Ground Scouring

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ground Scouring

  • Birthday 08/25/1992

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    Northern Europe

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think this event will end up verifying on the “low” side of current expectations. The two most recent GFS runs have shifted toward a higher-amplitude, blockier setup due to their resolving the situation in the North Pacific (Gulf of Alaska) better. This means that the downstream circulation over the Ozark region will have a tendency to become “pinched” due to enhanced shortwave ridging over the Great Lakes. In turn, this implies a surging cold front along with mid-level winds paralleling the surface boundary, especially toward the northern half of the warm sector. I think we may see a few supercells capable of producing a couple of strong tornadoes, but these will likely be localised along boundaries from eastern MS eastward across the southern two-thirds of AL. Most of this event should consist of QLCS and bows, with some isolated, discrete events along boundaries, as mentioned. One thing I have noticed is that “major” events since 2011–13 have ended up underperforming in terms of either severity and/or aerial coverage, perhaps due to the warming Pacific basin, the slowing AMOC, and the +PMM signature; the warmer Pacific basin and emergent -AMO over time have tended to hinder low-amplitude, progressive setups, regardless of temporary shifts toward -ENSO/-PDO.
  2. There does not seem to be sufficient, specific evidence, as opposed to speculative notion(s), as of now to call the independent existence of the AMO cycle into doubt. Spectral AMO peaks clearly exist even in the study by Mann et al. If anything, climate change and the AMO(C) may be inversely correlated, given that a weaker AMOC due to AGW → weaker +AMO signal. The freshening of the North Atlantic will likely lead to an early—that is, premature—onset of the next -AMO period, and some signs, namely temperature and salinity, are that this began in 2013–14, although overall Atlantic TC activity has yet to fully respond accordingly. I think AGW is likely leading to shorter +AMO periods over time and is likely heralding the next -AMO within five to ten years.
  3. Could climate change weaken the correlation between ENSO and severe weather as the Pacific warms?
  4. The problem with renewables is that they are highly inefficient in terms of energy output and actually add to the carbon footprint via expensive, environmentally destructive practices, e.g., mining for rare-earth metals. The more one invests in, say, solar panels and wind turbines, the more multinational corporations take over vast swaths of the Third World, while still adding vastly more to the carbon footprint than renewables eliminate, owing to the productive processes involved in manufacturing renewables. Unfortunately, Western discourse on this topic is dominated by a false dichotomy between conventional fossil fuels and a limited, pre-selected array of renewables. Intelligent countries such as China, South Korea, and Pakistan are heavily investing in building new nuclear plants and upgrading their old ones. Nuclear power is both clean and energy efficient. We as a species already have the tools in place to store nuclear waste far more effectively than we did in the recent past. Japan’s disaster in 2011 was due to neglect and negligence, not nuclear power itself. Plus, many governments and semi-private organisations likely have far more efficient, black-budget energy sources than are currently marketable in public. Free energy is not sci-fi, but very viable. This does not even cover the potential for abiotic sources to emerge. Unfortunately, the fossil-fuel monopolies have effectively suppressed information about this and other threats to their power, including nuclear. Pressure from the fossil-fuel lobbies has generated hysteria about the supposed dangers of nuclear energy while performing “bait-and-switch” for the polluters via their pseudo-“‘Green’ New Deal” based on fossil-fuel-consuming renewables.
  5. Part of the problem is that the Pacific basin is the largest on the planet and thus is warming faster overall than the other basins due to climatic forcing.
  6. Is there any overriding, large-scale, climatic forcing that is likely behind this? It definitely seems to be a theme, regardless of other factors.
  7. The CanSIPS, NMME, and CFSv2 models are suggesting that the current +PDO, which has persisted for two years, will continue through the fall (and perhaps early winter) of 2016. Such a long +PDO stretch without a single monthly negative reading would be unprecedented since the early 1940s. We've already seen 25 consecutive months of positive values. Is there any climate feedback that could favor more frequent/intense or long-lived +PDO cycles in a warmer world? Obviously, they've occurred many times on (and off) record.
  8. Most likely the warming of the Pacific/Indian basins and the attendant Hadley expansion have been the long-term climatic signals favoring drier conditions in CA. The overuse of local resources is worrisome in light of the overall changes in the global climate system. At some point, conditions and overpopulation could make parts of the state uninhabitable, barring technological evolution, which is always likely to help people cope with change. The question is whether there is some point at which even larger sacrifices besides conservation will need to be made.
  9. Long-range guidance (CanSIPS, NMME, CFSv2, etc.) has been fairly consistent in depicting a 2011-type summertime pattern at 500 mb, with a mean ridge over the southern High Plains and a weakness over the western Atlantic. That type of pattern would be mostly very unfavorable for storms to hit the United States, unless homegrown MCV-type/frontal development were to occur in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Otherwise, storms approaching from the MDR would likely curve out to sea or continue into the Caribbean, where westerly shear may be elevated thanks to the tenacious +PDO (shown by all guidance for ASO '16), with attendant warmer-than-average SST projected off the Pacific Northwest and Baja California. We'll likely have a slightly-above-average season with few, if any, U.S. landfalls. 2011 tracks
  10. Ditto. And I'll be the first to say that my previous (low) expectations for DCA have/are going out the window. What a storm...!
  11. Long-term radar doesn't show the dry slot filling in. The fact that some people are relying on one model showing unrealistic totals shows desperation (though understandably so). DCA, at least, isn't getting more than 5" additional inches out of this storm. The show is all along the Appalachians.
  12. Honestly, by most people's standards this won't end up as historic, simply because the heaviest +SN is out in the boondocks of far northern VA, eastern WV, and western MD. Technically, it's still a HECS, but considering how those areas have seen many similar events, it's not as historic as similar totals would be farther east and south. After all, the areas most affected are along the Appalachians...
  13. Models continue to advertise a potentially significant threat around 30 Jan–1 Feb, with the 12Z deterministic ECMWF and the 12Z EPS showing one of the warmest low-level air masses since 26 Dec 2015 (the date of the Garland, TX, EF4 tornado) over the southern High Plains for multiple days. In fact, even the EPS mean shows 15°C 850-mb temperatures reaching as far north as the TX/OK panhandles on at least two of the days that I mentioned. One important key is the relatively low amplitude of the upcoming pattern, with its lack of significant cold intrusions, which not only may prevent heights from rising too much ahead of any ejecting disturbance, but also allows southwesterly low-level flow to advect richer instability (as well as a noticeable if not strong elevated mixed layer, which is surprising given the subtropical jet) north from the Mexican plateau. The tongue of greatest instability is likely to be at least a bit narrower than projected at this point, but the fact that we are talking about EMLs and a potentially significant southern High Plains threat in a potent El Niño says a lot. For reference:
  14. Both the EPS and the GEFS are signaling a major long-range pattern shift toward the the end of January and the first week of February (especially around 28 Jan–1 Feb), with a restrengthening of the polar vortex and at least a transient +NAO/–EPO/–PNA period taking hold. Even at this range, models are indicating that the polar jet will take over as the dominant stream with strong hints of multiple shortwave impulses intruding into the Pacific Northwest, likely inducing lee cyclogenesis east of the Rockies. Details regarding ejection and overall evolution are obviously too early to ascertain, but the overall trend toward a more zonal look/longer wavelengths favors a Southeast ridge with likely favorable moisture vectors out of the Caribbean, setting up a potentially decent return flow over the southern High Plains for a few days in advance of any potential ejecting disturbance. There aren't many analogs from strong El Niño events since 1950, but an interesting one is 26 Feb 1958, which was somewhat similar synoptic-wise and featured several significant tornadoes across LA and MS. An interesting difference is that this case may also extend the opportunity for severe weather to the southern High Plains.