A drop of golden sun...

Feb 6, 2024 8:23 PM

Roorgak

Views

2279

Likes

66

Dislikes

1

https://www.sciencealert.com/rise-in-storm-intensity-prompts-calls-for-a-whole-new-category-of-hurricane

A bit of a lighthearted take with all the wolf puns, but you gotta have some fun with it. I seem to remember New Zealand may have expanded their cyclone (hurricane) rating system to include a category 6 years ago as part of readying for climate change fueled super storms.

I'm actually more worried about the effects of category 2 and 3 storms occurring in cities which aren't prepared for cyclones at all. At least the people in currently in cat 5 areas know how to handle wind, they'll probably handle a 6. Drive around in a city where people have never really had to experience a cyclone, maybe just the tail end of one but never the full thing. Soooo much fodder for flying debris. So many cities that would look like Darwin after cyclone Tracy hit it. Even one or two big modern cities getting flattened completely would be enough to collapse insurance companies, let alone the potential for loss of life and homes.

Less frequent but more powerful is the prediction for climate change's effects on cyclones in my area. Every year now we roll the dice.

weather

new_zealand

hurricanes

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As for twisters, if cat. 5 was "the God's finger", I'm afraid to ask what do they name new ones after.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Hammer of the heavens

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's gone from Category 5 to Brock Lesnar

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

It's taking way too many steroids and HGH?

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But they aren't turning them up to 11 yet, right? Right?

2 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Higher than cat 5? At that point numbers are meaningless. Cat 6? 7? 8? Anything higher than cat 5 you might as well just say hurricane category "you're fucked if you don't leave." I've lived through my share of hurricanes. 3s can be pretty bad. 4s are where it gets really scary if you're getting hit directly. 5s i dont want to be near when they happen. Going beyond that? Fuck no.

2 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

It's important to have standardized categories to make discussing them easier.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Partially I agree with you but there is a point to going higher. Specifically to indicate that the climate has changed and has become more deadly. It does not mean I agree with the decision but the reasoning behind it has merits.

2 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

I think "you're fucked" does a pretty good job to convey that the climate has changed significantly. Lol

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

True but some people just needs it spelled out because they do not believe in climate change and can't accept that it has real life consequences

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I am a hurricane researcher, and this is a pretty common opinion on the topic in my field. If Category 5 is supposed to represent widespread destruction, then what is a higher number supposed to represent? There's a lot more nuance also mentioned in the article, but the biggest concern boils down to risk communication either way.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

As long as tornadoes dont need to get an EF6

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(Just a thought)
The one discussion i overheard about statistics and weather conditions was, that we only have been witnessing it from sattelite and on film for a century. Conditions that unfamilar are always spectacular and also devastating, but 100 years is not a very long time to justify them as being apocalyptical suggestions of the end. I honestly think if we manage to live another 500 years without killing eachother before that then we might learn something else.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Also have paleological and archaeological evidence of climate and the effects of changes to it which extend back quite a bit further than 100 years... I think that the major risk that the current changes entail for us is not direct damage by weather (although we're up to thousands or tens of thousands of extra deaths per year globally). Its the risk of economic collapse and war. Climate change dramatically decreases our chance of living through the next 100 years without killing each other.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

We have data on storms from before 100 years though. Charleston SC has been measuring tides continuously since 1921 and sporadically since 1840 (they only measured king tides, apparently). Do you think we just didn't write down when storms hit New England?

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

This concern is why hurricane researchers also develop and test theoretical equations, through both observational analysis and idealized modeling. More data helps constrain uncertainty, but theory is how we predict.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Adding a new category will result in more people dying. Part of the reason some people respect category 5 hurricanes is because it is as high as the scale goes. It is not a rational fear for what it actually is but rather a relative sense for it's strength based on the scale itself. Add a new one and category 4 and 5 will look weaker by comparison and people won't take them seriously.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thats a branding issue. Higher categories will help local governments in deciding if and when to issue mandatory evacuations. A cat 5 isn't a huge deal if you live in Orlando, but a Cat 6 might require an evacuation even from Central Florida.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You can call it a branding issue if you want. The situation would be entirely resolved if people looked at the numbers more objectively, but if that was a case we would not need to categorize them in the first place.

The point remains, we can't resolve this branding issue through realistic means which means that people will die due to this change.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In my country we use our category rating system to determine building regulations for a given site. Things like "do you need cyclone rods anchoring your roof trusses to your foundation" and the like. Having 6th category would be useful for that. We have people who build for cat 5 and weather them successfully every ten or twenty years or so. They deserve to know if an incoming storm is survivable sheltering in the building they've got or if they need to head elsewhere. Ratings are useful.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I would just like to note that different countries define the category thresholds differently. I agree that more nuanced building codes are good.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I am not saying it can't be useful, I am saying that it will kill people and that fact remains. If you want a system for building codes then honestly it's better to separate that out of the general hurricane scale to something specific to the building codes.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think the main use of a category system is to know whether to shelter in place or evacuate. Building codes need to reference the same categories used in the news so that people can make informed decisions based on the building they are in. Otherwise we might actually cause death via miscommunication. Also - do people go outside during category 3 and 4 cyclones in your country? Surely your ratings aren't 'fine', 'fine', 'fine', 'still fine', 'death'? I am remembering a flag meme...

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There are no bad storms in my country but I have indeed encountered Americans who specifically thing anything but the worst is "fine". Even if you give humans the tools to make their own informed decisions, it turns out we are just really bad at informing ourself so it's worthless.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ah I see I see, fair enough that does sound like a risk

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0