Part 3 of my weeklong series, "Hey, what did I miss around here?" (Scientists a step closer to steering hurricanes):
Scientists have made a breakthrough in man's desire to control the forces of nature – unveiling plans to weaken hurricanes and steer them off course, to prevent tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina.
...
But the hurricane modifiers are fighting more than the weather. Lawyers warn that diverting a hurricane from one city to save life and property could result in multi-billion dollar lawsuits from towns that bear the brunt instead.
...
The theory has so far been tested only in computer simulation by Mr Alamaro's colleague, Ross Hoffman. Mr Alamaro said: "With small changes to this side or that side of the hurricane we can nudge it and change its track. We're starting with computer simulations, then will hopefully experiment on a small weather system."
Two comments:
- I have a theory that my vita would look better with an American Economic Review publication at the top of my list. So, far it has only been tested in a computer simulation.
- I'm guessing/hoping that these guys don't get much past the computer simulation. Over a post-seminar beer a couple of weeks ago we wondered if the unintended consequences might be catastrophic (e.g., kudzu).
I like to say Kudzu.
Posted by: Tim Haab | November 14, 2007 at 10:17 AM
What you want to say, as a would-be hurricane interventionist, is that you are not "steering" at all, but only "de-powering."
Hard to think of anyone who would claim damage from a smaller storm ... maybe the odd ski lift operator.
Posted by: odograph | November 14, 2007 at 10:25 AM
I'm guessing/hoping that these guys don't get much past the computer simulation. Over a post-seminar beer a couple of weeks ago we wondered if the unintended consequences might be catastrophic (e.g., kudzu).
ummm aren't the consequences already catastrophic?
That is what Katrina was right? A catastrophe?
Posted by: joshua corning | November 14, 2007 at 10:20 PM
10 bucks say that steering hurricanes is more cost effective then Kyoto.
hell 10$ says that steering hurricanes is more cost effective then any proposed climate change mitigation discussed on this blog.
It is fun to know that we live in an age where laser beams in space are cheaper then what many democrats are asking us to do in order to fix a problem that will manifest itself 100 years from now.
Posted by: joshua corning | November 14, 2007 at 10:28 PM
I'd prefer their computer simulations get better at predicting the storms' tracks before they do any "minute" adjustments.
Posted by: another john whitehead | November 15, 2007 at 01:33 PM