The hype meter at the Discovery Channel has pegged at full McKibben. See this:
Sandy wasn’t even a category 1 hurricane when it made landfall. Yet somehow, that elevates it for “megastorm” status?
I wonder if AccuWeather meteorologist Henry Margusity (who was heavily relied upon in the show) knew before he got suckered into this show that they’d make such incredible leaps of labeling?
Now, with a storm that doesn’t even come close to storms that have hit the area in the past, such as 1954 Hurricane Hazel or the Great Hurricane of 1938, what will they call a Cat3 or greater storm if it hits the area? Here’s some possibilities:
- SuperDuperStorm
- MegaMegaStorm
- GigaStorm
- SandyOnSteroids
- Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Storm
- Spawn of MegaDoppler 9000
Gail Combs
That is one interesting graph. Just shows what can be achieved with a little licence and a creative mind.
Evan Pugh said on November 18, 2012 at 11:47 pm
And Marco at 1:24 am, picked up on it and said
Reduce co2 to below 150ppm and all plant growth ceases, without plants all life on Earth ceases to exist, including the ignoramuses at the Discovery Channel.
When Lisa Jackson of the EPA was being quizzed by (a congressional ?) committee she was unable to answer the question of how much co2 was in the atmosphere, to both her and the US courts co2 is a pollutant, presumably both would seek removal of that ‘pollutant’ and hence unwittingly the consequent extermination of all life on Earth.
I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone at Greenpeace also thought that co2 should be ‘”eliminated” from the air we breathe.
That would be the ultimate irony, the organisation set up to protect mankind from pollution etc ends up ‘inadvertently’ killing all life on planet earth. That would be quite an epitaph.
Sandy was not a megastorm because there were reporters out reporting during the storm!
Pamela Gray says:
November 19, 2012 at 6:55 am
…Many textbooks through high school include the hydrological cycle, cloud types, and storm systems but do not include more advanced Earth science centered on micro and macro weather parameter drivers….
__________________________________
Guess I was lucky, out high school Earth Science teacher covered all of that plus plate tectonics, how to use topo maps and lots of other neat stuff. He is the reason I took several Geology courses in college just for the fun of it. (And yes I did go back and thank him)
What are the odds on New York doing anything to prepare for the “new normal”, or even a proper hurricane.
Low to non existent ?
JudyW says:
November 19, 2012 at 8:11 am
The mules on both sides of this argument appear to purposely have blinders on. The continued battle focus on carbon without regard for other major climate change contributors occurring now is myopic…
___________________________
I do not think you have been at this site for very long. The discussions are wide ranging. For example a frequent commenter is Vukcevic. Here are a links to some of his work focusing on geomagnetism since that is one topic you mentioned.
North Atlantic Hydro-Magnetic loop: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/HmL.htm
more: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC1.htm
Sam the First says:
November 19, 2012 at 8:36 am
There are some very convincing points and links posted here in this thread, as usual
But the problem facing us, is how to get journalists, activists, teachers, and parents to read such stuff in order to better inform themselves….
_______________________
It is very frustrating especially since the Greens keep morphing from “Global Cooling” to “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” to “Weather Weirding” This alone tells you the basic fight is really about whether humans should be allowed to advance scientifically and technologically or whether western civilization should retreat back into a Dark Age of superstition and serfdom. An age where capitalism and individual freedom are submerged into communitarianism.
mstickles said that the NHC reported the following about SANDY:
SATELLITE…RADAR…SURFACE…AND RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT DATA
INDICATE THAT SANDY MADE LANDFALL NEAR ATLANTIC CITY NEW JERSEY
AROUND 0000 UTC. THE INTENSITY OF THE POST-TROPICAL CYCLONE WAS
ESTIMATED TO BE NEAR 80 KT AT LANDFALL WITH A MINIMUM PRESSURE OF
946 MB. AT LANDFALL…THE STRONGEST WINDS WERE OCCURRING OVER
WATER TO THE EAST AND SOUTHEAST OF THE CENTER. HURRICANE-FORCE
WINDS GUSTS HAVE BEEN REPORTED ACROSS LONG ISLAND AND THE NEW YORK
METROPOLITAN AREA THIS EVENING.
Unfortunately the NHC are apparently infested by AGWers, and therefore their opinions are biased, and I consider their “estimates” to be opinions. It is still possible though that their raw data are not biased – in another thread I showed that the highest sustained winds on land that could be found in NWS recorded data were about 52mph (below Storm Force 11). There were indeed several hurricane force gusts reported, which can be damaging, but they do not qualify as hurricane force _winds_. The point is that sustained hurricane force winds occurring as the eyewall of a true hurricane makes landfall cause a swathe of damage which would make SANDY look like a picnic.
As a non-American it continues to amaze me that power is carried by relatively flimsy overhead cables. New Jersey’s electricity supply devastation is, I believe, a consequence of past design decisions that that is an OK and cost-effective thing to do. Still, it may actually be more cost-effective to replace them on rare storm occasions than to invest in underground cables.
Rich.
JudyW says:
November 19, 2012 at 8:11 am
The mules on both sides of this argument appear to purposely have blinders on. The continued battle focus on carbon without regard for other major climate change contributors occurring now is myopic…
=====================================================
Like Ma Gaia?
The “focus on carbon” is because the political spin is focused on the control of “carbon emissions”.
A real and honest scientific look at what’s going on has been left in a cloud reddish-green dust.
Is Sandy being called a “Superstorm” because the storm itself was powerful or because it deprived so many of power?
If our power grid depended on windmills and solar panels maybe nobody who didn’t live on the coast would have noticed?
Andy: I think you’ve grossly mischaracterized Sandy by saying it “wasn’t even a category 1 hurricane when it made landfall”. Although the storm no longer had the characteristics of a hurricane (a warm core), it came ashore with the wind speed (85-90 mph) of a Category 1 hurricane. The storm was poorly organized, so the area covered by hurricane force winds reached 175 miles from the center. This means that a much larger area was damaged than typical for even a Category 3 hurricane (www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2012/h2012_Sandy_prt.htm), but that much less severe damage occurred near the track of the eye. Most importantly, the storm was powered by a 940 mb low pressure center typical of a Category 3 hurricane, a record for the region.
In many cases, most damage from hurricanes is caused by storm surge. The direction of approach and the shape and steepness of the coast have a great influence on how much water strong winds can push onto land. Sandy’s track directed the greatest storm surge into densely populated Northern New Jersey shore and New York Bay. New York Bay had been previously identified as being unusually vulnerable to storm surge (www.nhc.noaa.gov/surge/risk/).
Below is a comparison of Sandy and The Great Hurricane of 1938 using information from the source you linked and data of unknown reliability from the web. Sandy comes close to 1938.
The Great Hurricane of 1938 Sandy
Peak Steady Winds 121 mph 85 mph
Lowest Pressure 946 mb 940 mb
Peak Storm Surge 17 ft. 14.6 ft
Peak Wave Heights 50 ft. 40 ft
Deaths 700 131
Homeless 63,000 40,000
Cost $47 billion $20-50? billion
Rate of Advance 50-70 mph 18-25 mph
(slower = more time for damage)
I forgot a link in my earlier comment:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/evaporation-water-surface-d_690.html
Thanks for the interesting articles and comments
Kyle says:
November 19, 2012 at 10:49 am
… Do you think this is a joke? Do you like making fun of a storm that ruined peoples lives and destroyed every possession they owned? …. you should use this blog to inform people of ways to stay alive if a disaster happens to them. This is a waste of a website and you waste your life doing absolutely no good on here.
____________________________________
You are addressing the WRONG people.
I have complained here as have others, that building on a flood plain, as my geology prof. explained, is building IN A RIVER, it is just a part of the river not used very often. Others here have noted barrier reefs MOVE.
Anyone with a lick of sense DOES NOT BUILD in those locations. If the people are too ignorant to understand that, then complain to the school system that is SUPPOSED to prepare them for life. Complain to the local and state government that let local planners get away with being bribed by construction companies so they could build in unsuitable locations.
Remember Katrina? That should have never have been the disaster it was and the politicians who allowed it to happen should be up on manslaughter charges and I do Not mean Bush.
Again, you are addressing the wrong people. Worse, by the media calling this a mega-storm caused by CO2 instead of explaining what is actually happening more people will die while funds are wasted on pork barrel solar and wind projects that do nothing but transfer wealth from the poor tax payer to the politically connected ‘Investor’
Simon says:
November 19, 2012 at 1:28 pm
Gail Combs
That is one interesting graph. Just shows what can be achieved with a little licence and a creative mind.
___________________________
Oh you mean like this? graph
Jimmy Haigh (Nov 18, 2012 at 10:28 pm) says: “For all those deniers of natural sea level changes – here is some information… At several times in the geological past sea level has been 200 to 300 metres higher than present.”
And what was the comparison of the mean volume of the ocean below present sea level in those past eras, compared with the present time?
The topography of the hard surface of the planet was very different in the geological times for which sea levels are claimed to be 400 metre above the present level.
Gail Combs
No, that Greenland ice core one made Manns hockey stick look straight. If Mann is to be accused of distorting facts, whoever did that one should be in the circus.
There is only one thing “super” about Sandy. It struck a densly populated area, filled with Chicken Littles. Those impacted by the strorm, needed a PR system to milk the federal system, and in stepped the NY media. The transformation was a win-lose. The winners get to re-build, on the taxpayers expense, in an area exposed to storms of this type, and the losers, get the bill. And the winners even get to blame the losers for the causing the storm, by their “reckless use of energy”.
This is another effort to justify building structures in risky locations, and transfer the financial risk of “inevitable” distruction, to those that did not build at those locations. If you want to build next to the ocean, accept the risk that goes with it. Coastal residents are fine, with accepting the benefits of easy access to the oceans, they just want to be subsidized for the associated financial risk.
Gail Combs says:
November 19, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Anyone with a lick of sense DOES NOT BUILD in those locations. If the people are too ignorant to understand that, then complain to the school system that is SUPPOSED to prepare them for life. Complain to the local and state government that let local planners get away with being bribed by construction companies so they could build in unsuitable locations.
Rather like NC-20 in North Carolina.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/11/science-vs-agw-advocacy-in-north-carolina/
Gunga Din says:
November 19, 2012 at 2:32 pm
Is Sandy being called a “Superstorm” because the storm itself was powerful or because it deprived so many of power?
If our power grid depended on windmills and solar panels maybe nobody who didn’t live on the coast would have noticed?
================================================
I notice some new names here. Just to be clear, they’d be so used to power outages that they might not have noticed Sandy knocking out their power.
I guess you’re just one those people who likes being a moron. The storm was the most powerful ever to hit the east coast at 940 mb’s. Over a hundred people died and will probably end up causing 60 – 80 billion in damage. 40,000 homes are still uninhabitable just on the south shore of Long Island alone. Sorry that it doesn’t qualify for your own numbnuts definition of what a megastorm is. And I’m also sorry for whatever severe head trauma you suffered as a child – living with brain damage can’t be easy.
REPLY: Thanks for so clearly illustrating the angry, scientifically bereft, emotionally based rhetoric of the warm side of the debate, Mr. “Bazwald”.
Be sure to look up some hurricane history to see where that 940mb fits into the scheme of things. Here’s a good place to start. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/09/bill-mckibbens-tabloid-climatology-claims-are-easily-debunked/
– Anthony Watts
See – owe to Rich says:
November 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm
As a non-American it continues to amaze me that power is carried by relatively flimsy overhead cables. New Jersey’s electricity supply devastation is, I believe, a consequence of past design decisions that that is an OK and cost-effective thing to do. Still, it may actually be more cost-effective to replace them on rare storm occasions than to invest in underground cables.
***
Not so much a problem w/overhead lines per say, but trees draping over & around them. I doubt many lines were directly blown off the poles. Maintaining proper clearances around the lines would have vastly decreased the damage.
As a former power plant engineer, underground lines are impractical/too expensive in rural areas and much more time-consuming to locate faults on when they occur.
beng says:
November 21, 2012 at 9:01 am
See – owe to Rich says:
November 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm
As a non-American it continues to amaze me that power is carried by relatively flimsy overhead cables. New Jersey’s electricity supply devastation is, I believe, a consequence of past design decisions that that is an OK and cost-effective thing to do. Still, it may actually be more cost-effective to replace them on rare storm occasions than to invest in underground cables.
***
Not so much a problem w/overhead lines per say, but trees draping over & around them. I doubt many lines were directly blown off the poles. Maintaining proper clearances around the lines would have vastly decreased the damage.
As a former power plant engineer, underground lines are impractical/too expensive in rural areas and much more time-consuming to locate faults on when they occur.
Indeed most of the damage to the overhead lines in central NJ was due to trees. One thing to remember is that there are many more trees here than there were 50 years ago and they’re much bigger. PSE&G’s latest number is 48,000 trees cleared, the previous highest number was 22,500 for hurricane Irene which held the previous record for number of customers effected, at 1.7 million Sandy was double Irene! Several substations and switching stations were knocked out by storm surge, this was the first time that had happened in their 50-75 year history!
PSE&G’s initial plans going forward are:
“To deal with the flooding from heavy rains that we saw in last year’s storms, we identified substations that needed to be protected with barriers and installed them.
We will evaluate options to protect substations in coastal areas.
The best way to protect the system is to build in redundancy in our distribution system. For example, we will be building a new substation over the next year inland in Newark. With the “loop” design of our network, we can reroute electricity when we have an issue with a substation. So, we will continue to build more redundancy into our system.
We will evaluate our tree trimming programs and be more aggressive with trees near power lines and will consider moving from a four-year cycle to a three-year cycle.
Repairing damaged equipment in hard-to-reach places is time and resource intensive. We need to consider how we can work with municipal leaders to move utility poles and electrical lines that run through backyards to the curb.
We will continue to build up our transmission infrastructure around the state to increase reliability. We expect to invest about $1 billion in transmission enhancements and replacements this year.
We will analyze the effectiveness, costs and whether it might make sense to bury some overhead lines to increase reliability.”
Like many other things they’re fighting the last battle, no doubt the next event will be different and require different counter-measures.
[snip. You know why. — mod.]
John F. Hultquist
“…politicians and media could tell the truth…”
Yeah, and pigs could fly too.
“It really isn’t normal for sea surface temperatures to be so high.”
SSTs were generally between 0.5c and 1c above normal where hurricanes track so nothing unusual here.
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-121028.gif
Part of the AMO and this has been warm in past.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-amo
High pressure being persistent over Greenland is opposite would should happen with global warming when it was expected to cause mainly positive NAO and AO pressure anomalies with the jet stream further North.
Instead the NAO and AO were generally negative and the jet stream further South with a meridional pattern. A meridional pattern is often associated with this pressure anomaly with a jet stream further South and brings colder and warmer air together much easily. This increases severe weather events around the planet and has been observed particularly during the cooler periods. This type of behavior was normally associated with cooler climates and recent research currently blames the low solar activity for it. Low Arctic ice has also been blamed, but where was it before when Arctic ice was still low then? This pattern happened fairly often in the cooler periods when ice was higher, so I don’t see any link with ice here. The difference in the positioning of the hurricane towards New York area happens occasionally, but this change brought this recent event.