Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 112

Thread: Extreme Weather....

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    It should be, you mean. But it's not. Well, it is in a political sense --- the cost of pushing for policy that will leave you vulnerable to political attack vs. the benefit of being prepared for a bad storm at some point in the future.

    And then there's corruption... a different cost/ benefit calculus altogether. Everyone knew that sooner or later a hurricane would destroy New Orleans. If I recall correctly, there was a lot of corruption associated with the federal funds allocated to the Army Corps' attempts to improve the city's flood control system, a project that was inadequately designed, sorely underfunded as it was, and planned over a time table that didn't match the risk at all.
    Corruption in New Orleans? Impossible.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Anecdotally -- As of this week's snow, Detroit broke it's all-time record for most snow in a winter season. This winter has SUCKED - worst I can remember since the 1980s for sure. But the kids loved it, so....

    Regarding prep for a 100 year storm, I think the typical practice is to not prepare for it. The cost of hardening infrastructure against something that happens maybe every 100 years doesn't justify the benefit - for some - and certainly doesn't pass the political test. Hell, most places in the US hang their electrical and comm wires on poles so that in a winter ice storm whole regions lose electrical power for days in the worst possible season. How's that for storm prep? Sure is cheaper than burying them though.
    It's not just 100 year storms, though. Much of the mid-Atlantic had mild winters for a stretch, and with municipal tax base crunches we just let things go. Even the power companies weren't keeping up on line/pole maintenance. BTW, I think most of the downed lines come from ice on trees, and tree limbs falling into lines. Or cars crashing into poles and knocking out power. But yeah, we don't prepare very well, and tend to squawk about the "expenses" of preparation....until we get the bill for clean-up and rehab.

    Ok, but really what this is about is prep for Global Warming's promised increase in frequency of weather extremes, right? How we should deal with it is evaluate the risks as best we can with available data, on a location by location basis, and make prudent improvements to local infrastructure, building codes and zoning. I'd like to see river flood plains and coastal areas prone to hurricanes evacuated, but people pay lots of money to live by the water, and nobody listens to me anyway. We should also beef up our storm response capability, stage supplies and equipment regionally, etc.

    What will we do? Up until the first really bad disaster spins out of control and upsets a lot of people, preparation will depend on what political entity tells the best lies. After the disaster, probably we'll get serious about it for a while.
    People will never give up coastal or river living, and they're too important for trade and transportation anyway. At least hurricanes have a degree of advanced warning from meteorologists....can't say the same for tornado alley, or any place on/near an earthquake zone. That's where the disaster response is so important.

    You listen to NPR sometimes....did you hear the bit about CA's extreme drought, and farmers and farm workers petitioning for more federal reservoir diversion for agriculture? Talk about a political mess.

  3. #63
    Some 70 million people were exposed to recent tornadic weather conditions. Good thing they were not all direct victims, huh?

    Millions of people were direct victims of heavy rains and flooding, especially in Pensacola, Florida.

    I've got golf-ball sized hail raining right now, but it doesn't compare to 20 inches of rain in 24 hours, or regional flooding.

    Meanwhile, San Fransisco, CA registered 90 degree temps in late April -- practically unheard of.

  4. #64
    What does that even mean? Pretty sure one is not "exposed to a tornado condition" unless there's an actual tornado in one's town.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    What does that even mean? Pretty sure one is not "exposed to a tornado condition" unless there's an actual tornado in one's town.
    It means that what we used to think of "tornado alley" is expanding beyond mid-western plains states (like Kansas) into southern states (like Florida). Gov. Scott declared a state of emergency for Pensacola in order to take advantage of federal disaster and FEMA dollars. He stated it wasn't for hurricane winds or flooding (which Floridians "know" how to prepare for), but tornadic activity that was totally unexpected.



    By the same token, that's why NJ and NY residents are still having problems for Emergency/Disaster relief funds and insurance compensation from super-storm Sandy.....

  6. #66
    I love your attempt to call out an apparent expansion in areas at risk for tornadoes. You know, my brother lives near the coast here in California and his town had a tornado touch down year before last, first time that happened in the area's history. And yet, 2012 year was a record low for tornado activity, over the 60+ years we've been keeping organized records of it. It broke the prior record, established the year before. And this year broke last year's record. Tornado activity is down and has been going down for some time overall (albeit sometimes there are nasty spikes. 2010, the year before these three consecutive record lows, was an awful year). At least in the US, I can't speak for other areas.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    I love your attempt to call out an apparent expansion in areas at risk for tornadoes.
    The risk of tornadic activity was expanded to places that didn't "routinely" experience tornadoes....just as hurricane force winds and flooding was expanded to places that didn't "routinely" have hurricanes. Are you doubting NOAA and other scientific weather-related agencies?

  8. #68
    I'm questioning your interpretation of what NOAA and other scientific weather-related agencies have said. Seeing as, again, those same groups have recently announced that 2013 was, for the third consecutive year, a record low for "tornadic activity." They've also said that 2014 has so far shaped up to be well below average. What were the exact words I saw headlined in the WPost? "Slowest start to tornado season on record", I think it was.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  9. #69
    http://host-53.242.54.159.gannett.co...-Tornado-Alley

    http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...lley&FORM=IGRE

    There are also forecasts/predictions for more intense storms causing more damage and destruction to human life and property. Not simply because they impact highly populated areas, but because the storms are more severe and violent, and frequently sudden.

  10. #70
    Uh. . . if I'm parsing the information from my search terms correctly, the actual report this "expansion" is based on is a historical analysis of deaths and damage inflicted by the nastier tornadoes in US history. It's a claim that "Tornado Alley" was always larger than it has generally been represented (IIRC though the term arose for frequency of all tornadoes, not just the destructive ones. And of course "Tornado Alley" doesn't have any official recognition. It's a media term that made it into general social awareness, not any sort of actual defined area or phenomenon). And the claim is not a new one. "Dixie Alley" was coined back in 1971 for the propensity in the Mississippi and lower Tennessee Valley's for more destructive tornadoes, though that at least partially has more to do with non-storm factors, like the historically weak economic conditions there and its attendant consequences.

    No one from the weather services appear to be claiming things have gotten worse.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  11. #71
    And San Diego had 95 degree temps in early May. That's weather that hasn't necessarily been fully categorized, plotted, researched, or analyzed....but can still be considered "extreme"

    If this is another one of your attempts to parse terminology, give it up already. Everyone knows that "tornado alley" has traditionally meant plain states like Kansas or Oklahoma that routinely have high tornadic activity. People living in Georgia or Florida don't.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    And San Diego had 95 degree temps in early May. That's weather that hasn't necessarily been fully categorized, plotted, researched, or analyzed....but can still be considered "extreme"

    If this is another one of your attempts to parse terminology, give it up already. Everyone knows that "tornado alley" has traditionally meant plain states like Kansas or Oklahoma that routinely have high tornadic activity. People living in Georgia or Florida don't.
    People living there do know. They know because they actually live there. You might not know, but that's a hole with no bottom and your knowledge or ignorance matters approximately not at all.

    San Francisco hit the '90s earlier this week. Uncommon sure, and I'm sure you'd call it "extreme" but since your notion of "extreme" mostly has to do with whether you want to make a point of it, usually something imaginary that bears no relation to the facts, like your assertions about tornadoes, I don't think that label has much meaning.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  13. #73
    I didn't coin the term "extreme weather", let alone "tornado alley" ya know.

    http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/#alley1
    http://www.spc.noaa.gov/
    http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/2014_torww_to_date.png


    Fuzzy, some meteorologists have suggested changing/expanding what laypeople traditionally consider "tornado alley" -- since many states outside Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas or north Texas have experienced tornadoes just as severe and/or destructive. Tornadoes can happen anywhere weather conditions are ripe, but many people living in southern or mid-Atlantic states haven't traditionally considered themselves as susceptible. That debate has been going on since the "Supercell" of 2011 was compared to the "Super Outbreak" of 1974.

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weath...ley/54157872/1

    Now, you can get all pendantic and wonky about what "extreme" weather means, or what "tornado alley" means.....but if it doesn't help people's preparedness, or create better public policies....what specific point are you making other than "shit happens"?

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    I didn't coin the term "extreme weather", let alone "tornado alley" ya know.
    No you didn't, I believe I pointed out four posts ago that "tornado alley" was media-generated term which made it into the national consciousness. Just like other terms (like "Dixie Alley", for that area you're referencing) also were generated by the media and made it into local awareness even if they didn't achieve national penetration.

    Fuzzy, some meteorologists have suggested changing/expanding what laypeople traditionally consider "tornado alley" -- since many states outside Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas or north Texas have experienced tornadoes just as severe and/or destructive.
    Yes. Again, exactly as I pointed out four posts ago. But that isn't something new. It hasn't been going on since 2011 (and I think you're actually getting confused that confused with 2010) as you allege, it's been going on for decades. YOU are the who became aware of it recently. When you learn about something is not actually when it starts.

    Tornadoes can happen anywhere weather conditions are ripe, but many people living in southern or mid-Atlantic states haven't traditionally considered themselves as susceptible.
    YOU haven't traditionally considered them as susceptible. You are no sort of authority on what other people think and I'll just as kindly ask you not to put words in their mouths or thoughts in their head as I will sharply correct you not to do the same to me. And whether or not they accurately or inaccurately think some other place has it worse or better has no bearing with them being familiar with their own conditions. It affects their estimate of the conditions elsewhere, not where they are.

    Now, you can get all pendantic and wonky about what "extreme" weather means, or what "tornado alley" means.....but if it doesn't help people's preparedness, or create better public policies....what specific point are you making other than "shit happens"?
    You're talking about "global" awareness (in this case, how things compare across the nation) and are trying to insist that's the basis for local response. It's not. Preparedness and public policy as it relates to things like tornadoes or any other weather phenomenon is not set at the national level. It's done at the substate level with state coordination (and then state and federal support for the aftermath of events). And that is, in fact, the best way to approach this stuff in a country as large as the US is. And none of that is determined by what the media chose for a sound-byte sixty years ago.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    No you didn't, I believe I pointed out four posts ago that "tornado alley" was media-generated term which made it into the national consciousness. Just like other terms (like "Dixie Alley", for that area you're referencing) also were generated by the media and made it into local awareness even if they didn't achieve national penetration.



    Yes. Again, exactly as I pointed out four posts ago. But that isn't something new. It hasn't been going on since 2011 (and I think you're actually getting confused that confused with 2010) as you allege, it's been going on for decades. YOU are the who became aware of it recently. When you learn about something is not actually when it starts.
    Then why are you hammering me on terminology....when efforts to change/expand weather terminology comes from the professional meteorologic community -- and those with scientific "authority"?

    You're talking about "global" awareness (in this case, how things compare across the nation) and are trying to insist that's the basis for local response. It's not. Preparedness and public policy as it relates to things like tornadoes or any other weather phenomenon is not set at the national level. It's done at the substate level with state coordination (and then state and federal support for the aftermath of events). And that is, in fact, the best way to approach this stuff in a country as large as the US is. And none of that is determined by what the media chose for a sound-byte sixty years ago.
    Hang on...are you suggesting "extreme weather" is simply a phenomenon created by federal agencies, or media outlets?

    You may not think local/state policy has any connection to federal/national policy, but you'd be wrong. Any time a place is devastated by an "extreme weather event", be it tornado, hurricane, or flash flooding....the whole nation pays a price. Just as we do any time California state has a drought, wildfire, mudslide, avalanche, or earthquake.

    Sorry, but CA didn't know or realize their risks, without federal funding R & D that came first.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Then why are you hammering me on terminology....when efforts to change/expand weather terminology comes from the professional meteorologic community -- and those with scientific "authority"?
    Because it comes from neither? "Tornado alley" isn't a term from or used professionally by the scientific/meteorologic communities. It's a media term. They might reference the colloquialism to aid lay understanding but it's got no place in their professional work. Here, I'll provide the professional meaning of "tornado alley" as defined by the American Meteorological Society's official glossary of terms.

    A term often used by the media to denote a zone in the Great Plains region of the central United States, often a north–south oriented region centered on north Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska, where tornadoes are most frequent.

    Since statistics are variable on all timescales, the term has little scientific value.

    Are. . . are you under the misapprehension that broadcasting about the weather is meteorology?

    Hang on...are you suggesting "extreme weather" is simply a phenomenon created by federal agencies, or media outlets?
    Any use of the colloquialism "hot air" I might have made in this thread notwithstanding, I don't see how anything I've said could be taken as suggesting the feds, media agencies, or anyone else created weather phenomenon, extreme or otherwise. What you typed is obviously not what you meant but I've got absolutely no clue what it is that you did actually mean.

    You may not think local/state policy has any connection to federal/national policy, but you'd be wrong. Any time a place is devastated by an "extreme weather event", be it tornado, hurricane, or flash flooding....the whole nation pays a price. Just as we do any time California state has a drought, wildfire, mudslide, avalanche, or earthquake.
    And yet, Conneticut construction doesn't meet the code necessary to stand up to California earthquakes. Because, while it's possible for a 7.0 earthquake to hit there out of the blue from some buried fault, it's incredibly unlikely. Storm cellars and tornado shelters aren't common in Oregon because tornadoes are incredibly rare there and it makes absolutely no sense to build them. Or the alarm systems that would warn people to go to them if they did exist. Yes, there is some (mostly too small to measure) cost to people even if they're far from the event and damage where it happens. So? As I've said before, there's cost to "preparedness" too. Even you've acknowledged that.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy



    Are. . . are you under the misapprehension that broadcasting about the weather is meteorology?
    Nope. But I'm also disinclined to believe Florida's Governor when he said residents were "totally surprised" when faced with tornadic activity in April.

    Yes, there is some (mostly too small to measure) cost to people even if they're far from the event and damage where it happens. So? As I've said before, there's cost to "preparedness" too. Even you've acknowledged that.
    Then explain why southern states are reluctant to fund FEMA, even though they're net users.

  18. #78
    Fuzzy quotes from another thread http://theworldforgotten.com/showthr...014#post152014


    People are going to make poor decisions and they're going to be at risk because of them and that's not something you can regulate away. We're limited to trying to minimize the damage.
    Yes I do think elected officials, both in the past and now, have used their powers to support minimizing damage and to create tools focused on doing that, exclusively or as part of a broader mission. But there's still only so much attempting to "minimize" damage can realistically and feasibly accomplish. Consider, for instance, this Washington mudslide. The area was known to be dangerous. There'd been events there in the past, slippage in the current day, a number of attempts to shore up the slope and a proposal to buy out and relocate the people living there. That proposal went nowhere, the people living there had absolutely no interest in relocating. What are you going to do? You can't actually stop or prevent a major slide, anymore than you can an earthquake. All you can do is try and minimize what few contributive factors we're actually able to influence.
    Granted, it started out with lack of fire codes/regulations....but the principle is the same: knowing dangers and contributing influences in order to minimize risks and prevent harm.

    Fuzzy, in this thread you said "Preparedness and public policy as it relates to things like tornadoes or any other weather phenomenon is not set at the national level. It's done at the substate level with state coordination (and then state and federal support for the aftermath of events). And that is, in fact, the best way to approach this stuff in a country as large as the US is. And none of that is determined by what the media chose for a sound-byte sixty years ago."

    All that science begins at the federal level --- either by funding for R & D at state university level, or creating very expensive agencies (like NOAA or the NWS) that no state can afford on their own.

    It's complex in a big country like the US....but it's madness to spend billions on scientific R & D to learn about the science behind things, then turn around and spend billions more on the aftermath (evacuations, searches/rescues, Disaster Relief, rebuilding etc.)...and keep repeating the same mistakes.

    Yeah, what are you going to do? We can't expect everyone to relocate, since no place is danger-free, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect states to implement standards/codes/regulations that can often avoid calling on the feds for help cleaning up the mess afterward.
    Last edited by GGT; 05-11-2014 at 02:04 AM.

  19. #79

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Bump.
    Buffalo

    7 feet of snow today and 64F and rain on Monday. Gonna be a flood. That's extreme.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  21. #81
    I had to dig out my sweater yesterday, that was kind of annoying
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  22. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Buffalo

    7 feet of snow today and 64F and rain on Monday. Gonna be a flood. That's extreme.
    My first thought when I heard about the 7 feet of snow was "wow, they're going to have a huge flood".
    Hope is the denial of reality

  23. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    My first thought when I heard about the 7 feet of snow was "wow, they're going to have a huge flood".
    Wow, you're pretty smart.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  24. #84
    People overestimate the amount of water in snow. Fresh snow is usually over 10 times less dense then water.
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

  25. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
    People overestimate the amount of water in snow. Fresh snow is usually over 10 times less dense then water.
    Some parts hit a record 76 inches of snow in 24 hours. Even if thats 10 times less dense than water, they're still fucked.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  26. #86
    2 meters of snow -> 200mm of rain is a lot but not extreme, the record is 1800mm of rain in 24 hours. But what really matters is, how fast it will melt.
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

  27. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Wow, you're pretty smart.
    I'm just wondering why it took the media this long to figure out that snow will melt in November.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  28. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Some parts hit a record 76 inches of snow in 24 hours. Even if thats 10 times less dense than water, they're still fucked.
    Not really. I'm sure there are Canadians etc out there that will find that to be rather mild.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  29. #89
    There aren't too many Canadians living in the parts of Canada that are that bad.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  30. #90
    You only get floods if you get a lot of rain on top of the melting of the snow. The alps already have between 1 and 3 meters of snow. And while nobody lives up there, there are certainly a lot people living along the rivers below.
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •