Heat Waves (4) A Climate Case Study:
Heat Waves (4) A Climate Case Study:
In the last article I wrote that the extreme events of 2011 were providing us with the opportunity to think about climate and how to cope with a warming world. The U.S. is experiencing an extreme heat event this week (Masters @ WU). This heat wave is the consequence of a strong, stationary high pressure system over the central U.S., and it will move to the east over the next few days. Back on July 14th The Capital Weather Gang did a nice write up on the forecast of the heat wave. At the end of this blog are links to my previous blogs on heat waves and human health.
When thinking about weather, climate, and extreme events an important idea is “persistence.” For example, a heat wave occurs when there are persistent high temperatures. Persistent weather patterns occur when high and low pressure systems get large and stuck; that is, they don’t move. In the Figure below, you need to imagine North America and the United States. There is a high pressure center over the proverbial Heartland. With blue arrows I have drawn the flow of air around the high pressure system, and in this case moist air. There is moisture coming from the Gulf of Mexico and, in fact on the date when this was drawn, from the Pacific. This is common in the summer to see both the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific as sources of continental moisture.
Figure 1: Schematic of a high pressure system over the central United States in July. While generic, this is drawn to represent some of the specifics of 2011. The green-shaded area is where there have been floods in 2011. The brown-shaded area represents sustained drought in the southern part of the nation.
At the center of this high pressure system there is a suppression of rain, because the air is moving downward. This sets up a situation where the surface heats from the Sun’s energy. There is not much mixing and cooling, because of the suppression of the upward motion that produces rain. Hence, if this high pressure system gets stuck, then there is persistent heat. This is a classic summer heat wave.
Let’s think about it some more. There is lot of moisture being drawn around the edge of the high pressure system, and this moisture contributes to the discomfort of people. People – just a short aside about people: if we think about heat and health, then we are concerned about people’s ability to cool themselves. It is more difficult to cool people when it is humid because sweat does not evaporate. Suppose that in addition to this moisture, there is a region where the ground is soaked with water from flooding. Then on top of already moist air coming from the Gulf, there is local evaporation into the air being warmed by the Sun. If on the interior of the high, where the rain is suppressed, there is hot, wet air, then it becomes dangerous heat.
It’s not easy to derive a number that describes dangerous heat. But in much of the eastern U.S. a number that somehow combines temperature and humidity is useful. Meteorologists often use the heat index. It’s the summer time version of “it’s 98 degrees, but it feels like 105.” For moist climates, the heat index is one version of the “it feels like” temperature. Jeff Masters tells me that in Newton, Iowa yesterday, July 17, 2011, the heat index was 126 degrees F. (see here, and 131 F in Knoxville, Iowa on July 18)
Another measure of heat and humidity is the dew point; that is, the temperature at which dew forms, and effectively limits the nighttime low. The dew points in Iowa, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are currently very high and setting records. Here is a map of dew point for July 19, 2011.
Figure 2: Exceptionally high dew points centered on Iowa.
Now if I was a public health official, and I was trying to understand how a warming planet might impact my life, then here is how I would think about it. First, the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific are going to be warmer, and hence, there will be more humid air. This will mean, with regard to human health for the central U.S., heat waves will become more dangerous, without necessarily becoming hotter. It is also reasonable to expect heat waves will become more frequent and last longer, because those persistent, stuck high pressure systems are, in part, forced by the higher sea surface temperatures. If I am a public health official here is my algorithm – heat waves are already important to my life, and they are likely to get more dangerous, more frequent, and of longer duration. But by how much? Do I need to know by how much before I decide on a plan for action?
If I think about the air being more humid, then I might expect to see trends in the heat index. I might expect to see trends in dew points, and trends in the nighttime minimum temperatures getting higher. (That’s where a greenhouse effect really matters.) I worry about persistent heat, warm nights, and the inability of people and buildings to cool themselves. I worry about their being dangerous heat in places where people and emergency rooms are not used to dangerous heat – not acclimated to heat – not looking for heat-related illness.
Let’s go back to the figure. Rain is suppressed in the middle of the high pressure system, but around the edge of the high pressure system it will rain; there will be storms. (see Figure 3 at the end) The air around the edge of high is warm and very wet. Wet air is energetic air, and it is reasonable to expect local severe storms. (See Severe Storm on Lake Michigan) And if the high pressure is persistent, stuck, then days of extreme weather are possible. If this pattern sets up, then there is increased likelihood of flooding. If I am that public health official, then I am alerted to the possibility of more extreme weather and the dangers thereof. But, again, can the increase of extreme weather be quantified? Do I need to quantify it before I decide on a plan of action?
Still with the figure - what about that region of extended drought and the heat from the high pressure system? Dehydration becomes a more important issue. As a public health official, I start to see the relation of the heat event to other aspects of the weather, the climate. I see the relation to drought. I see the flood, and it’s relation to the winter snow pack and spring rains.
So what I have presented here is to look at the local mechanisms of the weather – what are the basic underlying physics responsible for hot and cold, wet and dry – for moist air? If I stick to these basic physics, and let the climate model frame the more complex regional and global picture, what can I say about the future? Do I have to have a formal prediction to take action? Here in 2011, I see drought and flood and hot weather and warm oceans that interact together to make a period of sustained, dangerous heat. It does not have to “set a record” to convey the reality of the warming earth. It tells me the type of event that is likely to come more often, of longer duration, and of, perhaps, of greater intensity. If I am a public health planner, then I can know this with some certainty. The question becomes, how do I use that information in my planning?
r
Figure 3: Radar loop showing precipitation around the edge of the large high pressure system in the middle of the continent. July 19, 2011.
Previous Blogs on Heat Waves
Hot in Denver: Heat Waves (1)
Heat Waves (2): Heat and Humans
Heat Waves (3): Role of Global Warming
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 — Blog Index
haha
You didn't like Forbes magazine publishing the Spencer paper but this opinion article from livescience, which is owned and operated by TechMediaNetwork, a media advertising middle-man corp. One that is even partnered with your beloved FoxNews, which has been said by some not to be a real news network if I recall.
come partner with TechMediaNetwork,
We're not just an ad network we're a Monetization Network. We're a service-oriented network that works closely with you to increase your Revenue per Visitor, or-RPM.
We are the *fastest-growing web property in the Tech News category and we are currently the third-largest according to comScore.
As a large Google AdSense publisher, we are able to take your AdSense to the next level. We can help optimize AdSense on your site to work better with your website design that most AdSense Publishers cannot. We take our expert knowledge and pass that information on to all of our TMN partners.
*TechMediaNetwork experienced a 163% increase in growth in the last year according to comScore's December 2010 % Change Media Trend report..
We take good care of our partners here at TechMediaNetwork. Each publisher is assigned to a dedicated Account Manager who can be reached 24 hours a day. Our experienced reps provide data about site visits, advertising campaigns and much more.
Our years in the tech news business prove that A/B testing works, and we can share our testing techniques with you to increase your profitability quickly. Recently, we were able to increase the click-through rate of Google AdSense by 423 percent just by changing its design.
Our success is due, in part, to the strong relationships we've built with affiliate sales companies. Beyond helping you increase sales, we can help you make more money off each sale. Benefit from our expert negotiation skills.
We have an extensive list of premiere repeat advertisers such as HP, Microsoft, Canon, AT&T, Dell, ABC, Symantec, Verizon, Sprint and Kodak.
We have a team of full-time marketers and designers who create mockups and sell-sheets for partner sites. Our professionals can help you win advertising deals.
TechMediaNetwork has Display Ad teams working in all regions of the nation. Our salespeople have established relationships with premium advertisers. We share our extensive networking with partner companies to negotiate the best deals on the web.
As a TechMediaNetwork partner, you're in good company. We focus on high-quality, original content and understand how to make it profitable. We have been growing for years, and continue to thrive day to day. Link your brand with ours to reap the benefits of several years of internet monetization experience.
http://www.techmedianetwork.com/partners/why-join -the-network.html
I never mentioned religion, did I? I merely spoke of his lack of scientific credibility. Now, if a scientist comes out and insists that the earth is flat or that the sun is the center of the universe or that babies are brought by storks, he has no credibility, at least to most. If you feel otherwise, however, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.
haha..storks
Yeah--sorta like his article got the denialosphere going yesterday, huh?
this blog has done wonders for the word denial.
my goodness
No scientists contacted by them agreed? They conveniently left out how many scientists and whom they contacted. They quote two unabashed warmists. Kevin Trenberth of "where's the missing heat" fame, and Gavin Schmidt. Those are probably the only two they contacted. Just what do you expect them to say. These two guys have been wrong more than right in their climate science careers. Their models are horrendous, and they want us to care one bit what they say. At least Spencer's paper actually attempts to apply science to current conditions unlike Schmidt and Trenberth who don't have a clue but continue to push this AGW agenda as if they knew what was occurring in climate
Grant, Grant, Grant yourself, down the mainstream..
Throw real contradictory data overboard, and call it all a denialist dream.
EVERYBODY!!
Grant, Grant, Grant...
Actually if you have links to those books, I'd be interested in reading them.
I have read a few articles (stumbled across them, not searching for them) that show how people's self perception dominates their beliefs in a majority of cases. Liberals, being liberal, are less likely in intellectual subjects to be dominated by beliefs not relevant to the subject in question. That doesn't make liberals 'better' or 'smarter', just more open to analysing facts based on facts alone, everything else being equal. Everything isn't always equal of course.
By the way, what part of the science do you disagree with? Ok, the conclusions obviously, but what part of hte theory is false?
Actually it's just the opposite.
Via the process of capturing latent heat loss (air conditioning)to cool the interior of a building you first create heat through the compression phase. This heat generation takes place outside the building. In addition the unit itself creates a substantial amount of heat within the fans and compressors. Couple that with the heat reflected back by the buildings exteriors you are worse off than if there was no building there at all.
You can test this by moving your AC unit totally inside your house and I think you'll find you're worse off than with it outside as designed....or you can take my word for it.
Furthermore, stand next to a building downtown and then go stand in the park.
just saying...
Socialism and communism are real economic/sociopolitical systems. "Intelligent Design", on the other hand, is a superstitious hypothesis not remotely grounded in science or reality. As such, someone claiming scientific knowledge can be a socialist or a communist and still retain all their scientific credibility. Meanwhile, someone claiming a belief in the supernatural immediately loses their scientific credibility, at least in the eyes of many.
I'll ignore the rest of your baseless rant. As always. ;-)
Liberals, being liberal, are less likely in intellectual subjects to be dominated by beliefs not relevant to the subject in question.
************************************************* ********************
And that indeed wins the Sophistry of the month quote.
And achieves a close second for the mental onanism of the month.
Also ran...
Look up the word "bigot".
No, it is factual. Look up the post it was in response to. Any comments there? Why not?
Meanwhile, someone claiming a belief in the supernatural immediately loses their scientific credibility, at least in the eyes of many.
Uh???
Like Albert Einstein???
You just won first place in the Mental Onanism category plus the Sophistry of the Year Award.
Sorry greentortuloni...it is what it is :(
You also should look up the word "bigot".
Yes, but you won't answer the question: why is it 'bigotry' when I do it but not when someone who denies global warming does it?
The point sort of proves itself about bias, no?
Yeah, I gotta comment.
"It was posted by your hand."
If it needs any qualification that doesn't make you look like a bigot, then you need to be the one backtracking.
So Albert Einstein believed in "Intelligent Design"? Of course not. In fact, he didn't even believe in the supernatural. I'll let him speak for himself:
"Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true. The consequence was a positively fanatic orgy of freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression. Mistrust of every kind of authority grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions that were alive in any specific social environment - an attitude that has never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a better insight into the causal connections"
Now please tell me how that comment equates to Spencer's mad ramblings about Adam and Eve appearing in fig leafs or Noah's Ark floating atop a global flood 4,500 years ago. Seriously. Please enlighten us.
Or better yet, don't bother. Spencer has credibility in the climate sciences like Rupert Murdoch has it in journalistic ethics; that much is evident to most everybody.
Your question was about me being a bigot. I didn't confirm or deny it.
I merely noted your hypocritical-ness and ntoed that this made you a bigot too, as well as providing one point of data for 'bigoted' assumption.
But you refuse to answer why if I do it it is bigotry but if a denier does it, it is not. Answer or be known forever on these boards as a scientologist!
And with that, you can take a seat...or better yet, get off the bus.
So, let me understand you:
If someone doesn't believe in global warming, then that's the same as saying only Liberals can think rationaly? And if they aren't convinced then they also are a bigot?
Yup...that's what you just said and you just lost all credibility as even a backseat thinker.
When and where did Einstein denounce his belief in God or the creation of the Universe???
No, what I said was:
That when a denier says 'all people of class A are X'
and then
I say 'all people of class not A are X'
that either we are both bigots or neither of us are. However, you don't criticise the first statement, therefore you are hypocritical.
But, further, it was an interesting case of self reference, since the class in question is those who are mentally biased. Because it is self referential, it gives me an evidential loophole, where you proved that I can be both right and not a bigot by your actions.
You were utterly brilliant.
I still think Tom Cruise is not a good actor.
"POOF"
"POOF" you too.
Here you are representing that because Albert Einstein did not believe everything that's in the Bible then you can infer that he was not religous.
Get off the bus.
Foop!
Warming in the Arctic is causing the release of toxic chemicals long trapped in the region's snow, ice, ocean and soil, according to a new study. Researchers from Canada, China and Norway say their work provides the first evidence that some persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are being "remobilized" into the Arctic atmosphere.
"Our results indicate that a wide range of POPs have been remobilized into the Arctic atmosphere over the past two decades as a result of climate change, confirming that Arctic warming could undermine global efforts to reduce environmental and human exposure to these toxic chemicals," write the scientists, whose analysis was published yesterday in the journal Nature Climate Change.
That's of concern because POPs can travel long distances on air currents, persist in food and water supplies, and accumulate in the body fat of humans and other animals. The pollutants also can be passed from mother to fetus and have been linked to serious health problems in humans and other animals.
Co-author Hayley Hung, a scientist with Environment Canada's Air Quality Division who studies toxic organic pollutants in the Arctic, said that in recent years, researchers had posited that warmer conditions would liberate POPs stored in land, ice and ocean reservoirs back into the atmosphere.
"The chemicals are known to be semi-volatile," Hung said. "They have the ability to evaporate out of storage" -- if temperatures are warm enough.
She and her colleagues began to suspect the phenomenon was already under way when they examined 20 years of air monitoring data collected at a high Arctic monitoring site, Zeppelin Mountain Air Monitoring Station in Norway's Svalbard archipelago.
Toxic blasts from the past
Beginning in the mid-2000s, scientists observed higher levels of certain POPs, including hexachlorobenzene and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), at the Norwegian research station. That stood out, Hung said, because the chemicals' use has been restricted to the point where many POPs are no longer produced. As a result, the level of POPs in Arctic air had been decreasing.
"Stockpiles still exist, but these are limited sources," she said, "and the sources are already known to us. So we were surprised to see concentrations actually coming up at the Svalbard station."
The scientists then examined two decades of monitoring data from the Alert monitoring station in the Canadian province of Nunavut. They saw smaller, though still significant, increases in POPs at the second site.
Hung believes the larger increase at the Svalbard site is caused by its proximity to ocean areas where sea ice has retreated. "This is a sign to us that these chemicals are indeed evaporating out of the ocean," she said.
Still, she noted that all POPs don't react the same way to warming. Hexachlorobenzene and PCBs, the chemicals detected in increasing amounts in Norway and Canada, evaporate more easily than many other POPs, and are harder to dissolve in water. That means they're more prone to re-enter the atmosphere after they're deposited on land or sea.
Jordi Dach, a scientist at the Barcelona, Spain-based Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research, said the new study provided convincing evidence of the long-suspected movement of POPs from Arctic reservoirs into the atmosphere.
The new study "demonstrates that climate change can remobilize POPs stored in water, snow, ice and presumably soils -- and that this process is already occurring in the Arctic region," he wrote in an essay accompanying the new study.
Eventually, Dachs said, atmospheric circulation patterns could carry the newly liberated POPs to other parts of the globe.
Oldies, but not goodies
"The remobilization of pollutants generated by our grandparents -- pollutants that were banned decades ago -- are unwanted witnesses to our environmental past that now seem to be 'coming in from the cold," he said.
Meanwhile, the new study suggests the effect will intensify in the future with continued climate change, based on computer models that attempt to project how rising temperatures would affect the Arctic's chemical reservoirs.
That echoes a report released in February by the U.N. Environment Programme and the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme. "For some POPs, climate change-induced enhancement of emissions may reduce the expected effectiveness of the Stockholm Convention" -- the international treaty that bans use of several POPs -- "resulting in releases decreasing less rapidly than targeted."
That's a concern of Hung's, as well.
"The main purpose of this paper is to raise the awareness that climate change actually has an influence on contamination," she said. "It's not as apparent as other, more visible changes. ... People need to be aware there is an effect. As we evaluate the effectiveness of the Stockholm Convention, we need to take into account the effects of climate change."
Link
Didn't get the point I see. Here, one more time: a scientist can believe in socialism or communism without affecting his scientific credibility, as those are things that actually exist in the real world; like them or not, they are tangible entities. But a scientist cannot knowingly support something like ID that is not just unscientific, but anti-scientific. And I'd say the same about a "scientist" who professes belief in anything similar, like a flat earth, fairies, or flying pink unicorns.
You stated that Einstein had a belief in the supernatural. I responded with a single quote that proved that he didn't. But poof away if that'll make you more comfortable.
No. Those are theoretical entities whose existence is based on sound scientific principles. ID, on the other hand, is a refutal of known science. As such, any attempt to equate the two is intellectually dishonest.
Bottom line: if ID is solidly scientific, religion has no place in a discussion about it. And if, OTOH, ID is a religious concept, it has no place in a discussion about science.
I trust this patient explanation has aided your understanding.
Posted on Jul 29, 2011 03:46:26 PM | ICESCAPE
July 28, 2011
Mustang suits are hung, boxes packed, and pagers turned in. Tomorrow we arrive in Seward, Alaska, and step foot on land again for the first time in 34 days. Here's a look at the ICESCAPE 2011 campaign by the numbers.
Days at sea: 34 (tomorrow, after docking in Seward, Alaska)
Days of science data collection: 26
Link
The truth is:
Link
I am impressed, JBastardi. You actually used the NOAA website as the source for truth. I find that refreshing. Yes, I also agree that a journalist should not be trusted on this.
.
1000
BTW, I am still following up on the peer reviews. Thank you, for the links.
Nothing but a few vague insults followed by an embedded beer commercial? Gee, thanks for contributing so much to the evening's dialogue... ;-)
You were saying?
As SHTBTR said, kudos for using the NOAA site; that's where you'll find the unvarnished scientific data.
If the house catches fire, I'd much rather there be an alarmist around to call 911 than, say, someone who steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the flames.
You are very welcome. I don't participate here with any agenda, just my logic.
Ya just never know what you may find on any given day in today's world ~ Like this ~ :)
Seeing the wood for the trees: New study shows sheep in tree-ring records
You too ~ you were my inspiration..... LOL
I lurk here mostly, but that is not really a worthy response, Nea.
I musta missed that one ~
Gnight, make it a great weekend! Out>>
I think of Sol, no?
Amazing since BHO is in full court press to destroy
our economy!
Gallup Poll shocker: Obama job approval hits new low
July 29, 2011 | 11:18 am
As the economy sags, unemployment climbs and debt negotiators dawdle, President Obama's job approval rating has fallen to a new low.
A new Gallup Poll, just released, finds the Democrat's job approval rating has dropped to 40% in recent days, one point below his previous low from April and a full 10 points below the job approval he enjoyed as recently as June 7.
Gallup notes his job approval has hovered in the mid-40s for most of the last two months.
Link
From the LAtimes no less, as commie as they get.
"It's the economy, stupid"
The phrase, made popular by Clinton campaign strategist James Carville,
The coldest air made its way across the North Island early on Monday 25 July and a trough following on behind brought a further bout of heavy snow later that day. Heavy showers brought the snow level down as they passed: a centimetre or so of snow even fell in Greytown (about 100 metres above sea level) in the Wairarapa to the east of Wellington.
Location Maximum temperature on
Mon-25-Jul 2011 Lowest daily maximum temperature on record Month / year occurred in Record starts Monday’s max temperature is the lowest since …
Auckland 10.2 8.8 June 1976 1966 June 2002
New Plymouth 6.7 6.0 July 1951 1944 1944
Napier 7.4 3.6 September 1969 1940 May 1989
Paraparaumu 6.3 5.4 July 2004 1972 1972
Kelburn (Wellington) 5.6 4.5 August 1938 1931 July 1995
Christchurch 5.0 1.7 August 1992 1954 June 2007
Finally, this MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) satellite image shows the snow coverage over New Zealand late on the morning of Tuesday 26 July. Snow areas are coloured red.
Link
Record cold down under.
Chile: Severe winter
120,035 Swiss francs have been
allocated from the IFRC’s
Disaster Relief Emergency Fund
(DREF) to support the Chilean
Red Cross (CRCh) in delivering
immediate assistance to some
1,000 families. Un-earmarked
funds to repay DREF are
encouraged.
Summary:
A cold weather front has impacted
the Bio-bío and Araucanía regions,
bringing snowstorms and low
temperatures above yearly
averages.
Approximately 25,000 persons
have been affected, and
thousands of Mapuches and
Pehuenhue indigenous families
are completely isolated. Due to this isolation, additional snowstorms and delays in clearing secondary
roads, the CRCh in its auxiliary role to the Chilean government will be distributing emergency relief items
that include blankets, jerry cans and tools to 1,000 families.
The situation
On 13 July 2011, a cold front developed, bringing intense snowstorms to the mountainous region south of
Bio Bío and the Araucanía, particularly affecting communities in the area of the Curacautín and the Villarrica
National Park. By 19 July 2011, up to two metres of snow had fallen, blocking roads and mountain passes,
interrupting the electricity and communication services, disrupting the provision of food, medicines and fuel,
and provoking structural damages to some houses. In addition, with temperatures as low as –22 °C, water
pipes have frozen, interrupting the water supply in many areas.
The Chilean Red Cross (CRCh) based on information from the Emergency National Office (Oficina Nacional
de Emergencia – ONEMI), and other regional sources, estimates that approximately 25,000 persons have
been affected. As shown in the table below, many of the affected families are completely isolated.
Link
Viewing: 1051 - 1101
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 — Blog Index