Dark Star

Shouldn't this map be valid for April 1st?

No real arctic air in eastern Canada. At 11 AM, it's 7 degrees on the western shore of Hudson Bbbbay, and some negative teens in the NW Territories...

I go by averages, not extremes. Number of 90 days is good for relative measuring/records, but averages tell a much more complete story.

I only adhere to average temperatures since records have been kept.

62-66, no wind, tops...

In some ways, they already are...

I'm not feeling it...

I contend that it has been windier the past 10 years or so...

I wonder if Volcanic Winter can shed some light on whether the Alaskan Volcano potential eruptions on MSN is just "overblown" hooey?

For what it's worth, north central Canada is harboring -27 degrees air this afternoon.

Another potentially pleasant day ruined by the wind...

I don't know. It just seems windy all too often over the last 10 years, or so. Maybe I notice more since I have less hair?

I was covering the overnight shift at CBS. I saw the LFM and pointed out to Steve Deshler that it looked like a major snowstorm was going to hit us. Irv Gikofsky walked in and just laughed at me...

Busted isn't quite the word. See my write up from earlier today. Correct my breakdown as you see fit...

I guess just from a relatively brief downpour?

I do remember hearing Brooklyn actually got some snow out of it...

Today marks the anniversary of the biggest bust of all time in the NYC metro area (2001).

So the bulk of the rain today stays to our west?

There is some cold air up in Northern Central Canada, but also a very cold pool of air along the St. Lawrence Valley. The cold pool of air along the St. Lawrence valley appears cutoff since the air gets "warmer" the farther you approach the Hudson Bay area. Just hoping there is some source of cold air to tap into (just in case).

Walked my dog. 3 layers and was pretty cozy, except for one street which is a wind tunnel. Last gasp of cold air?

I assume that general temperature profiles can be extracted through trees, Ice Cores, sediment cores? I would trust data collected and assessed from before 1980, only because perhaps there could be a bias trying to prove an agenda *after that date). Sorry for my cynicism. I am among the minority of conservatives that A. there is global warming, and B. it is attributed to greenhouse gas emissions. I could be wrong, since there is varying data, of which I am not an expert in. The graph/chart/depiction that we are all "discussing", in and by itself, can make an argument both ways.

Wow, 9 pages for March, and it hasn't even begun. There must be a lot of weather going on...

The main point was Dupont dumped it directly into the Ohio River, was caught, so they continued dumping at night. were caught and started dumping into the ocean, were caught, and started storing it onsite and dumped into the creek next to the dairy farm. 3M was not the bad actor, even thought they manufactured it. They warned DuPont constantly throughout the years, as well informed the EPA. The EPA was aware of a lot even before the Parkesburg West Virginia incident. That's why I think today they are going overboard, and making everybody a scapegoat.

Actually, they set a limit for drinking water. The limit is 4.0 parts per trillion. That is also the instrument detection limit, meaning essentially zero. Drinking water facilities do not add PFAS chemicals to the water. But they are responsible for removing it. At an extremely large cost. The cost will of course be passed onto the consumer. PFAS are suspected carcinogens, but nothing more definitive. In my opinion, the greatest health effect is a correlation to PFAS concentration and reduced in birth weight. PFAS manufacturing is no longer occurring in the US. It's uses are now extremely limited, except in small concentrations where no other chemical can be substituted. As a result, the EPA has reduced PFOS from 30 ng/L in the average citizen's bloodstream to about 5 ng/L since 2000. So it is in decline. PFAS is still being manufactured in China, as can be imagined. Most of the products containing PFAS, which are many, are also still being manufactured there. There is no easy solution to eliminating every last trace of PFAS chemicals, since it is everywhere. Even the removal is a problem, as the EPA has realized the issue with disposing of the spent carbon resins. While I don't want any of these chemicals in my body (it takes about 4 years to eliminate half the concentration of PFAS in ones body) I'm not so sure of the EPA's recent response But don't get me started on the issue.

NJ has a 0.4 ug/L limit in drinking water, while Alaska allows up to 77 ug/L. California's limit is 1.0 ug/L, while Delaware allows up to 6 ug/L. The main source is from fertilizers, but it is also in shampoos and skin products. That doesn't sound right. NY banned it, except for trace amounts, whatever that is.