In his Katrina inquiries, Wistar also discovered that "trees were very helpful" in solving cases. In areas of Mobile, Ala., where complete neighborhoods were torn apart, he often examined tree damage for clues about what caused property destruction. He knew the direction of the wind at various points in the storm, both before and after the storm surge, and therefore could determine which direction trees would have fallen at those same points. By noting fallen tree locations and directions, he determined time lines for property devastation, even when there were no structures left standing.
"Part of our job is to filter the data and understand what makes and doesn't make sense," Wistar says. But above all, "my job is to tell the truth."
With the climate changing, forensic meteorologists' work will not diminish. "'Extreme' will become the new normal," Lombardo says. "Our most difficult tasks as forensic meteorologists are dealing with these extreme events, and how the forensic meteorology, insurance and legal industries are going to react." New definitions of what is "extreme" will affect potential claims against municipalities, Wistar adds.
Another concern is the uptick in weather and related events occurring on a planet-wide basis, such as El Niño and La Niña. Generally, forensic meteorologists' examinations are limited to a specific site. "If climate change continues to occur, however, and we see more worldwide events in increasing frequency, will that change how we look at local events? It may," ponders Lombardo. He cites a global weather phenomenon, called atmospheric blocking, as an example of a planet-wide occurrence that is has already affected his forensic micrometeorology endeavors. Atmospheric blocking obstructs winds that come across the Pacific and forces them north into Alaska, Siberia and the North Pole. The winds then head south, "creating a pool of cold Arctic air that moves into the United States, providing a source for ice storms to develop," he says. In the past two years, up and down the eastern seaboard, atmospheric blocking has directly led to snowfall in areas where heavy snow is uncommon, and consequently, "hundreds of slip-and-fall cases" have come across Lombardo’s desk. "[Atmospheric blocking] results in localized storms that produce the conditions that are favorable to generating future forensic work," he says.
But the future holds other concerns—and opportunities—for forensic meteorologists. As Wistar notes, more people have migrated to regions on the planet "where the weather tends to be more dangerous," such as the southern U.S. With more people in harm's way, there will undoubtedly be more legal, insurance and engineering cases in which forensic meteorologists' expert contributions will be vital.
See what we're tweeting about
3 Comments
Add CommentThey should sell an insurance policy which covers ALL catastrophic events. In Katrina there is a large population who believe they were insured and in fact were not. There is a difference between hurricane damage and flooding but as any sane man would know hurricane always comes with high rain and therefore it comes with flooding. Flooding damage by any cause would be covered. So in general all of the insured people in Katrina should logically have been covered for either Hurricane or flooding damage. Imho.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is a serious market failure with insurance, and the companies bear a major responsibility for it. We buy 'fire' insurance, and it happens to cover certain hazzards - wind amongst them. Never has an insurance company come out and analyzed what perils they (and I may incur when I buy a policy). If I wanted earthquake insurance it only covers the shaking - other related perils to the earthquake are tsunami, land slides (or collapse), and subseqent fires. Insurance companies simply refuse to investigate what they are covering, but after the event spend lots of money to avoid paying. It would make more sense, should I want to buy earthquake coverage, for a trained person to come to the house and determine what the major risks seem to be - shaking, tsunami, geological, fire etc. I may have to pay for the evaluation, but when all gets said and done the insurance company (along with the federally subsidized portion) should make a recommendation for a comprehensive plan for earthquake coverage for properties. Likewise hurricane coverage needs to include storm surge, rain induced floods etc. There is gaming in the current markets, both on the part of the insurance companies and on the part of the purchasers of insurance. And without prior investigating the particular perils faced by a particular property the gaming will continue. Mr Wistars talents might be better used on the front end of insurance rather than after the storm.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInsurance is a mugs game. The customer always looses. Insurance companies are happy to receive money but paying is entirely up to them, if it is good advertising they will pay else you can go to hell. If you think the legal system is going to help; think again. The legal system is a money making racket where you are assumed to know nothing. Once in their web, they will bleed you dry. If you receive compensation, you will find that your legal fees still leave you loosing money.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat has been my experience. When presenting your case they always leave out essential documents to support your case, they want to create debate at your cost. I was told I had a water-tight case and did not have to prove the same point multiple times. I may have won my case but because the judge was not totally convinced, got only 60% of my claim. Was awarded legal fees, but the amount awarded after another case was less than half my spend. I lost money by fighting for my rights. My lawyer made money by working with the opposing lawyer, having meetings with them and working for their mutual benefit.