The Stats Are In: Superstorm Sandy Totals

Sandy may not have been the most powerful hurricane to make landfall, but it is likely to be the most damaging ever

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Sandy caused many problems during its life. Here are some of the most impressive statistics from the storm.

SANDY DEBUNKED:

Sandy is not the strongest hurricane north of Cape Hatteras.

A near-record low barometric pressure occurred with Sandy offshore Monday afternoon. The pressure bottomed at 27.76 inches. For a storm north of Cape Hatteras, N.C., Hurricane Gladys of 1977 holds the record at 27.73 inches. Gladys was a Category 4 hurricane which remained off the coast of the U.S.

HIGHEST RAINFALL TOTALS BY STATE:

Andrews AFB, Md.: 15.3" (unconfirmed)

Easton, Md.: 12.55"

Wildwood Crest, N.J.: 11.67"

Virginia Beach, Va.: 9.57"

Milford, Del.: 9.55"

Maysville, W.Va.: 7.75"

Hanover, Pa.: 7.61"

Washington, D.C.: 5.44"

Lorain, Ohio: 4.29"

East Milton, Mass.: 3.03"

Jaffrey, N.H.: 3.83"

Niagara Falls, N.Y.: 3.02"

HIGHEST WIND GUSTS BY STATE (>74 mph):

Eatons Neck, N.Y.: 94 mph

Montclair, N.J.: 88 mph

Westerly, R.I.: 86 mph

Madison, Conn.: 85 mph

Cuttyhunk, Mass.: 83 mph

Allentown, Pa.: 81 mph

Highland Beach, Md.: 79 mph

Chester Gap, Va.: 79 mph

HIGHEST SNOW AMOUNTS BY STATE:

Redhouse, Md.: 26"

Bowden, W.Va.: 24"

Champion, Pa.: 13"

Newfound Gap, N.C.: 22"

Wise, Va.: 24"

Mt. Leconte, Tenn.: 20"

Payne Gap, Ky.: 14"

Bellefontaine, Ohio: 3.5"

POWER OUTAGES: CNN reported more than 7.5 million

By comparison, Hurricane Ike had 7.5 million over his entire path.

TOP WAVES:

39.67 feet (Buoy #41048)

TOP STORM SURGES:

The Battery, N.Y.: ~9 feet above normal

Kings Point, N.Y.: ~12.5 feet above normal

New Haven, Conn.: ~9 feet above normal

RECORD LOWEST PRESSURE (ON LAND):

Atlantic City, N.J.: 948.3 mb (28.00" Hg)

Philadelphia, Pa.: 953mb (28.23" Hg)

Harrisburg, Pa.: 963mb (28.46" Hg)

Scranton, Pa.: 971mb (28.69" Hg)

Trenton, N.J.: 958mb (28.31" Hg)

Baltimore, Md.: 965mb (28.49" Hg)

Harrisburg, Pa.: 964mb (28.46" Hb)

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Reprinted with permission from AccuWeather.com. The o riginal story was published on October 30, 2012.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American