Article

2010-01-25 Science

Scientists create model of monster 'Frankenstorm' (AGW alert)

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by logi_cal 2010-01-25 07:20|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 I suppose these scientists need something to do since it will be a while before they can use their computers to generate the Avatar sequel.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-01-25 09:26|| 2010-01-25 09:26|| Front Page Top

#2 I'm not sure... the article seems to be about preparations for what would happen if such a scenario occurred, not the likelihood of it.

Disaster preparedness, system hardening, network resilience- these would seem to be prudent and reasonable things for a state government to study, no?

Posted by Free Radical 2010-01-25 09:35|| 2010-01-25 09:35|| Front Page Top

#3 Disaster preparedness, system hardening, network resilience- these would seem to be prudent and reasonable things for a state government to study, no?

Maybe. When you're broke, there's a need to prioritize. I'm not sure this kind of apocalyptic fantasizing makes the cut.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-01-25 09:45|| 2010-01-25 09:45|| Front Page Top

#4 the heavy rains of 1905 caused a Colorado River flood which in turn created the Salton Sea (which is still with us thanks mostly to irrigation runoff).

Posted by lord garth 2010-01-25 10:27|| 2010-01-25 10:27|| Front Page Top

#5 what would happen if a series of powerful storms lashed at the state for 23 days

Twenty three days? That's apocalyptic chump change. Jupiter's Great Red Spot, a humungous hurricane-like storm, has been around for centuries. Model *that* in your disaster prep scenario, biotches!

Posted by SteveS 2010-01-25 10:41|| 2010-01-25 10:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Call me when Al Franken's face appears in the clouds.

Posted by Grunter 2010-01-25 11:17|| 2010-01-25 11:17|| Front Page Top

#7 Nearly a third of the young state's taxable land was destroyed.

You guys sure you mean "destroyed"? Not "inundated" or something like that? "Destroyed" has a pretty specific meaning...

Posted by mojo 2010-01-25 12:34|| 2010-01-25 12:34|| Front Page Top

#8 could get more frequent and severe with climate change

Or maybe not. Or may more frequent but less severe. Lovely April day, here in DC.

Posted by Bobby 2010-01-25 12:47|| 2010-01-25 12:47|| Front Page Top

#9 mojo, the operable word there is probably "taxable". "Destroyed for purposes of taxation". I'd be willing to bet that washouts mucked up existing cropland and destroyed improvements making the property taxable in the first place, thus removing them from the tax rolls.

Posted by Mitch H. 2010-01-25 13:52|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/ 2010-01-25 13:52|| Front Page Top

#10 Just to remind you all, the hydrological records in this country are at most, 150 years old. On a geologic scale, it's about 1/10 of a second. Events like these are not an if matter, they are a when matter and we don't know WHEN they will next occur because we don't have data on their frequency. Everyone talks about the 100 year flood, but keep in mind there are such things as the 5,000 year flood and worse. Sure, we can find evidence of such events occuring but pinning down when exactly is next to impossible.

So prudent planning for such things is a good idea and it sounds to me like these Geologists and Met guys are doing their jobs. Besides, when we're stupid enough to live on fault lines, volcanoes, flood plains and other hazard zones, we should at least understand such things WILL happen.

Posted by Silentbrick 2010-01-25 16:39|| 2010-01-25 16:39|| Front Page Top

#11 After the 500-year storm - or one that has a 0.20% chance of happening in any year - I believe hydrologists deal with PMP - Probable Maximum Precipitation. For a nuke plant 25 years ago, we didn't design for PMP, but had to be sure it didn't flood certain key elements - like the control room, I suppose. Roads, I remember, we designed to let that big one flow over the top without washing out the road.

Posted by Bobby 2010-01-25 18:14|| 2010-01-25 18:14|| Front Page Top

#12 Funny, but I remember just last year, I was reading articles about how climate change was going to cause less rain and continual drought in California. I do believe warming is happening, but I don't believe that anybody really has a very good idea about what the consequences will be.

Posted by AuburnTom 2010-01-25 18:40|| 2010-01-25 18:40|| Front Page Top

#13 sizing drainage facilities and infrastructure for such a storm would be foolish and will never happen. Model away, alarmists and grant whores!

Posted by Frank G 2010-01-25 19:48|| 2010-01-25 19:48|| Front Page Top

#14 What is more likely is a 100 years or more of drought. If you go to many Sierra Nevada lakes, you will find, at about 30 feet deep, tree trunks of large redwoods and Douglass fir. When those trees were living, the lake levels were much lower than today.

We are currently living in the wettest 500 years that the Sierra Nevada have seen in the past few thousand years. What we consider "normal" is actually pretty wet.

Chances are very good for "mega droughts" spanning centuries if the past climate in the area is any indication ... like back when it was warmer than now.

Posted by crosspatch 2010-01-25 20:20|| 2010-01-25 20:20|| Front Page Top

#15 I'm particularly interested & curious about the fact that not only did CalTech fail to make any mention of El Nino, but not a single commenter even brought it up, with a minority mentioning only in passing about 'natural cycles'.

My point was that it's particularly biased of a 'science organization' to go alarmist in a publication, catering to only a political crowd, and failing in any objectivity at all by failing to consider that natural cycles (SUCH AS the current El Nino cycle) may be a contributing factor. OF COURSE the 'perfect storm' is a possiblity, but it defies belief that an organization such as CalTech would use the movie The Day After Tomorrow as reference for their publication...suggesting that somehow 'climate change' would be responsible for a current-day storm 'similar to the 1861-1862 extreme floods'.
Chicken Little should check his six...that shadow might be a better indicator of things to come than anything coming from CalTech on weather...

Posted by logi_cal 2010-01-25 21:30|| 2010-01-25 21:30|| Front Page Top

#16 IOW, these Perts are still anticipating or forecasting the Sun to subjectively] heat up.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2010-01-25 21:31|| 2010-01-25 21:31|| Front Page Top

#17 Chances are very good for "mega droughts" spanning centuries if the past climate in the area is any indication ... like back when it was warmer than now.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2010-01-25 21:39|| 2010-01-25 21:39|| Front Page Top

#18 What I meant to say was that what you said is obviously nonsense, crosspatch. It has NEVER been warmer than it is today. Everybody knows that our planet has a fever, and the only cure is to reduce that poisonous gas, CO2, by shutting down all industry.
Or at least that is what Al Gore et al. seem to want.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2010-01-25 21:41|| 2010-01-25 21:41|| Front Page Top

23:50 anymouse
23:35 CrazyFool
23:12 Iblis
22:59 A_Rovian_Disciple
22:51 lotp
22:50 lotp
22:36 Besoeker
22:24 Barbara Skolaut
22:21 Barbara Skolaut
22:19 Frank G
22:17 Barbara Skolaut
22:13 Bright Pebbles
22:05 trailing wife
22:05 Alaska Paul
22:01 Barbara Skolaut
22:00 Barbara Skolaut
21:52 trailing wife
21:46 JosephMendiola
21:43 Pappy
21:41 Rambler in Virginia
21:39 Rambler in Virginia
21:31 JosephMendiola
21:30 logi_cal
21:29 Rambler in Virginia