An $11-million weather sensor network being installed in California will give officials more time to prepare for onslaughts of Pacific storms
NOAA has posted data from the initial tests online. When the system is complete the data it generates will be available to the public online, in real time. And the system could provide a model for better prediction around the world. Atmospheric rivers can strike the west coasts of most continents and landmasses; in mid-November a series of atmospheric-river storms caused the heaviest flooding in western England and Wales since the 1960s.
See what we're tweeting about
FlyingTrilobite Running thru Skydome. #jays https://t.co/Ibg4EmyUk5
BoraZ New cat is arriving on Monday night and I can't find his special food or special litter anywhere in the Triangle! Ugh!
SteveMirsky Early Land Animals Lacked Good Bites http://t.co/8hy8XhXoiE @sciam podcast
Deadline: Jul 25 2013
Reward: Varies
This challenge provides an opportunity for Solvers to build a web-based or mobile “app” to explore data relationships in scholarly conte
Deadline: Jul 15 2013
Reward: $5,000 USD
SciBX: Science-Business eXchange, a joint publication from the makers
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
Rights & Permissions
15 Comments
Add CommentWe knew about this storm for over a week before it got here so I don't know if this sensor system is even needed. BTW we used to call this the pineapple express, I guess renaming it justifies the cost.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reason you had 5 days of warning was indeed because part of the system was in place and being used. Pineapple expresses are a specific case of atmospheric rivers, "small ones," that originate from the Hawaii region of the Pacific, hence pineapple.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs it possible to to somehow divert the flood water to the Ogallala aquifer or some other storage area?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSteve926
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe used to build dams for that purpose but now we are tearing them down when we should be building more dams. We will be the cause of our own downfall when the earth warms.
mfischetti
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur weather radar has been informing us of these patterns for years.BTW these weather patterns come about every few years and this one was actually not that big compared to the ones we get every ten years.
This will criticize the content of this article, so it might not be printed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo "atmospheric rivers" supposedly have been around a long time, only about a mile high, carrying immense amounts of water and with recurring effects that supposedly have been documented for a very long time. But they are only now being mentioned in "science". As incongruous a suggestion as that the event named Sandy was really a hurricane.
Hurricanes have hit the Northeast numerous times in the past, but never with that kind of result. Too, it was only a category 1, far too weak for the damage displayed. Also, and very telling, it was touted as a superstorm by the media even before it hit! And climate change proponents never once, before Sandy arrived, emphasized that it was an example of the aggressive weather climate change is supposed to bring!
And the evidence of a fraud, with the "damage" being more man made than weather realted, is massive. Isolated trees in groups of trees being felled, while others around them stand, as if some lazy crew went to work and only pulled down the few. Electric wires laying on the street for days unattended, which is illegal if they had power in them, and highway lights being dark even though they aren't fed by overhead lines. Evidence that the power outages were caused only by electric companies shutting the electricity. Flooding never before seen even in more massive nor'easters, but fully similar to recent bouts of flooding that are the result only of affluent areas with reservoirs opening the floodgates and destroying low lying land so they could steal it for a song. That is, the flooding in areas that were seen by the "rank and file", "flooding" where no one outside of the New World Order power structure was permitted is likely a lie. And the fraud of the gas shortage, relying on the lie that money hungry gas companies wouldn't have generators to pump gas at stations hit by power outages, and furthered by the spectacle of only one gas station in each area being permitted to sell gas, even after power was restored and deliveries of gas resumed.
It's really not difficult to stage a phony "disaster"
Then herd the people into FEMA concentration camps and institute the police state, or, more aptly, the prison state.
Just so long as enough gullible people believe the hogwash like massive "atmospheric rivers".
Consider something even more significant.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOn Monday, December 3, the New Jersey newspaper, The Star-Ledger, ran an article, "Storm-spotting satellites expected to fail in 2016, leaving yearlong data gap", they described an expected disappearance of official satellite based meteorological information available to the "rank and file". Presumably, it will be restored when a new fleet of satellites is launched in 2017. Certainly, a major item, at least for those of the "rank and file" who haven't hypnotized themselves into thinking that whatever "scientists" say is unquestionably true and reliable. How like episodes of "Mission: Impossible" where they blank out surveillance cameras for a bit, then restore them after they have inserted a false image in front of the lens or after they've done their dirty work. It's not mentioned on Scientific American, it's not mentioned on PhysOrg. It seems limited to the relatively modest venue of The Star-Ledger. That, too, seems suspicious. Something does seem in the works.
@drafter, you could have read the article before claiming the prediction of the more recent storm proves this system isn't needed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis system is what predicted that storm 5 days in advance.
Not another climate change denier! You will drown in DeNial, friend, even if it's not an atmospheric river--just a plain old-fashioned river called "willful ignorance."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe penrod strikes again!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am more anticipatory of julian than I am of Carlyle, scienceproofreader (a new addition promoting outdated propaganda, as do all), Sisko, Prid, Shoshin, and, of course, GKarst, who (for why I do not know) likes to leave a "signature" of "GK" just to document his ignorance.
At least penrod keeps it interesting. The other trolls have become monotonous.
For one who claims the 'hockey stick' is valid & that the 'email scandal' was much ado about nothing, the claim that those who disagree with his interpretation of information are inferior beings is laughable. He would also agree with the head of the IPCC claiming that human behaviour was the cause of earthquakes & tsunamis no doubt. His statment:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGiven that human actions are increasingly interfering with the delicate balance of nature, natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes and tsunamis will occur more frequently, said Dr Rajendra K Pachauri, director general of TERI, and the chief of the inter-governmental panel on Climate Change.
Laughable?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html
You bore me, and others.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you incapable of reading them yourself? If you are happy to have others devise implausible explanations that fly in the face of the actual content of the emails, you are displaying blind faith in your preachers. All the emails are available online. Read them yourself. Even just reading those quoted on your site would be a start. Anyone who has actually taken the trouble to read the contentious emails can not dismiss them as being irrelevant unless they are wearing blinkers. As for the hockey stick, even most proponents of AGW are embarrassed by it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, you guessed it: I am illiterate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI also wear blinkers, on my ass. I use them to warn those behind me that there is an imminent left or right-hand turn coming.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.