Arguments
Hurricane Sandy: Neither weather nor tide nor sea level can be legislated
Posted on 29 October 2012 by doug_bostrom
Many Skeptical Science readers are following the progress of Hurricane Sandy as it continues on a collision course with the US eastern seaboard as well as an Arctic airmass. All of us hope for the best possible outcome for affected populations but at this point everything we know points to Sandy exacting a serious toll.
Meteorologist Dr. Jeff Masters has described some of the possible economic and financial impacts of Sandy, while University of Washington meteorology researcher Dr. Cliff Mass has explored how models are being employed to predict and narrow the landfall zone of Sandy.
Hurricane Sandy's arrival will be accompanied by a significant storm surge. This is unfortunately coincident with spring tides already bringing high water some 20% above normal, meaning that Sandy is expected to cause record coastal flooding. In a later post on his blog Dr. Masters describes the problem:
Last night's 9:30 pm EDT H*Wind analysis from NOAA's Hurricane Research Division put the destructive potential of Sandy's winds at a modest 2.6 on a scale of 0 to 6. However, the destructive potential of the storm surge was exceptionally high: 5.7 on a scale of 0 to 6. This is a higher destructive potential than any hurricane observed between 1969 - 2005, including Category 5 storms like Katrina, Rita, Wilma, Camille, and Andrew. The previous highest destructive potential for storm surge was 5.6 on a scale of 0 to 6, set during Hurricane Isabel of 2003. Sandy is now forecast to bring a near-record storm surge of 6 - 11 feet to Northern New Jersey and Long Island Sound, including the New York City Harbor. While Sandy's storm surge will be nowhere near as destructive as Katrina's, the storm surge does have the potential to cause many billions of dollars in damage if it hits near high tide at 9 pm EDT on Monday.
Climate Central provides a fascinating GIS tool called Surging Seas allowing users to explore effects of combined storm surge, tide and sea level rise on population and housing along the US coast. Early years of predictive output of this tool are dominated by "natural variability" in the form of storm surge and tides, with sea level rise (SLR) increasingly contributing as decades pass. Current storm surge predictions for New Jersey are in the range of 3 to 8 feet. Here's what Surging Seas shows us will happen with similar levels of flooding:
It's worth noting Surging Seas' presentation: this is all about probabilities, the odds of something happening in a given range of time. In the capture above we see there's approximately a 15% chance New Jersey will experience a 4' surge by the year 2020. As years pass, probability of a given surge level being achieved increases, due to sea level rise.
When tinkering and thinking with Surging Seas, something easily overlooked becomes more obvious. A few inches or a foot or so of sea level change doesn't go away when a combination of storm and tide pushes water onshore. These things are additive. There's a profound difference between having a dry home or business and one with 'just' a foot of water inside the first floor.
The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is providing an excellent interactive visualization tool for Hurricane Sandy's storm surge impact, updated as data comes in. Here's recent output:
Beyond producing impressive graphics, reams of predictive data describing destructive effects of weather, tide and sea level rise end up affecting lives of actual people. After decades of operations unaffected by weather on the surface, New York City will be shutting down its subway system for the second time in only eleven months, Sandy being the second hurricane after last year's Irene to affect operations. Some 370,000 persons have been ordered evacuated from their homes by Mayor Bloomberg. Evacuation maps describe the scene:
After Hurricane Sandy has passed and people whose lives are altered by the storm begin picking up the pieces it's important that we remember to learn from this event, to salvage some value from what otherwise is pointless waste.
As Climate Central's GIS tool shows, regardless of sea level rise the long term odds for safety of coastal development are poor. Add in expected sea level rise and these odds become still worse; as years pass the probability of record high storm surges increases and the trend of storm surge heights is upwards. For homeowners and businesses in low-lying coastal locations this is like playing a dire game with the odds of winning steadily diminishing over time.
Recently in the news and discussed at Skeptical Science was the effort by North Carolina legislators to set boundaries on what information could inform public policy concerning coastal development. Virginia has been tempted to go down the same path. Sandy's arrival reminds us of the folly of trying to legislate facts not amenable to or concerned with matters of law. Lawmakers can deny funding and facilities to scientists researching effects of climate change and they can forbid planners from incorporating cold facts into policy. Unfortunately the jurisdiction of legislators does not extend to physics or weather or the phases of the Moon, as we're seeing.
Here are sincere good wishes from Skeptical Science for the health and safety of those confronting Hurricane Sandy. We wish you well.
Addendum: Jeff Masters provides updated analysis of Sandy's surge threat here.
Good luck to you folk in the danger zone. Lets hope its not as bad as it could be, and if all goes well lets hope the mayor doesnt get attacked for being alarmist! It is indeed alarming.
Grim Trajectories.
At what point do you throw your hands up and walk away, head into the kitchen, open the fridge and pull out a frosty adult beverage, go to the porch and watch the sunset?
On the other hand...as this storm is tracking straight into the liberal elite's heartland as well as the center of both financial and political power, is there a possibility that this could be an event of seminal importance in tipping the scale of awareness toward honest and objective analysis of the mountain of evidence that has built into an Everest?
As is our nature, action, albeit reactive, will be determined by a body count of inescapable sadness and tragedy; anything less than rows of body bags and this storm will be just another History Channel footnote.
Shallow Waters and Unusual Path May Worsen the Surge
Nothing too bad here yet, but the wind has been steadily picking up since Sunday morning. I work in Newark, but my office is shut down today and tomorrow along with most of the rest of the city. My biggest worry ATM is another power outage like we had with Irene and then the big snowstorm this time last year. Both of those were followed by fairly warm weather, but this time they are predicting a cold snap after the storm. They finally started upgrading the infrastructure after those outages and the solar energy boom here in New Jersey has also been helping to push towards a more modern power grid. Among other things, they've installed individual solar panels on a few hundred thousand telephone poles around the state. Each of these is tied in to the electric line running on the same pole and capable of reporting back current power flow (along with performance of the solar panel and other data). That should immediately let them know where there are power outages, but we'll have to see how well it holds up.
Worth noting in this context is the move just over a month ago by the NSW conservative government to do away with the necessity for local councils to consider, when assessing development proposals, IPCC sea level rise predictions.
Someone with a bit of nous might put them on notice that Sandy demonstrates why this was a negligent move, and why the government might be considered culpable for future flooding of new developments.
If only the relevant politicians could be held accountable for any future damage that results from this policy change...
Here's a pretty nice tool for deducing tide timing in specific locations in the NE:
Nor'East Saltwater Tide Charts
Technically, I see that the 11 am update is now showing the inlets southwest of Manhattan are potentially looking at higher storm surges than western Long Island Sound.
Down along our shoreline, however, we have a lot of residential neighborhoods.
Our governor here in Connecticut, Dannel Malloy, just held a noon press conference in which he made a few subtle yet telling remarks. He pointed out that the storm is unprecedented, yet noted that it was a wake-up call for all of us. The two specific points he made were that our state would need in the future to plan for similar events that have the potential to knock out our electrical grids and sewer systems in low-lying areas. It turned out that an electrical substation in Bridgeport, Connecticut, almost needed to be shut down. Malloy said the storm surge was a matter of 8 to 10 inches shy of causing a shutdown at the point of high tide. The prediction is safety shutdowns will be required this evening going into the next high tide. Of course, we are already seeing wind-caused power outages all over the state, even though the wind is still barely gusting to tropical storm strength.
I think one of the interesting facts about this storm and last October's snow storm is that we are seeing a convergence of traditionally winter and summer weather events here in the northeast. All that extra energy in the climate system is finding new ways to act.
Earlier today I had the... luxury... of listening through a taxing explination that the fuss over Sandy has been hyped up by the "leftist media" in order to swing voters for Obama. The really frustrating part is I'm in Canada, and still in the path of the hurricane at that. To see the potential damage the US might undergo as a result of Sandy brushed off as a political ploy is just infuriating
And not to forget the real estate industry's liaisons with the likes of David Archibald, Ian Plimer, and Bob Carter.
I don’t know if you are aware or not but the real estate developer pictured in the SMH article you linked to is now the Lord Mayor of Newcastle – developer becomes politician.
Now that’s no way to solve the problem!
No, I wasn't aware of that! Brings to mind foxes and hen houses.
It's obviously a very different Hunter Valley now than when I knew it. It hints at the background for the state government's recinding of the sea level rise policy... Seems that cronyism is alive and well in NSW.
Joy Cummings will be turning in her grave.
Uh huh, sucked. Right.
What affected the storm track? Four factors.
Two of these four factors affected by climate change:
http://www.wbur.org/2012/10/25/hurricane-sandy-storm-new-england
These two: jet stream path, and persistence of blocking high pressure, both affected by arctic warming:
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/arctic-warming-is-altering-weather-patterns-study-shows
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012GL051000.shtml
Prediction made -- and, sure enough, evidence happened.
"“[The] tendency for weather to hang around longer is going to favor extreme weather conditions that are related to persistent weather patterns,” said Francis, the study’s lead author.
"One does not have to look hard to find an example of an extreme event that resulted from a huge, slow-moving swing in the jet stream. It was a stuck or “blocking weather pattern” – with a massive dome of high pressure ...."
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/arctic-warming-is-altering-weather-patterns-study-shows
And for Sandy -- the blocking high was over Greenland.
There was certainly a contribution to the strength of Sandy from anomalously warm Atlantic temperatures. Sandy showed up coinciding with a deep upper trough and short wave. Otherwise we would have had a merely normal nor'easter instead of a record breaking one.
Attribution: if AGW causes sea level to increase by 12" and because of those few inches your defenses fail during a storm in a way costing billions of dollars, AGW just cost you billions of dollars. If protecting your infrastructure against a "few" inches of sea level rise costs you billions of dollars, that's AGW costing you billions of dollars.
The past is prologue. Sandy's surge may have been influenced by AGW to a greater or lesser extent but Sandy's utility lies in telling us what we may expect. Sandy was a rehearsal.
So let's keep the SLR to a minimum. Simple enough?
This could be one mechanism which is involved when we get sudden climate change like GW as it has been noted in the geological record that earthquakes, volcanoes and seismic activity does increase with the changing climate.
Paul
As a geologist, I find this *fascinating*: are you saying (just so I'm hearing you correctly) that GW ~drives~ seismic and volcanic activity?
*Really*? Please cite the sources of that data, given you assert "...it has been noted in the geological record...."
As for me? I remain *extremely* skeptical of the claim that storms lead temblors and/or vulcanism.
It should go without saying that legislators who forbid use of facts in planning set up folks like LaRossa for failure. When executives "fail to anticipate" in the future VA or NC, who'll be fired? Legislators will be dust, leaving the bag in other hands.
Failure of foresight has serious consequences.
Things that are unprecedented can still be anticipated, if you're allowed to employ your intellect. Legislate intellect out of the picture and you're effectively left ignorant. Why would legislators mandate ignorance for their citizens?
Today's newspapers are littered with stories like this hospital's experience, all telling the same basic message.
This is a shockingly expensive lesson so let's benefit from it. Doing otherwise is disrespectful.
A few inches of water makes a big difference. Such a simple thing but so easily forgotten or overlooked, or just ignored.
Just a little less water going to the wrong place can be a wonderful thing. We still have some control over this.
That' a trick question, ain't it, doug?...;)
"Why are you failing? Is it ignorance, or apathy?"
"I don't know and I don't care."
Meanwhile, the WSJ talks with a VP of ConED:
A lot of information packed into that sequence:
"We’ve never had a 14-foot surge in New York City — I don’t know how you predict that."
Arm yourself with the best information and don't let legislators tell you that you shouldn't know certain things.
We’ve never had a 14-foot surge in New York City — I don’t know how you predict that. We were tracking probably 10 different storm models — I never heard an inch more than 12.
Researchers are conservative. Uncertainty is not your friend. Legislators mandating that models be less reliable is not a good thing.
It’s basically the sea is up into the substation.
Get used to it. Avoid the problem by choosing wisely. Don't allow legislators to make you ignorant.
I mean, the force of nature is just tremendous.
True. Why make it more powerful yet?
At what point do we start the planned, permanent evacuation of coastal cities and towns? Isn't this inevitable eventually anyway, at this point? Won't it take a very long time to do well? Shouldn't this be our wake-up call to start the process?
What's the chance that there will be no more Sandys or worse in the coming decades? What's the chance that sea level will be lower when they hit?
We are now under attack by the climate. It is (long past) time both to take precautionary measures and, of course, to stop providing 'munitions' to our 'attacker.'
We don't 'rebuild', we must 'reposition'.
I doubt it will be enforced by too many governments this time round, but I rather fancy the insurance companies might have a few things to say to guide people's future decisions. Insisting that insurance payments will be forthcoming only if people build elsewhere and that elsewhere must be further away from sea level could be one wake-up call.
IIRC, last week SwissRe increased it's rates for insurance companies doing business in North America because the rate of pay outs for disasters was going up so quickly. They also made it very clear that the kinds of disasters that were increasing so dramatically were specifically weather, heat and drought--the ones most closely linked to GW.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3622437.htm?site=tropic
"You see these major floods - these floods wouldn't be there if they hadn't filled in all the swamplands and lowlands and given permits to build in areas where the so-called 100-year flood occurs, and this is the 100-year flood that is now coming every five years.
This is a time to reposition, and not say, "We will rebuild".
The smart thing to say is, "We will reposition"."
There is also this book published quite recently with lots of references and a good read too as Bill discusses what we can look forward to from this aspect of GW....
Waking the Giant,
http://www.amazon.com/Waking-Giant-Changing-Earthquakes-Volcanoes/dp/0199592268
"As a geologist, I find this *fascinating*: are you saying ...that GW ~drives~ seismic and volcanic activity?
*Really*? Please cite the sources of that data, given you assert "...it has been noted in the geological record...."
And this, for fairness, "I remain *extremely* skeptical of the claim that storms lead temblors and/or vulcanism."
So you responded with a link to a book, by Bill McGuire, with whom I'm not terribly familiar. I have heard of his work and he seems well-regarded and well-published.
https://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/profile?upi=WJMCG95
Now, again, I ask, it was you asserted that storms like Sandy "...could be one mechanism which is involved when we get sudden climate change like GW as it has been noted in the geological record that earthquakes, volcanoes and seismic activity does increase with the changing climate."
This could well be and as a scientist, I *still* regard this with some skepticism, as it should be. "I might end up being wrong about that, but in the scheme of being a scientist, it would be a position we all are used to! We fail a lot more on early hypotheses, leading to credible and robust theories.
Have you read McGuire's book? If you did, does it credibly demonstrate that in the geological record, large storm activity drives seismological/volcanic events, and how? That would be the question wrt Sandy, and I'm not entirely tossing it out as as a *possible* option, wrt changes sudden CC could induce.
I have not read the book, but will give it a read and look into other "listings of reputable ilk" to see what is being said by others in my field who are more connencted to the hypothesis than I.
I put a *whooole* lotta research into this subject, and your assertion was the first time I'd heard it floated as a possible consequence for the damage caused by Sandy: a stormn surge of 13-ish feet is a large amount of water, no doubt; I still don't see credible data that that *very* local, and *very* time-restricted event, resulted in greater flood damage than otherwise it would have caused, due to land subsidence. As data is collected, we shall see.
Please do not *assume* I don't do "a bit of research" into this subject, and thanks for the tip about McGuire's book.
If links to such information are easy to come by, and plentiful, it would be tremendously useful if you could post two or three, since you have already vetted them. Once I see one article, I would have some better idea what kind of search words and phrases to use, to find more.
But it is not helpful when you offer a whole book, and slam the person who asked for references. This is science, why ask others to reinvent a wheel that you have at your fingertips? Just post links, make it easy for others to see what you see.
New Jersey Earthquake 2012: Small Quake Rattles Ringwood Community
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/05/new-jersey-earthquake-2012_n_2075620.html
N.J. - Some residents in northern New Jersey awoke to a small earthquake early Monday.
The temblor, with a magnitude of 2.0, struck at 1:19 a.m. and was centered in Ringwood, a community that's still dealing with downed trees and power outages from Sandy.