Slashdot Mirror


Historic, Widespread Flooding Will Continue Through May, NOAA Says (cnn.com)

The U.S. is likely to see "historic, widespread flooding" through May, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association's spring outlook. From a report: "This is shaping up to be a potentially unprecedented flood season, with more than 200 million people at risk for flooding in their communities," said Ed Clark, director of NOAA's National Water Center in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. NOAA's outlook calls for nearly two-thirds of the lower 48 states to face an elevated risk of flooding through May, with the potential for major to moderate flooding in 25 states across the Great Plains, Midwest and down through the Mississippi River valley.

"The flooding this year could be worse than what we have seen in previous years ... even worse than the historic floods we saw in 1993 and 2011," said Mary Erickson, deputy director of the National Weather Service. The warning comes amid record flooding triggered by a sudden warm-up and heavy rains earlier this month brought on by the "bomb cyclone." Combined with rapid snowmelt, the factors in recent weeks have put many places in the Great Plains and Midwest underwater.

47 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Time to build NOAA's Ark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    n/m

    1. Re:Time to build NOAA's Ark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think most people would consider 1000-year floods to be historic.

  2. Frosty by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Q: What did c6gunner say when he found some earth in his rice?
    A: It's pliau terra!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. Easy Puzzle with Scientific Thinking by Jzanu · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Flooding due to early snow melting (when other water occupies the drainage basins). Higher temperatures sooner in the year causing earlier melting. What drives higher temperatures in abnormal patterns compared to records? What drives new and old water into areas different than previously used as drainage?

    These events are occurring because global warming and increased human development press on the environment at the same time. Both pressures are at fault, and have a common cause as both are driven by faster development than is supportable in the ecosystem.

    1. Re:Easy Puzzle with Scientific Thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tough break for those farmers who voted for Trump.

      First he breaks their balls with an idiotic trade war, then he diverts funding from FEMA for his wall. And of course he doesn't give a rat's ass about climate change, so that's the cherry on top.

      Reap what you sow, mid-westerners

    2. Re: Easy Puzzle with Scientific Thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We all reap what they sow.

    3. Re:Easy Puzzle with Scientific Thinking by sexconker · · Score: 2

      I remember watching the HUGE HISTORIC floods on TV at my grandparents house in the midwest twice in my childhood, about a decade apart.
      As a teenager I remembered thinking "This is the same thing that happened before, why are they acting like it's some unprecedented event?".

  4. What higher temperatures by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Higher temperatures sooner in the year causing earlier melting.

    In Colorado we've had record low temperatures for February.

    A trend which carried on in March

    Where do you think much of the snowpack is, hmm...

    Maybe flooding is due to more moisture?? Like, say from a rare event that dropped a lot more moisture across a wide region than normal??

    Nah, can't be! Has to be the mythical Spaghetti Monster vibrating the atmosphere to shake out all the water!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What higher temperatures by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Informative

      In Colorado we've had record low temperatures for February.

      No, you had record cold temperatures in February -- you ignore the other days mentioned in your own article:

      The cold snap came amid a wild, roller coaster swing. Denver had a high temperature of 69 degrees on Sunday, and then the temperature dropped to a low of minus 3 degrees at 6:45 a.m. Tuesday. The 72-degree swing is the 13th widest on record, spanning 147 years, in Denver in a 36- to 48-hour time range, according to the weather service.

      Similarly

      A trend which carried on in March

      Two days, again according to your own article.

      Your February wasn't even in your top 20 coldest Februarys, so it's hard to see what trend carried into March.

      Maybe flooding is due to more moisture?? Like, say from a rare event that dropped a lot more moisture across a wide region than normal??

      Funny how those rare events keep increasing in frequency.

    2. Re:What higher temperatures by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Higher temperatures sooner in the year causing earlier melting.

      In Colorado we've had record low temperatures for February.

      A trend which carried on in March

      It may surprise you to learn that after things get cold in an area that they then get warmer which causes all that snow to melt. The increasingly extreme weather and weather fluctuations are indicative of Climate Change.

      It's not a coincidence that all these "rare weather events" are becoming increasingly common because they are part of the larger pattern that is Climate Change.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:What higher temperatures by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The new weather pattern. A warmer pacific ocean is generating a new air flow pattern, with more warmer air rushing up the US West Coast and the Pacific, pushing further North than was the old pattern. This warmer air is picking up a lot of moisture as it is cooling and heating up Alaska and the Arctic accelerating ice melt and picking up that newly available water, it then has to go somewhere, so it would normally go a bit more south east but it is being blocked by a warmer Atlantic and air moving north. So it gets squeezed between the pacific air flow and the Atlantic airflow and now goes much further south pushing cold air and a whole lot of moisture, in the form of snow.

      Once that now routine weather pattern is over, warm air comes it to replace that cold air as it is pushed out over the Atlantic, and melts all the snow, really quite fast, well the further south snow, more north not so fast, so lots of flooding further south because the snow melts a whole lot faster than previous regular patterns and flooding occurs.

      Suck it up, this is the new norm, and combined with sea level rise it will really be quite bad for the US East Coast, catastrophic is no understatement. Altered water levels really screw up building footings, storm water and sewer system. You can imagine the worth of a coastline full of flooded out collapsing structures and a lot of US military bases on the east coast are on really low lying land. Then you have sea ports and airports, again on low lying land (it was cheaper) also in real trouble.

      Too late to do much about the first say 1.5m of sea level rise, maybe keep it down to 750mm but that will take real action now. The safest economic measure, simple irrigate large swathes of Australia west coast desert, pumping desalinated water inland. You obviously pull that water out of the sea, so immediate benefit but in addition, green where it was red, cools the surface of the planet at lot, then of course the new planting would absorb lots of carbon dioxide and plant transpiration cycle also cools the atmosphere and for the cheery on top, the majority of that transpiration would fall as rain on inland Australia which is lower than sea level. The more you do that and the quicker you do it, the more it will reduce the impact of climate change and it in part pays for itself with a massive social benefit, tens of thousands of square kilometres planetary food and fibre bank (trees, hemp etc). Countries could invest in desalination in resources they could directly access, especially worth while for countries with limited land area, access to thousands of sqaure kilometres of land as long as they supply the desalinate irrigation to that land.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:What higher temperatures by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The article expects temperatures to remain cooler than average across the region, but with higher than average rainfall.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re: What higher temperatures by Thelaststraw · · Score: 1

      @ SuperKendall, not sure why I providing facts as you'll choose to ignore them, but here is one stat, I will reply with more as I get info. http://www.stormfax.com/huryea...

      --
      Nothing to see here, move along please.
    6. Re: What higher temperatures by Thelaststraw · · Score: 1

      @ SuperKendall, not sure why I providing facts as you'll choose to ignore them, but here is one stat, I will reply with more as I get info. http://www.stormfax.com/huryea...

      --
      Nothing to see here, move along please.
    7. Re: What higher temperatures by Thelaststraw · · Score: 1
      --
      Nothing to see here, move along please.
    8. Re: What higher temperatures by Thelaststraw · · Score: 2

      It has gotten so bad, even the oil companies have fessed up. https://corporate.exxonmobil.c...

      --
      Nothing to see here, move along please.
    9. Re:What higher temperatures by DRJlaw · · Score: 3, Informative

      It carried on a lot longer than that, according to LIVING HERE.

      We can see the temperatures ourselves, moron. Two days. Three if you want to pretend that 28 F is some sort of barn-burning cold. Only four days that didn't go above 32.

      It's only a few days after the bomb cyclone we've started actually approaching average temperatures.

      Own-goal. March 3rd to March 7th is indeed a "few days" from bomb cyclone to average high temperature. Also, not something that supports your point.

      So how do we have more melting that normal with below average tertmpetures?

      You misspelled "temperatures." I'd let it slide, but you have a spelling fetish it seems. How do you have more melting? Something about greater snowpack, which you admit, and daytime temperatures routinely above freezing, which we can see for ourselves. But wait, it gets better, because for some reason you want to only talk about Denver.

      You can dance around it all you like, but the fact is you and your scientifically, data starved ignorant friends are simply wrong about what is happening now, and you base your forecasts on this fundamentally mistaken view of the world... sad.

      You're appearing to confuse Denver with the predicted flooding areas, and then the world.

      You can't locate Denver on a map. SAD. The rest of us can. It's in one of those square states full of white.

      You misspelled decreasing. Just like a climate alarmists to confuse weather for climate.

      No, I really didn't.

      Pretty telling that I am the only one providing real data while you try to spread fear and panic by totally ignoring what the weather is actually doing.

      You can't click on a hyperlink to NWS temperatures? SAD.
      You should try clicking on these links. But you won't. SAD.
      You think that I have the sole responsibility to provide "real data" that is being published constantly yet you actively ignore? SAD.

      I'll let you have the last response, since at this point everyone is onto your game of deception... everyone except for you it would seem.

      You won't. You'll come back and post some nonsense, including that fact that "everyone" (except for every single reply to your post) agrees with your delusional position.

    10. Re:What higher temperatures by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Eh, according to the NOAA, Colorado had one of the colder Februaries on record. Not the top 20, but in the top 30ish out of 125

      Not what your weatherman means if he says says "record cold for February," now is it?

  5. Better infrastructure policy? by Picodon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So what are you going to do about it? How are you making a difference?

    How about better infrastructure policy, for starters? (Policy that would take into account realistic forecasts of climate evolution, in particular.)

    The many levee breaches make me think that we are not focussing on raising the right walls, at this point in time.

  6. How to not get flooded by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 2

    Step 1: "When was the last time this place flooded?"
    Step 2: "Oh, it has flooded before? Thanks. I'm not interested in the property."

    1. Re:How to not get flooded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Step 1: "When was the last time this place flooded?"

      Step 2: "Oh, it has flooded before? Thanks. I'm not interested in the property."

      good luck buying property anywhere, there is not a square inch on this entire planet that has not been underwater in the past.

    2. Re:How to not get flooded by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      It's a damned shame that cities keep permitting people to build on flood land just because it supports their tax base. We have permitting systems in place specifically to avoid things like this, but instead we use them to keep "undesirables" out.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:How to not get flooded by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      The water has a nice way of obliging them.

    4. Re:How to not get flooded by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Funny enough, the undesirables used to be forced to live on the floodplains here. No government help back then so rich people stuck to the higher ground.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    5. Re:How to not get flooded by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Step 2: "Oh, it has flooded before? Thanks. I'm not interested in the property."

      May I interest you in a really big boat? Lots of space to store animals.

    6. Re:How to not get flooded by houghi · · Score: 1

      Stupid Dutch.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    7. Re:How to not get flooded by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      The last time my area was underwater, there was a plesiosaur swimming in it.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    8. Re:How to not get flooded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Our home has never flooded before and was considered completely flood proof. In fact, our entire neighborhood was considered flood proof. We're at the top of the largest hill in the are, with the river bottom portion of the city several hundred feet below us.

      We had a LONG cold streak. For more than a month temperatures were well below freezing with near unprecedented snow. Which lead to huge piles of snow along roadways and driveways. Even though the snow started as fluffy and light due to the cold, it would pack down creating ice dams all along these roads and driveways. And when we suddenly swung from barely breaking zero degrees farenheight, to the forties AND got nearly ten inches of rain on that same day? The fluffy snow up top melted, but the ice dams remained. And we, along with many of our neighbors, were flooded. The water built up in the road and flowed across driveways directly into our homes. The poor folks in the river bottoms may lose their homes this year. We were lucky. We just get to clean up our floors, throw out some soaked carpet, and bleach our concrete.

      If this is a one year phenomenon? Random chance.

      If this is a new pattern, and it begins to happen year after year? We're all fucked.

    9. Re:How to not get flooded by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And now there is government help, but the help doesn't require people to relocate if they get it, and that's horribly misguided. People should either be able to stay where they are and have to do it all themselves, or get a hand up off the flood plain. I'm all for helping people, but you don't let the drowning man pull you under. You knock him the hell out if you have to.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:How to not get flooded by Outta_the_way_peck! · · Score: 1

      The do have to relocate, or at least raise, their homes. The issue is that flood zone maps only came about in the 80's and the pre-existing structures were grandfathered. However, when the cumulative repairs/improvements to those buildings eclipses half the value of the property, it now has to be brought within compliance with the flood zone restrictions. That is why flood zone properties are constantly being bought back and left vacant by state/county/city governments after every flood. The bigger issue with new construction is failure to understand the implications it has to flooding when not directly building in the flood zone. Building new or higher levees, while perhaps protecting that area, only pushes the problem downstream as the water will be forced there faster instead of spreading out in the now cutoff floodplain.

  7. Climate change impacts cost Trillions by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every year you put off implementing things to reduce climate change, the costs multiply many fold.

    What were once once a century storms and floods are now every 2-3 years.

    What were once massive inundations and beetle infestation wildfires are now commonplace.

    Even zoning codes have to change, to allow for redesign of buildings to survive such events every year or two, which increases building costs on average 50 percent and requires redesign of existing towns and buildings.

    Energy goes in.

    It comes out somewhere. It's like putting a bucket of bees inside. We can't tell you where the bees will sting or when, but we know there are going to be a lot of stings and consequences.

    Oh, and stop building on flood plains and lowlands and using levees. We're beyond that now. You waited too long.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Climate change impacts cost Trillions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the world is warming faster than it has ever before guess why? Chemistry that we are actively using and whose products really last thousands of years so everything ever done in industry is all building up and getting worse by the second

    2. Re:Climate change impacts cost Trillions by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      What were once once a century storms and floods are now every 2-3 years.

      All you need is 100 independent regions and you'll have a once in a century event every year.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Climate change impacts cost Trillions by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      All you need is 100 independent regions and you'll have a once in a century event every year.

      It's become common for regions to have new records every few years of late, and the globe has had two hottest years in recorded history in what, the last decade?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re: Climate change impacts cost Trillions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      So what?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re: Climate change impacts cost Trillions by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So these events aren't 100-year events (or what have you) any more.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Noah by AndrewFlagg · · Score: 2

    when did Noah build the ark? before the rain? i feel bad for the flooding areas, but hey, i have seen realtors sell a ton of things in a flood plain knowing better than to do that.. insurance companies just jack the rates up, and of course our government just bails our the insurance companies over and over again using taxpayer backed funds for stupid development and redevelopment on the coast and in under water table and levy housing that should have never existed after the first major catastrophe and flood... should have been made and remained a soccer field park or something like that forever...

    1. Re:Noah by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      An insurance payment for a flood-damaged home should come with a relocation requirement, and replacement should not be on any other flood plain, either.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Re: what an idiot you are by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Remember the sleestax in Land of the Lost? We use glowing rocks to compute.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  10. Re: Historic? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    Star Wars collectables nationwide are saying 'Oh no! Oh no!' in their basement display cases as owners ignore them and continue to frequent Marvel movies.

  11. Another prediction bites the dust. by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 2

    LOS ANGELES — With California entering its fifth year of a statewide drought, Gov. Jerry Brown moved on Monday to impose permanent water conservation measures and called on water suppliers to prepare for a future made drier by climate change.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

    Oh well.

    https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu...

    1. Re:Another prediction bites the dust. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Finally someone is speaking out against the conspiracy. Clearly drought didn't exist because today we get flooding. Just like how in many parts of the United States there was this supposed white powder than fell from the sky, blanketing the ground for months. Everyone knows that even in their wild conspiracies that left three-fourths or more of the year "snow" free. In such a fantasy, why would any even worry about snow removal, thicker clothes, or heating of homes. One should just sell all those beads and rattles because there's simply no reason to prepare for the future.

      Now, if you'll excuse me I'm going to go quit my job. My rent is paid. My belly is full. There's no reason for me to lift a finger because I have no reason to ever worry again.

    2. Re:Another prediction bites the dust. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Aquifers can accommodate several times as much water as surface storage, but they are not refilled in a year — even a year like this one. Too much of the water runs off. Deforestation and land development tend to cause land to shed water. It runs into the ocean instead of into land which can contain it until it can seep into aquifers. Los Angeles is the American poster child for this; it's got so much pavement that basically all of the water runs off immediately. I've read that they get enough rainfall per year to make up over 90% of their water use, but that it runs into the ocean instead of storage systems.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Another prediction bites the dust. by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      The point is droughts and floods are not a new thing, despite what some interests would like you to believe.

  12. well, what do you expect? by p51d007 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I lived near the Missouri river in mid Missouri, from birth to 20. When you travel around the capital area of Jefferson City, you see "the river bluffs". The Missouri river, as most rivers, have been SQUEEZED and SQUEEZED over the centuries, to claim the rich soil used to grow crops. When you have a major event, the river wants to go where it was, not where man "thinks" it should be.

  13. Food prices? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Slashdot *used* to have intelligent people posting, a dozen and more years ago. Now, you have to dig through the trolls and the 16 yr old idiots.

    Haven't seen the headlines telling you all that the price of food, later this year, will go *way* up: bread, tortillas, meat (what do you think they feed cattle, pigs and chickens?).

    Wonder if it'll result in food riots in the countries the US exports to....

  14. Odd by NetNed · · Score: 1

    Sooo they are going to ignore the dam break that was from bad construction that caused Iowa's flooding?? Am I also supposed to ignore all the early thaws or quick thaws of my childhood in the 70's?? If you are going to tell me some bullshit at least have it account for things that happened in the past and when facts come out about failed dams that the US Army Corp. built. That way you don't look as full of shit as you do now.