Playing with Data

Personal Views Expressed in Data

SPC Day 2 High Risks

Today, the Storm Prediction Center has issued a Day 2 High Risk for only the second time in it’s history. When was the previous one? 06 April 2006 for the vicinity affected by the 27 April 2011 outbreak. For those interested, the SPC DID NOT issue a Day 2 High Risk for the 27 April 2011 outbreak.

Below is a figure that plots the SPC forecast probabilities for the Day 2 High Risk. (The area contained in the 60% area is what was defined to be the High Risk.) In addition to plotting the forecast probabilities, the verifying storm reports from the National Weather Service publication Storm Data are overlaid. You may notice in the report legend (lower right), the total number of reports of that type and the total number of significant reports of the given type as included. In case you do not know, a significant report is:

  • Wind Gust great than or equal to 64 kts
  • Hail greater than or equal to 2 inches in diameter
  • Tornadoes greater than or equal to F/EF2 strength

So, since the SPC did not issue a Day 2 High Risk for 27 April 2011, does this mean that the SPC is expecting an even bigger severe weather event across the central US tomorrow? Not necessarily. On 26 April 2011, most meteorologists knew a significant tornado outbreak was going to occur the following day. In fact, most everyone I know expected the SPC Day 1 outlook to have a High Risk on 27 April 2011. The reason the 26 April 2011 SPC Day 2 outlook did not include a High Risk is because there were lingering uncertainties as to where the greatest concentration of severe weather would occur. So, even though today’s Day 2 outlook contains a High Risk, it does not necessarily mean that SPC is expecting an even bigger outbreak than 27 April 2011 tomorrow. It just means that SPC has a higher confidence on the region to be affected.

SPC Day 3 Moderates in Context: What Do They Become?

UPDATES

(28 April 2013): Updated to add 16/17 April 2013 outlooks. Also added verification for all days.
(15 April 2013): Updated to account for today’s Day 3 Moderate Risk

In light of all the discussion surrounding today’s Day 3 Moderate Risk issued by the Storm Prediction Center, one question that is on a lot of people’s mind is, “What do Day 3 Moderate Risks Become?” Well, here’s the answer…

  • Every Day 3 Moderate Risk has remained a Day 2 Moderate Risk or greater.
  • Every Day 3 Moderate Risk remained at Moderate or High Risk level for at least one Day 1 outlook.
  • 4 of 11 Day 3 Moderate Risks were Day 1 High Risk at some point during Day 1.

Note: this post is a follow up to the original SPC Day 3 Moderates in Context from 2011.

Weather Ready Nation: My Conversation

EDIT (28 March 2012 at 8:40PM CDT):
The title of this post is not a knock on the NWS’ Weather Ready Nation Initiative. I believe it’s a well-intentioned first step. “My Conversation” is merely a reflection of my desire to have a free-flowing, honest grassroots discussion. I offer my opinions as a starting point, not as the solutions.

The month of February saw me take the written portion of my general examination and the first half of March saw me prepare for and defend the oral portion of the general examination. A future blog post will describe in more detail what the general exam process was like, as well as provide a copy of my written question, written response, and oral presentation. I write this as a feeble defense as to why things have been quiet here. That’s about to change…

I won’t go into all the details of everything coming up, but I do want to pass along that I will be visiting the University of Alabama at Huntsville on 4-6 April 2012. The purpose of this visit is to give a seminar (12:45PM on 5 April 2012) titled, “Tornado Warnings: Past, Present, and Future“. In addition to the reasoning listed in the abstract (below), a lot of this seminar has grown out of my interest in the tornado warning process and the work previously posted on this blog. If you are in the area and are interested in attending the seminar, please contact me and I’ll put you in contact with the University. I’m hoping that EMs, Media, and NWS people can attend. As is my policy, the presentation will be posted online after giving it. Furthermore, in support of open science and reproducible research, I will be making available all of my code and data. I hope to do this for all of the research presented in this blog. My philosophy, “Don’t take my word for it; do it yourself, and here’s how you can get started.” (More on this in future posts.)

Tornado Warnings: Past, Present, and Future

2011 saw a record number of tornado fatalities for the modern era (1980-present), even though NWS warning performance was considered excellent by most current measures of service. This leads to the question, “If warning performance was ‘good’ by current metrics, what happened last year?” This question was at the heart of the NWS’ Weather Ready Nation initiative, which seeks to understand why so many people perished. In addition to the Weather Ready Nation initiative, NWS Central Region is undertaking a pilot program to study the feasibility of issuing impact based warnings.

This talk stems from my personal observations and discussions held during the first Weather Ready Nation meeting, focusing on the role of the NWS’ Tornado Warning product and it’s place in the warning process. Trends in tornado warnings, and the increasingly popular tornado emergency, will be presented in the context of how to measure service. Discussion will focus on the questions “Is the current tornado warning process the best it can be?” and “How do we measure ‘service’?”.

It is my belief that the meteorological community stands on a precipice regarding the future of tornado warnings, and a community dialog is needed before embarking on initiatives that we won’t be able to undo. The purpose of this talk is to start a community dialog and stimulate discussion on moving forward. Definitive answers to questions raised will not be provided — they may not exist.

As I state in the abstract, I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I’m merely offering my opinions as a means of starting a conversation — a conversation I truly believe needs to take place. I hope you will participate.

Tornado Emergencies: Stirring the Pot

Note: The presentation has been updated to correct the terminology. What was previously identified as Probability of Detection (PoD) was actually Success Ratio (1-FAR)

Note 2: This work should still be considered preliminary. The severe weather report database is riddled with problems as is commented on by numerous papers in scientific literature. Results may change as better data, such as county level tornado data, become available. However, I stand by the fact that Tornado Emergencies should be so good that even preliminary results capture their usefulness.

Here is a link to download my presentation on Tornado Emergencies from today’s National Severe Weather Workshop. I firmly believe the NWS is standing on a precipice, and the entire meteorological community needs to take a moment and figure things out before it’s too late. This presentation is designed to start a conversation; let the discussion begin!

A Review of NWS Tornado Emergencies

Seasonal Outlooks: How Quickly We Soon Forget…

This morning as I was making my rounds on social media before my day began, I came across a tweet from a good friend, and even better meteorologist, Ryan Vaughan. Apparently overnight some hail producing thunderstorms had rolled through his area after his forecast mentioned that the trough responsible for the thunderstorms would remain south of the area. Unfortunately, his forecast was off by about 100 miles, which is really good when you consider he’s attempting to forecast something that is “invisible”. But as someone who takes pride in his work, he was a tad disappointed. Ryan’s tweet simply stated,

“God sure has sent me a couple of slices of humble pie lately when it comes to forecasting. As I’ve said, sometimes we forecast, he laughs.”

After seeing this tweet, and thinking about how humbling forecasting can be, I came across a thread on a message board that was discussing the recently released AccuWeather Seasonal Tornado Forecast. In the thread it was brought up just how bad AccuWeather’s 2011 – 2012 Seasonal Winter Weather forecast had been (image below).

This forecast was particularly atrocious when you consider the November 2011 – January 2012 average temperature and precipitation maps shown below. As you can see, the area on the AccuWeather forecast that was to experience cold and snow conditions has actually observed temperatures that are well above normal and precipitation amounts largely below what is expected. In fact, places such as Midland, TX have received just as much, or more, snow than places across the midwest. Northeast Arkansas had received more snow by November (~10 inches in places) than Chicago, IL and Buffalo, NY had received by mid-January.

But this discussion isn’t about AccuWeather per se. To prove my point, here are the forecasts from the NOAA/NWS Climate Prediction Center. They are slightly better than AccuWeather on the temperatures across the south, but still call for cooler weather (than normal) across the north. The precipitation forecasts are almost 180 degrees out of phase from what happened in reality.

Don’t get me wrong; seasonal forecasting is hard. There is a reason why the severe convective hazards research community has resisted making seasonal tornado outlooks for so long — there is just too much intra-seasonal variability! But what really bothers me is when people use a forecasting philosophy of persistance on the seasonal scale. The idea behind persistance is that the atmosphere is in a relatively stable state and what’s previously happened will continue to “persist”.

In the southern plains, the first half of February 2011 was a winter nightmare. Two major winter storms traversed the area in the span of two weeks, with a comparatively “minor” winter weather event in between. (Note, that this “minor” winter weather event would have been considered a fairly significant one during a “normal” winter — whatever that is!) In addition to heavy snow, these winter storms were also accompanied by bitter cold. In fact, during this approximately two week span, Oklahoma set it’s all-time record low temperature and Arkansas reported it’s greatest 24-hour snowfall accumulation in history.

What people failed to remember was that this occurred in the midst of an extremely warm and dry winter. As cold as it was in Oklahoma during the first half of February 2011, the second half was even warmer than the first half was cold! Remember the record low set? Less than a week later the temperature had warmed over 100 degrees Fahrenheit at the same location! In fact, Oklahoma finished the month either near “normal” or slightly above normal in terms of average temperature.

During the winter of 2011-2012 2010-2011, Earth was experiencing a La Nina pattern. Namely, the waters of the central Pacific were cooler than normal. This has profound impacts downstream (i.e., over the United States). Typically during a La Nina, the CONUS is drier and milder than average, but due to atmospheric processes I won’t discuss here, is subject to extreme cold outbreaks. If one of these extreme cold outbreaks encounters moisture, then the recipe for a winter storms is well on it’s way to completion — as was the case in early February 2011.

To illustrate just how dry the winter of 2010-2011 2011-2012 was for the southern United States, below are a series of images from the U.S. Drought Monitor. It shows that in October 2010 (before the 2010-2011 winter) that much of the southern plains was experiencing normal to slight drought conditions. Fast forward 4 months and that picture had changed (Second image: February 2011 — after the barrage of winter storms). Pretty much everywhere in the southern plains was experiencing a drought. A drought that would persist through the Summer, culminating in the worst category of drought by October 2011 (Third Image).

When seasonal forecasts called for a repeat performance of La Nina this winter (not that La Nina’s are “repeatable”), a lot of those in the weather business called for a repeat of last winter’s conditions, which to a 0th order is reasonable expectation. So imagine my surprise when people tended to remember and focus on the two week period of extreme cold and heavy snow, rather than the season-long drought and mild conditions. I nearly fell out of my chair when I heard a local television meteorologists talk about how since we had X last winter and we got a lot of cold and snow, and X is expected this winter it should be a cold and snowy winter. How quickly we tend to forget! Out perceptions of what happened is affected more by extreme, unusual, and disrupting events, rather than the long-term mundane average. So, how did the forecast for a cold, snowy winter pan out? Well as you can see above, it’s been wetter and warmer than normal. It’s been so wet in fact, we’ve made substantial progress in overcoming a large part of our drought (below). Although, we still have a long ways to go.

So, what’t the take away point? Seasonal forecasting is hard. At its current optimum, it is slightly better than an educated guess (although, some might argue that all forecasting is this way!). So, when you hear the prognosticators try to spin their poor seasonal forecasts, you should know better than to fall for it. And when they offer you their next “highly accurate” and “highly detailed” seasonal forecasts, you’ll know exactly what to do with it. Take it with a grain of salt.