New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Smoke Makes Twisters More Likely to Strike

Smoke wafting north from the Gulf of Mexico worsened the already stormy weather brewing across the southeastern U.S. on April 27, 2011. Julia Rosen reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


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.


What could fires in Central America have to do with the deadliest outbreak of tornadoes in recent U.S. history? More than you might think, according to a new study. Researchers found that smoke wafting north from the Gulf of Mexico worsened the already-stormy weather brewing across the southeastern US on April 27, 2011. That afternoon, 122 twisters tore across the country, killing 313 people.

"It’s not that the outbreak happened because of the smoke." Pablo Saide, of the University of Iowa, and an author of a new study published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. [Pablo Saide et al, Central American biomass burning smoke can increase tornado severity in the U.S.] "What’s happening is that this smoke, it interacts with clouds and with solar radiation."

Smoke consists of tiny particles, called aerosols, which can have complicated effects on weather. So Saide used a model to explore whether these particles influenced the tornado outbreak of April 27. He found smoke made twisters more likely to strike, and more ferocious when they did. However, at the moment, weather forecasts don’t consider aerosol particles. 

"This is difficult because weather models need to be finished very fast—because you want weather predictions for today, not for tomorrow. And including these aerosols makes it slower."

But Saide thinks it’s worth it. He says understanding the role of smoke and other airborne particles will help forecasters predict when weather conditions might change from dreary to deadly.

—Julia Rosen 

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe