Sandy An Anomaly Of Conditions?
- Thread starter whitedust
- Start date
Ya know what's getting to me is that everyone was all "it's just a storm, nothing to worry about."
But it wasn't a storm, it was a HURRICANE!!!! And it got more power from the low front it collided with. And ya it will cause major damage cause it hit a majorly populated area. Sure it wasn't a cat5, but it still a hurricane none the less. A lot more power than any thunderstorm could hold.
I'm starting to think that we learned nothing from Katrina.
But it wasn't a storm, it was a HURRICANE!!!! And it got more power from the low front it collided with. And ya it will cause major damage cause it hit a majorly populated area. Sure it wasn't a cat5, but it still a hurricane none the less. A lot more power than any thunderstorm could hold.
I'm starting to think that we learned nothing from Katrina.
Well, first off, a bit of a clarification. Sandy was NOT a hurricane when it made landfall. The system went extra-tropical or non-tropical or cold-core (however you want to say it) just prior to making landfall in NJ. Because the point of landfall was so quickly followed after the transition, some of the eyewall features from the tropical component of the storm were still there. I think this is what makes this such an interesting storm to look at, because of all the different components it had to it. Oh, and by the way, a hurricane is a storm by definition.
With that out of the way, the question as to if the storms of this magnitude will be more common place due to climate change begs one to admit that some sort of unusual climate change is a fact. That is a whole other topic, perhaps for next spring- when we all have more time! Anyway, I guess my answer would be I do not see any trend towards these types of super storms over the past 20-20 years. If you go back in time over the past 50-100 years, you will find other super storms that have impacted areas of the US. Not exactly like this one did, Sandy was unique in many ways, but storms that would be classified "super storms".
I think the main thing that is happening is that as our population grows, so does the impact that weather has on the population. Look back at our coastlines 40-50 years ago and there was nowhere near the development along them as there is now. I am not saying that folks are purposely putting themselves in harms way, just saying that living on this planet puts us all at risk from one kind of weather event or another and coastlines present a host of weather related risks. So the more folks that live along the coasts, the more that will be at an enhanced risk.
However, it is not just the coastlines. Urban areas continue to grow in the heartland, many of these urban centers are in what is referred to as "Tornado Ally". As these cities grow in size, it increases the odds that they will be hit by a major tornado and reap the destruction from them. Development in earthquake prone areas is also very large and one of these days the "Big One" will hit and cause destruction beyond most folks imagination.
I know that after the devastating tropical season of 2005 (Katrina, Rita, Dennis) the media were having "experts" out there saying that years like that were going to become the new "normal". That year saw 31 named storms, 7 of which had a US landfall. Since then the number of named storms have gone like this:
<tbody>
</tbody>
These years are all above the long term averages of 11.3 named storms per year, but nothing like what happened in 2005.
So I think the bottom line is that we are most likely not seeing an increase in "super storm" activity, it is just that their effects are being felt more by humans and the media is covering them more. Just my 2 cents.
-John
With that out of the way, the question as to if the storms of this magnitude will be more common place due to climate change begs one to admit that some sort of unusual climate change is a fact. That is a whole other topic, perhaps for next spring- when we all have more time! Anyway, I guess my answer would be I do not see any trend towards these types of super storms over the past 20-20 years. If you go back in time over the past 50-100 years, you will find other super storms that have impacted areas of the US. Not exactly like this one did, Sandy was unique in many ways, but storms that would be classified "super storms".
I think the main thing that is happening is that as our population grows, so does the impact that weather has on the population. Look back at our coastlines 40-50 years ago and there was nowhere near the development along them as there is now. I am not saying that folks are purposely putting themselves in harms way, just saying that living on this planet puts us all at risk from one kind of weather event or another and coastlines present a host of weather related risks. So the more folks that live along the coasts, the more that will be at an enhanced risk.
However, it is not just the coastlines. Urban areas continue to grow in the heartland, many of these urban centers are in what is referred to as "Tornado Ally". As these cities grow in size, it increases the odds that they will be hit by a major tornado and reap the destruction from them. Development in earthquake prone areas is also very large and one of these days the "Big One" will hit and cause destruction beyond most folks imagination.
I know that after the devastating tropical season of 2005 (Katrina, Rita, Dennis) the media were having "experts" out there saying that years like that were going to become the new "normal". That year saw 31 named storms, 7 of which had a US landfall. Since then the number of named storms have gone like this:
| Year | # of Storms | # of US Landfalls |
| 2006 | 9 | 2 |
| 2007 | 17 | 3 |
| 2008 | 17 | 6 |
| 2009 | 11 | 2 |
| 2010 | 21 | 1 |
| 2011 | 19 | 3 |
| 2012 | 19 | 4 |
| Long Term Average | 11.3 | 2.1 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
These years are all above the long term averages of 11.3 named storms per year, but nothing like what happened in 2005.
So I think the bottom line is that we are most likely not seeing an increase in "super storm" activity, it is just that their effects are being felt more by humans and the media is covering them more. Just my 2 cents.
-John
I was on biz trip in NY & a tropical storm or hurricane whacked Long Island in the mid late 80s. The trees were down & a tangled mess right on Long Island eastern shore where I was staying but just a block in or so from the ocean. Power was out but I don't remember any flooding & the damage was on Long Island only nothing in New York City. Also thought that storm moved thru really fast like 6 hours max but wind damage was severe. Do you remember that storm?
I can't say I remember, but looking at the archives, my best guess would be hurricane Gloria that passed right over Long Island as a Cat 2 hurricane on Sept. 27. With the storm passing to the east of NYC, there would have only been strong winds and no storm surge.
Seems to fit what you experienced pretty well.
-John