Typhoon Tip

We're looking at 4 or 5 days of 90 to 94 type heat wave which began today for many front yards and towns but will be more convincing tomorrow through Thursday. Euro agrees with your assessment thereafter with heat returning over the weekend. Too early for confidence but it even soars Monday the 18th to 101 at Lawrence, MA otherwise a lot of 99's at all typical sites on the day. Aug 18 isn''t too late for that sort of thing, but it is nearing the climate drop off.

San Francisco can be brutal for ennui

Take up sky -diving

We have a kakistocracy ( - government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens ) ... for a government made possible by voters having dimmed intellect, and corrupted and/or poorly formed morality. That parenthetic is the formal definition of kakistocracy - give me a better description for this administration. You can't. That's what the hell why. Just sayn'

4 New Myths About Climate Change—and How to Debunk Them Pushing off climate change policy isn’t that far removed from denying its existence. Popular Science Sara Kiley Watson More from Popular Science Misinformation and delay are just climate denial tactics with a layer of green-washing. Not much more than 10 years ago, it may have seemed like climate change denial was an ordinary, if not misinformed, opinion shared among loads of people. Nowadays, with climate disasters plaguing most everywhere in the world, it’s not so practical to live in denial. As of September 2021, only one in every 10 Americans thinks climate change isn’t happening, but around three out of every four believes it is. Of course, some leaders still hold on to the constantly debunked idea that climate change isn’t happening. But businesses, even fossil fuel ones, are changing their tune ever so slightly. “Although some politicians continue to traffic in climate denial, corporations are too smart for that because they realize it will alienate most of their consumers,” says Edward Maibach, director of George Mason’s Center for Climate Change Communication. Climate change denial now comes in a variety of embellished, truthful-sounding opinions—but in reality, they’re just as mythical as the idea that climate change is a hoax. Here are three examples of those altered arguments. Myth no. 1: Clean energy will hurt working-class people It’s no secret that in the past, renewable energy was a far off and expensive alternative to fossil fuels. But today we know that isn’t the case: Solar and wind were the cheapest sources of energy in the world in 2020, and prices continue to drop. “Renewables present countries tied to coal with an economically attractive phase-out agenda that ensures they meet growing energy demand, while saving costs, adding jobs, boosting growth and meeting climate ambition,” Francesco La Camera, director-general of the International Renewable Energy Agency, said in June. Still, there are plenty of op-eds boldly stating that renewable energy policy will hurt the vulnerable—often to make the case for expanding fossil fuels. But these arguments are simplistic and overlook the bigger, more important picture, says John Cook, a research fellow at the Climate Change Communication Research Hub at Monash University in Australia. “More broadly, these types of arguments ignore the harmful impacts of climate change that damage society and the economy—the costs of climate inaction will be far greater than the costs of climate action,” Cook says. Some opponents have brought up concerns about job losses, specifically in the US, which despite global growth during the pandemic, saw a downtick in employment. Whether it’s fossil fuel workers in already-struggling communities or clean energy workers who lost jobs during COVID-19, policy must prioritize working class people in the energy transition. Myth no. 2: Scientists and activists are overreacting; opponents are being realistic Another way that climate denial views are being recast is in “culture war terms,” says Cook, by painting proponents of climate action as “extremist and pushing political agendas.” One example is the idea of “climate realism”—which supposedly exists to counteract panic. Fossil fuel-funded groups like the Heartland Institute have gone so far as to find their own anti-Greta Thunberg who pushes against “climate alarmism”—the idea that the climate crisis must be combated with serious urgency. In reality, we’ve been in the loop on climate change for at least 62 years—and that we’re down to the wire to to keep the worst impacts from happening. Making climate change political and dragging out decision making is in some ways, a new excuse to do nothing at all. “These kinds of arguments tap into people’s social identity and are quite corrosive as they have a polarizing impact on society,” Cook says. “When issues become culturally or politically polarized, progress becomes more difficult.” Another reason politics and social identity have been injected into climate conspiracies is through a fringe movement that correlates immigration with environmental catastrophe. This has also been named “eco-bordering” by British political scientists Joe Turner and Dan Bailey. “This discourse seeks to blame immigration for national environmental degradation, which draws on colonial and racialized imaginaries of nature in order to rationalize further border restrictions and ‘protect’ the ‘nativist stewardship’ of national nature,” they wrote in a recent paper. And these ideas aren’t new: John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club and often called the father of the American national parks, discriminated against Black and Indigenous people. This idea is based off a multitude of ethical problems and scientific inaccuracies—namely that the majority of climate change issues stem from overproduction and consumption in major economies, while poorer nations will be the ones to bear the worst brunt of climate change. Myth no. 3: Corporations are already doing the necessary work Greenwashing is everywhere—from buying clothes to taking vacations to offsetting carbon footprints by planting trees. But it very much exists for once-climate denying industries, especially fossil fuels. For example, Chevron may have set some goals for minimizing emissions, but the vast majority of its footprint comes from scope 3 emissions (all of the emissions associated with making and delivering a product) which isn’t addressed anywhere in its climate goals. Instead of accounting for emissions associated with oil and gas, according to environmental law group Client Earth, the company “will develop a renewable energy business, invest in ‘low-carbon technologies’ and sell offsets ‘to our customers around the world to help them achieve their own lower-carbon goals.‘ ” Still, Chevron’s shiny advertisements and rampant use of the terms net-zero and sustainable fuels don’t give the slightest clue that it hasn’t revealed how, or even if it plans to, move away from fossil fuels. A similarly concerning trend is “wokewashing,” where corporations pose as champions for people of color and women through advertisements. Exxon’s ad, which centers around the story of an immigrant from India who now works for the fossil fuel giant, is one example. “Big oil companies now spend a lot of money to convince us that they are dealing with the problem, although their claims are highly misleading,” says Maibach. “They have large advertising and PR budgets which they use to convince us that they are responsible actors who are working to solve climate change.” Myth no. 4: We’re doomed The final kind of new climate change denial is the belief that the apocalypse is inevitable, and there’s nothing we can do about the climate crisis. And while global warming is certainly an ever-looming and scary issue, it doesn’t have to signal the end of the world. “The kind of hope we need—rational, stubborn hope—isn’t about positive thinking, but it doesn’t begin with imitating an ostrich, either,” Katharine Hayhoe, chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy, wrote in New Scientist. “It starts by acknowledging just how serious climate change is and what is at risk: the future of civilization as we know it.” Luckily, we know what we have to do—namely drop emissions to keep the global temperature from rising above 1.5 degrees Celsius, while still prioritizing protection of biodiversity and human populations. But we’re cutting it close to the roughly 2030 goalline. “While it’s true that our climate has already been changed and that it will change for many decades to come, the actions we can take to limit the extent of the change will have huge benefits,” Maibach says, “many of which begin to pay off immediately in the form of cleaner air and water, better health, and more jobs.” Sara Kiley Watson is an Assistant Editor at Popular Science, where she has led sustainability coverage since 2021.

We're passing out of the solar max this weekend. It's going to get harder to get an official heat wave as the month ages onward. We've seen 90+ in early September, so heat can happen.. .but getting 3 days consecutive? sooner rather than later is climate preferred and for a reason. I wonder what is the latest official heat wave ( 3 consec days) to have occurred. Big heat ( > 95 F) ...I think I've seen that two or three times post Aug 20th.

90 to 96, Mon-Wed using a straight up blend of the operational Euro and GFS

yeah, entertaining fo' sho' but still, never seen a hurricane do an EC run thru a ridge and no steering field actually conducting it to do so in the first place. I feel that's beta drift in the model. If push came to shove I'd be forced to bet that a heat wave pattern from the OV-NE region sets the table for a Cane to do a Gulf o/mex entrance

it's like possible 100 F for 2 straight days followed by that yeeeeah

Ray and I began noticing the atmospheric teleconnector correlation stressing over the last 10 years actually. It's an interesting aspect. I haven't dug into the matter at the granularity of that, but have noticed it and what you're saying isn't far off from what Ray and I have discussed in the past. From what I'm anecdotally observing ... it's not so much that a -EPOs or +PNAs ...-NAOs don't correlate. It's more about the lack of resonance feed-backs locking in patterns long enough to give the correlations a time to manifest. The ephemeral atmosphere syndrome ... they abandon the storms ... cold and hot looks. That heat wave near the end of June was clipped for length by higher frequency for example.

It'd still be there; the eye isn't drawn to it because the trough may appear foreboding. But, it's presence is betrayed by the very fast flow around the trough. Speed anomalies is what you'd look for. It takes some "physics intuition" if you will, but can be shown mathematically ... The HC doesn't really "deflate" or go away in the winter. What happens is that the geometry of it gets converted to mechanical power in the form of wind - the balanced geostrophic wind velocity in the means. As the hgt field compresses south, the winds increase in direct proportion. The more the increase, the more compression took place ( steeper gradient).

"No injuries to wasps were committed in the making of this post"

i may be overt tree hugging in this .. clearly in the minority, but unless the bee's nest is critically located - which most realistically aren't - leave 'em the f* alone. they are hugely beneficial to the local ecological health. from pollinator species, to insect carnivores ( yellows and wasps - ) they do vastly more good than harm honey bees can even be moved by calling a specialist. if a bald face hornet's nest is clinging to the underside of the front door awning, than okay. but in the past, i just avoid them unless it's more obviously necessary. seems like some people wanna go after them just because it is there. hoping that's not the case -

Even the most objectively attempted science is still born of humanity; thus, humanity makes the science less than ideally objective. I agree ... a blizzard of 30" and 100 mph wind gusts happened whether there is a human there to complain about it or not. Like wise, what if it were 133 F routinely out there in the ambience of the world, yet no one happened to have ever felt it - global warming might truly, truly be denied. Fact of the matter is, the 100% objective analysis and conclusion pathway needs to be "weather" anything happens at all. Not whether someone was around to hear the tree fall in the forest.

There's been memes ( unverified by myself but they're out there - ) that advertized a DP record June and July for the OV-NE/MA regions. Again... not sure of the veracity of that, but I was entertaining the notion that this may have robbed some of the kinetic temperatures from getting to the higher levels. See ( you know this - ) the problem with living around the taint of the continent as we do, we are are the end result of gathered bio farts, industrial air waste, and whatever ozone we can possibly imagine, homogenized with soil moisture and the Great Lakes and the Gulf/lower M/A inflow... It's really a problem for us to soar the T side of the T/TD in a longer terms sense of climate because of these mitigators. This is part and parcel in why the hard empirical data over the last 20 years have shown more of the warm climate via the nocturnal temperature contribution to the means. These same mitigation in the top side, holds the bottom side elevated. Not all the time - duh... we're just talking tendencies. But the nighttime lows is where we "swelter" Anyway, in truly assessing the summer departures, I think the thermodynamics of the air mass should really be evaluated. I've often mused to self that similar to the OHC, there should be codified AHC ... or Atmospheric heat content, which is derived from the thickness ( not just height)-related potential surface temperature, then aggregated over time. interesting

So... being in a 'cool synergistic cage' for a week or more, it starts to get hard to visualize getting out of said cage. It kind of conditions the mind into thinking it won't get hot next week some how, some way. Not the most scientific approach of course, no, but there's something to that. It's a similar phenomenon to being in the 5th inning in the 2002 ALCS, with Pedro Martinez on the mound, with the Red Sox leading the Yankees 5-2 at the time ... and just knowing for some creepy reason that the Red Sox season was over. It was more than Grady Little's ambling out to the mound to tuck his tail between his legs when Pedro's ego told him go back. Annnnnd summarily the Yankees scored the two guys that were on base and the rest was history... It's not analogous as a comparison, per se, but just the 6th sense of it. Yet, I kind of would like one last heat departure before putting the ballast of summer in the books (watch us get a heat wave on Sept 10-13th or something...), and committing to missed hurricane season and an early frost/snow in October that heralds in another CC-denied winter shit show. weeee

I think it's interesting because that occurred with either nominal actual negative, or positive anomalies in the 500 mb heights. I'm thinking there was some environmental feed backs that synergistically aided cooler profiles to a realization. There may have been an initial push of cooler total/deep layer troposphere ending the heat wave at the tale end of July. Whatever the source ... it left, but also left a sloped soundings very left of potential aloft. Then, given our geography tending to abuse cold displacement south. If we stack synoptic denser air around the corner of White mountains... it tends not to stop until the Va Capes... I remember a lot of this cooling did come from a slow press S, and then it tipjped SW. A N-door front for us became a BD for the M/A... Then, we slabbed smoke over top during 4 of those days. I'm very suspect that it dimmed the ability to force solar modulation per the course. Yet another factor ... the high pressure moves more E than S, which keeps winds light and none mixing, as well as oceanic contribution (although the flow's been admittedly very light in this latter regard) It's been a hodge-podge of physical feed-backs teaming up. Just in principle, it's a bit incongruous to get this kind of persisting negative low level temperature result, when under heights persistently above 582 and even approaching 590 at times. Even the thickness' were above 560 per the course. We've observed temperatures close to 90 at 564 dm thickness. yet days pinned in the 70s. So these metrics demo that this was a bit of an unusual occurrence. Not signifying or implicating anything other than the objective observation of these field metrics vs results.

There's liable to be sea-breezes into eastern MA and coastal CNE with that synopsis today. It'll keep temps down, so using Logan for real world experience is probably a dumb idea. Later in the day, this could possibly gathered enough mass to sneak a low level cooling west to a termination somewhere near an Ayer - Worcester position.. Not certain though because tho the look for that is in place, even the higher res suppress a wavy breeze boundary from moving W. Prior to that the highs should make the low or mid 80s.

It's because the mean latitude of the westerlies/gradient is shifting N associated with CC. A shift that's doing so on the scale of life time, not mere seasons... So we don't really observe it year to year, but 15 or 20 years goes by and the jet axis are N of where they were... And idiosyncratic aspects emerge like like that where positive height anomalies cushion under the nadirs of the planetary wave spacings. I've noticed this more and more so over the years... where the bottom of the L/W axis appear to be 'compressing a balloon' at time.

Anomalies are relative to climatology. 18C at 850 mb (for example) over CON is more anomalous than it is over PHL. CON bleeds and PHL pisses

https://www.instagram.com/p/DNDngQCTCg4/?igsh=MTF4N3lpa2ozdDdxcw==

yup.. mentioned this earlier in the day. It may not feature a scalar temperature that bests late June, and recently in late July, but ends up with first place in the aggregate. Summing up 8 days straight of 91 to 95 is a greater "AHC" ( Atmospheric Heat Content ).

Euro's pretty straight forward.... you pick: do you want the heat, or do you want the hurricane. this rendition sends more heat. at least in the geopotential medium. not sure what the sfc/ 2-m stuff looks like but the AN is still evident above.

feels pretty warm.

I wanna say ... 1999? there were a couple of obnoxious warm departures between Halloween and January 1 that late autumn/early winter. The SE ridge had become proxy over the flow east across the continent, and each time it lasted a week. I remember consecutive days in the upper 60s balm, with no leaves on the trees and sweating streets. One of them had a couple days to 74. Something like that, tho not as extreme took place in 2006, too.