Children just aren't going to know what hail is…

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 such as this, which fell in Boulder, 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. Credit: Will von Dauster, NOAA

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….

Click here for more information.

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).

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
102 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
kadaka (KD Knoebel)
January 9, 2012 11:59 am

TimiBoy said on January 9, 2012 at 11:24 am:

What a steaming pile of unadulterated crap.
Sorry for being so articulate, but I AM Australian…

Which means what, you can bend like a large lorry?
C’mon, mate. While we tend to be polite, going by some of the words I’ve seen around here you sound more like a blooming English toff!
😉

John
January 9, 2012 12:01 pm

Nothing like fudging the model to fit the desired outcome.
For that Ft. Collins, hailstorm, July 1979: (from wiki) A violent forty-minute hailstorm bombed Fort Collins, CO, with hail up to grapefruit size. Two thousand homes and 2500 automobiles were severely damaged, and about 25 persons were injured, mainly when hit on the head by the huge stones. A three month old baby died of a fractured skull, struck by a large hailstone while being carried by his mother, who was running with him to seek cover. (The Weather Channel)
I remember a hailstorm in 1985 that covered most of Denver and Boulder – slightly larger than golf-ball size.

Hugh Davis
January 9, 2012 12:03 pm

This research makes no sense.
In southern Europe where summer hail regularly devastates the grape crops, the higher the temperatures the worse the hailstorms, so how is a bit of global warming going to abolish hail?
I have seen hail a foot deep in Provence after a blistering August day.

Editor
January 9, 2012 12:03 pm

Hmmm … so they took a global climate model. They “downscaled” the results of that global climate model and used them as inputs for a regional climate model. Then they downscaled those regional climate results and fed them to a weather model.
What’s next? Feed the results of the weather model back into the global climate model?
Near as I can tell, their whole trajectory doesn’t intersect with reality anywhere, which is a neat trick indeed.
w.

JustMEinT Musings
January 9, 2012 12:21 pm

you know as soon as I see the term ‘computer modeling’ thesedays I ‘turn off’. It is as if these guys are playing pac-man on their computer screens or something similar. “let me see, if I do X with YY and remove NN we will end up with DTYI…. Ahhhhhhhh less hail and rabbits with shorter ears.”

Gary
January 9, 2012 12:27 pm

Do they use imaginary numbers to count imaginary hailstorms? Maybe they should use future numbers that haven’t been invented/discovered yet. There must be a mathematical model for creating/finding them. /sarc

kbray in california
January 9, 2012 12:47 pm

The kool-aid mantra has to be pre-programmed in the modeling software somehow.
It shows up in the bias. Is it in the bios too ?

CRS, Dr.P.H.
January 9, 2012 12:57 pm

Having lived in Oklahoma & seeing several very nice cars demolished by softball-sized hail, I would gladly like to be one of the masses who no longer knows what hail is.
However, the chances of that ever happening are like a hailstone’s chances in Hell.

Rick K
January 9, 2012 1:01 pm

What the hail do I care?

Urederra
January 9, 2012 1:10 pm

Willis Eschenbach says:
January 9, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Hmmm … so they took a global climate model. They “downscaled” the results of that global climate model and used them as inputs for a regional climate model. Then they downscaled those regional climate results and fed them to a weather model.
What’s next? Feed the results of the weather model back into the global climate model?

Next is using an ecological model to see how many species are going to die in the in the following 50 years.
Oh, wait… That has been done already.

ntesdorf
January 9, 2012 1:11 pm

“…the team compared the hailstorms of the future…”
Another product of the electronic Ouidja Board employed at AGW Central. Recently augmented by increasing funding this quasi-religious machine continues ex-cathedra.
What they compared was the outputs of their old Ouidja Board to the outputs of their New Ouidja Board.

Gayle
January 9, 2012 2:36 pm

As a wheat farmer’s daughter, less hail seems like an altogether good thing. Many times, I have breathed a prayer, “Please God, don’t let it hail…”

KnR
January 9, 2012 2:44 pm

Is that the NOAA’s FLAT Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo.
Using this approach you could equally suggest that AGW will mean more rains of fish , but to give them cerdit 2070 is a nice long way away , and who by will remember this ‘claim’ ?

Dale Thompson
January 9, 2012 2:48 pm

Yawn. Another over simplified model of a complex system making predictions too far into the future which will never be verified or disproved. I mean, who is going to be reading that paper/thesis in 2070? Even the author will likely have passed away from old age by then!

R. Shearer
January 9, 2012 2:51 pm

You mean I won’t get a new roof every ten years?

Frank Kotler
January 9, 2012 3:21 pm

… and any hail that falls will be rotten hail!

meemoe_uk
January 9, 2012 3:36 pm

I don’t like it when WUWT just posts AGW religion propaganda without any debunking or ridicule in the article but instead passes that work down to the comments.

January 9, 2012 4:20 pm

Ditto “goofy.”
What’s the prognosis for sleet?

Sparks
January 9, 2012 4:28 pm

I would have thought that by using augmented-reality to draw any kind of scientific conclusion or to even use it and suggest that it was a proof of concept of what reality for the next 70 years is going to be, is unequivocally Null and void within the scientific arena.
“Open the pod bay doors, Hal.”

Robert Wykoff
January 9, 2012 4:34 pm

Interesting. Every time I have ever seen hail in Nevada it was always on very hot days. I have yet to see it hail in the winter. I always just assumed that hot days caused intense convection into the stratosphere. Or are they saying the stratosphere is going to be well over freezing because of global warming?

Keith
January 9, 2012 4:35 pm

Good news for lowering my Colorado homeowners insurance and auto insurance rates? I lost a car in the 70’s to a hail storm. However under the broken window fallacy just imagine the economic loss. I paid for a year of college at Colorado State by painting houses damaged by one of the hail storms. I made some side money helping re-roof houses damaged by hail.

wws
January 9, 2012 4:47 pm

for the man who asked “how does hail damage a roof?” You must have never seen a car that has been through a bad hailstorm. There was a notorious storm in Fort Worth a few years back that left almost every car in town looking like it had been worked over with a ballpeen hammer.
Shingled roofs don’t stand up to a beating like that.

jackstraw
January 9, 2012 4:53 pm

First of all I don’t believe this for a second.
But what pretzel logic, to infer that less damaging hail would be a bad thing.
The premise must be : “if man caused it, it must be bad”

January 9, 2012 4:53 pm

I’m ROFL.
Hail damages things, people would be happy to be rid of it.
Why in Alberta, insurance companies pay for seeding the atmosphere to reduce hail formation.

jorgekafkazar
January 9, 2012 4:59 pm

How much did this useless exercise in Wank-o-Matic science cost us?
O, the triviality!