KATC StormTeam 3 Weather BLOG

I’m not a big fan of saying whether it will be a “mild” or “cold” winter…we have had plenty of milder than normal winters in the past where temperatures have averaged well above normal but we have had one shot of 15 degree weather.  Most folks will remember that as a cold winter. 

Other previously mild winters we have seen accumulating snow…perception cold winter.   I can recall playing golf on a past Christmas Eve in shorts in a colder than normal winter…what did I remember from that winter…playing golf!  Far too many times as we say in the weather and TV business, “perception is reality”.

The bottom line is that each winter we have on average 20-30 days of 70 degree plus temperatures (December through February) and this year will be no different.  Some years we barely get below freezing but for a handful of days or less…other years we’ll see more than 5 or 6 mornings where we plunge into the mid-20s…like last year. 

Incidentally last December through February was a “colder” than normal winter with temperatures in Acadiana ranging more than 5 degrees below normal…and it started with the earliest snow on record on December 4th!  That winter was followed by the warmest summer on record in Acadiana!

Everybody is asking me this year is whether we will see snow?  If your forecast is based just on long-term trend forecasts many think the odds below or above normal can be determined…but as we all know, Mother Nature’s randomness decides whether we’ll see a snow or a hurricane for that matter. 

Long-term trend forecasts are not that good.  So I say with above normal forecast confidence, that anything can happen!  A ringing endorsement by the non-committal!

The Climate Prediction Center did forecast slightly cooler than normal and wetter than normal conditions last winter but they are going with the opposite for the balance of this winter through March. 

The predictions are calling for in general, above normal temperatures accompanied by below normal precipitation patterns.

This year the temperature forecast calls for a fairly good signal for above normal temperatures as the developing La Nina should induce more ridging across the south. 

The pattern of the last few weeks of November through the first two weeks of December may favor this pattern with regular cold fronts but with milder than normal return periods. 

Forecast confidence is below normal for the temperature pattern however, as just a slight shift of the mean winter longitudinal cold front axis could translate to much warmer or much colder than normal.  We’ll see.

Precipitation forecasts are calling for below normal rains which does not bode well for Acadiana and the state for that matter, as most of the region is in a moderate to severe drought with many spots across the west central and northern part of the state mired in an extreme drought.

Finishing off 2010, rainfall in Lafayette is more than 20 inches below normal.  If drier than normal conditions continue through the winter, they may likely perpetuate through the spring.  This could set the stage for a serious drought situation for much of the state until tropical season arrives.   It is never good when you are wishing for a tropical storm or hurricane to end a drought. 

Based on current trends, forecast “confidence” is above normal for the precipitation pattern.

Droughts have had a history of becoming multi-year events in Acadiana and this may be the start of one such period…again, we’ll see.

You may have noticed that  haven’t been on air this week and many thanks to KATC I have been attending the American Meteorological Society’s Broadcast conference in beautiful Miami Beach.  This conference combines presentations obviously about weather, but also how to be a better broadcaster and communicator of scientific information including topics outside of the weather realm. 

Roughly 200 attendees had the opportunity to take a course in tropical meteorology which was quite informative and we are looking forward to touring the National Hurricane Center…the mecca for tropical meteorologists! 

In addition, Hurricane Center Director Bill Read will be the keynote speaker at lunch today provided the tropical wave in the Western Caribbean doesn’t develop too quickly… if not we may be seeing him and his team in action at the NHC.   

This morning the subject of climate change has been the focus…always interesting perspectives…with disaster mitigation on the docket through the early afternoon.  Hopefully that will be followed by a little sand and surf later this today. 

Incidentally the talk of the conference amoungst many of us meteorologists has been the oil disaster in the Gulf.  Visually my flight out of  Houston was quite interesting where I did see what I believe were ribbons of oil roughly 20 miles off the Bolivar Peninsula  near Galveston along the upper Texas coast.  Flying over the main spill area south of Venice Monday was also quite interesting with colors more a kin to the dispersant rather than oil.  Again these are more casual observations and the visual inspection offshore the Louisiana Coast was from 30,000ft.  Obviously the big story over the last couple of days has been the thick stuff washing up onto Pensacola Beach…rough to watch. 

The new wild card of late is what Dave and Chris have been watching in the Western Caribbean…this system continues to show slow signs of development with models carrying this “something” into the Central Gulf by early next week…a tropical storm may be quite possible…never dull in our world.  Stay with KATC for the latest on the system as Hurricane Hunters should be on their way to investigate later today.  I will see you Monday!

I received the news from a Daily Show researcher Monday indicating the field piece shot with my WBRZ co-horts about a month back will not see the light of day.  Bummer for those of us who thought we had the opportunity to make some points from a broadcaster/forecaster standpoint with regard to climate change.   Perhaps our participation in the Comedy Central show was not funny enough, or they didn’t like the message, or something as simple as bad audio or video could all be factors…we’ll probably not ever know exactly why, but that’s they way it goes in the broadcast business and especially when you are not driving the broadcast bus.    I did speak with the Dasily Show researcher that originally set up the piece earlier today and she profusely apologized but the decision was made that it wasn’t the material they were looking for…but she did say that they enjoyed and were informed by what they shot.  Hopefully there was some impact for future stories.

I’ve been interviewed by a number of national media outlets in the past, most of which have never made it on air!  (Gosh maybe it is me?!?)  The Weather Channel was here in Acadiana about a year ago shooting a “Cantore Stories-Life on the Bayou” which turned out to be a very well done show (check you local listings as it has aired several times over the last few months).  They interviewed me for about 20 minutes but only about 10 seconds aired on the actual program.  This is not new to us in the broadcast business as we shoot up to an hour worth of video for every story we do that normally is boiled down to less than a couple of minutes when it aires.   So although the Daily Show won’t allow us local weathercasters to elaborate our position on climate change, a 2-3 minute segment or less wouldn’t do the subject justice anyway.  It was however an opportunity to make some decent points in a national spotlight, and felt honored to be even asked, but guess we’ll have to move on and not wait for the next phone call from any self-touted “fake” news-channels!

As most of you know I have started on a series of blogs regarding climate change following my interview for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart (I still don’t know the air date but will post it as soon as I do).  They wanted to know more about meteorologists/forecasters position on the subject versus climatologists, setting up for what I can only imagine will be a climatologists vs. meteorologists smackdown!  I figure I better take the time to address as many the issues (and sub-issues) with this subject before I am completely embarrassed on national TV!  

But seriously, this subject has become such a hot burner issue.  It used to be that people always asked me about “how’s the weather?” or “what does the hurricane season look like?”, but invariably I am asked more times than not if “I believe in global warming?”.   How can one explain a position or describe the incredible complexity of the subject and our planetary interactions with a simple yes or no?  I believe most folks are just looking for my feel on whether they should be worried about it or not…they are looking for appropriate “weighting” of the issue.  And that’s where this subject has taken a life of its own. 

But before I digress and launch into a rant on that subject alone, it is very important for me to explain the position of the American Meteorological Society(AMS),  which I am a member of and hold their broadcast Seal of Approval.  The AMS “promotes the development and dissemination of information and education on the atmospheric and related oceanic and hydrologic sciences and the advancement of their professional applications.  Founded in 1919, AMS has a membership of more than 14,000 professionals, students, and weather enthusiasts.  AMS publishes nine atmospheric and related oceanic and hydrologic journals — in print and online — sponsors more than 12 conferences annually, and offers numerous programs and services.”

The AMS published their statement on climate change in February of 2007.  It is an excellent summary on the state of the science as of 2007  and defines where the AMS stands with respect to the subject.  The AMS remains an important research body that helps us ferret out important bullet points on the subject.  But there have been a number of research projects and findings that already date the statement, especially when it comes to tropical activity and hurricanes…

Per the statement,  “A growing body of recent scientific work suggests that hurricanes have become more intense over the last several decades. There is evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record to date. Though hurricanes are projected to intensify with further warming of sea surface temperatures, significant uncertainty remains as to how other influences on hurricane strength will change in the future.”

Research by well-regarded climatologists/theorists such as Kerry Emmanuel and others have in the past indicated this.  More recent work by Chris Landsea at the Hurricane Research Division of the National Hurricane Center and others indicate that we may have been observing the  trend of “observing better” in the tropics and that there is very little signal that there has been, or will be any significant change to tropical intensities and frequency of storms in the last century, and potentially in a warmer climate for at least the next 100 years.  

But that’s not the headlines that we see in the media, nor was it the position set forth in the book and movie “An Inconvenient Truth“ where Katrina was made to be the poster child for climate change…a point that I have made in the past and during the Daily Show interview.  I wonder how much momentum Mr. Gore would have if the 2005 hurricane season wasn’t so severe?  It has certainly helped his cause and has awakened an environmental movement…and I’m not saying it’s completely a bad thing, but it is misleading. 

As we roll closer to June 1st I can all but guarantee that you will hear about a number of press releases by groups that will claim that global warming is causing more hurricanes and that they are more severe etc. and then proceed with their specific “forecasts”, or promote their university, hurricane shutters or related products.  With a busier tropical season ahead as compared to last year, beware of the headlines and be ready to read between the lines!  

Incidentally, Chris Landsea resigned from the IPCC in 2005…you can see his letter of resignation by following the link.  Makes for interesting reading and talking points about what went down then and how it still applies today.  Emmanuel et al have also cooled a little on their theories so there is much work to be done in this arena of climate change. 

It’s been three years and I would certainly like to see a more recent and definitive AMS statement updating their position on climate change.  I would also like to see comment about the dissenting opinions that refute some of the IPCC claims,  and for this group, or some researcher, to truly put into sensible context on what global climate change will really mean to all of us. 

We live in a world where we already know hurricanes come every summer,  severe weather events will continue, floods and other weather disasters will happen and lives and property are lost.  Not because of climate change, but because plain old weather happens (could be a bumper sticker)! 

Are we spending the same amount of research time, money and effort on these identifiable and very real threats as we are putting into our future warmer world?   Pure statistics dictate that there will be other disasters like Katrina or worse on the horizon.  Will we adapt as a society, mitigate and legislate appropriately?  I hope…and we need more definitive guidance from entities such as the AMS,  but that might just involve biting the hands that feed them!

Following my blog entry on climate change and the interview/comedy sketch that will air on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in the coming weeks, I plan to tackle many of the issues that are relevant to the topic.  There has been a lot of scuttle over recent months because of a couple of inaccuracies associated with the subsequent IPCC reports discussing the ramifications of continued warming.  Plus I believe there has been a false pretense that some climatologists (and others) have been telling us that we are actually feeling the ongoing warming trend and that recent severe hurricanes have been the manifestation of the process.  Add a brutal East Coast winter and the perceptions have changed on whether there has been anything going on.  These perceptions are incorrect in my opinion as a meteorologist, forecaster and as a person who has worked in the media for 20+ years as I will explain in future entries.   But to tackle such a broad subject and to set the stage for the sub-chapters of climate change we have to start with what we know. 

Over the last 150 years there has been a definitive anthropogenic (human activity induced) carbon footprint in our global atmosphere.  Global carbon dioxide (CO2) levels from the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, fires etc are now at levels that are much higher than on record over the last 400,000 years per geological studies including ice core samples taken in the Antarctic.  There is no debate that CO2 is at an unprecedented level in recorded history and that this is directly tied to 19th and 20th century industrialization.  CO2 is also strongly tied to warmer periods of our global climate but how much CO2 will force a warmer globe remains under study.   The question dejour remains how much warming is and will occur by CO2 forcing?  There is much debate between climatologists on this subject ranging from that we may already be in a runaway scenario to only modest warming, with a possible reversing trend factoring water vapor and other chemical and particulate influences.    While there are many studies that prove CO2 increases are strongly interrelated with warming temperatures there hasn’t been definitive proof that indicates that CO2 is the absolute factor in driving the “climate bus”.   There are many who believe other gases such as nitrous oxides, methane and water vapor are and will be more dominant in dictating any climate change.  The debate remains if CO2 does play as the main mechanism for warming how this will ultimately change our atmosphere and when will that happen and how will it manifest in other planetary factors?  And obviously what will this mean to you and I? 

Now per the National Climatic Data Center and by many other studies, there is an argument that we as a globe have been warming and most dramatically in the last 10-20 years.   Some of this warming (about 1 degree fahrenheit over the last 100 years) can certainly be attributed to man-made influences, but recent trends are further complicated by more accurate satellite data and the meshing of this data with surface temperature records.   Interpretation of these data sets and possible urban contamination and “siting” of surface observation locations has led to spirited debate over recent years and will be the subject of a future blog entry. 

Recently I spoke with a climatologist who indicated that given the increasing levels of CO2 in our atmosphere that we are just a few years away from the maximum effects of what CO2 will do with our climate.  Even if we continue to pour more CO2 at increased rates into the atmosphere in the decades ahead the subsequent warming effects that it may be forcing will level off.  It’s been explained to me that it is like putting a yellow filter on a light.  If you put another yellow filter on the light, the properties of the light change very little.   So we definitely have some interesting years ahead and we may have more answers on where this is all going sooner than later.  Until then, I truly believe that we obviously have to become more conscious of being a better steward to our environment and develop new methods for sinking carbon, but there will likely be much more answers, theories,  rhetoric, politicization and monetizing of the subject before then…future topics to be discussed.

A few weeks back I was contacted by the Daily Show with Jon Stewart to possibly discuss the topic of global warming and the general reticence of TV meteorologists and weather forecasters to completely agree with the entire IPCC report and resultant climate forecasts and the gravity of the ramifications of a warmer planet.  Now this is a topic that I can’t do justice in one blog entry but will try to explain the set-up for the interview and discuss the reasons of why I have risked my career in front of a national audience! 

After speaking with a researcher for the show I accepted their offer to be interviewed by a segment producer and  correspondent with the show full well knowing that the show would be looking to make fun of us weathercasters…but I figured it was an opportunity to place an emphasis on what us “day to day” forecasters think about the entire subject.  While it would be quite risky professionally, the topic of global warming is not completely understood by the media and public, and the certainties and uncertainties of the ramifications of a warmer world are not appropriately delineated.  Add politics, big money and the sense that we all need to be more environmentally responsible the question remains where is this all heading?  Being a meteorologist with a degree in the subject, 25 years of weather forecasting experience, tracking hundreds of tropical storms and hurricanes, and probably more than one thousand severe weather episodes, plus working in the the media, hopefully has given me a unique perspective on the subject matter. 

Full well knowing that a two hour interview would be edited down to just a few minutes I met with the the Daily Show producer and correspondent, actor Josh Gad at WBRZ’s studios.  I was interviewed along with WBRZ Chief Forecaster Pat Shingleton and WBRZ morning meteorologist Dave Nussbaum.  As Pat, Dave and I sat down for the interview we all looked at each other wondering aloud if careers would be going down the old porcelain facility!  

The aim of the piece is to highlight the disparity between climatologists and meteorologists when it comes to communicating the message on the subject of climate change.  Some of the impetus of the story I believe was initiated by a number of studies produced by George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication.  The paper just published Monday titled “America’s TV Weathercasters as Informal Climate Change Educators” indicates that TV weathercasters play a role on the subject of educating the public on climate change but there is much disparity in opinions amongst the group on the subject. 

Remember the Daily Show is billed as a “fake” news program with the main emphasis on “adult” comedy.  The show airs on Comedy Central at 1000pm locally.  Jon Stewart is certainly one of the great political satirists of our time so it’s almost an honor getting chosen to be made fun of!   The Daily Show also has interviewed climatologists for this piece so it will be a classic meteorologists vs. climatologists smackdown and hopefully it will be funny and not end anyone’s career.  I do not have an air date for the piece but will post it as soon as I know, plus more entries on the subject of climate change to come.  Rob