Source of title inspiration here
From NOAA Headquarters.
Colorado mountain hail may disappear in a warmer future
NOAA-led study shows less hail, more rain in region’s future, with possible increase in flood risk
Summertime hail could all but disappear from the eastern flank of Colorado’s Rocky Mountains by 2070, according to a new modeling study by scientists from NOAA and several other institutions.
Less hail damage could be good news for gardeners and farmers, said Kelly Mahoney, Ph.D., lead author of the study and a postdoctoral scientist at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo. But a shift from hail to rain can also mean more runoff, which could raise the risk of flash floods, she said.
“In this region of elevated terrain, hail may lessen the risk of flooding because it takes a while to melt,” Mahoney said. “Decision makers may not want to count on that in the future.”
For the new study, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, Mahoney and her colleagues used “downscaling” modeling techniques to try to understand how climate change might affect hail-producing weather patterns across Colorado.
The research focused on storms involving relatively small hailstones (up to pea-sized) on Colorado’s Front Range, a region that stretches from the foothill communities of Colorado Springs, Denver and Fort Collins up to the Continental Divide. Colorado’s most damaging hailstorms tend to occur further east and involve larger hailstones not examined in this study.
In the summer on the Front Range, precipitation commonly falls as hail above an elevation of 7,500 feet. Decision makers concerned about the safety of mountain dams and flood risk have been interested in how climate change may affect the amount and nature of precipitation in the region.
Mahoney and her colleagues began exploring that question with results from two existing climate models that assumed that levels of climate-warming greenhouse gases will continue to increase in the future (for instance, carbon dioxide, which is at about 390 parts per million today, increases in the model to 620 ppm by 2070).
But the weather processes that form hail – thunderstorm formation, for example – occur on much smaller scales than can be reproduced by global climate models. So the team “downscaled” the global model results twice: first to regional-scale models that can take regional topography and other details into account (this step was completed as part of the National Center for Atmospheric Research’s North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program). Then, the regional results were further downscaled to weather-scale models that can simulate the details of individual storms and even the in-cloud processes that create hail.
 |
||||
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
  IMAGE: Summertime hail could all but disappear from the eastern flank of Colorado’s Rocky Mountains by 2070, according to a new modeling study by scientists from NOAA and several other institutions….
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
||||
Finally, the team compared the hailstorms of the future (2041-2070) to those of the past (1971-2000) as captured by the same sets of downscaled models. Results were similar in experiments with both climate models.
“We found a near elimination of hail at the surface,” Mahoney said.
In the future, increasingly intense storms may actually produce more hail inside clouds, the team found. However, because those relatively small hailstones fall through a warmer atmosphere, they melt quickly, falling as rain at the surface or evaporating back into the atmosphere. In some regions, simulated hail fell through an additional 1,500 feet (~450 meters) of above-freezing air in the future, compared to the past.
The research team also found evidence that extreme precipitation events across all of Colorado may become more extreme in the future, while changes in hail patterns may depend on hailstone size — results that are being explored in more detail in ongoing work.
Mahoney’s postdoctoral research was supported by the PACE program (Postdocs Applying Climate Expertise) administered by the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and funded by NOAA, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Western Water Assessment. PACE connects young climate scientists with real-world problems such as those faced by water resource managers.
“With climate change, we are examining potential changes in the magnitude and character of precipitation at high elevations,” said John England, Ph.D., flood hydrology specialist at the Bureau of Reclamation in Denver, Colo. “The Bureau of Reclamation will now take these scientific results and determine any implications for its facilities in the Front Range of Colorado.”
NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on Facebook, Twitter and our other social media channels.
Co-authors of the new paper, “Changes in hail and flood risk in high-resolution simulations over the Colorado Mountains,” include Michael Alexander (NOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory); Gregory Thompson (National Center for Atmospheric Research) and Joseph Barsugli and James Scott (NOAA/Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, CIRES).
How does hail damage roofs? Does it cause cracks or open seams that then let in rain or vermin? would a metal roof withstand them?
Except when you get one cell dropping hail and then another cell comes after it dropping heavy rain. The left over hail will increase the run-off.
What’s the likelihood of this scenario vs. theirs? Not sure, but it seems you would get a larger total run-off when adding the water from two storm cells than you’d ever get from just one.
Kelly Mahoney :
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=Kelly+Mahoney+noaa&um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&sa=N&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&biw=1244&bih=594&tbm=isch&tbnid=1iVHQT4yYFXOAM:&imgrefurl=http://www4.ncsu.edu/~gary/forecastlab/alumni.html&docid=zczya9v9YZeEzM&imgurl=http://www4.ncsu.edu/~gary/forecastlab/images/kelly_wasis_cropped.jpg&w=496&h=477&ei=nR8LT8ijMIi02AXo0aiCAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&dur=30&sig=107079452240296593069&page=1&tbnh=131&tbnw=143&start=0&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0&tx=130&ty=97&vpx=678&vpy=135&hovh=220&hovw=229
Here’s Mahoney before she learned her B.S. in Meteorology…
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/newsletter/2009nov/index.html
Here’s the problem…. she uses UNIDATA Modeling software…. to ‘FACILITATE AMBITIOUS CAREER PATHS”….
Initially, many beginning undergraduate researchers possess vague ideas regarding the requisite level of rigor for scientific research, the scientific method itself, and the “tools of the trade” used in research. Despite this initial intimidation, it isn’t hard to recruit interested students, especially if the project involves winter storms, hurricanes, or severe weather. In my research group, once students progress to the data analysis stage of a project, Unidata visualization software and data sources are typically involved. When students realize that they can undertake meaningful analyses and create professional-quality graphics within a short period of time, they are encouraged, and their initial trepidation diminishes. In this sense, Unidata products and services “lower the entry barrier” for undergraduate research. Many of the undergraduate research ventures culminate in a presentation; these presentations invariably feature graphics generated using Unidata software. A large fraction of undergraduate researchers go on to attend graduate school; positive undergraduate research experiences can facilitate ambitious career paths.
Unidata software = PHD IN A CAN.
These “model children” with BS and PHD’s can’t seem to do real science anymore… they use modeling software. They haven’t advanced much beyond “PLAY DOH”.
No matter what BS they spew, Piled Higher and Deeper, the reality will always reveal itself in the fullness of time.
Dr. Mahoney, Present any goofy theory you like but please don’t burden me with any related foolish taxes and fees in the meantime. Perhaps you might be more successful with “Catalog Modeling” or “cat walk modeling”, that’s where you have your strong points… they are not in your science modeling.
They claim that the small hailstones will travel through an additional 1,500 feet of above freezing air, which will cause them to melt before they hit the ground. At terminal velocity, hailstones should travel though that additional distance in about 5 seconds. I’m not Climate Scientist(TM), but I can’t believe you’re going to get that kind of melting in that short length of time.
Flash floods? The water content of a hail storm is usually negligible. Converting that quantity to rain will hardly result in a major flood.
Jeez, they are never happy. Less hail, more runoff.
I loved living in Iowa. The farmers always had a complaint.
Too cold, too hot, too wet, too dry, too sunny, too cloudy, not enough snow cover, too little snow cover, too short a growing season, too long a growing season, humidity too high, humidity too low, too windy, not enough wind (wind affects cross-pollination; too much makes it hard to hand cross-pollinate the seed crops, too little wind and the corn crop does not pollinate well = fewer kernels formed).
AND there was always some sort of government remuneration for having complaints.
The kicker is that, despite the always horrible conditions, they keep having bumper crop after bumper crop!
I grew up in Colorado. Some of the worst floods i can remember were after hailstorms.
I can think of no benefits to hail dropping for the sky in preference to rain (melted hail). Ask any farmer or insurance adjuster. Even if these NOAA “scientists” are correct in their prediction, Less hail and more rain in Colorado can only be considered a good thing, on balance.
IN 2005, Phil Jones of CRU did not seem to be convinced that the evidence was in yet:
.This is partly why I’ve sent you the rest of this email. IPCC, me and whoever will get accused of being political, whatever we do. As you know, I’m not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish.
Source: http://www.di2.nu/foia/1120593115.txt (hat tip: http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/)
Remarkably selfish for those who foresaw apocalypse , and many of them leaned on the support of CRU and the IPCC. So while Jones himself may not have been leaping up and down with alarm over imminent catastrophe, others such as Al Gore were so doing, and so doing without getting a ticking-off from any of a motley crew of scientists pursuing ‘the cause’ they held so dear. Amongst the lucative spin-offs were no end of scientific studies along the lines of ‘what if we take the model projections seriously, what would happen to X?’ Now X might be polar bears, or tne sands of the Sahara, or snow in England, or glaciers, or ice caps, or sea levels, and so on and on and on without end. Now we have a ‘threat’ to hail in Colorado. Add it to the list.
I wonder how easy it is to get research grants for work that begins ‘what if the GCM projections are not worth the paper they could be printed on, X is largely beyond our control, but we can’t resist some speculations about it?’ Now some such research might even be worthwhile. but I fear the decoupling from the ‘The Computer Has Spoken, Beware of the Doom’ line might make for a tougher time in raising funds.
How severe did it get? Well, on May 24th, 1626, a hailstorm struck central Germany and dropped one meter of hail.
— Sally Baliunas
http://youtu.be/wcAy4sOcS5M
Can I include this on the list of things I hope to never see in my lifetime?
If I lived in Colorado, I would plan for a large number of extreme hail “events” over the next couple of years. The Gore affect wins every time.
So the Stratosphere is going to be above 0C in 2070? There will be no Convective action?
Every time someone make a statement like that usually the opposite happens….
I speak as one that has been spit out of the top, and bottom of thunderstorms-
one particular rocky mtn. storm comes to mind…..
Roger Knights says:
A metal roof will withstand hail, but may be severely dented depending upon the size of the hail. Tile can crack. Most rooves out here are made from asphalt shingles, however, which take a beating from severe hail storms. Simply put, yes, hail can cause cracks and open seams which will then proceed to leak in places that you cannot get to (a corollary to Murphy’s Law). Most of the denizens of my neighborhood have already replaced their rooves due to a few recent (heavy) hail storms, and most of the homes are under 10 years of age.
If I’m not mistaken, Colorado has not really warmed anyway, correct?
Mark
Spent 20 years on the Front Range, until ’91, was a storm spotter for the NWS and kept precip. records for the same.
Retired Engineer says: January 9, 2012 at 8:47 am
After I moved to Colorado in July ’88, we had a foot of hail in August. They had to get the snowplows out of storage to clear the Interstate. Good grief, what have I done? Then, perhaps a decade later, we had over 6 feet of hail at an intersection on the road to work (strange wind conditions) also in summer. Completely buried cars and a truck. No one injured. And all of this at only 6,000 feet. With many assorted hail storms in-between. almost none predicted. So I conclude that we have very strange weather
Bingo! Colorado has the most unpredictable weather in the nation. Severe weather for Kansas and east starts in the foothills and plains. Weather forecasters come here to train because of our weather*. Fort Collins has had softball-sized hail, right through house roofs, killed an infant IIRC.
* Colorado native’s weather attitude: if you don’t like it, wait ten minutes.
How I wish the politicians would cut off all funding for the bankrupt pseudoscience of Climatography.
it is to be hoped that children will grow up not knowing what climatographers do for a living.
What is the first clue your model may be crap?
… So the team “downscaled” the global model results twice: first to regional-scale models that can take regional topography and other details into account (this step was completed as part of the National Center for Atmospheric Research’s North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program). Then, the regional results were further downscaled to weather-scale models that can simulate the details of individual storms and even the in-cloud processes that create hail.
Don’t meteorologists already use such “weather-scale” models for their forecasts?
Mahoney and her colleagues began exploring that question with results from two existing climate models that assumed that levels of climate-warming greenhouse gases will continue to increase in the future (for instance, carbon dioxide, which is at about 390 parts per million today, increases in the model to 620 ppm by 2070).
By the Mauna Loa Observatory data, 390 ppm was the 2010 annual average reading. So the rate of increase in the model is 230ppm in 60 years, an average annual rate of increase of 3.8 ppm/yr.
Averages of annual rate of increases over certain recent periods:
1981-2010 1.71
1991-2010 1.79
2001-2010 2.04
1981-1990 1.55
1991-2000 1.54
While the rate of CO2 increases does appear to be increasing, their model has an average rate of increase that’s more than double the rate of any recent period except 2001-2010, with that one being very nearly double.
Wow, to get this apparently exponential increasing in the rate of change to get that average rate, it’s like their models have built-in assumptions of the complete death of carbon trading/rationing, the annihilation of nuclear power, and the collapse of all renewables including biofuels, leaving mankind nothing for energy but dirty old fossil fuels. Well, isn’t it wonderful to know they think that highly of their fellow humans and their abilities to solve problems like generating “low carbon” energy.
What other interesting assumptions are tucked away into their models? For example, what do they expect the precipitation-causing particulate levels to be from all that burning of assorted dirty fossil fuels that will lead to that meteoric rise in CO2 increase rates?
Does that mean all their Anti warming measures are going to fail then. They haven’t got much faith in the IPCC either!
Hail falls in the summer. Flooding in Colorado occurs during spring runoff. I hardly think that summer precipitation falling as rain instead of hail is going to pose a flooding problem.
Merely more modern day phlogiston. History will ultimately show that CAGW/global climate change was the alchemy of our times. How I hope to live to see that day fulfilled.
Children not knowing in the future what hail is are far more likely to not know what honest science is right now.
Dennis Nikols P. Geo says: ‘ … The remainder of this is a fairy tail.’
I knew fairies had wings, but ?
Gee, maybe I should make a model that shows that up is down and we will all fall off into space if we don’t do whatever the socialists want. (That would probably rake in the grant money wouldn’t it. /sarc) These people are starting to get on my last nerve.
What a steaming pile of unadulterated crap.
Sorry for being so articulate, but I AM Australian…
Good one DJ
Here’s what they truely learned; DO NOT PUT PREDICTIONS IN PRESS RELEASES THAT CAN BE PROVED WRONG WHILE YOU ARE STILL GAINFULLY EMPLOYED AS A PROGNOSTICATOR.
By 2070, every person currently in the work force will be retired. I will have been dead for at least a few decades. If they had projected this for 2025 or even 2035, they could potentially subject themselves to humiliation, in the style of Mike Mann, James Hansen, Phil Jones, IPCC, etc.