[HN Gopher] First hurricane to hit California in 84 years
___________________________________________________________________
First hurricane to hit California in 84 years
Author : laurex
Score : 81 points
Date : 2023-08-19 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
| andsoitis wrote:
| List of California Hurricanes:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_hurricanes
|
| Note, Hilary won't be Hurricane by the time it hits California.
| Just a Tropical Storm.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| If you actually read that list rather than let yourself be
| guided by the titles, only one of those (the 1858 one) may have
| made landfall as a hurricane (the reconstructed track has even
| it just missing landfall), and the only tropical cyclone known
| to have had its center over CA as a even a tropical storm was
| the one in 1939.
|
| > Note, Hilary won't be Hurricane by the time it hits
| California.
|
| And it will be the first Tropical Storm over the state since
| 1939, and its not making a glancing blow to the coast like most
| tropical cyclones hitting California, but tracking straight up
| through central SoCal toward and potentially into Nevada, with
| tropical storm strength winds likely over the whole width of
| Southern California, massive rainfall, high flash flood risk in
| a stretch through Southern California up into Nevada, moderate
| flash flood risk to places as distant from the main track as
| Las Vegas and potential flooding impacts to and beyond the
| northern borders of California and Nevada, as well as east into
| Arizona and Utah.
| landemva wrote:
| I am grateful I don't get emotionally torn up about natural
| weather. At some point the Yellowstone caldera will rip.
| Until then, I will thrive and enjoy life.
|
| For those who can not be resilient, move to a more hospitable
| locale.
| anon84873628 wrote:
| Sadly there are probably people living in storm drains or
| hiking in slot canyons etc who are going to be caught
| unaware and drown.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| There's nothing "just" about tropical storms.
| paulddraper wrote:
| As someone who grew up in Florida, there kinda is.
|
| Tropical storm winds aren't enough to cause a problem most of
| the time. (Falling branches, or particularly weak trees)
|
| Rain can be a problem, if the storm moves slowly.
| canadianfella wrote:
| [dead]
| casion wrote:
| For some people it is. A tropical storm doesn't even shut
| down schools here.
|
| Some folks are being ignorant and dismissive with "just", and
| some are relating their personal experiences.
|
| I have caught myself saying "just 2 inches of rain" since we
| get that frequently, sometimes in an hour or two. For many
| people that is a dangerous and life changing amount of
| rain... and that can be easy to forget if it isn't for you.
|
| tldr; hanlon's razor
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > For some people it is.
|
| There is nothing "just" about tropical storms with tracks
| over the State of California.
| Retric wrote:
| Conversely, people would be flipping out if the expectation
| was 3 feet of snow and or -45C temperatures to hit your
| area.
|
| That said, I have trouble imagining anyone saying "just 6
| inches of rain and 50 - 70 MPH sustained wind speeds". The
| low end of tropical storms aren't that bad but it covers a
| wide range.
| fortysixdegrees wrote:
| That's not how this works. It's the water, not the wind. This
| is completely unprecedented
| andsoitis wrote:
| I know. I live in Los Angeles. Last winter we had 12
| atmospheric rivers over 2 or 3 months, each dumping as much
| water in a 24h period as Hilary is expected for our area.
|
| Areas like Palm Springs, though, are expecting much more and
| I'm worried about my friends there.
|
| However, to say a hurricane is hitting California is
| hyperbole. I've been in hurricanes in both Florida and New
| York.
| CrzyLngPwd wrote:
| https://archive.is/xrKNt
| johntfella wrote:
| interestingly research on San Andreas fault and Salton sea was
| recently published in July noting of fill up relating to slip
| rate; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06058-9
|
| Another study published for September looks further into the
| history of slip rate and fill up;
| https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2023.118271
| chrisco255 wrote:
| This and other lies the media tell you:
|
| "Western Megadrought Driest in 1200 years" (Feb 2022)
|
| https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2022-02-14/western...
| nicechianti wrote:
| [dead]
| tpmx wrote:
| https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/19/weather/hurricane-hilary-cali...
| (updated 2 hours later than the WP article)
|
| _The hurricane weakened from a very dangerous Category 4 to a
| Category 3 storm on Saturday, according to the National Hurricane
| Center._ [...]
|
| _Hilary is expected to continue to weaken as it moves north-
| northwestward through cooler waters toward Southern California._
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| te_chris wrote:
| I always thought storms in the pacific were called 'cyclones'.
| williamcotton wrote:
| Technically they are all called tropical cyclones with the word
| hurricane being specific to the North Atlantic.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| "Hurricane" is a word for a particular strength of tropical
| cyclone particular to the North Atlantic _and_ Northeast
| Pacific (which is why Hilary, which we are discussing, is
| currently a hurricane, despite very much _not_ being an
| Atlantic storm.)
| [deleted]
| dragonwriter wrote:
| They are all tropical cyclones.
|
| In the North Atlantic and Northeastern Pacific, the strongest
| tropical cyclones are called "hurricanes", while weaker ones
| (at least in the US) are called "tropical storms" and "tropical
| depressions", in declining order of strength.
|
| In the Northwestern Pacific, the strongest are called
| "typhoons".
|
| Elsewhere (South Pacific and Indian Ocean), they are just all
| called tropical cyclones or cyclonic storms, with additional
| adjectives denoting strength.
| parineum wrote:
| North/South hemisphere is the distinction there.
| BaseballPhysics wrote:
| It's a bit more nuanced than that:
|
| https://gpm.nasa.gov/resources/faq/what-difference-
| between-t...
|
| > The terms "hurricane" and "typhoon" are regional names for
| tropical cyclones.
|
| ...
|
| > Over the Atlantic and East Pacific, tropical cyclones are
| commonly called "hurricanes." The common term is "typhoon"
| for a tropical cyclone that forms in the West Pacific.
| Tropical cyclones are called just "cyclones" in the Indian
| Ocean and near Australia.
|
| So basically they're all cyclones, but depending on where
| they originate they might get more specific terms as well.
| yeahwhatever10 wrote:
| With all these once in a 100 year events happening in the past
| decade it makes you rethink just how chaotic the 1910s-1930s
| were.
| xvedejas wrote:
| When you're rolling thousands of dice on phenomena that only
| happen once every hundred years, you'll get a lot of hits each
| decade.
| 7e wrote:
| When the planet is this hot, the dice are loaded.
| snapplebobapple wrote:
| Probably more that observation and promotion is 1000x
| better than 100 years vs planet warming. 100 years ago i
| would have no idea any of these things happened because
| they didn't directly affect me and the threshold for
| reporting it outside the affected area was dramatically
| higher due to cost constraints.
| BaseballPhysics wrote:
| It's both. The answer is both. These storms are becoming
| more frequent and more powerful, and the public is more
| aware of them.
| snapplebobapple wrote:
| That's usually what "probably more that..." means. The
| post I was responding to proposed one reason and I
| responded with the correct answer that it is probably
| more that reporting is quite a lot better now. If I was
| negating their answer I would have said "No, that is
| wrong, this is why...." Even in the last 40 years my
| answer is correct because people's exposure to this has
| increased leaps and bounds faster due to reporting than
| it has due to actual events happening. Hell, even in the
| 30 or so years I personally remember this is true. My
| local climate has barely changed while my exposure to
| news about climate disasters has exploded.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Yeah climate change was really bad back then
| macinjosh wrote:
| September 28-October 1, 1932: The remnants of a hurricane
| brought four days of rain. Flash floods killed 15 people
|
| I mean, shit happens?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_hurricanes
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| That was particularly bad for a few reasons 1. There wasn't
| any weather station in the areas so people didn't know the
| storm was coming. 2. The LA area didn't have nearly as much
| of the US army corp of engineers' flood control systems it
| has today.
|
| LA nowadays has an incredibly robust flood control system.
| I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being a bad
| thunderstorm and mostly a nothing burger.
| ghaff wrote:
| Forecasting can make a huge difference.
|
| When a hurricane practically wiped Galveston off the map
| in 1900, US weather forecasting capabilities were
| extremely limited. [1] On a much smaller scale, there was
| the Blizzard of '78 which basically shut down Boston for
| a week and stuck many drivers on Route 128 from which
| they had to be laboriously evacuated. Quite a few people
| were stuck in their offices for a week--all in part
| because the storm pretty much caught everyone by
| surprise.[2]
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1900_Galveston_hurricane
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeastern_United_Sta
| tes_bli...
| Retric wrote:
| Mudslides are upstream of flood control systems and
| likely the biggest threat. Similarly local flooding can
| cause a great deal of damage without being part of a
| stream system.
|
| "Remnants of" Hurricane Ida killed 44 people in the NYC
| area in 2021, this is expected to still qualify as a
| tropical storm when it makes landfall.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| 1939, when there was a tropical storm track that actually
| ran through Southern California, is probably a better
| comparator (but, both general and, because of forecasting,
| specific preparedness should be much better this time - the
| existence of a Southern California forecast office, after
| all, was a direct response to that storm.)
|
| Track looks much farther inland: the 1939 storm hit Long
| Beach, the track for this is predicted to run over what
| looks like about the Imperial Valley, and up north toward
| (and potentially still with tropical storm winds into parts
| of) Nevada. Less populated areas directly in the track, but
| pretty much the whole width of Southern California is
| potentially going to get tropical storm strength winds, as
| well as whatever rains this brings, which are the real
| problem.
|
| The flash flood risk maps are...quite extensive. [0]
|
| https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_ep4+shtml/204534.
| s...
| [deleted]
| Madmallard wrote:
| we've had several tropical storms in the last few decades. This
| is media overhype and climate scaring. I learned how to ride my
| bike as a child during tropical storm nora.
| ldehaan wrote:
| [dead]
| [deleted]
| fortysixdegrees wrote:
| I posted this in a comment but going to post it again at the top
| level. For anyone interested in discussing this, I highly
| recommend you read the NHC forecasters day 2 summary. Ignore the
| media, just go straight to the source.
|
| This is very much unprecedented, despite many here posting that
| hurricane remnants hit CA all the time.
|
| https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/ero.php?opt=curr&day=2
| resolutebat wrote:
| Here's the bit, buried towards the end:
|
| _The 19 /12z NAEFS is indicating IVT values 19.1 sigmas above
| the mean; it should be noted that it is using a dataset that
| does not include the rash of tropical cyclones that impacted
| the Southwest in the 1970's, so this value is likely a bit too
| high. Even assuming a non-standard distribution and standard
| deviations half as large, this is extreme. There is a very real
| potential for 3" amounts in an hour in this environment should
| sufficient instability be present. Even if instability was
| completely eroded, 0.5" an hour totals would be possible; heavy
| rain appears inevitable. The 00z Canadian Regional shows local
| amounts of towards 10", which would be exceeding rare for the
| region from a tropical cyclone, potentially unique for Nevada.
| The 100 year ARI is forecast to be exceeded. Some locations
| within this arid region are slated to get 1-2 years worth of
| rain in one day. If a 7"+ maximum materialized over Mount
| Charleston Sunday into early Monday, it would challenge
| Nevada's 24 hour rainfall record, set in 2004._
| pard68 wrote:
| What's wild to me is that 1-3" of rain / hour is about our
| norm for any given storm (southern MO, where evey cloud is a
| microburst). Really helps put into perspective how little
| rain Cali is used to.
| dpe82 wrote:
| At least that part of California. It's a gigantic state and
| some areas see fairly significant seasonal rain. This
| storm, however, will impact a region that includes the
| Mojave Desert - the dryest place in North America.
| anon84873628 wrote:
| IIRC, The excellent book _Dreamt Land_ says 2 /3 of
| California's precipitation falls in the northern 1/3 of
| the state. But it's the southern part with the ideal
| climate for agriculture. Hence the largest water movement
| system in history.
| luma wrote:
| One interesting thing I learned while in Las Vegas during a
| major rain storm, a lot of the buildings leak like a sieve.
| Word was that heavy rain happens so rarely that leaks are
| rare to present themselves and thus hard to discover and hard
| to troubleshoot.
| [deleted]
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I'm watching this storm with interest, but I'm a little bit
| skeptical due to all the extreme language that the NWS forecast
| used around the storm in January February of this year, which
| ended up being basically a nothing Burger.
| anon84873628 wrote:
| What? The storms in January and February were a huge deal for
| California coastal regions. The president visited Santa Cruz
| county afterwards.
| kepler1 wrote:
| Is this not the anticipated reason our predecessors built all
| that infrastructure for channelizing and holding in the water all
| over LA?
| mtreis86 wrote:
| I pay close attention to Tropical Tidbits for Atlantic storm
| season, their latest on this storm:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJlBocxz0gs
|
| No sensationalizing, just meteorology.
|
| I also like Joe and Joe for the same reason, they usually do a
| Sunday morning show. Bit more long form. Both retired
| meteorologists: https://www.youtube.com/@JoeCioffiweather
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| I could swear I remember some kind of tropical storm/hurricane
| remnants hitting SoCal late last summer or maybe the summer
| before - was I dreaming of the future again?
|
| Edit: It was hurricane Kay:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Kay_(2022)
| xvedejas wrote:
| You might be thinking of an Atmospheric River / "pineapple
| express"? While that phenomenon may originate from roughly the
| tropics, it's not the same as a Tropical Storm.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Nope. This was hurricane remnants coming up from the south. I
| even recall tuning into some SoCal news stations for some
| live coverage. The atmospheric rivers come in the winter -
| this was late summer. Maybe it had weakened more and wasn't
| considered a tropical storm then, maybe just a tropical
| depression.
|
| Edit: maybe it was hurricane Kay?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Kay_(2022)
|
| "As Kay moved northward, it transitioned into a post-tropical
| cyclone overnight 9-10, not far southwest from San Diego,
| California"
| bandyaboot wrote:
| It was tropical storm Kay last year. It weakened to a post
| tropical storm some ways away from San Diego and ultimately
| turned back south. Though you are correct that it did have
| some impacts to California.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Yeah, that's the one I'm remembering. I kept hearing
| "this hasn't happened in 84 years" and was thinking,
| didn't it just happen last year? But apparently Kay was a
| good bit weaker than Hilary will be when it arrives in
| San Diego.
| njarboe wrote:
| Some serious impacts. That storm started over 600
| wildfires via lightning strikes. It overwhelmed the fire
| fighting system in California especially since we had
| serious COVID lock downs in effect and 10% of the
| firefighters were not available. They had been released
| from prison due to COVID. Much of the Santa Cruz
| mountains burned. In northern California a fire was left
| burning for about a month before it finally flared up and
| ended up burning over a million acres. Six weeks when the
| air was so bad that people in my area were advised to not
| go out doors. That was a big motivator for me leaving the
| state.
| bandyaboot wrote:
| Yeah I recall seeing the images out of SF last year where
| the sky just had an otherworldly color to them. Here in
| the northern reaches of the country this summer we've had
| our fair share of wildfire smoke out of Canada--probably
| something like 2 days a week on average when the wind
| lines up. But yeah, nothing like what was going on in CA
| last year.
| gensym wrote:
| Yeah, I remember it well because it put out a nasty
| wildfire that forced a lot of our neighbors to evacuate.
|
| As one person out it, "When you're praying for a once-in-
| generation hurricane to come save your home, that's a
| stressful week"
| bombcar wrote:
| It's threatened a few times but turned away in the last decade
| or so.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| Remnants from hurricanes or tropical storms fairly often make
| landfall in California as something less than a tropical storm
| [0], Hilary looks likely to be the first to hit California _as
| a tropical storm_ since 1939 (the last to hit as a hurricane
| appears to be in 1858, but Hilary isn't, contrary to the
| headline, expected to hit as a hurricane, either.
|
| Also, peripheral effects of a storm that is a tropical storm or
| hurricane may hit California without the storm making landfall
| in California.
|
| [0] by the NOAA definitions, where a tropical cyclone with wind
| speeds up to 38mph is a "tropical depression", one with winds
| of 39-73mph is a "tropical storm", and one with wind speeds
| over 74mph is a "hurricane".
| bryan0 wrote:
| Looks like last tropical storm to hit CA was from hurricane
| Nora in 1997:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Nora_(1997)
|
| Edit: ok I see it might have been downgraded to tropical
| depression by the time it hit CA
|
| Edit 2: apparently it did hit CA as a tropical storm but it
| does not count as "landfall":
| https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/the-last-time-hurricane-
| tr...
| Fricken wrote:
| I blame poor forest management.
| azinman2 wrote:
| You forgot the /s
| andsoitis wrote:
| It is Disney's fault. The whole Florida thing is just a
| distraction. In fact, the hurricane might have come from
| Florida.
| bombcar wrote:
| Disney experiences a setback in Florida and now hurricanes
| hit California? I think you're on to something.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Disney is a cover story for the high-tech survivors of
| Atlantis who have lived among us for thousands of years
| hiding their weather controlling technology from us. They're
| causing global warming now so that the seas evaporate and
| their old city will re-emerge from the cities, along with
| ancient R'lyeh which they will visit to make sacrifices to
| the Great Old One, Dread Cthulhu, in the hopes that He will
| eat them first and release them from this curse.
|
| or. something. Aliens.
| RobRivera wrote:
| and the public school system
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| Like a lot of weather stories, this is overblown. It won't be a
| hurricane by the time it gets to California, and remnants of
| hurricanes/cyclones are not infrequent.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_hurricanes
| Retric wrote:
| Those have "Remnants of ..." the concern is this will still be
| a full blown tropical storm when it makes landfall.
|
| "Remnants of" Hurricane Ida caused severe flooding in NYC
| killing 44 in the area, tropical storms are much worse.
| https://www.reuters.com/world/us/new-york-city-mayor-declare...
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| So? Tropical storms kill also. It's the rain and flooding more
| so than the wind.
| christophilus wrote:
| As someone who has lived through many hurricanes and tropical
| storms, the tropical storms are often surprisingly bad. They
| can dump even more water due to being slow-moving and sitting
| in the same spot for much longer.
|
| If you're in an area that is unused to this sort of storm,
| you'd better take it seriously. It may not end up being a
| severe weather event, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.
| baq wrote:
| It isn't the wind. Is the water. Wind might be a problem only
| if the storm tracks east of the coast thus causing storm surge.
| At this point it's unlikely.
|
| Also: read NHC discussions instead of anons on the internet.
| fortysixdegrees wrote:
| For anyone in CA or Nevada reading this misguided comment,
| please read the latest update from the forecasters at NHC:
|
| https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/ero.php?opt=curr&day=2
|
| Teaser: "The 19/12z NAEFS is indicating IVT values 19.1 sigmas
| above the mean;"
| nomel wrote:
| Mean for this time of year?
| [deleted]
| tayo42 wrote:
| Slightly worried about fires starting. Sandy was tropical storm
| that hit an area that was unprepared, lots of flooding. Don't
| think so cal is going to handle that well. Along with the power
| companies being kind of shit... Good luck
| jeffbee wrote:
| Solar power production is already down by half from a typical
| summer day and the rain isn't really here yet. CAISO is
| forecasting substantially reduced supply capacity for Sunday.
| Luckily, they are also forecasting very little demand.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-19 23:01 UTC)