical cyclone to affect that country in fourteen years, according to weatherwatch.co.nz. Tropical Cyclone Bianca is expected to skirt the west coast of Australia over the next few days and rapidly weaken, but could bring heavy rains to the coast near Perth when it makes landfall on Sunday as a tropical storm. Of much greater concern for Australia are two potential tropical cyclones that could hit the flood-ravaged state of Queensland next week. Both the European Center and GFS models predict that the remains of Tropical Cyclone Anthony will regenerate into a tropical storm and hit Queensland early next week. A second and potentially more powerful storm is forecast by the European model to form next week in the islands to the east of Australia, and threaten Queensland at the end of the week. The GFS model has backed off on its prediction of such a storm forming. If the cyclone were to form, it would be a serious blow for Queensland, which is struggling to recover from record floods. As reported in the latest Bureau of Meteorology climate statement and flood summary, the past four months (September - December) have been the rainiest such period in Queensland's history, and the resulting flooding disaster has been Australia's most expensive natural disaster in history.


Figure 3. Tropical Cyclone Bianca, the globe's second major tropical cyclone of 2011, as seen at 06:30 GMT on January 28, 2011 by NASA's Aqua satellite. Biana is expected to rapidly weaken and hit the Australian coast near Perth as a tropical storm on Sunday. Image credit: NASA.

Have a great weekend, and I'll be back Monday with a new post.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

Log In 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: 305 - 255

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

Quoting atmoaggie:
I had one that did. Was literally a "Global Climate Change" course taught outside of my department by geologist (yeah, a believer geologist at aTm...odd). That course was a technical elective.

But, she and I (and others) had some good discussions. Like usual, no one changed any minds given that circumstantial status of "evidence" and considerable room for doubt in either direction. Surprised her that in 2002 an undergrad had even heard of methane hydrates, could tell her how they were formed, and what the implications are of the potential methane release.

We also spent a little time in the ocean drilling core storage freezer as part of that course.
http://iodp.tamu.edu/about.html


lol, that's why it wasn't a required course. Funny though, I did have Math Professor that always talked about GW, it was before I used rate myprofessor, everyone in the class couldn't stand her lol. She was the worst professor Ive had. Don't get me wrong, she was brilliant at math, but she didn't care about students, she pretty much tried to prove how knowledgeable she was at mathematics, and how much we lacked in the knowledge of mathematics, pretty pathetic huh?

Before I take a class, I always do research on the professor ever since. On a lighter note, I have been extremely impressed with the rest of the professors Ive had so far. None of them are arrogant and look down on the students, and they are actual really likable people besides their knowledge of the subject. Not to mention they have all been very sharp and great at helping me to learn the material well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
hey guys whats up

umm I was wondering if we are going to have a wet spring any ideas
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting misanthrope:


Pssst - Aggie. It's not just the Geology Department:

Climate Change Statement

We, the faculty of the Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences of Texas A&M, agree with the recent reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that:

It is virtually certain that the climate is warming, and that it has warmed by about 0.7 deg. C over the last 100 years.

It is very likely that humans are responsible for most of the recent warming.

If we do nothing to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases, future warming will likely be at least two degrees Celsius over the next century.

Such a climate change brings with it a risk of serious adverse impacts on our environment and society.

Kenneth Bowman
Sarah D. Brooks
Ping Chang
Don Collins
Don Conlee
Andrew Dessler
Robert Duce
Craig Epifanio
Rob Korty
Mark Lemmon
Shaima L. Nasiri
John Nielsen-Gammon
Gerald North
Richard Orville
Lee Panetta
R. Saravanan
Gunnar W. Schade
Courtney Schumacher
Russ Schumacher
Istvan Szunyogh
Thomas Wilheit
Ping Yang
Renyi Zhang
Yeah, whatever. Half of the names on that list were not anything approaching alarmist for the months I was in their classes nor outside of the classroom.

Your statement and what their name was listed under or first hand interaction with those persons and actually discussing the topic, you decide.

I didn't have the other half. Don't know them well.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Neapolitan:

It's a well-established theory, Reed, just like evolution, and one that a majority of credible scientists agree fits the data. And as with evolution, until/unless an alternative theory is advanced, tested, and found to be superior, AGWT is, with increasing confidence, absolutely correct.
Alright, where are the pea plants so we can measure the difference between a control group and wrinkled ones in climate?

We don't have a control group by lack of measurement. And we haven't yet measured a single generation of climate...
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Jedkins01:



Oh they are, you are correct.

But of course, Neapolitan and Xyrus think they know more about a meteorologist's education then a student who is earning a degree of one, right...

In none of the courses to they come to the approach of GW panic either.
I had one that did. Was literally a "Global Climate Change" course taught outside of my department by geologist (yeah, a believer geologist at aTm...odd). That course was a technical elective.

But, she and I (and others) had some good discussions. Like usual, no one changed any minds given that circumstantial status of "evidence" and considerable room for doubt in either direction. Surprised her that in 2002 an undergrad had even heard of methane hydrates, could tell her how they were formed, and what the implications are of the potential methane release.

We also spent a little time in the ocean drilling core storage freezer as part of that course.
http://iodp.tamu.edu/about.html
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Neapolitan:

It's a well-established theory, Reed, just like evolution, and one that a majority of credible scientists agree fits the data. And as with evolution, until/unless an alternative theory is advanced, tested, and found to be superior, AGWT is, with increasing confidence, absolutely correct.


Evolution is much like Climate Change, some of it is correct, and some isn't. Which is why it to is becoming a dieing theory, now some scientists are turning to aliens in desperation, because years and years of endless research has never come up with evidence for macro-evolution. It proves how stubborn humanity can be. Micro-evolution is scientific fact, macro is isn't.

Just like Mayan Civilization was so strongly defended for years as being the peaceful utopia to prove communism works. Even though it took at least 50 years for it to finally be thrown out as junk. The very people that so defended the idea apparently had discovered evidence in their research years and years earlier that showed the Mayan's were violent like the rest of us humans, but they decided to cast away that evidence and try and hide it to the public as long and possible. They were stubborn about the idea to the grave. Us humans can be weirdly stubborn sometimes. You're beloved GW is more stubborn belief rather science, whether you admit it or not.

Micro-evolution=scientific fact. Macro-evolution= complete junk, not evidence at all for it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:
Call 911, your toast is burning...

;-)


If you can unplug the toaster, I won't need to call 911.

well, can ya?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting reedzone:


That's exactly what it is, a theory, not a true fact. It's debatable, some people on here push something that isn't even a fact.

It's a well-established theory, Reed, just like evolution, and one that a majority of credible scientists agree fits the data. And as with evolution, until/unless an alternative theory is advanced, tested, and found to be superior, AGWT is, with increasing confidence, absolutely correct.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 15264
Quoting reedzone:


That's exactly what it is, a theory, not a true fact. It's debatable, some people on here push something that isn't even a fact.


I'm so glad I did decided to go for meteorology as my major and not worry about the hard work it takes to get it. Yeah its hard work but its like playing for the super bowl, nothing in life feels better then overcoming hard work. Not only that, as my education grows in the science, more I come to find out how fraud this push for GW is.

Climate Change is real science, GW is theoretical and unproven, and then taken further into political panic and earth worship, completely unscientific.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting reedzone:


That's exactly what it is, a theory, not a true fact. It's debatable, some people on here push something that isn't even a fact.


This is a fact though: in 20 years, the climate situation will range from -20C to +20C on average from where we are not. It's not impossible that it will be outside that range but that is pretty reasonable.

The AGW theory simply says that based on the evidence, verified by recent years measurements, that within that range, the average temperature will be towards the right side of the scale (+20C).

You seem to be saying that because AGW is just a theory, only the average is possible? Or that, because it is just a theory, we should do nothing?

I doubt you use the same logic in your life to make all the millions of decisions that every human makes each day. Why so militant about AGW? If you're right, who cares? If you're wrong though, millions of people die.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jedkins01:



Hardly any of the IPCC are climatologists, don't give me that crap. Unfortunately for you guys, I'm not ignorant about Climate Science, and I happen to know the most people on the IPCC who support your beloved theory oh so much aren't Climate scientists at all. Nice try, though.

Why so angry? Anyway, I didn't say the IPCC members were climate scientists; how did that enter the conversation?

In the January, 2009, survey by the AGU, nearly 90% of 3,000 or so of climatologists agreed that there was evidence of AGW. Meanwhile, just 80% of all earth scientists agreed--while only 64% of meteorologists agreed. (In fact, only economic geologists who specialized in industrial uses of materials like oil and coal were more skeptical. Go figure.)

The thing is, climatologists are almost always affiliated with universities or research institutions where a doctoral degree is required. Most meteorologists, OTOH, can get a job as a weather forecaster with only college degree (AA or BA). That's not to denigrate such degrees--but in spite of what some may claim, there truly is a difference between a professional climatologist and, say, the evening weather guy on Channel 10 in Peoria.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 15264
How come Wunderground is only reporting one Cyclone in Australia when their gov web site
says there is two? www.bom.gov.au
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting greentortuloni:


So how does knowing that the planet humans are adding CO2 and that may be increasing the temperature (or may not, to take your 'honest' side), how does that translate into not taking emergency action?

I was on a plane once that filled with smoke. No one knew what the cause was but no one debated the issue: I've never seen plane land so directly at Miami airport, no turns, no set up except at the last moment.

Scientists may know that prediction isn't exact, but they also know when the best interpretation of facts isn't about rock solid certainties but about declaring an emergency.
Call 911, your toast is burning...

;-)
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting twincomanche:


You are making far too much sense for this blog.


So how does knowing that the planet humans are adding CO2 and that may be increasing the temperature (or may not, to take your 'honest' side), how does that translate into not taking emergency action?

I was on a plane once that filled with smoke. No one knew what the cause was but no one debated the issue: I've never seen plane land so directly at Miami airport, no turns, no set up except at the last moment.

Scientists may know that prediction isn't exact, but they also know when the best interpretation of facts isn't about rock solid certainties but about declaring an emergency.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I read Doc's blog.

Do ya'll have any idea, how much food comes from California??

Heed my advice. LEARN how to garden.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jedkins01:



Hardly any of the IPCC are climatologists, don't give me that crap. Unfortunately for you guys, I'm not ignorant about Climate Science, and I happen to know the most people on the IPCC who support your beloved theory oh so much aren't Climate scientists at all. Nice try, though.


That's exactly what it is, a theory, not a true fact. It's debatable, some people on here push something that isn't even a fact.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:
Climatological studies are not a requirement.

Ummm, they were at aTm 10 years ago for the BS in meteorology/atmo science. Still are, as far as I know.

And I heard that atmo chem is now required, too.



Oh they are, you are correct.

But of course, Neapolitan and Xyrus think they know more about a meteorologist's education then a student who is earning a degree of one, right...

In none of the courses to they come to the approach of GW panic either.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good morning all you guys and dolls...It's a beautiful sunny day in the deep south today. Looking at the models, this may be over for the next few and Tues looks pretty intimidating . Oh well, nothing new.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Actually, if anyone comes close to knowing a lot about climate, it's climatologists. Meteorologists learn to forecast what's going to happen next week: what are the chances of rain in Moscow on Monday? How warm will it be in Tampa on Tuesday? Climatologists, on the other hand, are concerned with long-term trends: what are the chances Russia will be cooler next year than last? Will Florida be wetter next decade than this?

Some speculate that the reason a smaller percentage of mets adhere to AGWT than do climatologists is due to professional jealousy. You know, the way nurses are sometimes jealous of doctors. I don't know that that's the case, but it certainly would go a long way toward explaining things.



Hardly any of the IPCC are climatologists, don't give me that crap. Unfortunately for you guys, I'm not ignorant about Climate Science, and I happen to know the most people on the IPCC who support your beloved theory oh so much aren't Climate scientists at all. Nice try, though.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Climatological studies are not a requirement.

Ummm, they were at aTm 10 years ago for the BS in meteorology/atmo science. Still are, as far as I know.

And I heard that atmo chem is now required, too.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting Jedkins01:


You Sir, aren't trained in climate science, and neither are hardly and other GW activists. If anyone comes close to actually knowing a lot about Climate, it is meteorologists. But of course, you wouldn't know that, because you don't have an education in the science of weather.

Actually, if anyone comes close to knowing a lot about climate, it's climatologists. Meteorologists learn to forecast what's going to happen next week: what are the chances of rain in Moscow on Monday? How warm will it be in Tampa on Tuesday? Climatologists, on the other hand, are concerned with long-term trends: what are the chances Russia will be cooler next year than last? Will Florida be wetter next decade than this?

Some speculate that the reason a smaller percentage of mets adhere to AGWT than do climatologists is due to professional jealousy. You know, the way nurses are sometimes jealous of doctors. I don't know that that's the case, but it certainly would go a long way toward explaining things.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 15264
This is sorta cool..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

I don't think anyone's claiming weather events are becoming more extreme, at least in most instances. What climate scientists have predicted is that extreme events will become more frequent--and that is precisely what seems to be going on. 2010 was a year of weather extremes...and the first four weeks of 2011 haven't been any different. When 100-year or 500-year or 1,000-year events--floods, heat waves, snowfalls, etc.--become commonplace things, something is changing.
2012 should be interesting. All adverse weather will be linked to the prophetic Mayan calender. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting pottery:
Good Morning, DDR and all.
12mm (about 1/2") rain overnight, and still cloudy and wet this morning.
Quite a lot of moisture around the Trop. Atl., which is unusual for end of Jan.
Easterlies have calmed down since yesterday, and yeah, it should be a good day.
Good morning Pott..Some water for the mighty Calabash Tree...Yoo goys still have a bit of a moisture feed..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting overwash12:
For those who think today's weather is becoming more extreme,here is  a link http://kiscrapbook.knottsislandonline.com/newsstorm.html  The SAME STORM ,1846 NOR'EASTER  created Oregon Inlet,which is a popular charter fishing inlet. 

I don't think anyone's claiming weather events are becoming more extreme, at least in most instances. What climate scientists have predicted is that extreme events will become more frequent--and that is precisely what seems to be going on. 2010 was a year of weather extremes...and the first four weeks of 2011 haven't been any different. When 100-year or 500-year or 1,000-year events--floods, heat waves, snowfalls, etc.--become commonplace things, something is changing.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 15264
№ 262
Quoting aspectre:...winter of 2006-2007 holds the record for the lowest yearly-maximum sea-ice extent...


Actually the winter of 2005/6 holds the record for lowest winter maximum, in both the IARC-JAXA record as well as the NSDIC record. The winter of 2006/7 is a close second in both. It may be that they show the winter of 2006/7 because it leads into the record low summer minimum of 2007. Heck, as I looked again at the JAXA graph I posted, it may even be that they changed it last November because 2006 was briefly the record low for the time of year and simply never changed it back.

As far as the difference in graphs, both the JAXA and NSDIC graphs do use the 15% concentration threshold, although they do differ slightly due to different measurement methods I believe. The DMI graph uses, as you mentioned, 30% as the threshold.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xyrus2000:


Fox News isn't a news station. it's an entertainment station. Or rather, that has been their defense when taken to court over it (which they won). Fox news is to news as the WWE is to wrestling.

Though I'm curious as to what liberal news station makes people paranoid idiots. I don't zone out in front of MSNBC (I don't get cable by choice) but I thought Fox News had the monopoly on making people paranoid idiots? Has MSNBC started adopting the same tactics now? Are they trying to take on Fox at its own game? I would hope that they weren't that stupid to try. Their ratings could only go lower from such a ploy.

I wouldn't trust any 24 hour news network for anything other than maybe getting a rough idea of some top stories. The rest of it is eye-candy and pointless babbling, trying to kick up controversy so they can do their impression of "Current Events with Jerry Springer". You don't learn much watching people scream over each other, and there's a lot more going on in the world than which political pundit called who a Nazi.

--EDIT

For some reason, the rest of the post got cut off.

I like the way they treat Global Warming around here. They don't oppose that humans are increasing CO2, but they know its ridiculous to assume we can accurately predict what the planets future will really be like. No political strings involved, just the way an honest scientist should look at it.


They know it's ridiculous? A real scientists would look at it that way?

I guess you and I have some significant differences when it comes to defining a real scientists. A real scientists doesn't look at an established theory and peer reviewed science and say, "That's ridiculous, and all the science is junk too!".

Meteorologists are not trained in dealing with weather on climatological scales unless they plan to study climate. Climatological studies are not a requirement. Not even for the NOAA. Some schools may include it in the curriculum but it's not universal.

You are implying that there is no difference between meteorology and climatology, which is incorrect. You're implying that a meteorologists has as good if not better grasp on the climate than a climatologist, which is also incorrect.

Meteorology is but one aspect of climate science, just like electrical wiring is one aspect of a house. I wouldn't let a certified electrician build the foundation of the house, but I'd certainly trust him/her to wire it correctly. Unless that electrician can come up with some damn good evidence that I shouldn't let the certified architect build the foundation, then I'll let the certified architect do the work.

Your mets can all claim that climate science is ridiculous and whatever less friendly terms you can come up with. The point being, until they put forth reviewed research on the subject, it's just a bunch of guys voicing their opinions.


You Sir, aren't trained in climate science, and neither are hardly and other GW activists. If anyone comes close to actually knowing a lot about Climate, it is meteorologists. But of course, you wouldn't know that, because you don't have an education in the science of weather.

I hate to tell you, but Climate science, and the issue of climate change is covered exceptionally well in meteorological courses. But like I said, you wouldn't know that :)


It makes me laugh that some people like you think you know everything, when you really are quite in the dark :)


I expected to have GW shoved down my throat when I went to college, amazingly so, Ive found out, that GW activists just have really loud and boisterous mouths. There aren't nearly as many of them as they try and lie to you about. In fact, there has been plenty talk about debate over Climate Change, but not a whole a lot of wacky there is no hope stuff and your a denier if you disagree.

I'm just happy to know, there aren't as many in the real science world then I thought, kinda ironic when you're telling me meteorologists aren't qualified, and you don't even know what is in MET courses, when I'm the one working on a degree. What a joke, you make me laugh :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
There hasn't been much news on this--it's been overshadowed by the civil unrest in Tunisia, Lebanon, and Egypt--but Jeddah, KSA, has been flooded again.

Jeddah receives an annual average of 61mm (2.4") of rain, and a January average of just 5mm (0.2"). But in November 2009, a freak storm dropped 90mm (3.5") in just four hours, leading to major flooding that killed 122 while leaving 350 missing. That was considered the heaviest rainfall in the city in more than a quarter century.

But now, just 14 months later, it's happened again. This time, a storm on Tuesday dumped 111mm (4.4") in just three hours. Again, more flooding, though the timing of the event thankfully hads led to far fewer deaths.



The flooding is apparently exacerbated by a poor drainage system--but I suppose with just a few tenths of an inch of rain every month, the city fathers didn't feel the need to upgrade.

Just keeping score, that's two 100-year floods in 14 months. Pure coincidence? Or sign 'o the times?
Birth pangs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting overwash12:
For those who think today's weather is becoming more extreme,here is  a link http://kiscrapbook.knottsislandonline.com/newsstorm.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             The SAME STORM ,1846 NOR'EASTER  created Oregon Inlet,which is a popular charter fishing inlet. 

Great read, Thanks for sharing.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
For those who think today's weather is becoming more extreme,here is  a link http://kiscrapbook.knottsislandonline.com/newsstorm.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             The SAME STORM ,1846 NOR'EASTER  created Oregon Inlet,which is a popular charter fishing inlet. 
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
How come Wunderground is only reporting one Cyclone in Australia when their gov web site
says there is two? www.bom.gov.au
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
There hasn't been much news on this--it's been overshadowed by the civil unrest in Tunisia, Lebanon, and Egypt--but Jeddah, KSA, has been flooded again.

Jeddah receives an annual average of 61mm (2.4") of rain, and a January average of just 5mm (0.2"). But in November 2009, a freak storm dropped 90mm (3.5") in just four hours, leading to major flooding that killed 122 while leaving 350 missing. That was considered the heaviest rainfall in the city in more than a quarter century.

But now, just 14 months later, it's happened again. This time, a storm on Tuesday dumped 111mm (4.4") in just three hours. Again, more flooding, though the timing of the event thankfully hads led to far fewer deaths.



The flooding is apparently exacerbated by a poor drainage system--but I suppose with just a few tenths of an inch of rain every month, the city fathers didn't feel the need to upgrade.

Just keeping score, that's two 100-year floods in 14 months. Pure coincidence? Or sign 'o the times?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 15264
267. DEKRE
Quoting Jedkins01:


You should make a distinction between the well known rains near the coast, there you are certainly right - it is duration, and the badly prepared ground. What I'm talking about is inland in spring, the east side of the mountains - rain is much rarer but spring can be surprising. I was once caught in a foot of snow within a couple of hours - with summer tires, of course. Try getting winter tires in San Diego!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Well, at least Bianca's maximum windspeed has slowed as predicted from a Category4 to a Cat.1 link
With a bit more of that luck, maximum windspeed will continue to slow as predicted before hitting (near)Perth. link

Anybody else run into the glitch yesterday in which WU's Bianca maps failed to display?
And do the displays still seem to fail to update to the current tracking and 5day-prediction maps?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
People, This week is going to be the hottest week of the summer in Sydney.
Sunday 91°F Monday 99°F Tuesday 102°F Wednesday 91°F Thursday 97°F Friday 97°F

West readies to take first hit as cyclones close in
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
184 Levi32 "Arctic sea ice is trying to make a late growth-season rally... [DMIchart]"
191 weatherboy1992 "National Snow and Ice Data Center has arctic sea ice still WAY below normal. [NSIDCchart]"
196 sirmaelstrom "Concerning the artic sea ice extent: [JAXAchart]
Not the worst it's been, especially considering recent conditions. Why does the NSDIC graph highlight the Oct'06-Feb'07 period? That particular period doesn't really stand out in any way."

Actually it does: winter of 2006-2007 holds the record for the lowest yearly-maximum sea-ice extent... then came the record-lowest yearly-minimum sea-ice extent in the summer of 2007
As for the choice of days&months, NSIDC displays a five-month running-chart with the months-displayed changing on the day that the NSIDC makes public its analysis of the previous month.
Makes me wanna grit my teeth... but the chart-form choices made by JAXA and DMI are equally annoying.

And the charts are in far less disagreement than what you folks seem to wanna imply:
DMI states "areas with ice concentration higher than 30% are classified as ice" while NSIDC uses 15% as its parameter for inclusion. And JAXA appears to use yet another (though I can't find what; my guess would be 20%).

Even IF the parameters were the same (and the chart-forms were the same), one would expect some differences due to the independent agencies using different satellites with differing radar frequencies respectively, then using different signal-processing equipment with differing algorithms to turn their respective raw-data returns into easily interpretable ice-extent charts.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting DDR:
Rough seas everyday for at least 2 weeks straight.

The Trinidad and Tobago Meteorological Service
continues to advise all marine interests that sea
conditions around Trinidad and Tobago are moderate
to rough especially along the exposed Northern and
Eastern coasts of both Trinidad and Tobago.


The low level wind regime has maintained its
strength during the last 12hours and is
forecasted to attain its maximum strength over
the next 12 – 18 hrs. Consequently, sea
conditions surrounding our twin island state will
continue to be turbulent.


Numerical Weather Prediction models indicate that
sea conditions will be 2.5m to 3.0m in open
waters. Waters in sheltered areas will be choppy
at times in an agitated state.

What is the date on that? Today??
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting DDR:
Piarco international Trinidad
Rainshowers
22C
Should be a pretty nice day today,despite some heavy over night and early morning showers.
Good Morning, DDR and all.
12mm (about 1/2") rain overnight, and still cloudy and wet this morning.
Quite a lot of moisture around the Trop. Atl., which is unusual for end of Jan.
Easterlies have calmed down since yesterday, and yeah, it should be a good day.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
259. DDR
The sea has been rough everyday for at least 2 weeks straight.

The Trinidad and Tobago Meteorological Service
continues to advise all marine interests that sea
conditions around Trinidad and Tobago are moderate
to rough especially along the exposed Northern and
Eastern coasts of both Trinidad and Tobago.


The low level wind regime has maintained its
strength during the last 12hours and is
forecasted to attain its maximum strength over
the next 12 %u2013 18 hrs. Consequently, sea
conditions surrounding our twin island state will
continue to be turbulent.


Numerical Weather Prediction models indicate that
sea conditions will be 2.5m to 3.0m in open
waters. Waters in sheltered areas will be choppy
at times in an agitated state.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
258. IKE
Nice Saturday in the Florida panhandle...Today: Areas of fog before 8am. Otherwise, sunny, with a high near 69. Calm wind becoming south southwest between 5 and 10 mph.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
257. DDR
Piarco international Trinidad
Rainshowers
22C
Should be a pretty nice day today,despite some heavy over night and early morning showers.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
255. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Tropical Cyclone Warning Center Perth
Tropical Cyclone Advice #44
TROPICAL CYCLONE BIANCA (12U)
6:00 PM WST January 29 2011
=======================================

At 5:00 pm WST, Tropical Cyclone Bianca, Category Two (975 hPa) located at 29.4S 108.7E, or 740 km west northwest of Perth and 580 km west of Geraldton has 10 minute sustained winds of 60 knots with gusts of 85 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving south southeast at 14 knots.

Storm Force Winds
================
50 NM from the center

Gale Force Winds
=================
120 NM from the center in southern quadrant
100 NM from the center in northern quadrant

Dvorak Intensity:

Bianca continues to weaken as it begins to move towards the southwest corner of the state. As it approaches the coast it will weaken rapidly but there is some risk that Bianca could still have an impact on the southwest on Sunday. DAMAGING WINDS with gusts to 100 kilometres per hour are possible southwest of a line Jurien Bay to Albany.

Tides between Jurien Bay and Cape Naturaliste will be higher than normal and are likely to rise above the highest astronomical tide level with ROUGH SEAS, DANGEROUS SURF. COASTAL EROSION and FLOODING of LOW LYING COASTAL AREAS. HEAVY RAINFALL is also possible on the southern side of the system with LOCALISED FLOODING. Extensive flooding is not expected.

VERY HIGH to SEVERE FIRE DANGERS are likely near the west coast and through the Central Wheat Belt on Sunday. Please refer to Fire Weather Warning [IDW30000] for further information.

Tropical Cyclone Warnings/Watch
================================
A Cyclone WARNING is current for coastal areas from Jurien Bay to Albany, including Perth, Mandurah, Bunbury and Busselton.

The next tropical cyclone advice on Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca will be at 12:00 PM UTC..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 305 - 255

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

Top of Page
Ad Blocker Enabled

Category 6™

About

Cat 6 lead authors: WU cofounder Dr. Jeff Masters (right), who flew w/NOAA Hurricane Hunters 1986-1990, & WU meteorologist Bob Henson, @bhensonweather

Local Weather

Light Snow
34 °F
Light Snow Mist

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Huron
Fall Color in Pictured Rocks
Pictured Rocks Beach Day
Pictured Rocks dunes and clouds