The Perfect Hurricane Factory – What’s Wrong With Current Predictive Computer Historic Modeling
By G. Giese
In light of Hurricane Irma, with Jose quickly following its track, it leads one to wonder the variables at work. We know all the computer models, many based on historical data, upper level winds, upper level pressure charts, steering currents, etc. But what if there are other factors at work ?
Storms need fuel to form, and continue. A typical life cycle of a thunderstorm is 30 minutes (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/jetstream/tstorms/life.html), but when they start training, other factors come into effect.
The main constituents of a hurricane are warm water (above 27 C), Coriolis force (near equatorial spin), high relative humidity, and weak vertical wind shear (no strong winds aloft).
But what keeps them going ?
I started tracking hurricane Irma with my pilot app on my iPhone, called ForeFlight. With this app, I would put a waypoint in the middle of the eye of hurricane Irma periodically. Then I noticed something odd, as soon as hurricane Jose formed, it followed almost identically, the same path as Irma. Conventional (USA and European Models) predicted a north turn, but Jose continues to follow Irma. Were the models wrong ? What else could be effecting the track ?
Usually, when hurricanes move over seawater, they produce cold water by upwelling, which (in theory) would prevent any hurricane from following. “Less well known is the fact that the passage of a hurricane over the ocean can cause the upper ocean to cool substantially, which can influence subsequent hurricane development.”
So why is Hurricane Jose following so closely in the same track ?
The dirty edge of the storm is in deep ocean water, up to 13,000 ft, while the receding edge is in the shallow zone, less than 300 feet. I started thinking that CO2 must play some role, so I researched it. The oceans have 50 percent more CO2 than air. The ocean provides a conveyor belt of CO2 absorption. (https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/oceanography/ocean-earth-system/ocean-carbon-cycle)
But why, or how does CO2 effect storm development ?
To look closer, I also had to look at one of the byproducts of thunderstorms, which is static electricity (Tribo effect) which builds until a corona discharge (lightning). The atmosphere statics can alter the evaporation rate (i.e. fuel) of moisture from seawater. Even more interesting, is that static electricity can be formed by dust storms.
Where are some of the biggest dust storms which can produce static electricity ?
The large plumes of dust blowing from the Sahara Desert and into the Atlantic Ocean, coincidentally, exactly where hurricanes form. Conventional theory is that a cyclone may form from the African Easterly Jet, which is unstable.
So, in my opinion, a new hurricane (tropical cyclone) model, would incorporate CO2 concentrations, dust (from dust storms, forest fires, etc.), and electrostatics. All of which increase the potency and longevity of a hurricane. Are they more dominant than steering winds aloft ? Are they a more important factor than traditional forecasting models ?
Here is my research:
CO2: Acidic solids acquire negative charge from water vapor, while basic solids become more positive. CO2 concentration can enhance triboelectric effect, and also evaporation. “Ion partition during water vapor adsorption is the basis of the recently discovered metal electrification by adsorption of water vapor, also known as hygroelectricity.”
(Ducati, T. R. D.; Simões, L. H.; Galembeck, F.; Langmuir2010, 27, 13763.)
“Charge partition and transfer during water vapor adsorption led to the recognition of the atmosphere as a source and sink of electric charge.”
( Rezende, C. A.; Gouveia, R. F.; da Silva, M. A.; Galembeck, F.; J. Phys.: Condens. Matter2009, 21, 263002. and Burgo, T. A. L.; Rezende, C. A.; Bertazzo, S.; Galembeck, A.; Galembeck, F.; J. Electrost.2011, 69, 401. ) From and article: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-50532016000200229
Electrostatics Tribo-Effect: Wind and vertical moisture upheaval produces tribo-effect (static electricity). Lighting in a thunderstorm is a result from moisture and ice pummeling up and down in a thunderstorm. Lighting is also found during the eruption of a volcano, from the dust friction. Sandstorms also exhibit static charges. Applying electrostatics removes water quickly and effectively, states Hoenig. With thermal evaporation, for example, “many of the water molecules that escape from the liquid go right back in.
With the Asakawa system, the molecules acquire a charge that repels them from the liquid water.” (http://www.achrnews.com/articles/84092-evaporation-with-electrostatics)
Evaporation: What increases rate of evaporation more than temperature ? Static charge. Combine warm surface water with static charge, and you get an increased evaporation cycle. Evaporation of water vapor builds clouds, and vertical development results in thunderstorms.
Thunderstorms produce static charge. Wind also increases evaporation. (http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-50532016000200229)
Salinity: Fresh water evaporates faster than saltwater. Less saline content, results in faster evaporation. Hurricanes produce huge amounts of fresh water, decreasing salinity at the surface.
Reduced Pressure: Hurricanes produce a vortex, and decreased pressure from huge updrafts of towering cumulus. Decreased pressure results in increased evaporation.
Lightning: “The amounts of ozone and nitrogen oxides created by lightning surpass those generated by human activities in that level of the atmosphere.”
“The half life of ozone in water is about 30 minutes.” (http://www.lenntech.com/library/ozone/faq/faqozone.htm)
Magnetic Effect on Solubility of CO2 in Seawater:
“Water, being dipolar, can be partly aligned by an electric field and this may be easily shown by the movement of a stream of water by an electrostatic source.“
( S. T. Bramwell, Ferroelectric ice, Nature, 397 (1999) 212-213. http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/magnetic_electric_effects.html)
“The magnetic-field effect on CO2 solubility is twice as large, from which we surmise that geomagnetic field variations modulate the carbon exchange between atmosphere and ocean. A 1% reduction in magnetic dipole moment may release up to ten times more CO2 from the surface ocean than is emitted by subaerial volcanism.”
(Magnetic effect on CO2 solubility in seawater: A possible link between geomagnetic field variations and climate Alexander Pazur1 and Michael Winklhofer2 Received 17 April 2008; revised 25 July 2008; accepted 29 July 2008; published 30 August 2008. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 35, L16710, doi:10.1029/2008GL034288, 2008 )
End of Tech Blog