Daily News 1 Nov 2024

Year 2024 Global Northern Hemisphere Hurricane Season is Clearly Below “Normal” Despite all the Alarmist Hype focused on the North Atlantic

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

NOAA’s projections about the year 2024 North Atlantic Hurricane season are shown below.

We are now through the June to October part of the 2024 season with only November remaining which has a history of far fewer hurricane and tropical storm monthly occurrences.

NOAA projected that there would be an 85% chance of an “above normal” year (most people would say “above average”, but we live in the government driven climate alarmism propaganda era) with between 17 and 25 named storms occurring.

Colorado State University North Atlantic statistical data (shown below) developed from NHC “operational best tracks” indicates 15 named storms have occurred to date with only the weaker tail end of the hurricane season ahead in the month of November.

Compared to NOAA’s 85% projected chance of 17 to 25 named storms occurring we have yet to experience the lowest number of 17 let alone the highest number of 25.

The data shows a total of 10 hurricanes have occurred which is at the lower end of the NOAA projection range of 8 to 13 such storms with 4 of those in the major hurricane category which is at the very low end of the 4 to 7 NOAA projection range.

The total year to date year 2024 North Atlantic region ACE of 145.3 is above the long-term historical average ACE of 122.5 as shown below.

Comparing the year 2024 to date North Atlantic Hurricane ACE and hurricane outcomes with other years going back to 1851 (found here) we note the following results recognizing that the lower activity month of November results remain for the year 2024.

The 2024 Hurricane total ACE at end October 2024 is 145.3 with a total of 10 hurricanes, 4 major hurricanes and 15 total named storms.

The years 2021 and 2023 achieved comparable North Atlantic ACE values as occurred in 2024 of 145.7 and 145.6 respectively with a total of 7 and 7 hurricanes, 4 and 3 major hurricanes and 21 and 20 named storms respectively.

There are 23 years since 1851 where the North Atlantic total hurricane ACE exceeded 150 (greater than the present year 2024 ACE value of 145.3) starting in year 1878 and ending in year 2020.

Of these 23 years 15 exceeded the year 2024 major hurricane outcome of 4 such storms. These 15 major hurricane years include major hurricane occurrences of 5, 6 and 7 major hurricane outcomes compared to year 2024 with 4 major hurricanes. These higher major hurricane year occurrences range from years 1893 to year 2020.

The record highest North Atlantic Season total ACE was in year 1933 at 258.6 with that year experiencing 6 major hurricanes resulting in that year’s ACE being 56% greater than occurred in year 2024 and 78% greater than the long term North Atlantic historical average ACE.

The Year 2024 North Atlantic Hurricane season was not particularly unique and was clearly far from being any kind of “record year” as assessed through the metrics used to evaluate and compare hurricane year outcomes.

The year 2024 Major Hurricane Helene flooding caused in Asheville, North Carolina (with that area falsely claimed as being a “climate haven” by climate extremists) that was so over hyped by climate alarmists had also been severely flooded in 1916 by Major Hurricane Number 4.

The 1916 North Atlantic hurricane season (found here) had an ACE value of 144 (compared to 145.3 for year 2024), 15 named storms (compared to 15 named storms in year 2024), 10 hurricanes (compared to 10 hurricanes in year 2024) and 5 major hurricanes (compared to 4 major hurricanes in year 2024) was basically a 108-year-old “twin” of the year 2024 hurricane season metrics.

But the real and extraordinary story about the year 2024 hurricane season year is the glaring reality that this year’s season is well below “normal” throughout the Global Northern Hemisphere.

This huge reality is simply hidden and ignored by the climate extremists and their clueless media that base their hype on only the North Atlantic season which accounts for just 21% of the total Northern Hemisphere historical season average ACE outcomes.

Provided below are data showing the year 2024 to date ACE values for the Northeast Pacific and Northwest Pacific regions which account for 74% of the Global Northern Hemisphere historical season average ACE outcomes.

Also shown below is the year 2024 Northern Hemisphere ACE outcome to date clearly demonstrating the far below “normal” outcomes (only 73% of the historical average ACE) across the globe.

It is unfortunate and pathetic that the climate extremist media works so hard concealing the clear picture provided by measured climate science data which demonstrate that the world is not facing a climate emergency.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/LTaxAhj

November 1, 2024 at 08:06AM

Daily News 1 Nov 2024

The ‘Aunt Dolly Bushfire System’ is doomed to fail

By Roger Underwood AM

Environmental activists and green academics in Western Australia are pushing the government to make radical changes to bushfire policy and operations. In place of the current approach, which integrates pre-fire mitigation with post-fire response, the activists are pushing for “response only”, otherwise known as ‘the Aunt Dolly Bushfire System’.

Specifically, they want the government to abandon the program of mild-intensity prescribed burning, a strategy aimed at reducing fuel levels in a mosaic pattern across south-west forests so as to make it easier, safer and cheaper to control fires under the worst case scenario situation.

The burning program is strongly supported by bushfire scientists and firefighters. Over time it has helped to ensure that wildfires do less damage. Despite the best efforts of the academics, and numerous inquiries over the years, no deleterious ecological impacts from periodic burning have ever been demonstrated.

The activists assert that fuel reduction will be redundant if only a “new” system of super-detection and hyper-rapid response is adopted. This will comprise futuristic technology, including high-tech computer-operated, tower-mounted cameras scanning the forest, with heat-seeking satellites circling above, plus fast-attack drones and a massive fleet of water/retardant bombing aircraft.

The success of this proposal presumes three things: first, that every new ignition in the forest will be detected and precisely located almost immediately after the first spark; second, that suppression forces will be able to find the fires and extinguish them before they get going; and third, that there will be a sufficient resource of firefighters to deal with many simultaneous fires on days of extreme fire weather.

All three presumptions are unlikely, if not improbable.

The activists justify their proposal by claiming that periodic low-intensity fire (which is what the prescribed burning program amounts to) is somehow “un-natural” and is destroying the forest’s biota. Native flora and fauna are being decimated, they say, referring to those doing the burning as “ecological vandals”. To top all this, a startling new concept has recently been added: pre-emptive burning (they assert) is not needed, because if the bush is left unburnt it becomes non-flammable, bushfire fuels having disappeared.

In fact, there is no evidence of any ecological collapse in WA forests as a result of periodic burning, nor has any area of forest ever been discovered in WA’s south-west where bushfire fuels have disappeared in the absence of fire. Both assertions are pure fantasy.

What is not fantasy is the fact that every summer in the southwest of WA, the so-called ‘firefighter’s nightmare’ can, and usually does occur. This is when there are multiple simultaneous ignitions (usually caused by lightning or arson or both), on a hot, windy day, in remote or inaccessible areas, burning in heavy fuels. Land managers know that unless we have in place a system that can cope with this scenario, we are not doing our job: firefighters will be overwhelmed, and the outcome will be calamitous. We also know that firefighters never succeed in controlling multiple fires under extreme conditions, unless the firegrounds have been prepared in advance by systematic fuel reduction. This is not academic theory, it is the real world, derived from decades of practical experience.

I will never forget the words of an old firefighter with whom I once attended a fire in wandoo forest on a 42 degrees summer day. Thanks to the prescribed burning program the fire was merely trickling around in light fuels: “My Aunt Dolly could have put that out with her garden hose”, Jack had remarked.

Of course, the ‘response only’ system proposed by environmentalists and green academics in WA will succeed very nicely … but only with “Aunt Dolly Fires”. On the other hand, it will collapse comprehensively when most needed, i.e., when there are multiple fires on an extreme day burning in heavy fuels. The lessons from NSW and Victoria in Black Summer are stark reminders of these horrific outcomes.

WA governments over recent years have stood firm in rejecting green demands to shut down the fuel reduction burning program, but the situation is fragile. We have already seen the present Labor government fold to green pressure and shutting down the State’s hardwood timber industry, ludicrously false justifications having been manufactured by the greens. Some current Ministers and government MPs are clearly prepared to do whatever it takes to garner green electoral support and would sacrifice the forests and south-west residents to wildfires, if necessary, to get it.

However, and quite apart from helping to minimise the consequences of nasty wildfires, one important thing favours retention of the current approach. The green’s ‘response only’ proposal will be enormously expensive to implement and then maintain. It will require acquisition and installation of new and costly equipment, the recruitment and training of specialist technicians to operate it, the building of new specialist technical centres where information from cameras and satellites can be received and analysed, and will require the development and maintenance of a large standing army of firefighters plus an air force of drones and water/retardant bombers with all the necessary support services. Furthermore, it will need back-up systems to guard against the notorious fallibility of computers (and humans).

By comparison, the burning program (although it is under-resourced at present) is cheap, requires no new technology or know-how and if done properly, means that fewer, not more firefighters and aircraft will be needed. The current system has been field-tested under all conditions, and steadily modified over the generations in the light of experience and research findings.

Yes, the ‘response only’ bushfire approach advocated by WA’s green activists will handle Aunt Dolly fires. But all this does is highlight their profound ignorance of the basics of bushfire science and control, their sorry lack of experience faced with the challenges of multiple fires on a bad day, and their continuing descent into a world of fantasy. Any government who adopted their proposals would rightfully stand accused of irresponsibility and inhumanity.

Roger Underwood AM is a retired forester and bushfire specialist. His first job after leaving school was in a fire crew at Dwellingup in 1958, and he has been involved in bushfire science, operations and policy ever since. He publishes stories about trees, forests and bushfires at http://www.forestleaves.blog.

via The Carbon Sense Coalition

https://ift.tt/XFcS3K4

November 1, 2024 at 07:19AM