![701204main_20121029-SANDY-GOES-FULL[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/701204main_20121029-sandy-goes-full1.jpg?w=300&resize=300%2C209)
This was quite a circus to watch today. I didn’t bite.
Early this afternoon, AccuWeather reported the National Hurricane Center had announced they were modifying the definition of hurricane warnings becuase of Hurricane Sandy. They made a big deal out of it. Turns out that wasn’t quite right, read on.
Following the criticism of the National Hurricane Center’s handling of Hurricane Sandy and the non-issuance of hurricane warnings north of North Carolina, it has been decided that the NHC will now have more flexibility in their policy regarding the issuance of advisories. Beginning in 2013, the NHC will have the flexibility to issue multiple advisories on post-tropical cyclones for landfalling systems or close bypassers.
According to the NHC, this required a revision of the Hurricane Warning definition.
…
“The main issue is: we want people to get ready for hurricane conditions, and that’s why we are changing the definition of hurricane warning to be a little more inclusive of other things than just a hurricane,” Chris Landsea, Science and Operations Officer at the National Hurricane Center, told AccuWeather.com.
Playing follow the leader, The Weather Channel added a story that built upon the AccuWeather story. TWC wrote:
The National Hurricane Center confirmed Wednesday that changes to their system of issuing hurricane warnings will be altered prior to the start of the 2013 season. NOAA spokesperson Maureen O’Leary said changes to the warning system will be made, but said she was not able to comment further at the time.
A report issued at an annual NOAA hurricane meeting in Miami stated the NHC will now be able to issue a hurricane warning on a post-tropical cyclone.
But wait, not so fast! They haven’t actually made a rule change yet.
Seeing all the excitement, the In an emailed statement to many media outlets today, NOAA’s Chris Vaccaro indicated this change is not final but rather part of an ongoing process:
A proposal was raised during the NOAA Hurricane Conference last week for NWS to have the option to issue hurricane and tropical storm watches and warnings for post-tropical cyclones that threaten life and property.
This is one step in the process required before any proposed change to operational products becomes final. As part of our review of the 2012 hurricane season, including the Sandy service assessment, we will review all policies and changes through the existing and established process.
This sort of reporting is just about what we’d expect.
I think some new categorization is a good idea, because some storms are big on winds, some are big on rain, some are big on storm surge, and some are big on all three. Getting a handle on these to truly rate storm effects would be better. In this case, Sandy happened to just hit a place that isn’t used to hurricanes on a regular basis, and it wasn’t strong enough to rate hurricane strength, so hurricane warnings were not issued. The fact that it was NYC put a microscope on it. If hit Florida, it would have been just another storm.
CCM Mike Smith talks about the warning issue on WUWT.TV here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu-6NIUNNw0
You can see some of the MSM playing follow the leader below….
Related articles
- Breaking: NHC Modifies Hurricane Warning Definition in Wake of Sandy (livescience.com)
- NHC Modifies Hurricane Warning Definition In Wake Of Sandy (huffingtonpost.com)
- National Hurricane Center re-defines the term hurricane warning (earthsky.org)
- Breaking News: NHC Modifies Hurricane Warning Definition in Wake of Sandy (paramuspost.com)
- Hurricane Warnings : A New Policy (wjla.com)
- Sandy forces change to hurricane warning definition (usatoday.com)
- National Hurricane Center to change alert system to include transitioning storms (sacbee.com)
It IS worth a read of the older “Willis” thread, however here are some of the links to the Weatherflow data:
The link takes you to the Weatherflow Sandy data page.
http://www.weatherflow.com/datascope-open-for-tropical-cyclone-sandy/
Select any station, scroll down and you’ll find the data archive graph, click on 10/29 segment to blow it up. (You’ll also find a map with other stations below the praph).
Here is the Tuckerton Station reading referenced in the NWS advisory I posted above:
http://ds.weatherflow.com/spot/45700
Here is the Image link for the Tuckerton 10/29 data – please note that landfall was appx 4:00PM – and at that point this station had a 90mph gust, 60+mph avg wind speeds and 50+mph “lull” windspeeds. Please also note the relationship between gust wind speeds and sustained wind speed – usually 20-25mph, with max 30mph difference at peak gusts. So it really is quite easy and useful to look at a peak gust map as provided earlier and max a useful and reasonably accurate estimate of sustained speeds :
http://api.weatherflow.com/wxengine/rest/graph/getGraph?spot_id=45700&time_start=2012-10-29%2000:00:00&time_end=2012-10-29%2023:59:59&units_wind=mph&wf_apikey=1d10f490-991c-11e1-a8b0-0800200c9a66&wf_token=29e47310552f9e85e6728a414e5a5d86&wind_speed_floor=30&graph_height=250&graph_width=720&type=line3&fields=wind&format=raw&v=1.1
Here is an example of the confusion – I noted this comment I had seen from a reader somewhere in researching the data issues:
[blockquote]Here is a reader comment about the transition and naming change that shows the concern quite well:
“I honestly thought the storm had been downgraded when I first read the headline earlier today – but now that I read the whole story I’m glad I did. Nothing has changed about the storm but the name……..” [/blockquote]
One last image – this is like what Matthew, as a meteorologist, was talking about – it was from WeatherNationTv – a weather news provider – :wind speeds from 76-94mph
http://blog.weathernationtv.com/wp-content/uploads/10.30.12-wind-gusts.jpg
There are nearly two generations in the Northeast that are unaccostumed to “real” hurricanes. Older people remember them though and the reality is that they are simply not as prepared to deal with it now as they were 40 years ago. tropical storms hitting NJ and Long Island is not novel. Full-on huricanes have hit them with rather impressive strength. People relied on themselves a lot more though because they were used to it and they weren’t so dependant on infrastructure. If cars were flooded in the streets, teenagers would move them for a tip so they could dry out. If the lights went out, they have kersense lamps and fuel-oil heat. Phone and TV weren’t essential. Now with the entire generation of young people expecting government to protect them and rescue their property, expecting once imaginary services such as internet and cellphones to never be out, let alone electricity, we are completely unprepared. Normal hurricane seasons will return and it will be interesting to see what happens when a real Cat 3 storm hits New Jersey and New York.
Hurricane? What hurricane?
I seem to recall pretty continuous “updates” on SuperMegaStorm Sandy for about a week before it hit. It wasn’t as bad as hurricanes that have hit Virginia and South the past few years. It seems to have hit an area that had little big storm memory or preparedness and a high population density. Also seems that the Federal response has improved only in the quality of photo-ops since 2005.
Very amusing, this argument from authority, “I am also a meteorologist”, authority diminished by the failure of rigorous professional standards – they aren’t dismissed for incompetence. Taleb suggests forecasters not having skin-in-the-game be given scant attention.
I’m watching the debate with some personal interest – skin – for having escaped such as Hurricane Hugo (my sailboat survived unscathed) only to discover that blizzard has no standard objective definition. Is a blizzard likely in the current weather pattern and will I live long enough to seen the Modern Minimum’s worst?
Believe nothing that you read or hear without verifying it yourself unless it fits your preexisting worldview (this latter clause excuses the invincibly ignorant too).
Otsar’s observation, “If it is not a hurricane when the storm hits land, then the hurricane deductible does not apply.” is spot on. Much of this kerfuffle is insurance/economically driven as storms are compared by inflated damage costs.
Change the classifications – which are, largely, arbitrary bands – and there’ll still be another storm that is “just under” the new classification and people will still whinge. What’s important is an accurate assessment of impacts.
Dear old Michael Fish was technically corrent in 1987 when he said there wan’t a hurricane coming, but by heck there was a big, bad storm on the way that caused extreme havoc and disruption.
Now we see the opposite where news bulletins are full of “Weather Alerts”, “Severe Weather Warnings” and such like for what are, generally, normal seasonal spells of poor weather. We have one active at the moment for about an inch of snow that may fall at low levels. It’s December. In Scotland.
I knew what Sandy was, what it was likely to do and what the impact was likely to be 3 days beforehand, owing to blanket media coverage – even in the UK. I can only assume that similar media coverage in its path was at least as clear – if not clearer. SO there can be no quibbling about what it was CALLED – we knew what it was likely to DO. Was it overhyped – possibly; was its strength and impact in line with the warnings that had been clearly given – absolutely.
The problem is that banging out severe weather warnings for events that are typical seasonal weather and don’t actually have any exceptional impact desensitises people to the warnings and means that when there’s a REAL severe impact likely, people tend to shrug and go “yes, like the last 27, we’ll just get on with normal life”.
We need forcasters to let us get on and deal with “bad” weather with a manageable impact and leave the warnings for “exceptional” weather with severe impacts.
This is a case of closing the barn door after the horses have all escaped. It is also called “covering your ass” (and is — store this added information in a safe place — characteristic not just of climate academics, but of our current President and his administration, since he does not know how to do anything but destroy everything he touches, and routinely needs to save himself from comeuppance), and it is the hallmark of incompetence exposed. Calling it “Superstorm Sandy” was clear hype, and part and parcel of the “global warming” incompetence (so blaming the NHC for not calling it a hurricane, or residents for not preparing for the water surge, are equally incompetent). We are in a World War, and anything we get from the media that makes our “leaders” look good is propaganda — and that is what this announcement is.
Are these weather people all “communications” majors? When communications is always the main focus, science is only a secondary consideration.
I just want to mention, for the record, that I can think of at least one non-hurricane storm that probably shows Matthew Souder’s argument to be a little, um, weak.
The great storm of 1987. Sustained winds of around 75mph, gusts up to 134mph, lowest recorded pressure of 953 mbar at the “eye”. If it had been a hurricane it would have been classed as a category 2 when it crossed the south coast.
And then it happened again in 1990.
I don’t know what this proves or not, except this: The ’87 storm destroyed a huge chunk of my country’s economy and directly killed 18 people, but we didn’t declare the end of the world and run around screaming that it was “unprecedented”. It was a very rare conjunction of atmospheric effects.
So was the storm that hit New York. It was not a hurricane when it made landfall. It was a very bad storm, but it was only bad because of a freakish (yet not unprecedented, as we’ve just seen) combination of weather fronts.
So there.
Can I have my prize now?
Tim B is absolutely correct. The problem isn’t the warning system. The problem is that people have never experienced these storms simply don’t realize their destructive power. As a young man in 1989, when Hurricane Hugo was on track to hit Charleston, SC, I was excited at the prospect of experiencing my first real hurricane. My parents, who had lived through several Cat 2 & 3 storms, finally managed to convince me to leave. After seeing the devastation Hugo left from Charleston, SC to Charlotte, NC, I will never again think about staying.
Northerners are used to dealing with snow and cold snaps. Tropical they don’t know about, understand, or care about. Of course, no storm can possibly be important if it doesn’t
affect that most self-centered of all cities : New York, which still pretends it’s the center of commerce and trade.
Why doesn’t the USA just have a national environmental hazard system and ditch the divided communications. Put all the data from all type of hazards and disseminate it out.
I would like to suggest a graphic, much like those on large semis designed to tell idiots that really big trucks take two lanes to make a right turn: A graphic showing the vehicle driven by the idiot being hit by the truck. Maybe pictures of cars floating off, people on roofs, water pouring down through the street. We live in a society of people who don’t really speak a language much but they do understand pictures. So how about a hurricane warning system in pictures?
I also agree with some commenters that today’s scientifically ignorant, easily frightened, reality-denied children will be the ones who suffer. The deaths from storms will go up since the government cannot (and doesn’t even care to) be there to save everyone from danger. After a lifetime of childproofing and government handouts, these people will be totally incapable of saving themselves in a disaster. The death will go up, count on it.
Given the number of people that live in the area where the storm hit, what was the casualty rate as a percentage of the population?
If a storm hits an area where 10 people live, and all 10 people are killed, that is a killer storm. If a storm hits an area where 10 million people live, and 100 people are killed, then for 99.999% of the people it wasn’t a killer storm.
Michael, “Put all the data from all type of hazards and disseminate it out.” There is no objective and standard definition of hazard. I retired from a career in nuclear power with 3 REM WBE.
The essence of the current US political struggle is statist over weening government.
Believe nothing that you read or hear without verifying it yourself unless it fits your preexisting worldview.
Few people are ever killed by wind. Mostly it is water that kills people in large numbers. For example, tropical thunderstorm pack hurricane force winds but are rarely fatal. While tropical depressions that bring flooding without wind can lead to widespread death.
Thus, trying to rate storm danger based on wind speed is a nonsense.
Storm surge and flooding is mostly what kills people on the east coast of every continent, because the water is often shallow for miles offshore. The combination of high tide and storm force onshore winds drives water ashore which kills people in low lying areas.
If you want to measure the risk of a storm, measure the flooding risk not the wind speed.
There used to be a time when “Storm Warning” was sufficient for people to understand the term meant “risk to life, seek shelter and high ground.”
However, when the press starts using labels like “FrankenStorm”, then people will regard “Storm” as “no risk, business as usual”. Pretty soon we will need a label like “SuperDuperFrankenStorm” before anyone pays attention.
Why Not “PayAttentionNumbSkull” as a new storm classification?
Tim B says:
December 6, 2012 at 2:30 am
People relied on themselves a lot more though because they were used to it and they weren’t so dependant on infrastructure.
=========
throughout history every 3 generations the hills people would conquer the city people and become the new city people. The first generations builds it, the second runs it, the third spends it.
ferd berple says:
December 6, 2012 at 7:47 am
Why Not “PayAttentionNumbSkull” as a new storm classification?
========================================================
Why not a new 12-point scale, something like;
1. Nothing to see here, move along
2. No, really, nothing to see here, move along
3. Local Weather Service will issue warning
4. National Weather Service will issue warning
5. Event will be linked to Climate Change by relevant Weather Service / placemen
6. OK folks, wise up ‘cos something bad’s probably on the way
7. Even Porsche owners may want to put the roof up
8. You might want to take some precaustions
9. You might want to take a lot of precautions
10. You might want to leave town
11. You might want to leave the country
12. Have you seen “The Day After Tomorrow”?
If the authorities issue a warning that is over cautious, overstates the actual strength, the next warning will be ignored.
As usual, the NHC nailed the track forecast. That should be enough.
More nonsense and hand-wringing. When soldiers were being sent to Iraq, do you think any of them took the risks lightly because it wasn’t a declared war? When you see a “high voltage” sign, do you ignore it because there’s no accompanying “high amperage” warning? Sandy was identified by a variety of names including Hurricane, Superstorm, Megastorm, and Frankenstorm. Of those, the most benign to the non-meteorologist is probably the actual designation of “hurricane”.
This is an exercise in semantics. There was no material effect on the level of concern or readiness that was caused by the hurricane classification system. The risks were accurately described and elected officials and the the public prepared accordingly (or didn’t).
BTW, the Weather Channel was on site 24 hours before Sandy made landfall, standing in Battery Park and predicting storm surges in excess of 12 feet. If Bloomberg really did tell New Yorkers to go about “business as usual”, he should be removed from office immediately. I live in New Jersey and I had already decided that my kids would be staying home from school, dragged out my generator and deepened the drainage ditch that carries water away from my basement. I learned my lesson with Floyd in 1999, so if Bloomy is over 13 years old, he should have known what was coming.
Mark says:
December 6, 2012 at 8:34 am
That’s great! but to be fair, there may be too many big words and choices for the average dimwit to grasp! Y’know, for some people they just need two options :
Everything’s AOK
or
Dig a big hole and get in it!