– Many buildings in Toy-Tepa were damaged by this quake. Witnesses report cracks in many houses there, some of the houses were completely destroyed, as local newspapers are reporting. So far there are no information about injuries.
– From user input, there has been 2 reports of major cracks in houses, and 1 that the power is out. Internet however not.
– Good news – the earthquake has been felt IV-V in Tashkent. This means that there will be likely less damage than first thought.
– According to Uzbekistan Seismology, the earthquake occurred 32km south of Tashkent, and 7 km from Toy-Tepa.
Expected shaking based on the M5.6 Magnitude of USGS. The final Magnitude was set by the Uzbek seismologists to M5.2, seriously weaker and having a lesser impact than this image shows
– A strong earthquake occurred in Eastern Uzbekistan. It is expected that there will be damage.
It has been given a M5.2 locally, at a depth of 12km.
This earthquake is a bit to the south of Tashkent according to the hypocenters.
Expected shaking values of the most important locations near the epicenter
It has hit right by Tashkent. We should remind viewers of the 1966 earthquake which destroyed much of Tashkent and had the same magnitude but was 3-8km in depth and right under Tashkent – 10 were killed, 1000 injured, 100000 homeless where 28000 buildings collapsed. It is important to note that the USSR figures of this event have never been properly corrected.
Most important Earthquake Data:
Magnitude : 5.3
Local Time (conversion only below land) : 2013-05-25 03:18:35
Boobs, or as the fledgling Illuminati might call them: “Yet another chance at a mass Blue Pill moment”.
First off let me say, I’m not a Doctor; I’m a singer and stunt person – and this is, as with my commentary last week on the healing power of plants, purely my opinion.
There are so many factors wrapped up in movie star / sex icon Angelina Jolie’s recent announcement to dismember herself by prophylactically removing her, currently perfectly healthy breasts, that I won’t be able to cover all the dark layers of this recent Illuminati creation, but I’ll try my best to touch on a few of the pertinent ones.
First of all, let me say this trend of mutilating women is nothing new in America and the planet as a whole. It would be interesting to know what percentage of women reading this right now have had the ‘H’ word, i.e. hysterectomy, thrown at them at least once in their lifetime. As for years now, hysterectomies have been the ‘cure of choice’ offered by mainstream medicine for symptoms ranging from excessive menstrual bleeding to fibroids to endometriosis to even sadness. I, myself, was offered this ‘easy breezy panacea’ over 5 times in my life and had to search high and low for my own way out. I had to create my own balance and health to avoid the mutilation option that was being sold to me with the zeal and fervor of a door-to-door salesman.
So this ‘just cut it off tactic’ is nothing new. What is new is using a movie star/sex icon with such global reach in the digital age to ‘sell’ the completely warped concept to women all over the world that this is the only option one has to not be killed by your breasts, your ovaries or uterus. The message: “Just remove body parts and all will be fine.”
All is not fine – let me say this very clearly to anyone who has up to this point bought the whole Jolie double mastectomy story: Cancer is not a breast problem. It is an environment problem and by that I mean it’s the environment you create for yourself –i.e. What you take in in the form of nutrition, supplements, air, food, water, physical activity, life purpose, the people you choose to surround yourself with, the stress you allow yourself to put up with and the amount of joy you allow in. The phrase ‘Epigenetics’ is often used to encompass many of these factors
It’s not just absurd, it’s downright dangerous what’s being sold to women via this latest media / Big Pharma move. To mis-direct women even farther away than they’ve already been led…farther away from taking true care of, honoring and loving their bodies and keeping them healthy and vital for life (which by the way is possible…) is vastly unhealthy.
Instead women are being fed the message that:
* Everything is out of your control
* You have no power
* Your breast, your uterus, your ovaries, essentially everything that makes you a woman is dangerous and can and will kill you so your best bet…rip it all out and cut it all off.
This dangerous message, this lie, in my humble opinion, is bordering on abuse of women on a mass scale.
Curious, as I write this that the same ‘hard sell’ has not been pushed on the males of the world. I’ve not heard one male superstar or actor or celebrity yet announce that all young men should have their testicles removed. If it’s really a game changer to remove body parts prophylactically to prevent death (which by the way is going to happen with or without breasts, testicles or any other organ you remove to quote ‘save your life’) – shouldn’t it apply to men as well? But we’ve never heard Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt jumping on the mass media bandwagon saying “I’ve decided to remove my testicles as they have proven to be a health hazard” thereby encouraging young men all over the world to follow suit. No, we have yet to hear that announcement …
Finally, we all probably know by now know of the blatant ties of this latest move to Corporate Profits as we watched the stock prices of Myriad Genetics, the company who developed the $3,000 BRAC Analysis test that Jolie referred to in her Times piece soar since her announcement. In addition, it’s now known that a whopping 20% of women’s genes are currently owned by private corporations/monopolies, poised to farm their future billions off you. Yes, that’s right, a Corporation owns your genes women. Not only that, every cancer patient diagnosed and put through ‘the system’ yields $1million in profits for Big Phrama and the medical money machine. Are you now connecting the dots?
I’d like to conclude by saying to women everywhere: You are not powerless. You are not wrong. Your body is not wrong. Your body is not bad or evil or dangerous. Your body is not in need of changing or mutilation to live. Your body is your best friend, an amazing creation and will never steer you wrong if you speak to it, develop an intimate relationship with it, and listen to it.
So, do your homework, take responsibility for your own state of mind, body and happiness and don’t willingly give it away to someone else to decide for you. If, after doing your research you decided that mastectomy or hysterectomy or another removal of a body part is best then it will serve you. But you’ll have come to that conclusion on your own not by following someone else’s directives.
You have so much knowledge and power and wisdom within that the world is hungry for. Go within and seek that wisdom and knowing. You owe it to yourself . Women, this is your time. Take back your power, protect your joy and thrive.
Last updated on May 24, 2013 at 12:00 am EDT by in5d Alternative News
The following is a list of Monsanto Free Seed Companies. If the government will not stand up for our rights, then it is time to make a statement on our own. Personally, I’ve bought seeds from Baker Creek Seed Company, who have a very large assortment of heirloom seeds, but feel free to shop and compare any and all of these companies.
Names are in alphabetical order. Try to search for a company in your bioregion when possible. Also, it never hurts to ask any company if they sell any Seminis seeds or seeds from Seminis’ partners.
(Sites with *asterisks* have the additional approval and endorsement by Farmwars.info and verification by recognized leaders in the battle)
Organic farmers have yet another environmental hazard to contend with, this time compliments of the U.S. Government in the form of chemtrails. A mess of toxic chemicals, these harmful sprays pollute the soil, water and air while compromising the health of humans, animals and plants. And now Monsanto has developed seeds that will weather the effect of the sprays, creating a tidy profit for the corporation while organics suffer. If this poisoning continues, true organic farming may become impossible in the not so distant future.
Chemtrail cocktail
Geo-engineering hides behind the claim of arresting global warming through atmospheric spraying of arsenic, aerosol, aluminum, barium, depleted uranium and substantial amounts of mercury. There’s only one problem – what goes up, must come down. These chemicals are seriously polluting our waterways and soil while seeping into crops and contaminating livestock, not to mention changing the weather patterns. Plants are especially sensitive to the soil degradation that occurs with chemtrail spraying, creating serious issues concerning our food supply.
What does the top GM seed corporation do when crops die from chemtrail contamination? It profits. True to form, Monsanto has used the devastation caused by geo-engineering to its advantage by creating patented GM seeds that withstand the effects of chemtrails. The seeds are designed to survive extreme weather conditions, pollution, salt stress, heavy metals and mineralized soils. According to Farm Wars, the patents for stress-tolerant plants not only include the main GM crops of corn, soybean, wheat, cotton, rice and canola, but also:
What this means is that these mutant plants will be able to survive the onslaught of chemtrail toxins and severe weather changes whereas organic crops are bound to whither and die – giving Monsanto further control over the global food supply. Even if organic farmers shield their crops from atmospheric chemicals and unpredictable weather, toxins still leach into the groundwater, eventually polluting the soil and plants. This scenario is a boon for Monsanto yet a disaster for those who appreciate clean and healthy food.
If we truly want to preserve organic farming, chemtrails must be stopped. Global Skywatchand Kimberly Gamble of Thrive Movement offer several strategies to help shut down the spraying.
Photo by NASA via Getty ImagesA satellite image of Hurricane Sandy as it approached the East Coast last year
The residents of Moore, Oklahoma are still cleaning up from the EF5 tornado that tore through their town on May 20. 24 people died in the twisters, and thousands of homes and buildings were damaged or destroyed. The total bill may come in at over $2 billion, which would make the Moore tornado the most expensive in American history.
So this may not be the best time, but the Moore tornado almost surely won’t be the last billion-dollar weather the U.S. faces in 2013. On Thursday the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released its annual outlook on the summer Atlantic hurricane season—and it is not good. Technically it will be “active or extremely active,” which is fine if you’re talking about a workout session, and less good if you’re projecting how many potentially devastating tropical storms will hit the U.S. mainland.
Altogether NOAA predicts a 70% likelihood that 13 to 20 named storms—which have winds that sustain at 39 mph or higher—will occur, of which 7 to 11 could become hurricanes (winds higher than 74 mph). Of those three to six may become major hurricanes, which means Category 3 to 5, with winds above 11 mph. That’s all well above the average for an Atlantic hurricane season, which lasts from June 1 to the end of November.
Why will this summer potentially be so stormy? For one, an atmospheric climate pattern, including a strong African monsoon, that’s been ongoing since 1995 will help supercharge the atmosphere for tropical storms. Warmer-than-average water temperatures in the tropical Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea will lead to more of the wet, hot air that provides the fuel for hurricanes. And there is no El Nino—the alternating climate pattern that means unusually warm sea temperatures—which would usually suppress the formation of hurricanes.
It’s important to remember that NOAA is only predicting whether or not hurricanes and tropical storms will develop—not whether they will make landfall like Superstorm Sandy did last fall. Only three of the 19 named storms that formed in the Atlantic last year made enough of an impact on the U.S. to cause any real damage. Most storms form in the Atlantic and never leave. It’s not just the strength of a storm that makes it dangerous—it’s location.
Superstorm Sandy made that clear. By the time storm made landfall on the East Coast, it had actually weakened to the point that it was barely a hurricane at all, though it was an unusually massive and wet storm. Had it spun back out to sea, we never would have remembered its name. Instead, though, Sandy tore through the most populated and expensive property in the U.S., flooding parts of New York City and causing some $65 billion in damage. We can only imagine what kind of destruction it would have caused had Sandy been an even stronger storm.
There’s no way of knowing how many of the storms to come this summer will indeed make landfall, but it stands to reason that the more storms that form, the greater the chance one will eventually end up in our backyard. According to NOAA, billion-dollar disasters are increasing in the U.S. at a rate of about 4.8% a year—there were 11 just last year. That’s mostly a result of economic growth—as the country gets richer, even with inflation, any weather disaster that disrupt the economy will cost more. But climate change is likely playing a role as well—in the case of hurricanes, warming temperatures seem to make storms stronger, and rising sea levels increase the threat of coastal flooding.
In any case, the growing danger from extreme weather just underlines the need to invest in forecasting, preparation and adaptation, as acting NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan said:
With the devastation of Sandy fresh in our minds, and another active season predicted, everyone at NOAA is committed to providing life-saving forecasts in the face of these storms and ensuring that Americans are prepared and ready ahead of time.” said Kathryn Sullivan, Ph.D., NOAA acting administrator. “As we saw first-hand with Sandy, it’s important to remember that tropical storm and hurricane impacts are not limited to the coastline. Strong winds, torrential rain, flooding, and tornadoes often threaten inland areas far from where the storm first makes landfall.
Of course, if you really want to worry, remember that last year NOAA predict that the Atlantic hurricane season would be just a little above normal. It ended up being considerably more active. But there’s one thing we can be sure of—there won’t be another Hurricane Sandy. That name has been retired.
A portion of an Interstate 5 highway bridge in Mount Vernon, Wash., collapsed Thursday night, sending cars and people into the water, authorities said.
Skagit Valley Hospital in Mount Vernon, Wash., was expecting two patients taken from the accident, according to Kari Ranten, a spokeswoman. She believed a third patient was transported to another hospital. She did not know the patients’ conditions.
“N/B and S/B lanes of I-5 Skagit River Bridge collapsed,” Washington State Trooper Mark Francis posted on Twitter. “People and cars in water.”
The collapse occurred around 7 p.m. and the portion of the that collapsed was four lanes wide, The Associated Press reported.
Xavier Grospe, 62, who lives near the river, told the AP he could see three cars partially submerged in the water with what appeared to be one person per vehicle, with drivers on top of vehicles or sitting on open window openings.
“It doesn’t look like anybody’s in danger right now,” Grospe said.
Strong earthquake in an merely unpopulated are in northern California
Last update: May 24, 2013 at 8:19 am by By Ashish Khanal
A couple of aftershocks up to M 4.9 occured. There are so far no reports of any structural damage.
The populated areas Greenville, Westwood and Chester (5000 inhabitants in total) may have felt a MMI V moderate shaking.
39000 people may have felt a light shaking.
Shaking map of the epicenter are
9000 people may have felt a moderate shaking based on USGS experience reports, this means that this earthquake can be labeled “harmless” for serious damage and injuries.
The many I Have Felt It reports which can be read in this site are confirming the USGS numbers.
11km (7mi) WNW of Greenville, California
43km (27mi) SW of Susanville, California
60km (37mi) NE of Magalia, California
67km (42mi) NE of Paradise, California
159km (99mi) NW of Carson City, Nevada
Most important Earthquake Data:
Magnitude : 5.7
Local Time (conversion only below land) : 2013-05-23 20:47:07
– A large crack also appeared in a bridge in Jakutsk in eastern Siberia, only 1500 km west of the epicenter. Samara and Moscow are more than 6000 km east of the epicenter.
– Some damage reports arrive from Moskow and Samara, where a few buildings cracked. One building in Samara suffered major damage.
In St. Petersburg, one person was sick due to the shaking of the office tower.
– An other country, feeling this quake, is Kazakhstan. 20 people in Uralsk in western part of the country reported authorities they felt it.
– Seems that this quake was felt over the whole Eurasian plate. Russian media report that also some people in Romania felt it. We received reports from Finland and Denmark and a perso from Italy gave their report to ESMC.
In St. Peterburg one more building was evacuated. Both towns, Moscow and St. Petersburg, usually do not have any earthquakes. So people are frightened if it happenes.
There are still no news about damage from Kamtchatka. But usually those buildings widestand larger intensities than V, so no heavy damage is expected.
– Many parts of China were also affected by the quake. People from different provinces said they felt the quake, among them Heilongjiang, Gansu, Hubei, Chongqing, Jiangsu and Sichuan. No damage was reported from China.
– In Moscow at least two offica buildings were evacuated due to the quake. Several hundred people had to leave their workplace for some time. There are no damages reported, but some people in Moscow said they experienced an aftershock. No quake was registered around Moskow.
– Now a reader from Finland told us that this quake was felt there.
– No tsunami was registered on russian coast so far and the tsunami warning was lifted.
Russian newspaper confirm that this quake was also felt in St. Petersburg on Baltic Sea.
– We also received reports of people in Alaska and Canada who might have felt this quake. If you also felt it, please tell us.
So far, there are no reports of damage from Kamtchatka. There it was felt with moderate intensity. Also parts of western Siberia experienced a moderate shaking. People in Moskow and Tomsk report a weak shaking.
India and Japan also experienced only a weak shaking.
– In Petropavlosvsk this quake caused panic. People ran out of their buildings, schools were evacuated.
– The earthquake was felt in many parts of Russia, including Siberia and Moscow. Also people in Japan and India felt this quake. There is a tsunami warning for the russian pacific coasts.
– There exists a very very low tsunami threat from this M8.2 off Kamchatka if the 600km depth is correct.
– The cool subducting plate off the Pacific, slowly moves down into the mantle, and these bits of old crust can still be brittle enough to make big earthquakes, even 600km down.
AN EARTHQUAKE HAS OCCURRED WITH THESE PRELIMINARY PARAMETERS
ORIGIN TIME - 0745 PM HST 23 MAY 2013
COORDINATES - 54.7 NORTH 153.4 EAST
LOCATION - SEA OF OKHOTSK
MAGNITUDE - 8.2 MOMENT
EVALUATION
BASED ON ALL AVAILABLE DATA A DESTRUCTIVE PACIFIC-WIDE TSUNAMI IS
NOT EXPECTED AND THERE IS NO TSUNAMI THREAT TO HAWAII. REPEAT. A
DESTRUCTIVE PACIFIC-WIDE TSUNAMI IS NOT EXPECTED AND THERE IS NO
TSUNAMI THREAT TO HAWAII.
THIS WILL BE THE ONLY STATEMENT ISSUED FOR THIS EVENT UNLESS
ADDITIONAL DATA ARE RECEIVED.
USGS gives this massive earthquake with M 8.2, luckily in a relatively safe depth of more than 600 km.
In 2011, a series of violent severe storms swept across the Plains and Southeast U.S., bringing an astonishing six billion-dollar disasters in a three-month period. The epic tornado onslaught killed 552 people, caused $25 billion in damage, and brought three of the five largest tornado outbreaks since record keeping began in 1950. In May 2011, the Joplin, Missouri tornado did $3 billion in damage–the most expensive tornado in world history–and killed 158 people, the largest death toll from a U.S. tornado since 1947. An astounding 1050 EF-1 and stronger tornadoes ripped though the U.S. for the one-year period ending that month. This was the greatest 12-month total for these stronger tornadoes in the historical record, and an event so rare that we might expect it to occur only once every 62,500 years. Fast forward now to May 2012 – April 2013. Top-ten coldest temperatures on record across the Midwest during March and April of 2013, coming after a summer of near-record heat and drought in 2012, brought about a remarkable reversal in our tornado tally–the lowest 12-month total of EF-1 and stronger tornadoes on record–just 197. This was an event so rare we might expect it to occur only once every 3,000 – 4,000 years. And now, in May 2013, after another shattering EF-5 tornado in Moore, Oklahoma, residents of the Midwest must be wondering, are we back to the 2011 pattern? Which of these extremes is climate change most likely to bring about? Is climate change already affecting these storms? These are hugely important questions, but ones we don’t have good answers for. Climate change is significantly impacting the environment that storms form in, giving them more moisture and energy to draw upon, and altering large-scale jet stream patterns. We should expect that this will potentially cause major changes in tornadoes and severe thunderstorms. Unfortunately, tornadoes and severe thunderstorms are the extreme weather phenomena we have the least understanding on with respect to climate change. We don’t have a good enough database to determine how tornadoes may have changed in recent decades, and our computer models are currently not able to tell us if tornadoes are more likely to increase or decrease in a future warmer climate.
Video 1. Remarkable video of the tornado that hit Tuscaloosa, Alabama on April 27, 2011, part of the largest and most expensive tornado outbreak in U.S. history–the $10.2 billion dollar Southeast U.S. Super Outbreak of April 25 – 28, 2011. With damage estimated at $2.2 billion, the Tuscaloosa tornado was the 2nd most expensive tornado in world history, behind the 2011 Joplin, Missouri tornado. Fast forward to minute four to see the worst of the storm.
Figure 1. Will climate change increase the incidence of these sorts of frightening radar images? Multiple hook echoes from at least ten supercell thunderstorms cover Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee in this radar image taken during the height of the April 27, 2011 Super Outbreak, the largest and most expensive tornado outbreak in U.S. history. A multi-hour animation is available here.
Changes in past tornado activity difficult to assess due to a poor database
It’s tough to tell if tornadoes may have changed due to a changing climate, since the tornado database is of poor quality for climate research. We cannot measure the wind speeds of a tornado directly, except in very rare cases when researchers happen to be present with sophisticated research equipment. A tornado has to run over a building and cause damage before an intensity rating can be assigned. The National Weather Service did not begin doing systematic tornado damage surveys until 1976, so all tornadoes from 1950 – 1975 were assigned a rating on the Fujita Scale (F-scale) based on old newspaper accounts and photos. An improved Enhanced Fujita (EF) scale to rate tornadoes was adopted in 2007. The transition to the new EF scale still allows valid comparisons of tornadoes rated, for example, EF-5 on the new scale and F5 on the old scale, but does create some problems for tornado researchers studying long-term changes in tornado activity. More problematic is the major changes in the Fujita-scale rating process that occurred in the mid-1970s (when damage surveys began), and again in 2001, when scientists began rating tornadoes lower because of engineering concerns and unintended consequences of National Weather Service policy changes. According to Brooks (2013), “Tornadoes in the early part of the official National Weather Service record (1950 – approximately 1975) are rated with higher ratings than the 1975 – 2000 period, which, in turn, had higher ratings than 2001 – 2007.” All of these factors cause considerable uncertainty when attempting to assess if tornadoes are changing over time. At a first glance, it appears that tornado frequency has increased in recent decades (Figure 2). However, this increase may be entirely caused by factors unrelated to climate change:
1) Population growth has resulted in more tornadoes being reported. Heightened awareness of tornadoes has also helped; the 1996 Hollywood blockbuster movie Twister “played no small part” in a boom in reported tornadoes, according to tornado scientist Dr. Nikolai Dotzek.
2) Advances in weather radar, particularly the deployment of about 100 Doppler radars across the U.S. in the mid-1990s, has resulted in a much higher tornado detection rate.
3) Tornado damage surveys have grown more sophisticated over the years. For example, we now commonly classify multiple tornadoes along a damage path that might have been attributed to just one twister in the past.
Figure 2. The total number of U.S. tornadoes since 1950 has shown a substantial increase. Image credit: NOAA/NCDC.
Figure 3. The number of EF-0 (blue line) and EF-1 and stronger tornadoes (maroon squares) reported in the U.S. since 1950. The rise in number of tornadoes in recent decades is seen to be primarily in the weakest EF-0 twisters. As far as we can tell (which isn’t very well, since the historical database of tornadoes is of poor quality), there is not a decades-long increasing trend in the numbers of tornadoes stronger than EF-0. Since these stronger tornadoes are the ones most likely to be detected, this implies that climate change, as yet, is not having a noticeable impact on U.S. tornadoes. Image credit: Kunkel, Kenneth E., et al., 2013, “Monitoring and Understanding Trends in Extreme Storms: State of Knowledge,” Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 94, 499–514, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00262.1
Figure 4. Insured damage losses in the U.S. due to thunderstorms and tornadoes, as compiled by Munich Re. Damages have increased sharply in the past decade, but not enough to say that an increase in tornadoes and severe thunderstorms may be to blame.
Stronger tornadoes do not appear to be increasing
Tornadoes stronger than EF-0 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale (or F0 on the pre-2007 Fujita Scale) are more likely to get counted, since they tend to cause significant damage along a long track. Thus, the climatology of these tornadoes may offer a clue as to how climate change may be affecting severe weather. If the number of strong tornadoes has actually remained constant over the years, we should expect to see some increase in these twisters over the decades, since more buildings have been erected in the paths of tornadoes. However, if we look at the statistics of U.S. tornadoes stronger than EF-0 or F-0 since 1950, there does not appear to be any increase in their number (Figure 3.) Damages from thunderstorms and tornadoes have shown a significant increase in recent decades (Figure 4), but looking at damages is a poor way to determine if climate change is affecting severe weather, since there are so many human factors involved. A study in Environmental Hazards (Simmons et al., 2012) found no increase in tornado damages from 1950 – 2011, after normalizing the data for increases in wealth and property. Also, Bouwer (BAMS, 2010) reviewed 22 disaster loss studies world-wide, published 2001 – 2010; in all 22 studies, increases in wealth and population were the “most important drivers for growing disaster losses.” His conclusion: human-caused climate change “so far has not had a significant impact on losses from natural disasters.” Studies that normalize disaster data are prone to error, as revealed by a 2012 study looking at storm surge heights and damages. Given the high amount of uncertainty in the tornado and tornado damage databases, the conclusion of the “official word” on climate science, the 2007 United Nations IPCC report, pretty much sums things up: “There is insufficient evidence to determine whether trends exist in small scale phenomena such as tornadoes, hail, lighting, and dust storms.” Until a technology is developed that can reliably detect all tornadoes, there is no hope of determining how tornadoes might be changing in response to a changing climate. According to Doswell (2007): “I see no near-term solution to the problem of detecting detailed spatial and temporal trends in the occurrence of tornadoes by using the observed data in its current form or in any form likely to evolve in the near future.”
Figure 5. Wind shear from the surface to 6 km altitude in May on days with days with higher risk conditions for severe weather (upper-10% instability and wind shear) over the South Central U.S. has shown no significant change between 1950 – 2010. Image credit: Brooks, 2013, “The spatial distribution of severe thunderstorm and tornado environments from global reanalysis data”, Atmospheric Research Volumes 67-68, July-September 2003, Pages 73-94.
Figure 6. Six-hourly periods per year with environments supportive of significant severe thunderstorms in the U.S. east of the Rocky Mountains. The line is a local least-squares regression fit to the series, and shows no significant change in environments supportive of significant severe thunderstorms in recent decades. Image credit: Brooks, H.E., and N. Dotek, 2008, “The spatial distribution of severe convective storms and an analysis of their secular changes”, Climate Extremes and Society
How are the background conditions that spawn tornadoes changing?
An alternate technique to study how climate change may be affecting tornadoes is look at how the large-scale environmental conditions favorable for tornado formation have changed through time. Moisture, instability, lift, and wind shear are needed for tornadic thunderstorms to form. The exact mix required varies considerably depending upon the situation, and is not well understood. However, Brooks (2003) attempted to develop a climatology of weather conditions conducive for tornado formation by looking at atmospheric instability (as measured by the Convective Available Potential Energy, or CAPE), and the amount of wind shear between the surface and 6 km altitude. High values of CAPE and surface to 6 km wind shear are conducive to formation of tornadic thunderstorms. The regions they analyzed with high CAPE and high shear for the period 1997-1999 did correspond pretty well with regions where significant (F2 and stronger) tornadoes occurred. Riemann-Campe et al. (2009) found that globally, CAPE increased significantly between 1958 – 2001. However, little change in CAPE was found over the Central and Eastern U.S. during spring and summer during the most recent period they studied, 1979 – 2001. Brooks (2013) found no significant trends in wind shear over the U.S. from 1950 – 2010 (Figure 5.) A preliminary report issued by NOAA’s Climate Attribution Rapid Response Team in July 2011 found no trends in CAPE or wind shear over the lower Mississippi Valley over the past 30 years.
Figure 7. Change in the number of days per year with a high severe thunderstorm potential as predicted by the climate model (A2 scenario) of Trapp et al. 2007, due to predicted changes in wind shear and Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE). Most of the U.S. east of the Rocky Mountains is expected to see 1 – 2 additional days per year with the potential for severe thunderstorms. The greatest increase in potential severe thunderstorm days (three) is expected along the North and South Carolina coast. Image credit: NASA.
How will tornadoes and severe thunderstorms change in the future?
Using a high-resolution regional climate model (25 km grid size) zoomed in on the U.S., Trapp et al. (2007) and Trapp et al. (2009) found that the decrease in 0-6 km wind shear in the late 21st century would more than be made up for by an increase in instability (CAPE). Their model predicted an increase in the number of days with high severe storm potential for most of the U.S. by the end of the 21st century, particularly for locations east of the Rocky Mountains (Figure 7.) Brooks (2013) also found that severe thunderstorms would likely increase over the U.S. by the end of the century, but theorized that the severe thunderstorms of the future might have a higher proportion causing straight-line wind damage, and slightly lower proportion spawning tornadoes and large hail. For example, a plausible typical future severe thunderstorm day many decades from now might have wind shear lower by 1 m/s, but a 2 m/s increase in maximum thunderstorm updraft speed. This might cause a 5% reduction in the fraction of severe thunderstorms spawning tornadoes, but a 5% increase in the fraction of severe thunderstorms with damaging straight-line winds. He comments: “However, if the number of overall favorable environments increases, there may be little change, if any, in the number of tornadoes or hailstorms in the US, even if the relative fraction decreases. The signals in the climate models and our physical understanding of the details of storm-scale processes are sufficiently limited to make it extremely hazardous to make predictions of large changes or to focus on small regions. Projected changes would be well within error estimates.”
Figure 8. From 1995 (the first year we have wind death data) through 2012, deaths from high winds associated with severe thunderstorms accounted for 8% of all U.S. weather fatalities, while tornadoes accounted for 13%. Data from NOAA.
Severe thunderstorms are capable of killing more people than tornadoes
If the future climate does cause fewer tornadoes but more severe thunderstorms, this may not end up reducing the overall deaths and damages from these dangerous weather phenomena. In 2012, the warmest year in U.S. history, the death toll from severe thunderstorms hit 104–higher than the 70 people killed by tornadoes that year. Severe thunderstorms occur preferentially during the hottest months of the year, June July and August, and are energized by record heat. For example, wunderground weather historian Christopher C. Burt called the number of all-time heat records set on June 29, 2012 “especially extraordinary,” and on that day, an organized thunderstorm complex called a derecho swept across a 700-mile swath of the Ohio Valley and Mid-Atlantic, killing thirteen people and causing more than $1 billion in damage. The amount of energy available to the derecho was extreme, due to the record heat. The derecho knocked out power to 4 million people for up to a week, in areas where the record heat wave was causing high heat stress. Heat claimed 34 lives in areas without power in the week following the derecho. Excessive heat has been the number one cause of weather-related deaths in the U.S since 1995, killing more than twice as many people as tornadoes have. Climate models are not detailed enough to predict how organized severe thunderstorm events such as derechos might change in a future warmer climate. But a warmer atmosphere certainly contributed to the intensity of the 2012 derecho, and we will be seeing a lot more summers like 2012 in coming decades. A future with sharply increased damages and deaths due to more intense severe thunderstorms and derechos is one nasty climate change surprise that may lurk ahead.
Figure 9. Lightning over Tucson, Arizona on August 14, 2012. A modeling study by Del Genio et al.(2007) predicts that lighting will increase by 6% by the end of the century, potentially leading to an increase in lightning-triggered wildfires. Image credit: wunderphotographer ChandlerMike.
Lightning may increase in a warmer climate
Del Genio et al.(2007) used a climate model with doubled CO2 to show that a warming climate would make the atmosphere more unstable (higher CAPE) and thus prone to more severe weather. However, decreases in wind shear offset this effect, resulting in little change in the amount of severe weather in the Central and Eastern U.S. late this century. However, they found that there would likely be an increase in the very strongest thunderstorms. The speed of updrafts in thunderstorms over land increased by about 1 m/s in their simulation, since upward moving air needed to travel 50 – 70 mb higher to reach the freezing level, resulting in stronger thunderstorms. In the Western U.S., the simulation showed that drying led lead to fewer thunderstorms overall, but the strongest thunderstorms increased in number by 26%, leading to a 6% increase in the total amount of lighting hitting the ground each year. If these results are correct, we might expect more lightning-caused fires in the Western U.S. late this century, due to increased drying and more lightning. Only 12% of U.S. wildfires are ignited by natural causes, but these account for 52% of the acres burned (U.S. Fire Administration, 2000). So, even a small change in lightning flash rate has important consequences. Lightning is also a major killer, as an average of 52 people per year were killed by lightning strikes over the 30-year period ending in 2012, accounting for 6% of all U.S. weather-related fatalities.
Summary
We currently do not know how tornadoes and severe thunderstorms may be changing due to climate change, nor is there hope that we will be able to do so in the foreseeable future. It does not appear that there has been an increase in U.S. tornadoes stronger than EF-0 in recent decades, but climate change appears to be causing more extreme years–both high and low–of late. Tornado researcher Dr. Harold Brooks of the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Oklahoma said in a 2013 interview on Andrew Revkin’s New York Times dotearth blog: “there’s evidence to suggest that we have seen an increase in the variability of tornado occurrence in the U.S.” Preliminary research using climate models suggests that we may see an increase in the number of severe thunderstorms capable of producing tornadoes over the U.S. late this century, but these thunderstorms will be more likely to produce damaging straight-line winds, and less likely to produce tornadoes and large hail. This will not necessarily result in a reduction in deaths and damages, though, since severe thunderstorms can be just as dangerous and deadly as tornadoes–especially when they knock out power to areas suffering high-stress heat waves. Research into climate change impacts on severe weather is just beginning, and much more study is needed.
the ‘H’ word, i.e. hysterectomy, thrown at them at least once in their lifetime. As for years now, hysterectomies have been the ‘cure of choice’ offered by mainstream medicine for symptoms ranging from excessive menstrual bleeding to fibroids to endometriosis to even sadness. I, myself, was offered this ‘easy breezy panacea’ over 5 times in my life and had to search high and low for my own way out. I had to create my own balance and health to avoid the mutilation option that was being sold to me with the zeal and fervor of a door-to-door salesman.
~in5d
