Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Hurricane Sandy's Size


Check out the fascinating article by Dr. Jeff Masters, of Weather Undergound, regarding Hurricane Sandy's enormous size.

Hurricane Sandy's huge size: freak of nature or climate change?


Published: 1:10 PM GMT on November 13, 2012
Hurricane Sandy was truly astounding in its size and power. At its peak size, twenty hours before landfall, Sandy had tropical storm-force winds that covered an area nearly one-fifth the area of the contiguous United States. Since detailed records of hurricane size began in 1988, only one tropical storm (Olga of 2001) has had a larger area of tropical storm-force winds, and no hurricanes has. Sandy's area of ocean with twelve-foot seas peaked at 1.4 million square miles--nearly one-half the area of the contiguous United States, or 1% of Earth's total ocean area. Most incredibly, ten hours before landfall (9:30 am EDT October 30), the total energy of Sandy's winds of tropical storm-force and higher peaked at 329 terajoules--the highest value for any Atlantic hurricane since at least 1969. This is 2.7 times higher than Katrina's peak energy, and is equivalent to five Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs. At landfall, Sandy's tropical storm-force winds spanned 943 miles of the the U.S. coast. No hurricane on record has been wider; the previous record holder was Hurricane Igor of 2010, which was 863 miles in diameter. Sandy's huge size prompted high wind warnings to be posted from Chicago to Eastern Maine, and from Michigan's Upper Peninsula to Florida's Lake Okeechobee--an area home to 120 million people. Sandy's winds simultaneously caused damage to buildings on the shores of Lake Michigan at Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, and toppled power lines in Nova Scotia, Canada--locations 1200 miles apart!

Largest Atlantic tropical cyclones for area covered by tropical storm-force winds:

Olga, 2001: 780,000 square miles
Sandy, 2012: 560,000 square miles
Lili, 1996: 550,000 square miles
Igor, 2010: 550,000 square miles
Karl, 2004: 430,000 square miles



Figure 1. Hurricane Sandy’s winds (top), on October 28, 2012, when Sandy was a Category 1 hurricane with top winds of 75 mph (this ocean surface wind data is from a radar scatterometer on the Indian Space Research Organization’s (ISRO) Oceansat-2.) Hurricane Katrina’s winds (bottom) on August 28, 2005, when Katrina was a Category 5 hurricane with top winds of 175 mph (data taken by a radar scatterometer on NASA’s defunct QuickSCAT satellite.) In both maps, wind speeds above 65 kilometers (40 miles) per hour are yellow; above 80 kph (50 mph) are orange; and above 95 kph (60 mph) are dark red. The most noticeable difference is the extent of the strong wind fields. For Katrina, winds over 65 kilometers per hour stretched about 500 kilometers (300 miles) from edge to edge. For Sandy, winds of that intensity spanned an region of ocean three times as great--1,500 kilometers (900 miles). Katrina was able to generate a record-height storm surge over a small area of the Mississippi coast. Sandy generated a lower but highly destructive storm surge over a much larger area, due to the storm's weaker winds but much larger size. Image credit: NASA.

How did Sandy get so big?
We understand fairly well what controls the peak strength of a hurricane's winds, but have a poor understanding of why some hurricanes get large and others stay small. A number of factors probably worked together to create a "prefect storm" situation that allowed Sandy to grow so large, and we also must acknowledge that climate change could have played a role. Here are some possible reasons why Sandy grew so large:

1) Initial size of the disturbance that became Sandy was large
Sandy formed from an African tropical wave that interacted with a large area of low pressure that covered most of the Central Caribbean. Rotunno and Emanuel (1987) found that hurricanes that form from large initial tropical disturbances like Sandy did tend to end up large in size.


Figure 2. The initial disturbance that spawned Sandy, seen here on October 20, 2012, was quite large.

2) High relative humidity in Sandy's genesis region
The amount of moisture in the atmosphere may play an important role in how large a hurricane gets (Hill and Lackmann, 2009.) Sandy was spawned in the Caribbean in a region where the relative humidity was near 70%. This is the highest humidity we saw during 2012 during the formation of any Atlantic hurricane.

3) Passage over Cuba
Sandy struck Cuba as an intensifying Category 2 hurricane with 110 mph winds. While the core of the storm was over Cuba, it was cut off from the warm ocean waters surrounding Cuba. Most of Sandy's large circulation was still over the ocean, though, and the energy the storm was able to extract from the ocean went into intensifying the spiral bands over water. When Sandy's core re-emerged over water, the hurricane now had spiral bands with heavier thunderstorm activity as a result of the extra energy pumped into the outer portion of the storm during the eye's passage over land. This extra energy in the outer portions of Sandy may have enabled it to expand in size later.

4) Interaction with a trough of low pressure over the Bahamas
As Sandy passed through the Bahamas on October 25, the storm encountered strong upper-level winds associated with a trough of low pressure to the west. These winds created high wind shear that helped weaken Sandy and destroy the eyewall. However, Sandy compensated by spreading out its tropical storm-force winds over a much wider area. Between 15 and 21 UTC on October 25, Sandy's area of tropical storm-force winds increased by more than a factor of two.

5) Leveraging of the Earth's spin
As storms move towards Earth's poles, they acquire more spin, since Earth's rotation works to put more vertical spin into the atmosphere the closer one gets to the pole. This extra spin helps storms grow larger, and we commonly see hurricanes grow in size as they move northwards.

6) Interaction with a trough of low pressure at landfall
As Sandy approached landfall in New Jersey, it encountered an extratropical low pressure system to its west. This extratropical storm began pumping cold air aloft into the hurricane, which converted Sandy into an extratropical low pressure system, or "Nor'easter". The nature of extratropical storms is to have a much larger area with strong winds than a hurricane does, since extratropical storms derive their energy from the atmosphere along a frontal boundary that is typically many hundreds of miles long. Thus, as Sandy made landfall, the hurricane's strongest winds spread out over a larger area, causing damage from Indiana to Nova Scotia.

Are we likely to see more such storms in the future?
Global warming theory (Emanuel, 2005) predicts that a 2°C (3.6°F) increase in ocean temperatures should cause an increase in the peak winds of the strongest hurricanes of about about 10%. Furthermore, warmer ocean temperatures are expected to cause hurricanes to dump 20% more rain in their cores by the year 2100, according to computer modeling studies (Knutson et al., 2010). However, there has been no published work describing how hurricane size may change with warmer oceans in a future climate. We've seen an unusual number of Atlantic hurricanes with large size in recent years, but we currently have no theoretical or computer modeling simulations that can explain why this is so, or if we might see more storms like this in the future. However, we've seen significant and unprecedented changes to our atmosphere in recent decades, due to our emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide. The laws of physics demand that the atmosphere must respond. Atmospheric circulation patterns that control extreme weather events must change, and we should expect extreme storms to change in character, frequency, and intensity as a result--and not always in the ways our computer models may predict. We have pushed our climate system to a fundamentally new, higher-energy state where more heat and moisture is available to power stronger storms, and we should be concerned about the possibility that Hurricane Sandy's freak size and power were partially due to human-caused climate change.

References
Emanuel, K. (2005). Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature, 436(7051), 686-688.

Hill, Kevin A., and Gary M. Lackmann (2009), "Influence of environmental humidity on tropical cyclone size," Monthly Weather Review 137.10 (2009): 3294-3315.

Knutson, T. R., McBride, J. L., Chan, J., Emanuel, K., Holland, G., Landsea, C., ... & Sugi, M. (2010). Tropical cyclones and climate change. Nature Geoscience, 3(3), 157-163.

Rotunno, R., & Emanuel, K. A. (1987). An air–sea interaction theory for tropical cyclones. Part II: Evolutionary study using a nonhydrostatic axisymmetric numerical model. J. Atmos. Sci, 44(3), 542-561.

The Atlantic is quiet, but a Nor'easter expected next week
The Atlantic is quiet, with no threat areas to discuss. An area of low pressure is predicted to develop just north of Bermuda on Wednesday, and the GFS model predicts that this low could become a subtropical cyclone as moves north-northeastwards out to sea late in the week.

The long-range models are in increasing agreement that a Nor'easter will develop near the North Carolina coast on Sunday, then move north to northeastwards early next week. High winds, heavy rain, and coastal flooding could affect the mid-Atlantic coast and New England coasts next Monday and Tuesday due to this storm, but it appears likely that the Nor'easter will stay farther out to sea than the last Nor'easter and have less of an impact on the region devastated by Sandy. Ocean temperatures off the coast of North Carolina were cooled by about 4°F (2.2°C) due to the churning action of Hurricane Sandy's winds, but are still warm enough at 22 - 24°C to potentially allow the Nor'easter to acquire some subtropical characteristics. I doubt the storm would be able to become a named subtropical storm, but it could have an unusual amount of heavy rain if it does become partially tropical. The Nor'easter is still a long ways in the future, and there is still a lot of uncertainty on where the storm might go.

Jeff Masters

Monday, November 5, 2012

Good to Have Heat and Power Back!!


I hope everyone is safe here in the NY Metro Area.  It's been quite a week, thanks to Hurricane/Superstorm Sandy.  Unless you live in the area, you don't really have a good sense of the devastation.  Sorry, but the pictures just don't do it justice.  Chaminade fared pretty well, all things considered.

Amazing super-rapid satellite scans of Hurricane Sandy, courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory.


Check out NOAA's post-storm aerial surveys: NOAA Post-Sandy Aerial Surveys

Check out NOAA's post-storm before and after images of some coastal sections:
NOAA Ocean Service Before/After Sandy Images

Prayers and best wishes to all.  If you are not a local reader of this blog, pray for us, and send donations, if possible, to a reputable charity.

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Storm Surge

If you are looking for the Bingham Canyon Mine blog post and videos, you must go to the blog's archive.



Obviously we have a strong transitioning hurricane moving into our area.  Just one of the dangers of a hurricane is the storm surge.

Below is the latest set of storm surge predictions regarding Hurricane Sandy (courtesy of NOAA, via Weatherundground.com):



Click on the link for an excellent short video from NOAA about storm surge.
NOAA Storm Surge Video

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

That's One Huge Mine!

Watch the two videos below for some insight into the mining operations at the Bingham Canyon Mine in Utah.


Here's Part 2.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Two Fascinating Volcanoes

Geologists recently concluded a study attempting to figure out whether Mauna Loa and Kilauea are connected.  There has long been speculation that they are connected due to their close proximity.

Read on for some more...


Connection Between Hawaii's Dueling Volcanoes Explained

ScienceDaily (Oct. 23, 2012) — A new Rice University-led study finds that a deep connection about 50 miles underground can explain the enigmatic behavior of two of Earth's most notable volcanoes, Hawaii's Mauna Loa and Kilauea. The study, the first to model paired volcano interactions, explains how a link in Earth's upper mantle could account for Kilauea and Mauna Loa's competition for the same deep magma supply and their simultaneous "inflation," or bulging upward, during the past decade.
The study appears in the November issue of Nature Geoscience.
The research offers the first plausible model that can explain both the opposing long-term eruptive patterns at Mauna Loa and Kilauea -- when one is active the other is quiet -- as well as the episode in 2003-2007 when GPS records showed that each bulged notably due to the pressure of rising magma. The study was conducted by scientists at Rice University, the University of Hawaii, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
"We know both volcanoes are fed by the same hot spot, and over the past decade we've observed simultaneous inflation, which we interpret to be the consequence of increased pressure of the magma source that feeds them," said lead author Helge Gonnermann, assistant professor of Earth science at Rice University. "We also know there are subtle chemical differences in the lava that each erupts, which means each has its own plumbing that draws magma from different locations of this deep source.
"In the GPS records, we first see inflation at Kilauea and then about a half a year later at Mauna Loa," he said. "Our hypothesis is that the pressure is transmitted slowly through a partially molten and thereby porous region of the asthenosphere, which would account for the simultaneous inflation and the lag time in inflation. Because changes in pore pressure are transmitted between both volcanoes at a faster rate than the rate of magma flow within the porous region, this can also explain how both volcanoes are dynamically coupled, while being supplied by different parts of the same source region."
Gonnermann said the transmission of pressure through the permeable rock in the asthenosphere is akin to the processes that cause water and oil to flow through permeable layers of rock in shallower regions of Earth's crust.
"When we fitted the deformation, which tells us how much a volcano inflates and deflates, and the lava eruption rate at Kilauea, we found that our model could simultaneously match the deformation signal recorded over on Mauna Loa," said James Foster, co-author and assistant researcher at the University of Hawaii School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology. "The model also required an increase in the magma supply rate to the deep system that matched very nicely with our interpretations and the increased magma supply suggested by the jump in CO2 emissions that occurred in late 2003."
Mauna Loa and Kilauea, Earth's largest and most active volcanoes, respectively, are located about 22 miles apart in the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park on the island of Hawaii. They are among the planet's most-studied and best-instrumented volcanoes and have been actively monitored by scientists at USGS's Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (HVO) since 1912. Kilauea has erupted 48 times on HVO's watch, with a nearly continuous flank eruption since 1983. Mauna Loa has erupted 12 times in the same period, most recently in 1984.
"To continue this research, we submitted a proposal to the National Science Foundation (NSF) earlier this summer to extend our study back in time to cover the last 50 years," Foster said. "We plan to refine the model to include further details of the magma transport within each volcano and also explore how some known prehistoric events and some hypothetical events at one volcano might impact the other. This work should help improve our understanding of volcanic activity of each volcano."
Gonnermann said there has been disagreement among Earth scientists about the potential links between adjacent volcanoes, and he is hopeful the new model could be useful in studying other volcanoes like those in Iceland or the Galapagos Islands.
"At this point it is unclear whether Hawaii is unique or whether similar volcano coupling may exist at other locations," Gonnermann said. "Given time and ongoing advances in volcano monitoring, we can test if similar coupling between adjacent volcanoes exists elsewhere."
Study co-authors include Michael Poland and Asta Miklius, both of HVO; Benjamin Brooks of the University of Hawaii; and Cecily Wolfe of the University of Hawaii and the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
The research was supported by the USGS and the NSF. The Kilauea and Mauna Loa GPS networks are supported by grants from the USGS, NSF and NASA and operated in collaboration by the USGS, Stanford University and the Pacific GPS Facility at the University of Hawaii.
Share this story on FacebookTwitter, and Google:
Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided byRice University. The original article was written by Jade Boyd.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:
  1. Helge M. Gonnermann, James H. Foster, Michael Poland, Cecily J. Wolfe, Benjamin A. Brooks, Asta Miklius.Coupling at Mauna Loa and KÄ«lauea by stress transfer in an asthenospheric melt layerNature Geoscience, 2012; DOI: 10.1038/ngeo1612
 APA

 MLA
Rice University (2012, October 23). Connection between Hawaii's dueling volcanoes explained.ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 23, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2012/10/121023134810.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Is It Hot in Here, Or Is It Just Me?

Fascinating article below regarding the Permian Extinction, one of if not the most lethal in earth's history.


Tropical Collapse in Early Triassic Caused by Lethal Heat: Extreme Temperatures Blamed for 'Dead Zone'

ScienceDaily (Oct. 18, 2012) — Scientists have discovered why the 'broken world' following the worst extinction of all time lasted so long -- it was simply too hot to survive.
The end-Permian mass extinction, which occurred around 250 million years ago in the pre-dinosaur era, wiped out nearly all the world's species. Typically, a mass extinction is followed by a 'dead zone' during which new species are not seen for tens of thousands of years. In this case, the dead zone, during the Early Triassic period which followed, lasted for a perplexingly long period: five million years.
A study jointly led by the University of Leeds and China University of Geosciences (Wuhan), in collaboration with the University of Erlangen-Nurnburg (Germany), shows the cause of this lengthy devastation was a temperature rise to lethal levels in the tropics: around 50-60°C on land, and 40°C at the sea-surface.
Lead author Yadong Sun, who is based in Leeds while completing a joint PhD in geology, says: "Global warming has long been linked to the end-Permian mass extinction, but this study is the first to show extreme temperatures kept life from re-starting in Equatorial latitudes for millions of years."
It is also the first study to show water temperatures close to the ocean's surface can reach 40°C -- a near-lethal value at which marine life dies and photosynthesis stops. Until now, climate modellers have assumed sea-surface temperatures cannot surpass 30°C. The findings may help us understand future climate change patterns.
The dead zone would have been a strange world -- very wet in the tropics but with almost nothing growing. No forests grew, only shrubs and ferns. No fish or marine reptiles were to be found in the tropics, only shellfish, and virtually no land animals existed because their high metabolic rate made it impossible to deal with the extreme temperatures. Only the polar regions provided a refuge from the baking heat.
Before the end-Permian mass extinction, Earth had teemed with plants and animals including primitive reptiles and amphibians, and a wide variety of sea creatures including coral and sea lillies.
This broken world scenario was caused by a breakdown in global carbon cycling. In normal circumstances, plants help regulate temperature by absorbing Co2 and burying it as dead plant matter. Without plants, levels of Co2 can rise unchecked, which causes temperatures to increase.
The study, published Oct. 19 in the journal Science, is the most detailed temperature record of this study period (252-247 million years ago) to date.
Sun and his colleagues collected data from 15,000 ancient conodonts (tiny teeth of extinct eel-like fishes) extracted from two tonnes of rocks from South China. Conodonts form a skeleton using oxygen. The isotopes of oxygen in skeletons are temperature controlled, so by studying the ratio of oxygen isotopes in the conodonts he was able to detect temperature levels hundreds of millions of years ago.
Professor Paul Wignall from the School of Earth and Environment at the University of Leeds, one of the study's co-authors, said: "Nobody has ever dared say that past climates attained these levels of heat. Hopefully future global warming won't get anywhere near temperatures of 250 million years ago, but if it does we have shown that it may take millions of years to recover."
The study is the latest collaboration in a 20-year research partnership between the University of Leeds and China University of Geosciences in Wuhan. It was funded by the Chinese Science Foundation.
Share this story on FacebookTwitter, and Google:
Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided byUniversity of Leeds, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:
  1. Yadong Sun, Michael M. Joachimski, Paul B. Wignall, Chunbo Yan, Yanlong Chen, Haishui Jiang, Lina Wang, and Xulong Lai. Lethally Hot Temperatures During the Early Triassic GreenhouseScience, 2012; 338 (6105): 366-370 DOI: 10.1126/science.1224126
 APA

 MLA
University of Leeds (2012, October 18). Tropical collapse in Early Triassic caused by lethal heat: Extreme temperatures blamed for 'Dead Zone'.ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 21, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2012/10/121018141844.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.