The 200-mph winds from the EF5 tornado that touched down in Joplin, Mo., blew apart everything in its path, leaving debris hanging from most every thing left standing. These trees were left standing on the east side of Joplin High and collected debris from the heavily damaged school.
Image: Flickr/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District, John Daves
SAN FRANCISCO -- The United States was battered this year by at least 12 natural disasters that each caused at least $1 billion in damages, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said yesterday.
The agency said it was adding a June tornado outbreak in the Midwest and Southeast and record-setting wildfires in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico to a list that also includes flooding along the Missouri and Mississippi rivers, drought in the Southern Plains and southwestern United States, five previous tornado outbreaks in Southern and central states, and a blizzard.
That count could still rise, because NOAA is still tallying damages from Tropical Storm Lee and a late October snowstorm in the Northeast.
But this year was not an aberration, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said during a speech here yesterday.
The seemingly endless onslaught of floods, droughts, wildfires, windstorms, blizzards and tornadoes that have marked 2011 fit within an ongoing increase in the number of natural disasters recorded in the United States, she said, citing statistics maintained by reinsurer Munich Re.
And at least some of that increase appears to be driven by climate change, Lubchenco said, citing a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
"What we are seeing this year is not just an anomalous year, but a harbinger of things to come for at least a subset of those extreme events that we are tallying," the NOAA chief told attendees of the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting.
That puts more pressure on NOAA to improve its ability to better understand and predict those events, at a time when budget pressure in Washington threatens to reduce the agency's ability to carry out those tasks, Lubchenco said.
Demand for weather and climate data rises as budget drops
"The pressure to reduce government spending is intense and intensifying," Lubchenco said. "The irony is that the demand for services provided by agencies like NOAA is at an all-time high and rising. And one reason for this demand is the growing number of record-setting weather events."
Half of the U.S. population lives in areas that were under a heat wave warning or advisory at some point this summer, she said, adding that was just one example from a year of wild weather.
"Budgets and politics threaten our observations, our research, our modeling and our delivery of information and other services," Lubchenco added.
The White House requested $5.5 billion for NOAA in fiscal 2012, but Congress set aside only $4.9 billion for the agency. It has also repeatedly blocked NOAA's proposal to reorganize its existing climate research programs and centers into a new "Climate Service." Lubchenco and other Obama administration leaders have said the plan would help the agency handle a growing demand for information on climate change science and impacts, a message she reiterated yesterday.
"The unfortunate thing is that with more and more extreme events, we are being requested with increasing frequency by emergency managers, by citizens, by the business community, by farmers ... for more information on climate-scale events, which we define as anything beyond 14 days," Lubchenco said. "We will not be able to do it as efficiently or effectively as we would like to because we were not able to reorganize."
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. www.eenews.net, 202-628-6500
See what we're tweeting about
28 Comments
Add CommentYou obviously have zero knowledge of the role NOAA plays. NOAA is about understanding the science behind the earth's weather dynamics, providing weather prediction and climate modeling services which allow Americans to effectively manage and limit risk to agricultural and maritime resources and to provide advanced warning to Americans of impending events.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ejdisler et al; I would suggest ignoring geojellyroll because he is obviously not effected by logic and is probably some kind of paid front man for the fossil fuel energy lobby. Everyone reading this magazine knows that he and priddseren are not to be taken seriously.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, I agree, he doesn't understand NOAA's role in weather prediction or climate science. I don't see many corporately funded weather satellites being sent up these days. Maybe geojelly wants to predict weather with chicken bones instead of satellites.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAdd Carlyle to that list. Sometimes, I really think they're the same person because it's impossible to tell their ranting styles apart.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisadd me to the list as well, this is just another money grab...just like the hockey stick graph to 'prove' global warming was...the world has always and will always be in a state of change and there is nothing we, humans, can do to change that...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgeojellyroll,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"It doesn't stop any drought, a tornado, natural fire etc."
The gods are eating hoi polloi and have contracted kuru.
There is no global climate change they say.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2011/12/homeland-big-brother-plutonomy-3.html
Just like all the others...accepting whatever the angry man on the TeeVee, talk radio, or blog tells you without any evidence to back up their point.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf this is all about money, you can't ignore the $1 Trillion in PROFIT the top 5 oil companies made over the last decade. You can't ignore the fact that their lobbying has a 70-to-1 return on investment, EVERY YEAR, and that's just for direct government subsidies. This doesn't even touch the indirect subsidies enjoyed by dirty energy because they get to use our environment as their open sewer for free. The cost of pollution is offloaded onto society as a whole, making their products artificially cheap, and they laugh all the way to the bank with the profits.
Money grab...sure, keep believing that...
Pokerplayer...you are one of the few with an awareness of the real world.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is over 14 TRILLION in debt and agencies like NOAA need to prioritize where they need to put limited resources. There is 'x' to be done and what was done with $1 in the past now needs to be done with $.90 Many Americans just don't accept the reality of the current economic crisis in government spending.
"just like the hockey stick graph"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhich 'hockey stick' graph?
The sea level hockey stick? The underwater hockey stick? The South American hockey stick? The Arctic summer temperature hockey stick? The tropical glacier hockey stick? The North American mountain snowpack hockey stick? The glacier length hockey stick? Or the warming of Atlantic water into the Arctic hockey stick?
Or are you still really going on about Mann's 13 year old graph?
"A harbinger of things to come..." That's scare talk to get more money. Let's face it, NOAA can't accurately predict the weather next week, they have no idea what next year is going to look like.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUnless you go after defense and other "security" spending, you're worrying about drops in the bucket. Also, our huge deficits started right when we cut taxes in 2001, so there's the 2 biggest holes in federal revenue. Eliminate the cap on income subject to Social Security Taxes and there's no budget problem anymore.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSault, you do realize anyone can actually read data, research and form conclusions? I know I know, only people who have specifically a degree in climatology and of course must be funded by grants from the US Federal Government are acceptable to you but the reality is the world is full of intelligent people and it does not really take much to see when a scam is being pulled. The problem with all of your so called proof is it is based on cherry picked data, arbitrary assumptions like an "average global temperature", the only place your proof actually works is in computer models and most of all, every single experiment you people do has no condition to indicate you are wrong. When you perform and experiment and all possible results prove your belief, the experiment is flawed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen applying some simple logic, the atmosphere is made up of dozens of molecules, it is affected by the Sun, the planet, the oceans, the magnetic field and who knows what else. All of your data is statistical and only measures the smallest part of the whole atmosphere and this stuff is not even the most ridiculous part. It is the conclusion only CO2 is the cause. Only CO2 nothing else. Not some combination of molecules, not the fact that humans produce a whole lot of heat from industry. Water vapor and methane both are significantly better green house gases and are also increasing, yet it is not these molecules it is CO2.
So follow the money as you did. It is not evil corporations or SUV driving soccer moms making money from polluting. It is the US government who made 3 trillion in taxes off of those same oil companies you mention. It is the plethora of snake oil companies selling carbon offsets, managing your carbon tax system, coming up with insane, expensive and ineffective "solutions" to reduce carbon output that gets subsidies from government or simply mandates from government forcing the country to have to buy their "green" crap or pay for it in some way, using by taxes or inflation.
So the conclusion, not coming from pointless television or radio. Scant data proving religious like beliefs containing end of the world predictions all caused by a natural molecule and a load of money going to the believers or their green companies and add in the fact that the culprit CO2 cant actually be measured because we NEED it in the atmosphere. So you people can claim it is always bad or good, depending on how much money you need or political power desired...
Yeah, It is not hard to conclude you people are full of it.
Love this kind of article. Yep, there has never been bad weather in the past. No blizzards all through the late 70s and early 80s, no dust bowl, no hurricanes, no tornadoes, never any insane flooding. It all just happened in the last year.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course, it is not mentioned that the population of america is significantly higher now and with more people, larger cities and more stuff to damage, of course each natural disaster will cost more. There are more areas to hit and more things to damage. Drought, sorry I think the Dust Bowl still far exceeds anything happening today and wild fires are as much a part of nature as rain is, for the Western US. The only reason those fires are more intense is because of the Government doing everything it can to prevent the fires, which leaves more fuel to burn. The causes of the fires, most are people and again, the more people around and the more stuff built for those people, such as power lines, etc... the more fires will be generated by accident or arson.
Harbinger of things to come... it is when "scientists" make religious sounding claims like this that makes anything they say ridiculous. Why, because the very first problem with the entire article is the assumption of what is normal. The medieval warming period was warmer than today with ice free north Atlantic but since no one was recording temps, drought and hurricanes in North America we dont actually know what happened and therefore could not know what normal is. I know I know, your IPCC Synod "concluded" that just because the medival warming period existing, it was just regional and they dont believe it was a global warming period, lol. I do enjoy how you people gerry mander data to support your belief. BUT the point is still valid. NO one was recording to any real accuracy past 50 to 75 years ago and with so few people to notice a hurricane or fire or anything else, there is no way to conclude we know what normal weather is or that what we had this year was unusual for the existence of the planet earth.
I know, I know, your fantasy climate in your computer models likely have "normal" plugged into it but I go by observed reality or data that is proven accurate not by fantasy and statistics.
Wow sault, you really do live in another world. The Huge deficits started when Obumbler tacked on 1.5 trillion each year for nearly 3 years. He managed in 2 years to add the equivalent of the previous 8 years of deficits and now we are in year 3.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow I understand why you believe the global warming religion like a religious fanatic, you cant even take real economic numbers and compare them and draw the correct conclusion.
You want no budget problem, then the Spending needs to be cut. Last time I checked this is still NOT a communist country where he government confiscates all money and doles it out by need. Nor is the government mandated by the Constitution to find every possible way to tax, fine, fee or borrow every dollar they can get their hands on for the purpose of lining their own pockets, union pockets, Corporate welfare pockets, lazy welfare recipients, social security ponzi schemes or anything else. Though unlike what your plan is, Social security for all that it is a ponzi scheme, it is at least fair. It is taxed at the same rate on everyone and up to the same cap. Changing it, makes it a welfare scheme and we are not communist as I said before.
By the way sault, if we did get the Federal and State Spending of 7 TRILLION a year down to what is constitutionally mandated and remove the 75% of the socialism, then the people would actually have the money to consider the purchase of hybrids, maybe solar or other self generating options(I notice you never comment on my practical and doable ideas to reduce carbon) or upgrade houses to use less energy. Or companies could then invest in the same. Keep handing it to the government and all we will get is more oil subsidies, more Solindra scams, the Feds sending money to india via your carbon tax and who knows what else.
So aside from my being a heretic, sorry denier, there are actually many effective ways to reduce carbon, I mention them frequently and they cant be done because you people and your socialism are taking all the money that could be used on those solutions and you are forcing the money into grand schemes to magically make it all better solutions because I guess the practical solutions are not sexy enough, they don't make any money for your green companies and they dont add to politicians pockets.
Agree that budget cuts are needed. But just wait until after the budget cuts when people realize that it has resulted in a less effective warning system for tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. What people don't realize is that yes, government spending does often accomplish useful things.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs a general prediction, one can expect that as the earth warms, the heat energy in the atmosphere and ocean will increase, leading to more high-energy weather events. There's no way it can't. It's called conservation of energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDude I live on the beach (atlantic ocean) and we're doing fine with the water level and temp...record year for turtle nests actually...if the graph is wrong (on purpose) it's wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissault, the goverment makes way more off the oil companies and do nothing for it...what's wrong with a company that supplies good and services (oil in this case just so happens to be the engine of our entire economy) and making a profit. They do the exploration, drilling, refining, distribution, all the risks etc...what's the government do? Nothing except tax the companies...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisunless you go after entitlement your talking about a drop in the bucket
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI guess what is to be gained by NOAA predicting and accounting for the increase in event extremes. Doing anything about it is not possible. The United States has about 20M scientists and engineers in the United States, or about 8.5%. Everyone else, most importantly journalists, politicians, religious leaders, TV personalities, CEOs, Boards of Directors, and anyone who controls purse strings are completed devoid of anything approaching knowledge. In its place, they have beliefs and opinions and a bully pulpit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe rest of the remaining 91.5% are consumers and drones. Welcome to the real world. From this real world, the expectation of any correct decision in vanishingly small.
With taxes at their lowest level since the 1950s, there's no way you can say that taxes are too high.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith corporations recording record profits and just sitting on them, there's no way you can say the government is taking in too much money.
When you cut taxes while trying to wage 1 unnecessary war and 1 bungled war, there's no way you can blame the ensuing deficits on the guy who has to come in and clean up the mess.
When a 30-year deregulation orgy coupled with a financial "innovation" implosion causes the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and government revenues are severely depressed, there's no way you can say that the weak steps taken to solve the problem ARE the problem.
Take your blinders off...it's just embarrassing to know that people can be this misinformed.
And what's with the assumption that the Government doesn't do anything? You like the roads you drive on, or the water you drink? How about the food you eat? Don't you feel comfortable that an independent party is monitoring the food supply? I mean, this at least prevents Ford Pinto-type decision making where the costs of the wrongful death lawsuits were deemed less than the costs of a recall. Remember, corporations are legally required to maximize shareholder "value". There are no moral sentiments or ethical obligations in this arrangement. It is up to government to make sure people are safe and that the playing field is level.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you have qualms about SPECIFIC regulations that you would like to discuss, let's discuss. Otherwise, painting in broad brushstrokes about those boogeymen regulations and government interference is a waste of time.
So, get rid of the tax cuts for those making over $200K a year, people were fine in the 90s under these rates, we weren't some communist nation or anything, and the economy grew at a fantastic clip. In fact, some of the fastest GDP growth this country experienced was when the top marginal tax rate was 70 or even 90(!) percent. If you graph GDP growth versus top marginal tax rate for the U.S., they are DIRECTLY CORRELATED!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBring defense spending as a percentage of GDP or government spending to the level it was in the 90s as well. Close all those Cold War-era bases that were given new life in the "War on Terror" and get the frick out of Afghanistan.
Are we up to $1T a year in savings yet?
Maybe repeal oil subsidies to the tune of $20B a year and the support for corn ethanol while you're at it. Allow Medicare to bargain for drug prices, a practice it was BANNED from doing under the Part D expansion. Tell the pharmaceutical companies to let the Free Market do its work! This will save $100B a year.
All this, together with reduced interest payments on the debt, will get our fiscal house in order. No need to balance a deficit created by favoring the top 1% on the backs of the 99%. No need to gut NOAA for petty political reasons when our weather will increasingly be chaotic and destructive.
So how do you explain the hurricane called Jupiter’s Red Spot? A frigid planet & a centuries old storm, larger than the entire Earth. It is not heat that drives storms. It is temperature differential. If the earth was the same temperature planet wide, whether extremely hot or frigidly cold, there would be far less storms. The weather is a giant heat engine. Learn about the Carnot cycle. One of the things that have occurred as we continue to come out of the Ice Age is that storms have decreased. Reporting world wide on the other hand, has increased dramatically.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow, you don't even know about Jupiter's internal heating which is equal to the energy it gets from the sun. No wonder you're so misinformed about every other scientific issue you try to wade into.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisExactly. It is the heat differential causing the massive storms on Jupiter. Not the absolute temperatures. If the outer layers were the same temperature as the inner regions, there would be no storm. How does this conflict with my heat engine description? On Earth as the temperature differential between polar & equatorial regions decrease, so will the ferocity of storms. I know you can not help it. Never mind.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh, and where's your proof that storms have decreased?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course Diodes will reject this out of hand.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientists have studied this issue and come to the opposite conclusion: extreme events are becoming LESS common. Atlantic hurricanes were much more numerous from 1950 to 1975 than from 1975 to present. Hailstorms in the US are 35% less common than they were fifty years ago. Extreme rainfall in the US at the end of the 20th century is comparable to what it was at the beginning of the 20th century. Roger Pielke, Jr, in the journal Climatic Change (1999) said “it is essentially impossible to attribute any particular weather event to global warming.” For flooding, Pielke did list a number of important non-climatic factors that have the potential to influence flooding in the future, including deteriorating dams and levees, changes in land use, building in flood-prone areas, governmental policies, as well as other societal influences. Pielke, R.A., JR. 1999. Nine fallacies of floods. Climatic Change 42: 413-438.
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/faqs-and-myths#1