LibertyBell

it even goes beyond this, the wildfire particles are going high up and causing the formation of another hole in the ozone layer

You guys really need to watch Cosmos: Possible Worlds. Excellent narration by Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Season 3 Episode 7- The Four Kingdoms of Life- was particularly memorable. He mentioned the intelligence and empathy of trees and bees (and the mathematical and astronomical knowledge that bees possess) and how humans first need to realize the sentience that exists on earth itself before they go looking for it elsewhere. Talks about empathy, sentience and intelligence among nonhumans (including trees!) And how human-centricism may prevent us from recognizing it elsewhere.

I've never agreed with this policy of hacking down a tree and putting it in the middle of Rockefeller Center.

1999 and 2007 are reappearing analogs. I've seen some extreme temp records in the SW (Phoenix, for example) that were previously held on the same dates in 1999.

byeee to my allergies! although there still seem to be some around today.....

what would make you think January would be any good? and I thought March is usually the coldest month in a La Nina?

lol I know. I was just commenting that it's an extremely windy with a lot of volatile weather going on.

Thanks Walt! I remember 1998 was prolific for them, in May 1998 and again in September 1998 when an F2 tornado passed about 2 miles from my house!

I wonder if they measure snow there too and how long that equipment has been there?

The Coldenham Elementary School tragedy that happened in Nov 1989 happened without a tornado warning? I do remember there were tornado watches in effect, but no warning as far as I remember. Do you have any maps from what happened that day? All I remember is that day was extremely windy and we couldn't get the doors open.

No tornado Walt.....or at least no one investigated to see if there was one.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're right. History has taught us that pessimism is usually correct. With so many factors interconnected it's not a surprise there would be a feedback mechanism to amplify the outcome. I put the odds that we avoid a runaway greenhouse effect at around 10%. I've always believed that we should've started to cut greenhouse consumption back in the 80s-90s and should never have turned to fracking, but humankind has a history of making dumb shortsighted decisions (one of many reasons why I favor artificial intelligence and scientists running govt over politicians.)

from SciAm https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-green-new-deal-is-more-relevant-than-ever/

Wow Iota is now a 160 mph / 917 mb Cat 5 forecast to strengthen even more. It's still extremely windy out here too!

Looks like 1.3 from the first event and 0.4 (but accompanied by intense 60-70 mph winds) for the second event. Do you think that was a derecho Walt? Widespread extreme wind event from Ohio, across PA and into the North East including a 15 ft seiche on Lake Erie! Also are late season events like these more common during a La Nina (especially a moderate-strong one) just like they are during the spring?

Excellent papers guys! Going to read them now as the big severe weather outbreak is now behind us. One question I have emanating from this research is will it lead to Nina/Nino like events being defined for the other ocean basins, not just the Pacific? It could also help with TC forecasting in other parts of the world and the interconnected relationships with global weather patterns!

Are very late season severe outbreaks / derechos like we experienced yesterday more likely during a la nina especially a strong one? I know there's a correlation to them during the spring but didn't know there was also one in the fall.

Also heard that this was the first time ever a part of NYC has had a tornado warning in November? Overall there were three tornado warnings, one for parts of NYC (Manhattan, Bronx) another one in the Lower Hudson Valley and one in Suffolk County. These records go back to 1984.

Thanks for this! Will these values be accepted? The highest official wind speeds I've seen quoted this morning is the 70 mph at Brooklyn College. It's been reported that 60 mph gusts were widespread throughout the area. My other question is- was this a derecho? We had a long line of extremely strong winds going from Ohio, across PA and right into the Northeast. There was even a 15 ft seiche on Lake Erie!

Winds are high up here too, 10K power outages so far Lots of trees and power lines down

https://www.inverse.com/science/5-strategies-for-climate-change According to a new study published Thursday in the journal Science, the food industry is on track to produce 1,356 gigatons of carbon dioxide between 2020 and 2100. As the researchers highlight in the study, that is enough carbon dioxide to push the Earth beyond 2 degrees Celsius of global warming within that time frame, even if every other industry that produces CO2 suddenly halted. But there is a way out. In the report, the scientists detail five strategies to change how we produce, supply and consume our food. Together, these solutions would result in an up to 18 percent decrease in CO2 emissions from food production. They could even tip the industry into being carbon negative. The five strategies the scientists propose are: Global adoption of a plant-based diet, like the Mediterranean diet. Reducing personal consumption to healthy, recommended amounts. Improving crop yields using genetics and other technology. Cutting food waste by half. Using precision technology, like fertilizers and food additives. Why change — Right now, food production releases massive amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Clearing and deforestation for agriculture and livestock, fertilizers, and fossil fuels used in food production and supply chains all added up to the release of more than 35 trillion tons (16 billion metric tons) of carbon dioxide equivalents per year from 2012 through 2017, according to the paper. Reducing food-related emissions will “likely be essential” to meeting goals to prevent global warming set out by the Paris Climate Agreement, according to the study.

and now for some good news lol.... a soil bacterium that extracts methane from the atmosphere https://www.inverse.com/article/54695-this-bacterium-could-help-curb-climate-change

Good luck to whomever still exists on this planet in 2100 and thereafter. I'm most certainly glad that I wont be here and that I decided to not have any children, I wouldn't wish this kind of hell on my worst enemy. https://www.inverse.com/science/the-permafrost-is-doomed They look at two possible scenarios. In the far more likely of the two scenarios, they assume that humans completely eliminate manmade greenhouse gas emissions by 2100. Under this scenario, global temperatures reach a peak around 2075 before falling for 75 years to 2 degrees Celsius above temperatures in a pre-industrial Earth by 2150. That's in tune with other science on what such a drastic action would have on global warming. What is unexpected is everything that happens after 2150. After 2150, the global temperature counterintuitively starts rising again, despite no new production of greenhouse gases. In the highly unrealistic second scenario, which posits that humanity abruptly cuts all greenhouse gases in 2020, the same pattern of initial decline followed by global warming still occurs. Essentially, we've missed the boat. Rather, to stop the melting of the permafrost now, the study states that "all man-made emissions would have had to be cut to zero sometime between 1960 and 1970" — when the global temperature was only 0.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Oh No. New study reveals the true cost of Earth's melting permafrost We are "beyond the point-of-no-return," the scientists say. BlackJack3D/Getty Images Tara Yarlagadda 11.12.2020 3:21 PM The science behind the melting Arctic permafrost, is, frankly, terrifying. As it melts, mummified remains of animals are slowly emerging, offering us a glimpse at the ancient world — one that scientists believed would always remain hidden, locked up for good. These puppies, birds, and other fauna are the proverbial canaries in the coal mine. Now, a new study published Thursday in Scientific Reports gives us even more cause for concern. Jørgen Randers is one of the study's authors and professor emeritus of climate strategy at the BI Norwegian Business School. He tells Inverse that the permafrost may not just be melting — it might never freeze again. "According to our system dynamics simulation model ESCIMO, humanity is beyond the point-of-no-return when it comes to halt the melting of the permafrost using greenhouse gas cuts as the single tool," Randers says. In other words: cutting down on (or completely eliminating) greenhouse gas emissions now won't stop the melting of the permafrost in the future. Instead, Randers explains, it "will continue to melt over the next 500 years — irrespective of how quickly humanity cuts its greenhouse gas emissions." The melting Siberian permafrost represents a vicious cycle of climate change.The Washington Post/The Washington Post/Getty Images How did we get here — To come to this dire conclusion, Randers and co-author Ulrich Goluke used a simulation model known as ESCIMO (an Earth System Model of Intermediate Complexity) to observe the self-sustained melting of the permafrost. Goluke is assistant professor at the Business School Lausanne, Switzerland. They look at two possible scenarios. In the far more likely of the two scenarios, they assume that humans completely eliminate manmade greenhouse gas emissions by 2100. Under this scenario, global temperatures reach a peak around 2075 before falling for 75 years to 2 degrees Celsius above temperatures in a pre-industrial Earth by 2150. That's in tune with other science on what such a drastic action would have on global warming. What is unexpected is everything that happens after 2150. After 2150, the global temperature counterintuitively starts rising again, despite no new production of greenhouse gases. In the highly unrealistic second scenario, which posits that humanity abruptly cuts all greenhouse gases in 2020, the same pattern of initial decline followed by global warming still occurs. Essentially, we've missed the boat. Rather, to stop the melting of the permafrost now, the study states that "all man-made emissions would have had to be cut to zero sometime between 1960 and 1970" — when the global temperature was only 0.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The melting of the Siberian permafrost.Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post via Getty Images Vicious cycle — This bizarre oscillation in global temperature comes down to three factors: the melting of the permafrost itself, increased water vapor, and decreasing surface albedo. These three processes interact in a self-sustaining feedback loop, resulting in more carbon (in the form of methane or CO2) being released into the atmosphere. More carbon increases global temperatures and causes even more melting of the permafrost. Let's focus on that last factor: surface albedo. "Surface albedo is the same as the reflectivity, shininess of the Earth's surface as seen from space. Bright surfaces like snow and ice reflects most of the incoming energy from the Sun," Randers says. By contrast, dark areas — like the sea — reflect less and instead absorb more energy. "This means that as the globe warms, the area covered by ice and snow diminishes, laying bare ever more ocean surface, which absorbs more of the incoming light, warming and melting even more surface ice," Randers says. This has extreme implications for humans over the next 200 years — from 2150 on, the global temperature will continue to rise 0.5 degrees Celsius every century, according to Randers. "The rise will be so slow that humanity will probably adapt," Randers says — but he cautions that we will also suffer worse than if the temperatures and sea levels did not rise. What's next for the permafrost — Cutting greenhouse gases in the next fifty years is still important for the survival of our species, and our actions now do influence temperature increases in the future. But we also need to innovate our way out, too. "The world should accelerate its effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions and start developing the technologies for large scale removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere," Randers says.

That looks a lot faster than 60 mph.....

our biggest wind events always seem to happen in the fall. The aforementioned one in Nov 1989 and Labor Day 1998 are examples (although that was late summer.) Anyone remember the event we had years ago when the Staten Island Ferry crashed into the pier during a big wind event and 15 people died? I remember the ferry captain was held liable for that. What year was that and how strong were the winds?