Categories
Science

spring analysis outcomes are in – Watts Up With That?

Reposted from Polar Bear Science

After being locked out last year, fieldwork monitoring polar bears in the Svalbard region of the Barents Sea resumed this spring. The results show that despite having to deal with the most extreme loss of summer sea ice in the entire Arctic, polar bears in this region continue to thrive. These facts show no hint of that impending catastrophic decline in population size we keep hearing is just around the corner. No tipping point here.

Svalbard polar bear territory is managed by Norway. It includes sea ice all the way to the Russian border in the east and the Svalbard archipelago: the map below is from Aars et al. 2017.

Svalbard polar bear management region. Fig 1, Aars et al. 2017.

Observations are usually collected around Svalbard by a team lead by Jon Aars and Magnus Andersen of the Norwegian Polar Institute between March and May every year and they post their results online in June. They deserve our admiration and respect for making their research results available in such a timely fashion and without fanfare. It’s something all good scientists should be able to do.

Note that Svalbard comprises only half of the ‘Barents Sea’ polar bear subpopulation: in recent years, most of the region’s polar bears have been living around Franz Josef Land in the eastern (Russian) sector (shown below) where Norwegian researchers are not permitted to work.

Spring sea ice in the Barents Sea

Shown below is sea ice extent at end May 2021 (end of the 2021 Svalbard study field season):

In general, summer sea ice decline in the Barents Sea since 1979 has been the most profound across the Arctic (with a loss of 4.11 days of ice per year from 1979-2014): that’s six times as much summer ice loss as bears in the most southern-living subpopulation (Southern Hudson Bay, which had a loss of only 0.68 days of ice per year) according to calculations by Eric Regehr and colleagues (2016).

However, last summer Svalbard sea ice extent took a nose-dive to well below average levels (shown below at 18 Sept 2020). This condition of below-average ice persisted well into the fall (not shown): sea ice levels did not come back into the purple zone shown on the graph below until mid-December 2020. The ice chart below that for 15 September 2020 shows what that looked like.

According to polar bear specialist Andrew Derocher, this situation had disaster written all over it. In early November, the ice extent was the lowest it had been since 1967.

Poor conditions at Svalbard. Arrow shows Hopen Island. If the ice arrives in early November, 20+ denning females give birth to cubs there. In recent years, sea ice has arrived far too late for pregnant females to use the Island. 2020 doesn’t look good. https://t.co/CS7J50WRJE pic.twitter.com/rMdibACe0r— Andrew Derocher (@AEDerocher) November 9, 2020

However, that’s only because he and most of his colleagues still embrace the false premise (e.g. Amstrup et al. 2007) that summer sea ice is critical for polar bear health and survival, despite compelling evidence that spring ice conditions are the crucial environmental factor (Crockford 2017, 2019), which includes the data from Svalbard. They also have neglected to take into account the much greater primary productivity (i.e. more food for all ) that areas like the Barents Sea have experienced precisely because there has been less summer ice (summarized, with references, in Crockford 2021).

2021 Svalbard spring polar bear data

First up is body condition of adult male bears (1993-2021, 2020 data missing), which is down a bit from 2019 but this amount of year-to-year variance is normal. Some male bears were in much worse condition in the late 1990s and early 2000s (note the lowest ‘tails’ on the box plots) than they have been since 2015 and the analysis of the data, which does not include 2021, concluded: There is no significant trend over time.

And how about litter sizes? Below is the graph provided for number of cubs per litter (1993-2021, 2020 missing):

Litter size 2021 = 1.75. According to the analysis of the data without 2021, “There is a statistically significant (p=0.04) weak trend of decreasing litter size over time (red line).” Note that the litter size for 2019 was the highest it’s been since 1993.

Finally, there is the proportion of females that have cubs of the year (called ‘production of cubs’), which this year was 0.54 (well above what it was in 2019):

The analysis of the data without 2021, “shows a non-significant (p=0.069) linear trend [red line] in the proportion of females with COYs over time.”

This conclusion remains (@30 June 2021) at the bottom of the MOSJ webpage:

An aerial survey to estimate the size of the shared Norwegian-Russian Barents Sea subpopulation was carried out in 2004, and the resulting estimate was 2650 bears +/- ca 30%. A new survey of the Norwegian part of the population was conducted in August 2015, and the results do not show any sign of a reduction in population size.

Bottom line: Despite extremely low summer ice and record-breaking fall ice levels in 2020, on top of this region having the highest relative decline in summer sea ice of all polar bear subpopulations, there is no signature of impending disaster in the spring 2021 polar bear monitering data: no starving bears or large numbers of females without cubs. Last summer should have been the ‘tipping point’ for this population, according to the models. But adequate winter and spring ice developed and the bears are still thriving, as they were in 2015 (Aars 2018; Aars et al. 2017).

References

Aars, J. 2018. Population changes in polar bears: protected, but quickly losing habitat. Fram Forum Newsletter 2018. Fram Centre, Tromso. Download pdf here (32 mb).

Aars, J., Marques,T.A, Lone, K., Anderson, M., Wiig, Ø., Fløystad, I.M.B., Hagen, S.B. and Buckland, S.T. 2017. The number and distribution of polar bears in the western Barents Sea. Polar Research 36:1. 1374125. doi:10.1080/17518369.2017.1374125

Amstrup, S.C., Marcot, B.G. & Douglas, D.C. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century. US Geological Survey. Reston, VA. Pdf here

Crockford, S.J. 2017. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 19 January 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v1 Open access. https://peerj.com/preprints/2737/

Crockford, S.J. 2019. The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened. Global Warming Policy Foundation, London. Available in paperback and ebook formats.

Crockford, S.J. 2021. The State of the Polar Bear Report 2020. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report 48, London. pdf here.

Regehr, E.V., Laidre, K.L, Akçakaya, H.R., Amstrup, S.C., Atwood, T.C., Lunn, N.J., Obbard, M., Stern, H., Thiemann, G.W., & Wiig, Ø. 2016. Conservation status of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to projected sea-ice declines. Biology Letters 12: 20160556. http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/12/20160556

Like this:

Like Loading…

Categories
Sport

ESPYS 2021 vote – Tom Brady, Phil Mickelson, Naomi Osaka, Simone Biles land double nomination

Jun 16, 2021

  • ESPN staff

Welcome to the 2021 ESPYS presented by Capital One, where you, the fans, get to help decide the stars of the show (aka the award winners).

Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, 43, and PGA Championship winner Phil Mickelson, 50, both garnered two individual nominations for the 2021 ESPYS. Who could have predicted that a year ago? Other athletes who landed two nominations include Simone Biles, Breanna Stewart, Naomi Osaka, Amanda Nunes, DeVonta Smith, Lewis Hamilton, Nikola Jokic and Connor McDavid. Brady’s Buccaneers, Stewart’s Seattle Storm and Smith’s Crimson Tide also are among seven contenders for Best Team. Other awards include Best Breakthrough Athlete, Best Game, Best Record-breaking Performance and more. And check out our 16-contender fields for Best Play and Best WWE Moment. Cast your votes below starting today and tune in to the ESPYS on July 10 at 8 p.m. ET on ABC.

Best Athlete, Men’s Sports

Best Athlete, Women’s Sports

Best Breakthrough Athlete

Best Game

Best College Athlete, Men’s Sports

Best College Athlete, Women’s Sports

Best Team

Best Record-breaking Performance

Best International Athlete, Men’s Soccer

Best International Athlete, Women’s Soccer

Best MLS Player

Best NWSL Player

Best NFL Player

Best NHL Player

Best Driver

Best NBA Player

Best WNBA Player

Best Boxer

Best MMA Fighter

Best Athlete, Men’s Golf

Best Athlete, Women’s Golf

Best Athlete, Men’s Tennis

Best Athlete, Women’s Tennis

Best Athlete, Men’s Action Sports

Best Athlete, Women’s Action Sports

Best Jockey

Best Athlete With A Disability, Men’s Sports

Best Athlete With A Disability, Women’s Sports

Best Bowler

Best WWE Moment

Best Play

Categories
Entertainment

How Raven-Symoné’s “wonderful” spouse, Amanda, impressed her to drop extra pounds

Raven symone has a different outlook on life as she is a married woman.

The former Disney Channel star told E! News that she was motivated to lose weight after marrying an “amazing woman” Miranda Maday, last June. She remarked, “That was because we want to have a life together.”

“She doesn’t want to put me in an early grave and I want to make sure I’m there for her in the best of health,” the star said, noting that she previously had a doctor’s appointment where she received “terrible numbers.” during medical exams.

Since then, the 35-year-old actress has made some lifestyle adjustments that resulted in a 30 pound weight loss.

In June, she told Good Morning America that she had decided to eat low carb. “I do very little sport and I am eagerly faster. I make sure I fast at least 14 hours between dinner and … breakfast, ”she said before adding this method that works for her and is not necessarily a recommendation. “I’m not trying to speak for others.”

Categories
Science

To get the most effective direct photographs of exoplanets with area telescopes, we’ll search for star shadows

The James Webb (JWST) and Nancy Grace Roman (RST) space telescopes will be launched into space between 2021 and 2024. Successor to several observatories (such as Hubble, Kepler, Spitzer, and others), these missions will carry out some of the most ambitious astronomical surveys ever undertaken. This ranges from discovering and characterizing extrasolar planets to researching the secrets of dark matter and dark energy.

In addition to advanced imaging functions and high sensitivity, both instruments also carry coronagraphs – instruments that suppress darkening starlight so that exoplanets can be recognized and observed directly. According to a selection of articles recently published by the Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems (JATIS), we will need more of these instruments if we are to really study exoplanets in detail.

This special section on Starshades contains publications (published between January and June 2021) that cover the latest scientific, technical, research, and programmatic advances made with coronographs. These instruments, also known as Starshades, address one of the greatest challenges in the identification and characterization of exoplanets. In summary, it can be said that the vast majority of known exoplanets (4,422 confirmed to date) were discovered indirectly.

Exoplanet studies

Of these methods, the most widespread and most effective are the transit method (transit photometry) and the radial velocity method (Doppler spectroscopy). In the former, astronomers monitor stars for periodic decreases in brightness, which are a possible indication that an exoplanet (or more) is in orbit in front of the parent star (also known as a transit) relative to the observer.

In the latter, astronomers measure how a star moves back and forth (and how fast) to measure the gravitational influence of satellites in orbit. Regardless of this, these methods are also effective in determining the radius (transit) of an exoplanet and its mass (radial velocity). Together, they are the most effective means of confirming and characterizing exoplanets and limiting their potential habitability.

On rare occasions, astronomers have been able to observe exoplanets directly by detecting starlight reflected from their atmosphere – also known as. the direct imaging process. Unfortunately, most of these planets were gas giants or had long orbits around their star (or both). For smaller, rocky planets with shorter orbits (where more Earth-like planets are found), the light reflected from their atmosphere is likely to be washed out by their sun.

For this reason, coronagraphs have been the subject of significant research and development in recent years. In addition to instruments that can be integrated into observatories, NASA also intends to build a spacecraft that can work in conjunction with space telescopes to suppress obscuring starlight. These efforts are part of NASA’s Starshade Project, which is to provide a spacecraft with an extendable flower-shaped light shield.

The special part

Despite the advances made in the development of the Starshade (and related technology) in recent years, the news about those advances tends to be scattered. For this reason, the editors of the special section – all members of NASA’s Starshade Technology and Science working group – have collected 19 research papers representing the latest research (January to June 2021).

As the editors state in the introductory paper entitled “Special Section on Starshades: Overview and a Dialogue”:

“The star shadow is a technology that has undergone rapid development and great interest from many institutions. Much of the advances in this area are spread across many journals and conferences. It is therefore difficult to collect them in a single place to get a good overview of the state of the star shadows. “

“As interest in developing Star Shade-based missions grows, we hope this particular section serves as a tutorial and provides enough background information to potential investigators unfamiliar with Star Shade to get an up-to-date overview of the field in one location receive.”

This work is divided into six categories corresponding to four different research areas, all of which are presented in the second part – Summary and contributions – the special part. It starts with an overview of the Starshade program and the types of missions it will enable, followed by a series of technology related papers that consider the challenges of deployments and rendezvous, followed by a series of academic and mission related papers.

Summary and contributions

Many of the publications deal with the particular challenges Starshade faces in connection with a space telescope. For example part two – Operation and formation flight – presents papers examining the technical challenges of sending a mission into space in stowed formation and then dispatching it once it has reached its destination – similar to what James Webb will do after its launch (currently scheduled for November 2021).

Staying in formation with a space telescope is also a major challenge, especially when the telescope is moving from one target to another. Here, the papers presented consider various guidance, navigation, and propulsion systems and determine that a chemical propulsion system that does not require ground tracking and laser beacons would be the optimal arrangement.

The importance of proper planning is also addressed, which is as true for Starshade as it is for the proposed Remote Occulter – a wraparound Starshade concept that was developed for working with ground-based telescopes. In sections three and four, Starlight suppression and power modeling and Sunshine, another major challenge is addressed, namely the possibility of interference from zodiacal light and sunlight reflecting off Starshade’s petals.

Exploring the possibilities

Equally important are publications exploring the benefits of a Starshade mission in combination with next-generation telescopes such as the JWST and RST, as well as the Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) and the Large UV / Optical / IR Surveyor (LUVOIR). These proposed missions will be optimized for direct imaging and characterization of exoplanet atmospheres and will likely be combined with a Starshade concept (or have their own coronograph instruments).

The many papers that the Star shadow program and NASA’s efforts to bring the Starshade to Technology Readiness Level 5 (TLR 5) – an effort overseen by the S5 project. This part also describes the efforts of the Starshade Exoplanet Data Challenge and the Roman Exoplanet Imaging Data Challenge (EIDC), both of which aim to combine the scientific requirements of future Starshade missions with specific performance parameters.

In the first case, researchers at NASA JPL relied on synthetic images of exoplanet systems generated by the Starshade Imaging Simulation Toolkit for Exoplanet Reconnaissance (SISTER). This versatile tool, managed by Caltech, is designed to provide accurate models of what exoplanet systems would look like if observed through a star’s shadow.

The EIDC, on the other hand, is a community effort led by the Turnbull CGI Science Investigation Team, which in turn is led by Margaret C. Turnbull – the renowned astrophysicist and researcher Margaret C. Turnbull of the SETI Institute. Launched in 2019, the Roman EIDC basically simulated what the Nancy Grace Mission Telescope will see with (and without) the help of a Starshade Rendezvous mission.

This is taken up later in sections five and six – Exoplanet detection and Observations – where research papers re-discuss the types of exoplanet systems that future telescopes will see with the help of Starshade. In some of these publications, sample images were provided and specific targets – nearby star systems that are considered optimal candidates – were discussed.

The Observations section concludes with three articles written by different teams, all led by lead researcher Eliad Peretz of NASA Goddard. Here, the research teams investigated how effectively space telescopes with Starshade would recognize and characterize potentially habitable exoplanets (based on different observation conditions) and how ground-based observatories would benefit from the remote occulter.

Artistic concept of the NASA HabEx space telescope in combination with the Starshade. Source: Gaudí et al.

Promote dialogue

The special part closes things off with a little tutorial called. from Dialogue about star shadows. This section raises and covers questions in the form of a dialogue between a hypothetical student (named Morgan Nemandi) and a Starshade “expert” (Urania Sage). The questions were based on actual questions asked by members of the amateur astronomy and space exploration enthusiast communities.

The dialogue also pays homage to Galileo’s Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (It: Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo), a treatise he published in 1632 that presented arguments for the heliocentric model of the universe of Copernicus. It was also presented in a format that emphasized how many of the questions people have about space exploration are things they don’t always like to ask (i.e., “things I’m afraid to ask”).

This last part of the special is organized in a four day format that reflects the original dialogue. While Morgan and Urania cover the basics of Starshade and the history of the project on the first day, they cover engineering and technology questions on the second day, science questions on the third day, and program-related questions on the fourth day.

While the Starshade development schedule has not yet been released, it is clear that NASA and other space agencies intend to pursue this technology. In the years to come, starlight suppressors and coronographs are likely to become an integral part of next-generation astronomy and exoplanet research. In combination with the James Webb, Roman, TESS, HabEx and LUVOIR space telescopes, the number of known rocky exoplanets will increase exponentially.

Starshade technology will also support missions such as ESA’s proposed characterizing ExOPlanets Satellite (CHEOPS), PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of star (PLATO) and Atmospheric Remote-sensing Infrared Exoplanet Large-survey (ARIEL) space telescopes. These missions will also serve to complete the census of terrestrial exoplanets, characterize their atmospheres, and find evidence of life outside of our solar system.

Further reading: SPIE Digital Library, NASA Exoplanet Program

Like this:

To like Loading…

Categories
Sport

Patrick Beverley apologizes for pushing Chris Paul on shedding Clippers: “Feelings have one of the best of me”

Patrick Beverley’s final act of the 2021 NBA playoffs wasn’t a smart one.

The Clippers point guard nudged Chris Paul hard from behind after a timeout was imposed in the Suns 130-103 win over the Clippers. The game was reviewed and the umpires found Beverley a technical foul.

He was also excluded from the competition.

Much was made of the whining between Paul and Beverley, and many wondered if Paul had said anything that caused Beverley to lose his temper. But in the end, Beverley knew he was wrong, and on Thursday he set out to make things right with Paul.

DECOURCY: Where Chris Paul is one of the best point guards in the game

Beverley tweeted an apology to Paul on Thursday afternoon. In the tweet, the Veteran Guard wrote that he “had the most emotions” during the incident.

@ CP3 emotions got the best out of me last night. My evil wasn’t meant for you. Congratulations on reaching the final. Good luck

– Patrick Beverley (@ patbev21) July 1, 2021

The apology is a kind gesture from Beverley, and Paul will likely appreciate it. But Beverley basically confirmed in his message what Jae Crowder was already insisting: The Suns broke the Clippers late.

“We knew they were broken. We know we broke them,” Suns striker Jae Crowder said of Beverley’s kick. “There is no better sign of defeat than right now. . . When we knew we’d won the game, we knew they’d break eventually. I think that’s basically what you saw guides in this locker room.

“And it’s a great feeling to have such a great feeling, especially in the playoffs.”

And that “great feeling” will carry over to the Suns when they go to the NBA Finals for the first time since 1993.

Categories
Entertainment

Tina Lawson Exhibits Off Beyoncé’s Singing Expertise With A Studio Clip (Video)

Roommates, if you know anything about Tina Lawson, it’s probably that she doesn’t play when it comes to her talented daughters, Beyoncé and Solange! After last week’s  campaign by Trick Daddy to discredit Beyoncé’s SANGing abilities, Tina posted a throwback clip of the superstar stunting in the studio! In the 30-second video, Beyoncé can be heard mimicking a guitar solo using only her voice during a session with producer DJ Swivel.

“I have always been in awe when she does this,” Tina wrote in her caption. “She does it with other instruments as well!!!!”

DJ Swivel, whose real name is Jordan Young, is a Toronto-born “producer, mixer, and songwriter,” according to his official website. In 2012, he secured a Grammy award for his work with Beyoncé on her album ‘4’ and followed that with work on her ‘Beyoncé’ album.

On Tuesday, Tina posted the clip from Beyoncé’s studio session for the song ‘I Care.’ It’s not clear where the clip originated, but once posted to Tina’s Instagram account, it began circulating online. Unfortunately for enthused fans, the video is only a screen recording of the song-mixing technology and not a peek at the Houston talent.

The clip is captioned “Beyoncé’s engineer (DJ Swivel shares vocals from her ‘I Care’ studio session” at the top of the video. Another caption at the bottom of the video reads “her voice is INSANE.” DJ Swivel can allegedly be heard speaking.

“Guitar solo that she mimics with her voice, which I’ve never heard before, but um let’s see if we can pull it up,” DJ Swivel said.

After the brief sound of a guitar solo, Beyoncé effortlessly takes over with her vocals. She begins strong then turns her voice up a few notches to conquer the sound—obviously demonstrating her range. After a few seconds, applause from unknown sources can be heard in the voiceover. The clip ends with DJ Swivel paying the star a deserved compliment.

“She kills it,” he said. “Yup.”

Check out the video posted by Tina below:

Want updates directly in your text inbox? Hit us up at 917-722-8057 or click here to join!

Categories
Health

New wave of Covid has arrived in Europe, says the WHO

Scotland fans will arrive at King’s Cross Station in London, England on June 17, 2021. Football games that take place during the European Championship have been blamed for an increase in the number of Covid cases.

Rob Pinney | Getty Images Sports | Getty Images

A new wave of coronavirus cases could soon hit Europe, the World Health Organization warned on Thursday, stressing that the drop in infection numbers in the region has now ended.

“A ten-week decline in the number of Covid-19 cases in the 53 countries of the WHO European Region has come to an end,” warned Hans Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe, in a press conference.

“Last week the number of cases rose 10% due to increased mixing, travel, gatherings and a relaxation of social restrictions,” he said.

The increase in cases is against the background of a “rapidly evolving situation,” said Kluge in view of the new Delta strain, which the WHO identified as a worrying variant in May.

Millions remain unvaccinated in Europe, warned Kluge, with protection from the Delta variant largely guaranteed by offering two doses of the Covid vaccines. Kluge reiterated what the data has already shown that the Delta variant is much more transmissible than the Alpha variant (which itself was more transmissible than previous strains).

Continue reading: The rapidly spreading Delta Covid variant could have different symptoms, experts say

“Delta is overtaking Alpha very quickly … and is already leading to increased hospital admissions and deaths,” said Kluge. He said the delta variant would dominate the WHO European region until August, while vaccinations had not yet caught up.

“By August, the WHO European Region will be ‘delta dominant’,” he noted, adding that 63% of people are still waiting for their first shot, while restrictions on public life are likely to be lifted by next month. For example, the UK, which has a high vaccination rate but also many cases from the Delta variant, plans to lift the restrictions on July 19.

Continue reading: The Covid Delta variant “exploded” in Great Britain – and could be a blueprint for the USA

Kluge said there were three conditions for “a new wave of excessive hospital admissions and deaths” before the fall: new variants, a deficit in vaccine intake and increased social mix.

“There will be a new wave in the WHO European Region if we don’t stay disciplined and even more if there are far fewer rules to follow,” he warned.

Medical worker Mantra Nguyen installs a new oxygen mask for a patient in the Covid-19 Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at the United Memorial Medical Center in Houston, Texas.

Nakamura go | Getty Images News | Getty Images.

Increase in infections

Smart comments come amid a worrying spike in Covid infections across Europe, despite efforts to restrict travel from high-risk regions.

Others are now following the UK, with France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Russia belonging to a group of countries where an increasing number of Covid cases are caused by the Delta variant, especially among younger, unvaccinated or not yet fully vaccinated people .

Continue reading: Europe wants to stop the Covid Delta variant. But experts say it might be too late

The increased mix, especially given the delayed UEFA Euro 2020 football tournament currently taking place across the continent, has not helped to prevent the spread of the variant with gatherings and crowds during the games.

Categories
Science

Was 2020 a Document-Breaking Hurricane Season? Sure, However. . . – Watts Up With That?

Reposted from Inside the Eye, Official Blog of the National Hurricane Center

POSTED ON JUNE 30, 2021 UPDATED ON JUNE 30, 2021

Chris Landsea and Eric Blake [1]

An Incredibly Busy Hurricane Season

The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active and destructive with 30 named storms.  (The Hurricane Specialists here at the National Hurricane Center use the designation “named storms” to refer to tropical storms, subtropical storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes.)  We even reached into the Greek alphabet for names for just the second time ever.  The United States was affected by a record 13 named storms (six of them directly impacted Louisiana), and a record yearly total of 7 billion-dollar tropical cyclone damage events was recorded by the National Centers for Environmental Information (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/time-series/US).  Nearly every country surrounding the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Sea, and tropical/subtropical North Atlantic was threatened or struck in 2020.  Total damage in the United States was around $42 billion with over 240 lives lost in the United States and our neighboring countries in the Caribbean and Central America.

Track map of all 30 named storms during the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season.

The 30 named storms in 2020 sets a record going back to the 1870s when the U.S. Signal Service (a predecessor to the National Weather Service) began tracking tropical storms and hurricanes.  The only year that comes close is 2005 with 28 named storms.  It’s also apparent that a very large increase has occurred in the number of observed named storms from an average of 7 to 10 a year in the late 1800s to an average of 15 to 18 a year in the last decade or so – a doubling in the observed numbers over a century!  (The black curve in the figure below represents a smoothed representation of the data that filters out the year to year variability in order to focus on time scales of a decade or more).

Number of combined tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricanes each year from 1878 to 2020.

However, the number of named storms is only one measure of the overall measure of a season’s activity.  And indeed, for the 2020 season, other measures of Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane activity were not record breaking.  For example, the number of hurricanes (14) was well above average, but fell short of the previous record of 15 hurricanes that occurred in 2005. 

For overall monitoring of tropical storm and hurricane activity, tropical meteorologists prefer a metric that combines how strong the peak winds reached in a tropical cyclone, and how long they lasted – called Accumulated Cyclone Energy or ACE[2].   By this measure, 2020 was extremely busy, but not even close to record breaking.  In fact, with a total ACE of 180 units, 2020 was only the 13th busiest season on record since 1878 with seasons like 1893, 1933, 1950, and 2005 substantially more active than 2020.  One can also see that while there is a long-term increase in recorded ACE since the late 1800s, it’s quite a bit less dramatic than the increase seen with named storms.  There also is a pronounced busier/quieter multi-decadal (40- to 60-year) cycle with active conditions in the 1870s to 1890s, late 1920s to 1960s, and again from the mid-1990s onward.  Conversely, quiet conditions occurred in the 1900s to early 1920s and 1970s to early 1990s.

Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE), a measure which combines the number, intensity, and duration of tropical storms and hurricanes, each year from 1878 to 2020.

Technology Change and Named Storms

So why would the record for named storms be broken in 2020, while the overall activity as measured by ACE is not even be close to setting a record?                               

The answer is very likely technology change, rather than climate change.  Today we have many advanced tools to help monitor tropical and subtropical cyclones across the entire Atlantic basin such as geostationary and low-earth orbiting satellite imagery, the Hurricane Hunter aircraft of the U.S. Air Force Reserve and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), coastal weather radars, and scatterometers (radars in space that provide surface wind measurements).  In addition, the instrumentation and measuring techniques used by the satellites, aircraft and radars are continually improving.  These technological advances allow us at the National Hurricane Center to better identify, track, and forecast tropical and subtropical cyclones with an accuracy and precision never before available.  This is great news for coastal residents and mariners, since these tools help us provide the best possible forecasts and warnings to aid in the best preparedness for these life-threatening systems.

Such technology, though, was not available back at the advent of the U.S. Signal Service’s tropical monitoring in the 1870s.  Without these sophisticated tools, meteorologists in earlier times not only had difficulty in forecasting tropical cyclones, but they also struggled in even knowing if a system existed over the open ocean.  In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, the only resource hurricane forecasters could use to monitor tropical cyclones were weather station observations provided via telegraph.  Such an approach is problematic for observing – much less forecasting – tropical cyclones that develop and spend most of their lifecycle over the open ocean.  Here’s a timeline of critical technologies that have dramatically improved tropical meteorologists’ ability to “see” and monitor tropical cyclones:

Technological improvements for monitoring tropical storm and hurricanes between 1878 and 2018.

The upshot of all of these advances in the last century is much better identification of the existence of tropical cyclones and their strongest winds (or what meteorologists call “Intensity”).  So, the further one goes back in time, the more tropical cyclones (and portions of their life cycle) were missed, even for systems that may have been a major hurricane. This holds for both counting named storms back in time as well as integrated measures like ACE.  Our database is incomplete and has – as statisticians would say – a severe undersampling bias that is much more prominent earlier in the record.  HURDAT2 – our Atlantic hurricane database – is an extremely helpful record which is a “by-product” of NHC’s forecasting operations, but it is very deficient for determining real long-term trends.  (It’s important to point out that many data entries in HURDAT2 for intensity and even the position of the named storms are educated guesses as opposed to being based on observations before the 1970s advent of regular satellite imagery). To be able to examine questions about any impact from man-made global warming (aka climate change) on long-term changes in the number of named storms, for example, one must first account for the massive technology change over the last century.

Fortunately, to help address this issue, researchers at NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) – (Gabe Vecchi and Tom Knutson in 2008’s Journal of Climate) have invented a way to estimate how many named storms were missed in the pre-geostationary satellite era (before the 1970s).  This was done by comparing the population of tracks and sizes of named storms that have occurred versus the density of observations from ships that were traversing the ocean.  If there were ships everywhere all of the time back to the 1870s (and these ships didn’t try to avoid running into tropical cyclones, which they certainly did), there would be very few named storms unaccounted for.  But the reality is that much of the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Sea was sparsely traversed by ships from the late 19th Century until the middle of the 20th Century.  (The plots below indicate the amount of shipping traffic and weather observations from those ships – Orange/Red are numerous, Green/Yellow are moderate, Gray are few, and White are no measurements).

Plots showing the density of shipping traffic across the northern Atlantic Ocean between 1878-1914, 1915-1945, and 1946-1965. White and blue areas indicate little to no ship traffic, while oranges and red indicate a high level of ship traffic.

In addition to the issue of named storms that were previously missed, due to the lack of ability to observe them, technological improvements also have effectively allowed the standards for naming a storm to be refined resulting in better identification of weak (near the 39-mph/63-kph threshold) systems.   Tropical warnings for many of the weak, short-lived named storms in past eras were not issued, and thus these systems were not automatically included into the HURDAT2 database.  In the cases when forecasters in earlier years were either 1) not sure that the system possessed the required 39-mph/63-kph winds, 2) assumed that it would be too short in duration, or 3) thought that the system was non-tropical (i.e., with a warm to cold gradient of temperature across the system’s center), they usually did not issue named storm advisories, and therefore these systems did not get added into the historical database[3].

In research that the lead author had investigated (Chris Landsea and company in 2010’s Journal of Climate), we discovered that weak, short-lived (lasting less than or equal to two days) named storms – aka “Shorties” – had shown a dramatic increase in occurrence over time.  There were only about one a year in HURDAT2 up until the 1920s, about 3 per year from the 1930s to the 1990s, and jumping up to around 5 per year since 2000.

Number of tropical storms and subtropical storm “Shorties,” those which had a duration of 2 days or less, each year from 1878 to 2020.

Of the 30 named storms in 2020, seven were Shorties and a few more were just longer than two days in duration.  Of these seven Shorties, four are very unlikely to have been “named” before around 2000:  Dolly, Edouard, Omar, and Alpha.  (Of the remaining Shorties, Bertha and Kyle may have been named, while Fay likely would have been named).  These and other weak, short-lived systems since 2000 have been observed and recognized as tropical storms due to new tools available to forecasters including scatterometersAdvanced Microwave Sounding Units, the Advanced Dvorak Technique, and the Cyclone Phase Space diagrams.   The Hurricane Specialists here at the National Hurricane Center then are able to issue advisories on these named storms in real-time and then include them into the HURDAT2 database at the end of the season.

Examples of four “Shorties” in 2020 that were very unlikely to have been designated as named storms in the past.

From a warning perspective for mariners and coastal residents, it is very beneficial that the National Hurricane Center is now naming (and recording) these Shorties.  But without accounting for how technology affects our records, one can come to some unfounded conclusions about true long-term changes in named storm activity.  In addition, it is worth pointing out, but perhaps not too surprising, that it has been shown by the researchers at Princeton University and at GFDL (Villarini et al. 2011, Journal of Geophysical Research) that the observed increase in Shorties has no association with any environmental factor known to influence named storms including man-made global warming.  It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the dramatic increase in the number of these Shorties is simply due to better observational technology.

An “Apples-to-Apples” Comparison of the 2020 Long-Lived Named Storms with the Past

So how can we come up then with a more apples-to-apples comparison of how the number of named storms has actually changed over the last 100 years plus?  Here are the steps that were performed in the 2010 Journal of Climate paper, about Shorties, updated for data through the 2020 hurricane season:

(1) Start with the original HURDAT2 database of named storms from 1878 onward:

Number of combined tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricanes each year from 1878 to 2020.

(2) Remove all of the Shorties from the original database, leaving just the long-lived named storms:

Number of combined long-lived (more than 2 days) tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricanes each year from 1878 to 2020.

(3) Add in the best estimate of the number of missed long-lived named storms before geostationary satellite imagery and the Dvorak technique became available:

Number of combined long-lived (more than 2 days) tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricanes each year from 1878 to 2020, adjusted by adding “missed” systems.

The resulting final time series shows tremendous variability, with highest values of 23 in 2020 and 20 in 1887 and 2005, and lowest values of 2 in 1914, and 3 in 1925, 1982, and 1994.  Overall, there remains a modest upward trend in the database over the entire time series superimposed with quasi-cyclic variations seen in the ACE data as was discussed earlier: higher activity in the late 1800s, mid-1900s, and from the mid-1990s onward, but lower activity in the early 1900s, and in the 1970s to early 1990s. These cycles of higher and lower activity have been linked to a natural phenomenon called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) (see paper by Stan Goldenberg, Chris Landsea, and colleagues in 2001’s Science).  Recent controversial research, however, is calling into question whether the AMO actually exists (see paper by Michael Mann and company in 2021’s Science).  Regardless of the validity of the AMO, the bottom line is that the doubling in the number of named storms over a century is very likely due to technology change, not natural or man-made climate change.

(4) And finally, add in the uncertainty to these estimates with the reasonable largest number of missed long-lived named storms. This represents the 95% method uncertainty value, or in layman’s terms, the largest reasonable number of missed systems.

Highest reasonable number of combined long-lived (more than 2 days) tropical storms, subtropical storms, and hurricane each year from 1878 to 2020, adjusted by adding a high estimate of “missed” systems.

Note that after adding on the uncertainty to the missed number of long-lived named storms (blue coloring), we can conclude that 1887 and 2020 may be just as busy for the number of long-lived named storms. 

The New “Normal” for Named Storm Numbers

With the completion of the 2011 to 2020 decade, climatologists are updating records to provide a new “normal” (or average) to compare against new weather.  The previous 30-year based climate period to decide if a weather event or season was unusual or expected was 1981-2010.  For weather phenomena around the world, we’re now changing the years to compute normal conditions to 1991-2020.  (The 30-year normal concept is designed to provide a long enough time period to obtain relatively stable statistics, and to also have the time period reflect the most recent weather experienced over a human generation.  Thirty years is a good compromise between these two aspects.) It might seem odd to non-meteorologists to change the definition of “average” every ten years, but meteorologists/climatologists do so because climate is never stationary, i.e., the climate is always changing.  The climate has both natural variations (like El Niño/La Niña, effects from volcanic eruptions, and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) and man-made changes (like urban heat island, land use changes, and greenhouse gas emissions) that affect what’s been observed around the last three decades.  These revisions of new averages are done around the world in conjunction with the World Meteorological Organization.  Thus NOAA is updating the average of temperature, precipitation, and other meteorological parameters to reflect what has been observed.

This shift in the period used for the 30-year climate standard changes the definitions of average (or “normal”) levels of tropical cyclone activity to the following for the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea, and Gulf of Mexico (see this report by NOAA for more details):

System Type Old 1981-2010 Average New 1991-2020 Average
Named Storms 12 14
Hurricanes 6 7
Major Hurricanes 3 3

Comparison of the number of named storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes in the Atlantic basin using the old 30-year (1981-2020) averaging period with the new 30-year (1991-2020) averaging period.

These changes, therefore, reflect that most of the new 1991-2020 climatology period is within an active period that began in 1995 and includes the impact of the technology changes discussed above that have led to the National Hurricane Center more accurately diagnosing and naming more systems in the last couple of decades.    

Take Aways

The answers and conclusions to “Was 2020 a Record-Breaking Hurricane Season? Yes, but…”:

  • Doubling in the number of named storms over a century is very likely due to technology change, not natural or man-made climate change;
  • 2020 set a record for number of named storms, but given the limitations in our records it is possible that other years (such as 1887) were just as active for long-lived named storms; and
  • The boost in average or “normal” conditions from 12 to 14 named storms is due to a combination of a busy era that began in 1995 as well as the ability of the National Hurricane Center to observe and accurately diagnose more weak, short-lived named storms than had been done previously, mostly due to technology advancements.

A follow-on blog post, putting these observed changes of the number of named storms into context of what may be expected to occur in the future, is expected to be published in the near future.

[2] Accumulated Cyclone Energy is calculated by squaring the named storm’s intensity – maximum sustained surface winds (expressed in knots)  – for every six hours that the system had at least a 39-mph (63-kph) intensity. 

[3] There is on-going research into updating and revising the HURDAT2 database for the seasons of 1851 to 1999 in order to improve and make more complete the records that currently exist.  This is done by obtaining the original named storm observations from ships, weather stations, Hurricane Hunter aircraft, radars, and satellites and using today’s best meteorological analyses to revise the positions, intensities, and statuses in the database.  This work also adds in newly discovered named storms that were not identified as such at the time. Currently, the reanalysis project has added 35 years (1851 to 1885) to our official records and has revised the 1886 through 1965 hurricane seasons. 

HT/Mumbles McGuirck

3.7
3
votes

Article Rating

Like this:

Like Loading…

Categories
Sport

Lionel Messi’s Barcelona contract is being held up by La Liga monetary guidelines

5:02 p.m. ET

  • Sam Marsden

  • Moises Llorens

Barcelona President Joan Laporta said La Liga financial fair play rules are preventing Lionel Messi from signing a new deal with the club.

The 34-year-old Messi became a free agent for the first time in his professional career on Thursday when his contract with Barca expired.

– Messi at Barcelona: The Ultimate Story
– La Liga on ESPN +: Stream live matches and replays (US only)

La Liga president Javier Tebas has warned the Catalan club that they will have to cut back in order to register a new Messi deal before next season.

“We want him to stay and Leo wants everything to be on the right track,” Laporta told Onda Cero on Thursday.

“We still have financial fair play [issue] to clarify … we are in the process of finding the best solution for all parties. “

Barca had the highest salary cap in Spain before the pandemic, at € 671m a year, but by March that was almost halved to € 347m.

The eviction began last summer with the departures of Luis Suarez, Arturo Vidal and Ivan Rakitic, but Barca need to cut their wage bills further to register Messi’s new deal and four summer signings: Sergio Agüero, Eric Garcia, Memphis Depay and Emerson Royal.

So far, Barca have only been able to switch fringe players during the transfer window, with Juan Miranda, Jean-Clair Todibo, Matheus Fernandes and Konrad de la Fuente all leaving. Left-back Junior Firpo is also joining Leeds United.

However, the club has hit a wall when it comes to getting rid of high earners. There has been no movement with Neto, Samuel Umtiti, Philippe Coutinho or Miralem Pjanic.

Lionel Messi’s contract with Barcelona has expired. Photo by JOSEP LAGO / AFP via Getty Images

Sources at the club say they expect things to accelerate after the end of Euro 2020 and the Copa America, while they also investigate other ways to cut labor costs.

Any money Barca bring in from transfers could also help raise the salary cap for next season.

Messi’s last four-year deal, which expired on June 30, was worth over € 500 million made up of the signing fees, his salary, bonuses and image rights.

Barca can’t afford to pay him at the same rate and are looking for ways to compensate him over a longer period of time to ensure he doesn’t have to put up with excessive pay cuts.

Options include continuing to pay him an ambassadorial role if he leaves Barca for Major League Soccer in a couple of years, as he requested, and the chance to return to the club in a backroom role afterwards.

Messi was officially registered as a Barcelona player for the first time 20 years ago in 2001 and has been under contract with the club ever since.

He asked to leave last summer but was refused by then President Josep Maria Bartomeu. Laporta has since replaced Bartomeu, and ESPN stated on Wednesday that Messi has become open to extending his stay at Camp Nou as a result.

Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain have been watching the situation for the past six months but neither will make a serious game for the Argentina international.

The importance of Messi to becoming a free agent did not go unnoticed, however: the old boys of former Newell club invited him to social media, while the Brazilian Ibis Sport Club promised him “the worst time in the world” if he failed joins them.

Categories
Science

China releases sound and video of its rover touchdown

Do you remember the stunning video of the Perseverance rover landing on Mars? The Chinese National Space Agency (CNSA) has now released similar video footage from their Zhurong rover, including the sounds recorded as they plunged through the Martian atmosphere on their way to landing in Utopia Planitia. The CNSA also released noises of the rover driving off the landing platform.

Big Zhurong Update: Here is the full footage from the EDL of the Zhurong Rover showing the parachute deployment, backshell separation and landing, including the very cool hovering during the hazard avoidance phase. [CNSA/PEC] pic.twitter.com/iWUXrFKf40

– Andrew Jones (@AJ_FI) June 27, 2021

Footage from the rover landing on May 14, 2021 shows the deployment of the parachute, the separation of the backshell, and a view of the lander as it approached the surface of Mars. Or as the CNSA put it in its press release, “the descent process of the landing patrol”.

Interestingly, the parachute appears to have similar markings to the Perseverance parachute, which contained a secret message in binary code. The message “Dare Mighty Things” is a slogan of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and originally comes from a speech given by the 26th from the USA, Theodore Roosevelt.

The sounds from the surface of Zhurong exiting the lander were captured by its climate station, which is mainly used to record wind noise.

“The audio includes live sounds during the process of turning the rover’s drive mechanism on and off, driving on a ramp, and hitting the surface of Mars,” said CNSA. “The sound of the rover moving away comes mainly from the drive mechanism, the friction between the wheels and the ramp, and the friction between the wheels and the ground.”

The sounds are muffled, perhaps due to the weaker atmosphere on Mars compared to that on Earth. It will be interesting to hear more sounds from Mars from Zhurong over the course of the three month mission.

The photo shows the wheel tracks left by the Mars rover Zhurong. Photo credit: Xinhua and CNSA.

Perseverance had the first working microphone on Mars. At least three previous Mars missions had microphones as part of their design. The first to fly to Mars on board NASA’s Mars Polar Lander in 1999, but crashed on the surface. A similar microphone was supposed to be part of the Netlander mission of the French space agency CNES, which was due to launch in 2007, but the mission was canceled due to funding difficulties. The Phoenix lander, which touched down near the North Pole of Mars in 2008, had a microphone that was part of its descent vision system. However, shortly before the mission began, the engineers discovered a potential electronics problem in the microphone that could affect other systems, and the microphone was disabled.

The video also includes footage from a remote wifi camera that the rover placed near the landing pad. The Zhurong rover then returned to pose for a “family photo” with the lander.

A wireless camera took this “group photo” of China’s lander and rover Tianwen-1 on the surface of Mars. Photo credit: Chinese Space Agency

Like this:

To like Loading…