Posts tagged news
CU study: less hail may increase flooding on Front Range
Jan 9th
STUDY INDICATES HAIL MAY DISAPPEAR
FROM COLORADO’S FRONT RANGE BY 2070
FROM COLORADO’S FRONT RANGE BY 2070
Summertime hail could all but disappear from the eastern flank of Colorado’s Rocky Mountains by 2070, says a new study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the University of Colorado Boulder’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences and the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Less hail damage could be good news for gardeners and farmers, said lead author Kelly Mahoney, a research scientist at CIRES, but a shift from hail to rain can also mean more runoff, which could raise the risk of flash floods. “In this region of elevated terrain, hail may lessen the risk of flooding because it takes awhile to melt,” Mahoney said. “Decision makers may not want to count on that in the future.”
For the new study, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, Mahoney and her colleagues used “downscaling” techniques to try to understand how climate change might affect hail-producing weather patterns across Colorado.
The research focused on storms involving pea-sized and smaller hailstones on Colorado’s Front Range, a region that stretches from the foothill communities of Colorado Springs, Denver and Fort Collins up to the Continental Divide. Colorado’s most damaging hailstorms tend to occur further east and involve larger hailstones not examined in this study.
In the summer in Colorado’s Front Range above about 7,500 feet, precipitation commonly falls as hail. Decision makers concerned about the safety of mountain dams and flood risk have been interested in how climate change may affect the amount and nature of precipitation in the region.
Mahoney and her colleagues began exploring that question with results from two climate models, which assumed that levels of climate-warming greenhouse gases will continue to increase in the future, from about 390 parts per million in the atmosphere today to about 620 parts per million in 2070.
But the weather processes that form hail, like thunderstorms, occur on much smaller scales than can be reproduced by global climate models. So the team “downscaled” the global model results twice: first to regional-scale models that can take regional topography and other details into account, then again to weather-scale models that can resolve individual storms and even the cloud processes that create hail. The regional-scale topography step was completed as part of NCAR’s North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program.
Finally, the team compared the hailstorms of the future, from 2041 to 2070, to those of the past, from 1971 to 2000, as captured by the same sets of downscaled models. Results were similar in experiments with both climate models.
“We found a near elimination of hail at the surface,” Mahoney said.
In the future, increasingly intense storms may actually produce more hail inside clouds, the team found. However, because those relatively small hailstones fall through a warmer atmosphere, they melt quickly, falling as rain at the surface or evaporating back into the atmosphere. In some regions, simulated hail fell through an additional 1,500 feet of above-freezing air in the future as compared with the past.
The research team also found evidence that precipitation events over Colorado become more extreme in the future, while changes in hail may depend on the size of the hailstones — results that will be explored in more detail in ongoing work.
Mahoney’s postdoctoral research was supported by the Postdocs Applying Climate Expertise, or PACE, program administered by the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and funded by CIRES Western Water Assessment, NOAA and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. PACE connects young climate scientists with real-world problems such as those faced by water resource managers.
Co-authors of the new paper include James Scott and Joseph Barsugli of CIRES and NOAA, Michael Alexander of the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory and Gregory Thompson of NCAR.
CU team to turn on “green” lights in Haiti
Jan 5th
CU ENGINEERING TEAM TO SUPPORT
GREEN ENERGY IN HAITI
A team of University of Colorado Boulder engineers will travel to Haiti this month to support the growth of green energy on the two-year anniversary of the country’s devastating earthquake.
Engineering professors Alan Mickelson and Mike Hannigan and graduate student Matt Hulse will be in Haiti Jan. 8-16 to collaborate with the Neges Foundation school at Leogane to create a vocational training program on the installation, operation and maintenance of renewable energy systems.
“I’m eager to learn about the people of Haiti and the services that they would like energy systems to provide,” said Hannigan, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering. “Historically, the development of energy systems has shaped nations and economies, so the timing is right to pass along what we have learned about those energy systems that are sustainable.”
The Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake that struck Haiti destroyed what little electricity infrastructure had existed in the country, plunging towns across the country into total darkness and forcing households to rely on high-cost diesel generators for power, according to news reports. As a result, families are unable to study or work at night, and the number of assaults, particularly against women and girls, has increased.
Studies point to Haiti’s great potential for renewable energy, including solar, hydro and wind power. “The present lack of a Haitian power grid cries out for a distributed solution — that is, one that grows from small, localized, renewable energy sources,” said Mickelson, associate professor of electrical, computer and energy engineering.
To address these issues, the Engineering for Developing Communities project will:
- Develop a curriculum for vocational training on the operation and maintenance of self-contained, adaptable power sources, and electrical operations and maintenance with a focus on green energy systems.
- Build local capacity to provide vocational training on renewable energy systems using a “train-the-trainers” approach.
- Identify a viable system to create sustainable access to renewable energy that will meet basic household energy needs.
- Develop a strategy for the sustainable scale-up and replication of energy and infrastructure vocational training to support reconstruction efforts, with a focus on private sector investment.
About $35,000 has been provided for the initiative by CU-Boulder’s Mortenson Center for Engineering in Developing Communities, the IEEE Foundation and the CU-Boulder Outreach Committee. The Mortenson Center is seeking additional funding to build upon the initiative and develop additional vocational training curriculum on sustainable and disaster-resistant design and construction.
The Mortenson Center was founded to promote integrated, participatory and sustainable solutions to the engineering challenges of the developing world, with a focus on clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene; energy; sustainable and disaster-resistant building materials and shelter; and cook stoves and indoor air quality. For more information, go tohttp://ceae.colorado.edu/mc-edc.
Dirty Laundry: the Naked Curmudgeon blasts TV reporters stupid questions
Dec 28th
Here’s what gets me.
People have been upset with bearers of bad news at least as far back as the days of Sophocles, Euripedes and Aeschylus, the writers of tragedies in which a messenger could be killed just for bringing the king some bad news.
Nowadays, we don’t kill the journalists for giving us bad news; we seem to thrive on it and demand they give us more.
Oh, every decade or so there will be complaints that newspapers just report bad news and never good news, and some newspaper will be started that proudly proclaims it will print only good news. Then it will lose money and go out of business, because people are more interested in tragic events than in happy events … unless, of course, the events happen to them.
Remember, the Greeks invented tragedies before they invented comedies. Bad news allows us to feel good about ourselves, to feel pity for the sufferers and fear that the events could happen to us and to achieve a catharsis of those emotions.
Comedies, however, make us laugh and allow us to feel smug about our happiness. Greek tragedies were about the nobility, but comedies were about common people. Then the moralists of the 16th and 17th centuries decided that the purpose of comedy was not only to amuse and entertain, but also to instruct.
So, what would you rather read about (or more likely these days, watch on TV), the latest scandals about Washington politicians, foreign nobility and Hollywood stars or the fact that the reported number of crimes went down last month?
Bad news doesn’t usually come with the admonition that we shouldn’t act this way, but have you noticed how popular TV sit-coms usually end with a moral?
When I was young, I wanted to be a newspaper reporter. I was fascinated with the challenge of gathering all the facts about a story and then writing those facts according to journalistic formulas so that the least common denominator, Everyreader, could understand them without difficulty.
However, newspaper reporters didn’t make very much money, Woodward and Bernstein hadn’t made investigative journalism fashionable yet and the epitome of TV journalism was Edward R. Murrow, not some blow-dried performer who just reads the teleprompter.
Later, whenever any argument arose about journalism, I always defended the reporters. They were doing their job. Bad things happen. People would rather hear about bad news than good news.
News reporter messes up, calls herself stupid on… by Christian_Carrion
And yet I have become extremely upset with TV reporters and their stupid questions.
Why ask an accused criminal “Did you do it?” Do you believe a criminal will suddenly confess on national TV instead of to the police? Does another denial give the audience any more insight about the story?
Why ask anyone “How do you feel?” How do you believe anybody feels after tragically losing a loved one, surviving an accident or winning the Super Bowl?
And why do journalists insist on inserting their own opinions? I have a rule of never answering a question beginning with a negative. “Don’t you feel the proposed health plan will cost the taxpayers too much money?” is a weak way to ask for someone’s opinion, because the reporter’s opinion overshadows the question and any answer.
I have always wanted to be part of an important story, just so I could counter reporters’ stupid questions.
“Did I do it? That’s a stupid question.”
“I feel like you have just asked another stupid question.”
“Don’t you feel that by asking your question that way, you are just giving your own opinion instead of asking for mine?”
And speaking of opinions, who cares what the public believes? Why do so many TV and radio shows keep asking for public opinions? A Denver morning TV “news” program once asked, “Does it seem like you have a lot of bad hair days?” Back then people actually paid money to call in their one little vote.
Why are there so many daytime talk shows? In 1961 Jackie Gleason probably started the first prime-time TV talk show when he sat down with just one guest and they simply talked. I believe Phil Donahue established the pattern of involving audiences, taking phone calls and having guests with unusual problems or stories.
Perhaps fascination with dirty laundry is nothing more than wanting to feel fear and pity for the catharsis, being able to feel smug at the absurdity of other people’s lives and watching tragedies about the common folk for a change.
I rest my case.
The Naked Curmudgeon
Dan Culberson
