A Nor'easter for the Northeast

Monday, November 5, 2012
2:39 P.M.

Let me first start out by saying that this storm will be nowhere near as strong as Sandy. I was looking at some of the statistics from Sandy... 185 fatalities and at least 52.4 billion dollars in damage (the second costliest hurricane in the history of the U.S.), and I was shocked. I knew the storm was going to be bad, but I had no idea it would cause as much devastation as it did. I underestimated the destructive potential of Sandy.

This upcoming Nor'easter is, however, a strong storm, and should be taken seriously, especially since it is hitting areas that have already been ravaged by Sandy.

The biggest differences between this storm and Sandy is that this storm is much weaker and is not a hurricane. Remember how I talked about hurricanes being "warm core" storms and extratropical cyclones being "cold core" storms? This shows up very clearly on the models. I took another look at the 850 mb temperatures forecast by the European model and was struck by how different the temperatures at the storms' core were. Below is Sandy. Again, it is from the Monday, October 29 12z HWRF model at 850 mb, and these charts show the geopotential heights (contours, 30m interval), temperatures (color fill, 2 degrees Celsius interval), and the wind vectors (m/s)

6 hour forecast (from 12z October 29)

And here's the chart for the upcoming storm.

75 hour forecast (from 12z November 5)

You can clearly see that the upcoming storm has much more cold air at its center than Sandy, and you can also see that it is considerably weaker than Sandy. However, comparing your typical Nor'easter to Sandy is like comparing a Toyota Prius to a Mack Truck.

This Nor'easter is expected to bottom out at around 984 millibars, which isn't historically strong but still qualifies as a major storm. The Hanukkah Eve Storm of 2006 bottomed out at 970 millibars offshore and weakened to 976 millibars by the time it crossed southern Vancouver Island, and the Hanukkah Eve Storm knocked out power to nearly 1.5 million people. This storm will pack a punch, and it needs to be taken seriously.

57 hour forecast

The chart above shows the 10 meter wind speed in knots, with the direction given by the streamlines. There is a swath of 50 knot winds offshore, and it looks like the strongest winds are ahead of the storm's warm front and bent-back occlusion. Places like Cape Cod and Long Island will get hammered with winds, and these winds are strong enough to push a weak storm surge into these areas, which brings the danger of re-flooding low-lying areas that were pummeled by the surge from Sandy.

81 hour forecast

This storm will also be extremely slow-moving, and 24 hours later, it has only moved ~ 350 miles at an average of 14.5 miles per hour, which is pretty slow for an extratropical storm. This is not a good thing; it means that the Northeast will get battered by wind and snow (yes, snow) for an extended period of time. The snow is predicted to start Wednesday afternoon, and the map below (which is 6 hours after the snow is predicted to start according to this model, which is the Euro) shows the three-hour snowfall over the area for Thursday November 8 at 03:00 UTC. I looked for a 24-hour snowfall map, but this was all I could find. 

 Thu, 08 Nov, 03:00 GMT

Forecast hour 63

Six hours later, the snow has moved northward into Maine. 

Forecast hour 69

These model charts show snowfall all the way down to the coast, but I seriously doubt the coast will see snow. Instead, it will see 1-3 inches of rain, which is enough rain to cause some serious problems, and places inland could see several inches of heavy, wet snow. We'll have a better idea of the predicted snow totals as we get closer to the event.

This storm has the possibility to bring flooding due to higher-than-normal water levels and waves to coastal regions and the potential to damage trees and structures that were weakened by Sandy. The bottom line is that this will not be a historic storm, but it will be strong, and it couldn't come at a worse time. My thoughts are with the people on the East Coast, and I hope this storm doesn't make things too much worse.

Thanks for reading.

Charlie

Climate Change and the Election

Sunday, November 4, 2012

~12:00 P.M.

This election season has been pretty intense from both sides. I've seen some outrageous, unsupported claims on Facebook from people in support of both Obama and Romney, although I have to admit, I've seen more ridiculous posts in support of Romney. I've honestly gotten to the point where I am tired of all this stuff and just want the election to be over and done with. I'll go out and vote, but I won't be voting for Romney or Obama.

Why, you may ask? America has its fair share of problems right now. We have a massive debt, we involve ourselves in unnecessary wars, we have very high unemployment levels, and, in this day and age, we are still actually debating over the right of same-sex couples to get married. Homelessness, hunger, health, and poverty are all immediate issues, and the candidates have addressed these. But they have not addressed global warming as an immediate issue. As obvious as the evidence for climate change is, it is invisible compared to the fear and dread a soldier feels when he/she learns they will be sent off to war, and silent compared horrific suffering that same soldier feels when one of their comrades is killed, or when they, years after returning from combat, are still reeling from the pain, depression, and anxiety associated with PTSD. From this perspective, it seems immoral to spend money on trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions when so many people in the U.S. are suffering, and even worse when you consider the rest of the world. Hell, it seems immoral to spend money on anything that doesn't help people.

But global warming and ocean acidification are immediate issues. Since "Superstorm Sandy" struck last week, Michael Bloomberg, the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Independent mayor of New York City has expressed his unequivocal support for Barack Obama, stating that Obama has worked the last four years to reduce carbon emissions from power plants and cars, while Romney has "reversed course" and abandoned the pro-environmental positions he held while he was governor of Massachusetts.

"Our climate is changing," Bloomberg wrote in an editorial on Thursday, which you can find here. "And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it might be -- given this week's devastation -- should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action." It's not scientifically sound to say that Sandy was the direct result of global warming. Sandy was the direct result of, as Scott Sistek said in his blog, "a hurricane, an arctic storm, a strong jet stream, a strong blocking pattern in the western Atlantic, and a full moon" (the full moon made the storm surge worse). Sandy was a freak storm, and it makes just as much sense to cite Sandy as a direct result of climate change as it does to put a screen door on a submarine. Ok... maybe not that bad, but still, be wary of people pointing to Sandy as clear-cut evidence for climate change. It's not.

But let's go back to the topic of climate change/ocean acidification being immediate issues. When you are not prepared for something that will happen relatively soon, the issue needs to be given immediate attention to mitigate damage in the future. It's bad already here in Washington. There have already been massive oyster larvae kills in places like Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor due to decreasing pH levels in the ocean, and by the next 100 years, the water content of our snowpack will decrease five-fold at mid-elevation locations in the Cascades like Stampede Pass, which is located at 3,671 feet. As a result, river flows will decrease dramatically in the summer months, leading to problems with shortages in both water (for people, agriculture irrigation, and different flora and fauna that inhabit our region) and electricity (since 75% of our electricity comes from hydroelectric dams). Our ecosystem is not prepared for this, and neither are we, which means that it is an immediate issue.

But as bad as it is here, climate change will have exponentially worse consequences in the developing world. Take Bangladesh as an example.

The sea level is predicted to rise around 1.5 meters by 2100. This would displace 17 million people in one of the world's poorest countries. Add this with a predicted increase in the strength of typhoons in the tropical Pacific due to increasing heat energy in the oceans (95% of the increase in heat due to global warming has been absorbed by the oceans), and you have a recipe for disaster, as storm surges will be even more catastrophic to the area. The 1970 Bhola Cyclone killed over 500,000 people in Bangladesh. Imagine if a slight increase in sea levels meant that a similar cyclone could affect 17 million more people. That's a pretty immediate issue.

Heat waves will become more intense in regions, due to two reasons. First, since the average global temperature will rise, heat waves that are a certain anomaly above the average temperature will have bigger consequences because the average temperature will be higher. Second, heat waves are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity in certain regions, and even if the global average temperature wasn't rising, certain places would see more extreme events. I did some research last year (the research paper I wrote can be found here), and I looked in particular at a certain study by Tyler W. Ruff and J. David Neelin that predicted Gaussian "tails" in terms of temperature distribution in many areas, meaning that certain places would have a wider range of temperature distribution, and with it, the increased chance for unprecedented extreme heat events. The aging baby-boomer population will be especially sensitive to heat waves, particularly in California, where are large increase is expected to occur in many regions, particularly those in Southern California. But what about places in the third world that do not have the luxury of air conditioning or ample water supply? If these same Gaussian tails were present in, say, the Sahel, the consequences would be exponentially worse.

Who will I be voting for? Either Rocky Anderson, of the Justice Party, or Jill Stein, of the Green Party. I don't know which one yet... I still have to do some more research. But both of these candidates are not afraid to speak up about global warming in their campaigns. Yeah, I know they won't win... but I feel like my vote to support them will help them gain more recognition, and hopefully, make it clear that global warming is worldwide, extremely serious, and is an immediate problem that must be addressed on a level that it has not been addressed before, both for the U.S. and the rest of the world. If we, as the human race, are actually going to show the compassion and morality that we claim to have, we need to address climate change and ocean acidification as issues that require immediate action for the welfare of every other organism that lives on Earth.

Thanks for reading, and please choose your vote wisely on November 6th.
Charlie

The Official 2012-13 Winter Outlook!

Thursday, November 1, 2012
9:00 P.M.

I am extremely excited to announce the release of WeatherOn's Official 2012-13 Winter Outlook! I worked extremely hard on writing this outlook, and Tanner did an OUTSTANDING job creating some wonderful graphics to complement my writing and formatting the whole thing for his website. Please check it out, and I hope you find it informative, useful, and... as usual... pretty entertaining as well ;)

http://www.weatheron.net/2/post/2012/11/the-official-2012-13-winter-outlook.html

Thanks,
Charlie

A Record-Breaking Storm

Monday, October 29, 2012
3:06 P.M.

19 years old, and Spongebob is still my favorite cartoon. 

It seems like everywhere I go, people are talking about Hurricane Sandy. Most of what I'm seeing are Facebook posts from people on the West Coast praying for the health and safety of those affected by this massive storm. Some posts are from people who are experiencing the onslaught of the storm. Other posts juxtapose Sandy with other topics, such as the presidential debate or global warming. And of course, there is the occasional egotistical braggart who feels they need to tell the world how sunny and warm the weather is at their locale.

Sonja Breda, one of my good friends who is a freshman at Bryn Mawr in Pennsylvania, updated her status as "I have to say that I love radical weather, so I have been really enjoying watching Sandy's progression as I sit drinking tea with my pals, watching tree branches fly past our windows." Sounds like my kind of woman!!! On the other hand, I asked my friend Alex Dyring, who I thought was living in Boston, what the weather was like there, and he said "I actually live in Spain right now although I'd be happy to give you a report of my sunny day today." And of course, my good friend Nicholas Efthimiadis commented " It's very windy today... We've been so focused on Sandy, we forgot about our own weather." I agree, it has been a tad breezy. But it has been nothing like the East Coast.

Here's the latest satellite image of Sandy, and below that is a video that show's Sandy's development. I believe the loop approximately shows the last ~48 hours up to the time of the latest satellite image below.

NASA GOES 13 Satellite - Valid 2232 UTC, October 29, 2012

As of 2:00 PDT, Sandy was a category one hurricane located at 38.8 N and 74.4 W. It was heading WNW at 28 mph, has maximum sustained winds of 90 mph, and has a pressure minimum of 940 millibars. At some point, the pressure may dip below 940 millibars. Simply incredible. To put things in perspective, the Columbus Day Storm, which was by far the most powerful windstorm to ever strike the West Coast, only got down to 960 millibars. The record for the lowest pressure recorded north of Cape Hatteras is 946 millibars, and was recorded on Long Island during the New England Hurricane of 1938. I'm not sure if this record has been broken, but there is a good chance it will be.

There are, well, a trillion things about Sandy that make it different than your typical hurricane, but I'll just name a few. First off, it is exceptionally large. The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale rates hurricanes based on their central pressure, not wind speed. Since Sandy is so large, the wind is spread out over a huge area, but it isn't as strong as it would be if Sandy was a more compact cyclone. Hurricane Charley, which hit Florida as an extremely strong category four hurricane in 2004, had a minimum pressure of 941 millibars. So to say that Sandy is "just a category one" is misleading. It still has extremely high winds, and the large size of the storm helps to create a storm surge that has already inundated parts of the East Coast.

Second off, the thing that makes Hurricane Sandy different from your typical hurricane is that it is undergoing a transition to an extratropical cyclone. I mentioned this in my previous blog post on Friday, but it is the singular thing that makes this storm so unique. You regular readers of my blog know the whole spiel that I've given numerous times... tropical and extratropical cyclones are extremely different. Tropical cyclones form over warm water where there are minimal horizontal temperature gradients in the atmosphere, and they derive their energy exclusively from the ocean's warmth. Their warmest temperatures are at their core, and they have no fronts. Extratropical cyclones, on the other hand, typically have their coolest temperatures at the core, as the counterclockwise flow (in the Northern Hemisphere) brings cold air originating from the poles right into their low pressure center. Hurricanes and extratropical storms are often called warm and cold core systems, respectively.

What Sandy is doing is undergoing a transition from a warm core storm to a cold core storm. Take a look at some of the pictures below, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Disclaimer: I got the idea of showing these pictures from Cliff Mass' blog, because I thought he did a good job at explaining it. These are not the exact same pictures and aren't even from the same model run. These are from the Monday, October 29 12z HWRF model and are the charts at 850 mb. They show the geopotential heights (contours, 30m interval), temperatures (color fill, 2 Celsius interval), and wind vectors (m/s).

6 hour forecast

Six hours after the initialization (which was at 12z this morning, so this is chart models the storm as it was several hours ago), the storm has its warmest air at its core, and looks pretty darn symmetrical.

12 hour forecast

Six hours later though, its symmetry is starting to fade and it is getting cooler at the center. Most hurricanes weaken when their warm cores die, but this storm is special because it is actually strengthening off of the horizontal temperature gradients across latitudes. It has a ton of energy and moisture and the gradients are very sharp, so it undergoes explosive cyclogenesis.

18 hour forecast

Six hours after that, the process continues. The warm air at the center is being replaced by cold air.  You can  see the nice "hook" shape, this is due to the occluded front wrapping around the center of the low. This is called the "bent-back occlusion" and is a hallmark of strong extratropical storms.

24 hour forecast

24 hours after the initialization, the process is essentially complete. No more warm air in the center. Cooler air continues to flow in. By this point, the storm is starting to weaken, because the horizontal temperature gradients are weakening due to the evolution of the fronts, but it'll still be strong nonetheless.

The third main thing that makes this storm unique is the fact that it is causing blizzard conditions in the Appalachian Mountains. The National Weather Service is calling for up to three feet of snow in the southern Appalachians above 3,000 feet! That's some crazy stuff right there. You usually don't associate tropical systems with snow. But folks, this is no ordinary storm.

AP Photo/Robert Ray - Snow in the mountains of West Virginia - 10/29/12

I've seen a lot of headlines dubbing this storm the "Superstorm." What makes this storm any more super than other storms? In my opinion, it's just the most incredible, rare, meteorological setup. Hurricane Katrina was way stronger than this storm. But Hurricane Katrina didn't undergo an extratropical transition, and New Orleans did not receive any snow from this storm. This storm, whether it's just known as the "Superstorm," the "Frankenstorm," "Sandy," or something else, is a meteorologists' fantasy. 

That being said, my heart goes out for everyone who is affected by this storm, whether they are riding it out on the East Coast, or they are praying for somebody else who is. Please stay safe.

One more thought... there are some fake photos going around. 

The theme seems to be various types of horrendous weather the Statue of Liberty. If you want the most accurate information and photos available, well, you know where to find it.

;)
Charlie

The "Frankenstorm" of 2012

Friday, October 26, 2012
2:51 P.M.

Hi everybody. I just finished a hectic week. Two midterms. A ton of homework. I even finished an entire package of Omega-Three gummy bears from Costco. Maybe it's a stress thing.

But honestly, the thing that made this week the most hectic, was this.

This, my friends, is a wonderful satellite image that shows the evolution of Hurricane Sandy. I'm not sure where the loop starts, but I believe it starts at 22:15 UTC October 24 and ends at 18:46 UTC October 26. The loop is a composite image of very high resolution infrared imagery at night and visible imagery during the day. On October 24, when the storm legitimately looked like a hurricane, there were some serious signs that it could impact the U.S. One model (the ECMWF) was bringing it straight into New York City as a 950 mb megastorm. The other model, the GFS (which is the model I use the most and the model that the UW uses to initialize their WRF forecasts), showed the storm weakening and harmlessly moving out to sea. One thing I like to do on this blog is give people advanced warnings of historic storms that may be in the making. However, I just didn't have the time to do so.

I did, however, let some East Coast friends know that a potentially historic storm could be heading their way. I told them it probably wouldn't happen, but that it might, and it could be very serious if it does.

Before I show you the models and give you all a heart attack, let's look at some of the atmospheric and oceanographic conditions that have contributed to the formation of this once-in-a-lifetime storm. And no, folks, I am not exaggerating. 

For any tropical system to form, water temperatures need to be hot. Take a look at the pictures above. The top one is from "My Fox Hurricane." And no, these water temperatures are not conservative estimates (props to all of you who got that joke.) They are real measurements from buoys. The picture below is taken from satellites, and it shows the sea surface temperatures throughout the Western Atlantic basin. They are hot. The standard "rule of thumb" for hurricane formation is that they need water that is greater than 80 degrees Fahrenheit do a depth of at least 150 feet. If you take a look at the SSTs measured by the buoys above, they are well above 80 degrees. And the satellite picture shows that these warm temperatures extend up the East Coast thanks to the Gulf Stream. The water temperatures off the northern East Coast are up five degrees Fahrenheit above normal, and Sandy is predicted to perfectly follow the Gulf Stream, picking up more steam (literally) and becoming more powerful in the process. See the picture below for a map of the SST anomalies as of October 25. This picture was taken from NOAA's Office of Satellite Data Processing and Distribution.

But if you look at the last satellite image (below), the storm doesn't really look like a hurricane. It doesn't have an "eye" and is rather asymmetrical. It looks more like a mid-latitude cyclone than a hurricane.

Why is this? The storm is clearly over warm enough waters to be a hurricane. The answer, my fellow meteorological connoisseurs, is because of strong horizontal temperature gradients in the mid-latitudes. In terms of temperature, the transition from autumn to winter is much quicker than the transition from winter to spring. Even though the air temperatures to the northwest of this storm aren't incredibly cold, they contrast sharply with the tropically influenced temperatures to the southeast. This temperature difference forms fronts. Just a little meteorological 101 here... fronts are boundaries between two different types of air masses. And the air masses on either side of this storm are very different indeed.

I have a detailed blog post I wrote last (2011) summer about the differences in tropical storms vs. extratropical storms. I highly recommend reading it here.

This is clearly shown in the models. Take a look at the 18z GFS 500mb vorticity and height model below. Don't worry if you don't know what it means... just follow my lead and look at what I'm telling you to look at.

See that super red thingy over the Western Atlantic? That's Sandy. Pretty obvious. But now, look to the northwest of Sandy. See that big "trough" in the 500mb height level? It looks like a V. That represents colder air coming down from Canada. This chart is valid 00 UTC Monday October 29, and is 54 hours out.

And then, something extraordinary happens.

This image is valid 30 hours later, at 06 UTC on the 30th. Look at how far the trough has come, and look at how there is the slim line stretching all the way up into northern Canada connected to Sandy. That line represents increased vorticity at the 500mb level, which is simply defined as "the tendency for an air parcel to spin." High levels of vorticity are associated with foul weather and moving air parcels. What this diagram shows is how much cold, Canadian air Sandy is drawing into itself. This contrast between air masses will help transition Sandy from a tropical cyclone, which is built on a uniform mass of warm humid air, to a mid latitude cyclone, which gets its strength from horizontal temperature and humidity differences. As you can see in this picture, the differences will be absolutely massive, and this will lead to the formation of an extremely powerful storm.

I've got to head to a band practice now, but I will be extremely active on this blog and I will post more model forecasts in the future. As of now, it looks like a 940-950 mb cyclone will hit somewhere between North Carolina and Massachusetts, with 80 mph sustained winds on the coast and a very large gale-force wind field that will extend for hundreds of miles. Areas to the northwest of the storm will experience blizzard conditions, and areas along the immediate coast will experience a storm surge of at least 10 feet, nearly a foot of rain, and insane amounts of wind. This storm has already killed 42 people, and it will inevitably kill some more and cause billions of dollars of damage.

If you have any relatives or know anybody on the East Coast, WARN THEM NOW and let them know that the strongest extratropical storm they may ever see will be upon them in several days.

Stay safe.

Charlie