March 2 - 3 tornado outbreak: 10th largest in recorded history?
The deadly early-season tornado outbreak of March 2 - 3 that hit Indiana, Kentucky, and surrounding states, killing 41 people, may have been the 10th largest two-day tornado outbreak since record keeping began in 1950. NOAA's Storm Prediction Center now lists 132 preliminary tornado reports for March 2, and 11 for March 3. It typically takes several months to finish damage surveys and verify all the tornadoes that really occur in a big tornado outbreak. Sixty-one tornadoes have been confirmed so far, according to Wikipedia's tally of the outbreak. The two-day total of 143 tornadoes from March 2 - 3 is probably an over count of about 15%, based on historical levels of over counts. This would give the March 2 - 3 outbreak around 120 tornadoes, making it the tenth largest outbreak since record keeping began in 1950. Assuming this is true, the past two tornado seasons would hold four of the top ten spots for largest tornado outbreaks in recorded history. Below are the top two-day tornado outbreaks since 1950. Several of these two-day totals were taken from outbreaks that lasted three or more days; the highest two-day period of activity was selected for this list, so that the outbreak would not be mentioned multiple times. The numbers from the 2011 outbreaks are still preliminary:
262, Apr 26 - 27, 2011
169, Apr 3 - 4, 1974
160, May 29 - 30, 2004
141, May 24 - 25, 2011
135, Jan 21 - 22, 1999
130, Apr 15 - 16, 2011
125, May 4 - 5, 2003
123, Jun 15 - 16, 1992
121, May 4 - 5, 2007
120ish, Mar 2 - 3, 2012
120, May 3 - 4, 1999
Video 1. Spectacular tornado video taken at a home in West Liberty, Kentucky outfitted with seven automatic security cameras, which captured the fury of the strong EF-3 tornado with 165 mph winds that roared overhead on March 2, 2012. The views from all the cameras are worth watching, but don't watch past 7:00, as the end of the video has three minutes of blankness at the end. According to an article at wkyt.com, the home owners, Randy and Norma Risner, took shelter in the basement, and their home survived the tornado. "You could actually feel the ground shaking and our the 11-foot basement walls were shaking, too," Norma said. The tornado destroyed their workshop (caught on camera), and another camera shows the roof of their neighbors home peel off.
Video 2. Perhaps even more impressive is video taken at a nearby pharmacy showing the West Liberty tornado destroying buildings across the street. The view from Clinic Pharmacy starts at 0:50 into this video.
The uncertain business of counting tornadoes
While there's no question that having four top-ten tornado outbreaks in just two years is highly unusual, the quality of our tornado data base is poor, and there are probably outbreaks that occurred prior to 1990 that were significantly under-counted and would have made the top ten list, had they occurred today. The number of tornadoes being reported has increased in recent decades, and this increase may be due entirely to factors unrelated to climate change:
1) Population growth has resulted in more tornadoes being reported.
2) Advances in weather radar, particularly the deployment of about 100 Doppler radars across the U.S. in the mid-1990s, have resulted in a much higher tornado detection rate.
3) Tornado damage surveys have grown more sophisticated over the years. For example, we now commonly classify multiple tornadoes along a damage path that might have been attributed to just one twister in the past.
Figure 1. Number of EF-1, EF-2, EF-3, EF-4 and EF-5 tornadoes from 1950 to 2011. The total shown for 2011 is preliminary and uses unofficial numbers, but 2011 now ranks in 2nd place behind 1973. There is not a decades-long increasing trend in the numbers of tornadoes stronger than EF-0, implying that climate change, as yet, is not having a noticeable impact on U.S. tornadoes. Data provided by Harold Brooks, NOAA/National Severe Storms Laboratory.
If we look at changes in the strongest tornadoes--EF-1, EF-2, EF3, EF4, and EF-5 twisters, the ones most likely to have a reliable long-term detection rate, due to their destructive power--we see no sign of an increasing trend in recent decades (Figure 1), even if we include 2011. However, it is difficult to make solid conclusions on how tornadoes may be changing, since the quality of the historical tornado data set is so poor. This is largely due to the fact that we never directly measure a tornado's winds--a tornado has to run over a building before we can make an EF-scale strength estimate, based on the damage. As tornado researcher Chuck Doswell said in a 2007 paper, "I see no near-term solution to the problem of detecting detailed spatial and temporal trends in the occurrence of tornadoes by using the observed data in its current form or in any form likely to evolve in the near future." Major changes in the rating process occurred in the mid-1970s (when all tornadoes occurring prior to about 1975 were retrospectively rated),and again in 2001, when scientists began rating tornadoes lower because of engineering concerns and unintended consequences of National Weather Service policy changes. Also, beginning in 2007, NOAA switched from the F-scale to the EF-scale for rating tornado damage, causing additional problems with attempting to assess if tornadoes are changing over time.
Figure 2. Thomas Hudson and the Portlight trailer in Harrisburg, Illinois.
Portlight disaster relief charity responding to the tornado disaster
The Portlight disaster relief charity has made a strong showing in tornado-devastated Harrisburg, Illinois and Henryville, Indiana. Both towns were hit by deadly EF-4 tornadoes during the February 28 - March 3 tornado outbreak. From the Portlight blog:
"Yesterday we went to Henryville, Indiana and volunteered for a few hours, mainly unloading trailers with water, canned goods, etc.
The people were in great spirit, eager to rebuild, and overall thankful that it wasn't worse than it was.
Myself, Jeremiah Moran, Blaize Edwards, and Andrew Newcomb made the 2 hour drive from Washington, Indiana.
We will be trying to get back this weekend or a couple of days next week."
An interesting sciencedaily.com article discusses how the powerful EF-4 tornado from the February 29, 2012 outbreak that devastated Harrisburg, Illinois passed through a high-density network of seismographs. "The seismograms show a strong, low-frequency pulse beginning around 4:45 a.m. on Feb. 29. Our preliminary interpretation, based on other seismic records of tornadoes, suggests that we were recording not the tornado itself, but a large atmospheric pressure transient related to the large thunderstorms that spawned the tornadoes."
I'll have a new post by Wednesday.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 — Blog Index
Its a coronal Hole, nothing unusual..
Coronal Holes
Air is impervious to IR? BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHA! How is this guy even a meteorologist?
I'm going to find that quote, slap it on an internet meme picture, print it up, and put it in my hallway at NASA. That should get more than a couple of laughs. :)
It's almost alien looking
JB FTW!
Somehow, I find their the supporting evidence for their claims less than convincing. :P
Republicans have lost their minds. Definitely won't a be an elected republican president this term coming up. Sorry Folks!
I can't resist....:)
Yes they did. In several places in.
But why on Earth do people think the POTUS has any control over gas prices? They are driven by market conditions. The POTUS can influence foreign policy which might impact prices (i.e. stop threatening Iran). The POTUS can go before congress and request lower fuel taxes (at the expense of trying to maintain our infrastructure). But the POTUS is not a dictator. He can't simply say "Verily I sayeth gas prices be lower!" and they magically lower.
And even if he gets fuel taxes lowered at the federal level, he has no control at the state level. Sure he can pressure, persuade, etc. but he can't force states to lower their fuel taxes.
This is how the free market works. Political uncertainty, rumor, speculation, oligopolies, etc. all of it affects the price you pay at the pump. Congress (and to a lesser extent, the POTUS) can make and implement policies that influence the prices, but they cannot control them. The market does that.
Any candidate or member of congress claiming that they can magically lower gas prices is either a charlatan or an idiot.
Okay, thanks for the link. The (apparent) straight edge just seems unusual to me.
Uploaded by mediamatters4america on Mar 5, 2012
Following GOP strategy, Fox News is again blaming the Obama Administration for rising gas prices -- a claim that has been repeatedly debunked by energy analysts. But back in the summer of 2008 when the average U.S. gasoline price hit a record high of $4.11, Fox said that "no President has the power to increase or to lower gas prices" and the only way to reduce our vulnerability to gas price spikes is to use less oil.
14:52 GMT le 13 Mars 2012
Well, we decided not to put the capability to make comments on there for now. I'll discuss it with our developers next month during our monthly meeting, to see if there's any plan to change that.
Jeff Masters
Are you talking about Newt Gingrich?
snake eye
sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data
1) Any given plant has a limit on the amount of CO2 that it can use based on (its genetics and) the amount of available sunlight and water (as well as soil nutrients). When a plant reaches that absorption limit, it reduces its air intake by reducing the size and/or number of stomata ("breathing tubes") in its leaves... which is good in a warming world cuz stomata reduction also reduces its transpiration rate (ie water loss through its leaves).
2) Chlorophyll and other enzymes which control plant growth work within an efficiency curve: too cold or too hot, and they don't work at all. In a warming world, there will be more sunlight hours within more days in which plant growth is slowed or halted.
3) The plants which are geneticly endowed with the highest growth rates and thus the highest CO2 absorption limits are mostly considered weeds, pest species, eg: poison ivy, kudzu, and other vines; pigweed, ragweed, hemp, etc; duckweed, hydrilla, water hyacinth, etc; and "pond scum" algae and cyano-bacteria.
Except in places where folks have "given up the battle", growth of those particular weeds is strongly discouraged through various agri/arbo/aqua-cultural practices.
4) Ever more arable land is being converted to agriculture, arboculture, and aquaculture. Whether grain/produce farm, tree farm, or fish farm, such monocultures are (often less than) half as efficient as the highly mixed plantlife found on wildlands at turning sunlight&water&CO2&nutrients into plant growth and other biomass.
OK people! All of these storm center reports are simply ignoring what happened in the Charlotte/Harrisburg, NC area on the early morning of March 3rd. Folks, we had an F2 confirmed tornado pass through and while we did not have any fatalities or serious injuries, the damage is devistating.
Yes they did:
I remember it well, summer 2008 was highest gas had ever been
Still looking at a lot of Severe Weather next week. Very significant cutoff low/trough crossing the Rockies by next Monday.
You know, for once, he may actually be right!
Shocker..
I think I see a pinhole... fruitfly on my screen, sorry.
I have not read through the rest of the posts to see if this has been answered yet, TampaSpin, but this is what I understand. Plants take in CO2, but are only able to absorb so much of it. Imagine that you have a 22 oz. steak on your plate and that you love steak. Cooked to perfection, as well! You will eat all of it you can, but the rest is left uneaten. I have also read a study that as CO2 levels increase that the pores in the leaves will reduce in size. A gag reflex? .. Well, I am certain that others will know more, but this is my understanding.
There is a quote button, you know? :P
Link
You are correct; the study linking increased CO2 levels with reduced pore size in plants was conducted in the 50s and several others have been performed since with the same results. While some species aren't effected, the majority respond to higher levels by reducing their ability to take it in. Apparently this is a way to maintain fairly consistent levels of intake...
Mostly, but if a president tries to set off a conflict in an oil producing country, then it's a pretty direct impact on oil prices. Current price increases are for a few reasons, but the current political disquiet over Iran is part of that formula. Politics and economics are bound in some ways and not just in financial policy - the global economy doesn't function in a vacuum (well, most of the time...)
As for the claim that the current administration is jacking up oil prices highlighted above, that's nothing. If you want real mud slinging, look at the French election. They don't hold back.
Anyway, from earlier: Nice little graphic illustrating drought problems in SE England.
Not worried, though. The eyes of the world will be here for the Olympics. Which of course means it'll be throwing it down in buckets all throughout that time. Problem solved!
I'll be around.
Definitely worth a book - which could be a best seller. Big triangle on the sun? Has to be a symbol of something sinister.
Coronal Holes
This, on the other Hand..is a anomaly.
Filament eruption with a unknown "Sphere".
Close up of the Filament releasing..
Serial Number: 169
Issue Time: 2012 Mar 13 1727 UTC
ALERT: X-Ray Flux exceeded M5
Threshold Reached: 2012 Mar 13 1726 UTC
NOAA Scale: R2 - Moderate
NOAA Space Weather Scale descriptions can be found at
www.swpc.noaa.gov/NOAAscales
Potential Impacts: Area of impact centered on sub-solar point on the sunlit side of Earth. Extent of blackout of HF (high frequency) radio communication dependent upon current X-ray Flux intensity. For real-time information on affected area and expected duration please see http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/drap/index.html.
Woah really? I mean yes there is enough evidence to prove Obama is a U.S. citizen, but its not perfect. If someone questions that a little, does that really make that person equivalent to what you suggest?
Seriously man, let some air out of your big head before you pop it yourself. If anything you are the ignorant one because you don't question anything you hail to be the right answer. There are many different people with different views and opinions, that doesn't give them a low I.Q.
Furthermore, even if someone does have a low I.Q. they shouldn't be treated as inferior. Yet I see such a strong presence of an arrogant elitist attitude in this blog its horrendous. For those of you that possess it be careful because that person you think has such a low I.Q. might be far closer to the truth than you are.
I know, some might call this a rant, but I don't care, I do have some emotion and, I am not going to attempt to pretend I don't. I am quite sick of what I see.
Man that made my day!
i don't know the blogger who posted the sourcing, but seems legit and not novelty.
M5M7.9. It's the strongest since the M-Class flare on Saturday evening.528 aspectre "I think I see a pinhole... Fruitfly on my screen, sorry. "
530 TropicalAnalystwx13 "There is a quote button, you know?" :P "
Don't like it. I tend to respond to specific sentences&phrases within any given comment:
Reposting the entirety of a comment forces folks to reread a lot more than necessary to find the points that I'm addressing.
It's usually easier to copy&paste&edit&HTML than to delete the unaddressed portions of a blockquote.
The Quote button doesn't repost the comment number. I like to post the comment number so that folks can easily scroll back to find the entirety of the original comment, and to allow them to check the context-accuracy of my reposting.
Even for reposting short comments, the Quote button produces a blockquote that eats at least 5 more lines of vertical screen space than using cut&paste&edit&HTML
Besides... I believe that the Quote function in&of itself does more harm than good. Be silly of me to use something that I'd prefer to have eliminated.
That is impressive that they have an area outlined 7 to 8 days out. I agree looks bad next week.
that is not real..... dont you feel smart :O
The system doesnt look that bad:
and the next system(maybe):
looks completely boring . .
"Updated 3/11/2012 @ 23:30 UTC
Filament and Prominence Liftoff
Today we have a very tightly compacted solar filament tube off the southeast limb. Filaments are large regions that contain very dense, cool gas, held in place by the Sun's magnetic field in the Photosphere Region. These Solar Filaments can sometimes last for several days or months. Filaments and Solar Prominences are the same type of event. This type of event is considered a prominence when it is located off the limb of the Sun and appears bright against the darkness of space. It is called a filament when the cooler gas inside makes it appear darker against the background of the Sun."
Thanks, everyone
Also understand you spent some time making that map. I have a simple request. How about putting an "unofficial" disclaimer in your comment when your prognostication imitates an official SPC product the way that one does?
:)
We'll see before long how the risk develops. Just for the record, the official day 4-8 SPC map for today is blank and says "PREDICTABILITY TOO LOW, with the text:
DAY 4-8 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0325 AM CDT TUE MAR 13 2012
VALID 161200Z - 211200Z
...DISCUSSION...
LATEST GFS AND ECMWF BOTH AGREE THAT A WRN U.S. TROUGH WILL EVOLVE
THIS WEEKEND IN RESPONSE TO A FAIRLY STRONG BLOCKING HIGH THAT WILL
DEVELOP OVER THE ERN U.S. HOWEVER...THERE IS CONSIDERABLE
DISAGREEMENT REGARDING THE EWD MOVEMENT OF STRONGER MID-HIGH LEVEL
FLOW INTO THE PLAINS WHERE STRONGER SHEAR WOULD NOT ONLY SUPPORT BUT
ENHANCE THE PROSPECT FOR SEVERE STORMS GIVEN THE EXPECTED
MOISTURE/INSTABILITY. THE ECMWF IS CONSIDERABLY SLOWER WITH HEIGHT
FALLS ACROSS THE ROCKIES AND THUS STRONGER FLOW IS EXPECTED TO
ADVANCE NO FARTHER THAN WY/CO/NM BY THE END OF THE PERIOD. FOR THIS
REASON WILL NOT INTRODUCE A SEVERE RISK UNTIL TIMING IS RESOLVED
WITHIN THE MODEL GUIDANCE.
..DARROW.. 03/13/2012
This is not them being conservative, and the wording more than hints a risk area will appear in the day 4-8. Just the way the SPC does things. Those of us in the Plains, especially, would do well to pay close attention.
Viewing: 501 - 551
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 — Blog Index