[I]t is irresponsible not to mention the need to reduce inherent and avoidable human vulnerability to tornadoes in the crowding South, particularly in low-income regions with flimsy housing. I saw barely a mention of these realities in recent posts by climate-oriented bloggers on the tornado outbreak.Please read the whole thing, it's well worth it.
5 comments:
A well constructed single story brick building will survive a direct hit from an F4. I've seen it.
Dedicated shelters are a bad idea; they get broken into and rat infested. However, if there were a subsidy or rebate from the state to create an incentive for incoming businesses to build tornado-proof buildings with a well-thought out plan to make them immediately accessible in a tornado warning, that would work. That's what saved the population of Hallam, NE.
Yes, midwesterners do respond to tornado warnings. It's drilled into us in school. on TV, etc. etc. My department conducts an annual tornado drill and requires tornado safety training. I wonder do they do these things in the South?
There are a lot of things we could do to save lives in various situations. We don't do them because it's too expensive and/or too onerous.
For example, we could require cars to be built with race car spec roll cages, seven point harnesses for the seats and require fire suits and full face helmets with head restraints. But that's simply not going to happen. Pre-manufactured homes aren't going away any time soon either.
"There’s no doubt that Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University is right when he says “climate change is present in every single meteorological event” — in the sense that the buildup of greenhouses gases is a background nudge everywhere."
Really? Sounds like a statement of faith to me. How can I falisfy such an assertion? We're due for a little rain here in Boston - is there a CO2 nudge there that Revkin knows of? And there's no doubt? Even when Revkin puts on his Voice of Reason hat, he still can't stray completely off the reservation.
I'm not registered in the NYT to comment, but this quote from Mike Smith needs to be qualified:
"A bathtub in an interior bathroom gives reasonable shelter in an F-1, F-2 tornado but is no match in an F-4, 5 where everything is swept away."
While that's basically true and I support the basic premise of the entire article, it's far better for someone to take shelter in an interior room with a mattress over your head, even in an EF4 or 5, than to jump in a car and try to outrun it or travel to a safer place.
That Mann even uses the term 'climate change' the way he does puts him outside the realm of science.
It adds no information to the conversation.
The sun adds a little something to the weather as well.
Is there a solar crisis?
The thing Mann is hoping no one notices is that even with CO2 at ~390 ppm weather is not significantly different than it ever has been.
We have spent crazy amounts of money and crazier amounts of social capital chasing his obsession and poor science.
Post a Comment