DOCSLIB.ORG

Model Submission Checklist

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Model Submission Checklist Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model Submitted in compliance with the 2006 Standards of the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology June 12, 2007 Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology Model Identification Name of Model and Version: Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model 2.6 Name of Modeling Organization: Florida International University Street Address : International Hurricane Research Center, MARC 360 City, State, ZIP Code: Miami, Florida 33199 Mailing Address, if different from above: Same as above Contact Person: Shahid S. Hamid Phone Number: 305-348-2727 Fax: 305-348-1761 E-mail Address: [email protected] Date: June12, 2007 FPHLM V2.6 2007 2 June 12, 2007 Chair, Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology c/o Donna Sirmons Florida State Board of Administration 1801 Hermitage Boulevard, Suite 100 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Dear Commission Chairman: I am pleased to inform you that the Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model (FPHLM) is ready for its first review by the Professional Team and certification by the Commission. The FPHLM model has been reviewed by professionals having credentials and/or experience in the areas of meteorology, engineering, actuarial science and insurance, statistics and computer science; for compliance with the Standards, as documented by the expert certification forms G1-G6. Enclosed are 20 bound copies of our submission, which includes the summary statement of compliance with the standards, the forms, and the submission checklist. Also enclosed are 20 CDs containing the submission and forms. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this submission. Sincerely, Shahid Hamid, Ph.D, CFA Professor of Finance, and Director, Laboratory for Insurance, Economic and Financial Research International Hurricane Research Center RB 202B, Department of Finance, College of Business Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 tel: 305 348 2727 fax: 305 348 4245 Cc: Kevin M. McCarty, Insurance Commissioner FPHLM V2.6 2007 3 Model Submission Checklist 1. Please indicate by checking below that the following has been included in your submission to the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology . Yes No Item X 1. Letter to the Commission X a. Refers to the Expert Certification Forms and states that professionals having credentials and/or experience in the areas of meteorology, engineering, actuarial science, statistics, and computer science have reviewed the model for compliance with the Standards X b. States model is ready to be reviewed by the Professional Team X c. Any caveats to the above statements noted with a complete explanation X 2. Summary statement of compliance with each individual Standard and the data and analyses required in the Disclosures and Forms X 3. General description of any trade secrets the modeler intends to present to the Professional Team X 4. Model Identification X 5. 20 Bound Copies X 6. 20 CDs containing: X a. Submission text in PDF format X b. PDF file highlightable and bookmarked by Standard, Form, and section X c. Data file names include abbreviated name of modeler, Standards year, and Form name (when applicable) X d. Forms V-2, A-1, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, and S-5 (for models submitted by modeling organizations which have not previously provided the Commission with this analysis) in PDF format X e. Forms V-2, A-1, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, and A-7 in Excel format X f. Form S-5 (for models submitted by modeling organizations which have not previously provided the Commission with this analysis) in ASCII format X 7. Table of Contents X 8. Materials consecutively numbered from beginning to end starting with the first page (including cover) using a single numbering system X 9. All tables, graphs, and other non-text items specifically listed in Table of Contents X 10. All tables, graphs, and other non-text items clearly labeled with abbreviations defined X 11. Standards, Disclosures, and Forms in italics , modeler responses in non-italics X 12. Graphs accompanied by legends and labels for all elements X 13. All units of measurement clearly identified with appropriate units used X 14. Hard copy of all Forms included except Forms A-1 and S-5 2. Explanation of “No” responses indicated above. (Attach additional pages if needed.) Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model June 12, 2007 Model Name Modeler Signature Date FPHLM V2.6 2007 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE General Standards 11 G-1 Scope of the Computer Model and Its Implementation 11 G-2 Qualifications of Modeler Personnel and Consultants 43 G-3 Risk Location 50 G-4 Submission Specifications 52 Form G-1 General Standards Expert Certification 53 Form G-2 Meteorological Standards Expert Certification 54 Form G-3 Vulnerability Standards Expert Certification 55 Form G-4 Actuarial Standards Expert Certification 56 Form G-5 Statistical Standards Expert Certification 57 Form G-6 Computer Standards Expert Certification 58 Meteorological Standards 59 M-1 Base Hurricane Storm Set 59 M-2 Hurricane Characteristics 74 M-3 Landfall Intensity 83 M-4 Hurricane Probabilities 85 M-5 Land Friction and Weakening 97 M-6 Logical Relationships of Hurricane Characteristics 107 Form M-1 Annual Occurrence Rates 87 Form M-2 Maps of Maximum Winds 102 Form M-3 Radius of Maximum Winds 108 Vulnerability Standards 110 V-1 Derivation of Vulnerability Functions 110 V-2 Mitigation Measures 125 Form V-1 One Hypothetical Event 128 Form V-2 Mitigation Measures – Range of Changes in Damage 129 Form V-3 Mitigation Measures – Mean Damage Ratio 130 Actuarial Standards 133 A-1 Modeled Loss Costs 133 A-2 Underwriting Assumptions 134 A-3 Loss Cost Projections 138 A-4 Demand Surge 140 A-5 User Inputs 143 A-6 Logical Relationship to Risk 149 A-7 Deductibles and Policy Limits 155 A-8 Contents 158 A-9 Additional Living Expense (ALE) 160 A-10 Output Ranges 162 Form A-2 Zero Deductible Loss Costs by ZIP Code 166 Form A-3 Base Hurricane Storm Set Average Annual Zero Deductible Statewide Loss Costs 169 Form A-4 Hurricane Andrew Percent of Losses 171 FPHLM V2.6 2007 5 Form A-5 Distribution of Hurricanes by Size of Loss 181 Form A-6 Output Ranges 184 Form A-7 Percentage Change In Output Ranges (V1.5 to V2.6) 256 Form A-7 Percentage Change In Output Ranges (V2.5 to V2.6) 278 Statistical Standards 300 S-1 Modeled Results and Goodness-of-Fit 300 S-2 Sensitivity Analysis for Model Output 312 S-3 Uncertainty Analysis for Model Output 316 S-4 County Level Aggregation 320 S-5 Replication of Known Hurricane Losses 321 S-6 Comparison of Projected Hurricane Loss Costs 324 Form S-1 Probability of Hurricanes per Year 325 Form S-2 Probable Maximum Loss (PML) 326 Form S-3 Five Validation Comparisons 327 Form S-4 Average Annual Zero Deductible Statewide Loss Costs - Historical versus Modeled 330 Form S-5 Hypothetical Events for Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis 331 Computer Standards 363 C-1 Documentation 363 C-2 Requirements 364 C-3 Model Architecture and Component Design 365 C-4 Implementation 366 C-5 Verification 368 C-6 Model Maintenance and Revision 371 C-7 Security 372 Assessment of Meteorological Portion of Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model 374 Letter of Assessment from the Actuary 378 Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model (FPHLM) Item 3. General Description of Any Trade Secrets the modeler intends to present the Professional Team The source codes will be made available for professional team for inspection. FPHLM V2.6 2007 6 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. FLORIDA PUBLIC HURRICANE LOSS MODEL DOMAIN AND THREAT AREA ....................................................12 FIGURE 2. EXAMPLES OF SIMULATED HURRICANE TRACKS . NUMBERS REFER TO THE STOCHASTIC TRACK NUMBER , AND COLORS REPRESENT STORM INTENSITY BASED ON CENTRAL PRESSURE .......................................................14 FIGURE 3. WEIGHTED MASONRY STRUCTURE VULNERABILITIES IN THE CENTRAL WIND BONE DEBRIS ZONE ...............24 FIGURE 4. FLOW DIAGRAM OF THE COMPUTER MODEL .................................................................................................28 FIGURE 5. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ....................................................................................................................44 FIGURE 6. FLORIDA PUBLIC HURRICANE LOSS MODEL WORKFLOW ............................................................................47 FIGURE 7. COMPARISON OF OBSERVED LANDFALL RMAX (SM ) DISTRIBUTION TO LOGNORMAL (LEFT ) AND GAMMA DISTRIBUTION FITS OF THE DATA . .......................................................................................................................75 FIGURE 8. COMPARISON OF 100,000 RMAX VALUES SAMPLED FROM THE GAMMA DISTRIBUTION FOR CAT 1-4 STORMS TO THE EXPECTED VALUES ..................................................................................................................................76 FIGURE 9. REPRESENTATIVE STOCHASTIC HURRICANE TRACKS SIMULATED BY THE FPHLM. .....................................80 FIGURE 10. COMPARISON OF OBSERVED (RIGHT ) AND MODELED (LEFT ) LANDFALL WIND FIELDS OF HURRICANES CHARLEY (2004, TOP ), AND 2005 HURRICANE KATRINA IN SOUTH FLORIDA (BOTTOM ). LINE SEGMENT INDICATES STORM HEADING . HORIZONTAL COORDINATES ARE IN UNITS OF R/R MAX AND WINDS UNITS OF MILES PER HOUR ..................................................................................................................................................81 FIGURE 11. AS IN FIGURE 10 EXCEPT FOR HURRICANE WILMA OF 2005. .....................................................................82 FIGURE 12.F ORM M1 COMPARISON OF MODELED AND
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS HYDR0-20 STORM TIDE
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS HYDR0-20 STORM TIDE FREQUENCY ANALYSIS FOR THE GULF COAST OF FLORIDA FROM CAPE SAN BLAS TO ST. PETERSBURG BEACH Francis P. Ho and Robert J. Tracey Office of Hydrology Silver Spring, Md. April 1975 UNITED STATES /NATIONAL OCEANIC AND / National Weather DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION Service Frederick B. Dent, Secretar1 Robert M. White, Administrator George P, Cressman, Director CONTENTS 1. Introduction. • • • • • • • 1 1.1 Objective and scope •• 1 1.2 Authorization •• 1 1.3 Study method •• 2 2. Summary of historical hurricanes •• 2 2.1 Hurricane tracks 2 2.2 Historical notes 3 3. Climatology of hurricane characteristics. 8 3.1 Frequency of hurricane tracks •••. 8 3.2 Probability distribution of hurricane intensity. 8 3.3 Probability distribution of radius of maximum winds. 9 3.4 Probability distribution of speed and direction of forward motion • . • • • • • • • • 9 4. Hurricane surge • • • • 9 4.1 Surge model ••• 9 4.2 Shoaling factor •• 10 5. Tide frequency analysis by joint probability method • 10 5.1 The joint probability method • 10 5.2 Astronomical tides •••••• 11 5.2.1 Reference datum •.•••• 11 Table 1. Tropical storm parameters - Clearwater, Fla 12 Table 2. Tropical storm parameters - Bayport, Fla •• 13 Table 3. Tropical storm parameters - Cedar Key, Fla. 14 Table 4. Tropical storm parameters- Rock ·Islands, Fla .. 15 Table 5. Tropical storm parameters - Carrabelle, Fla • 16 Table 6. Tropical storm parameters - Apalachicola, Fla 17 5.2.2 Astronomical tide • • • •.• 19 5.3 Prestorm water level ••••••. 19 5.4 Tide frequencies • • • • . • ••• 19 5.5 Adjustment along coast ••••••.•••.•••. 19 5.6 Comparison of frequency curves with observed tides and high-water marks • • • • • • • • • • • .
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 North Atlantic Hurricane Season Review
    2014 North Atlantic Hurricane Season Review WHITEPAPER Executive Summary The 2014 Atlantic hurricane season was a quiet season, closing with eight 2014 marks the named storms, six hurricanes, and two major hurricanes (Category 3 or longest period on stronger). record – nine Forecast groups predicted that the formation of El Niño and below consecutive years average sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the Atlantic Main – that no major Development Region (MDR)1 through the season would inhibit hurricanes made development in 2014, leading to a below average season. While 2014 landfall over the was indeed quiet, these predictions didn’t materialize. U.S. The scientific community has attributed the low activity in 2014 to a number of oceanic and atmospheric conditions, predominantly anomalously low Atlantic mid-level moisture, anomalously high tropical Atlantic subsidence (sinking air) in the Main Development Region (MDR), and strong wind shear across the Caribbean. Tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic basin was also influenced by below average activity in the 2014 West African monsoon season, which suppressed the development of African easterly winds. The year 2014 marks the longest period on record – nine consecutive years since Hurricane Wilma in 2005 – that no major hurricanes made landfall over the U.S., and also the ninth consecutive year that no hurricane made landfall over the coastline of Florida. The U.S. experienced only one landfalling hurricane in 2014, Hurricane Arthur. Arthur made landfall over the Outer Banks of North Carolina as a Category 2 hurricane on July 4, causing minor damage. While Mexico and Central America were impacted by two landfalling storms and the Caribbean by three, Bermuda suffered the most substantial damage due to landfalling storms in 2014.Hurricane Fay and Major Hurricane Gonzalo made landfall on the island within a week of each other, on October 12 and October 18, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricane & Tropical Storm
    5.8 HURRICANE & TROPICAL STORM SECTION 5.8 HURRICANE AND TROPICAL STORM 5.8.1 HAZARD DESCRIPTION A tropical cyclone is a rotating, organized system of clouds and thunderstorms that originates over tropical or sub-tropical waters and has a closed low-level circulation. Tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes are all considered tropical cyclones. These storms rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere around the center and are accompanied by heavy rain and strong winds (NOAA, 2013). Almost all tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic basin (which includes the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea) form between June 1 and November 30 (hurricane season). August and September are peak months for hurricane development. The average wind speeds for tropical storms and hurricanes are listed below: . A tropical depression has a maximum sustained wind speeds of 38 miles per hour (mph) or less . A tropical storm has maximum sustained wind speeds of 39 to 73 mph . A hurricane has maximum sustained wind speeds of 74 mph or higher. In the western North Pacific, hurricanes are called typhoons; similar storms in the Indian Ocean and South Pacific Ocean are called cyclones. A major hurricane has maximum sustained wind speeds of 111 mph or higher (NOAA, 2013). Over a two-year period, the United States coastline is struck by an average of three hurricanes, one of which is classified as a major hurricane. Hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions may pose a threat to life and property. These storms bring heavy rain, storm surge and flooding (NOAA, 2013). The cooler waters off the coast of New Jersey can serve to diminish the energy of storms that have traveled up the eastern seaboard.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating a Hurricane Tolerant Community
    H!rt a. * am Hef7%e,,, io94 s~ NtA B.6~ «e ( >15 A Hurt a Comlnl Of+ Venice 19 "I t~Y: Oonald C aillOllette IC' i 2w-;vC p %7 iET ! A. 14- C M-i -r CREATING A HURRICANE TOLERANT COMMUNITY TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements . 1 .. Author's Notes . 5 Introduction . 6 Geography of Venice . Coastal Area Redevelopment Plan . 26 Venice Compliance Program . 62 Developing a Tolerant Building. 104 Hurricane Damage Prevention Project. .118 Growing Native for Nature ................. 136 Hurricane Defense Squadron . ............... 148 Executive Summary ..................... 157 A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S This pilot study was contracted through the State of Florida and was made possible by funding provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). William Massey and Eugene P. Zeizel, Ph.D. of FEMA and Michael McDonald with the Florida Department of Community Affairs were all instrumental in developing the scope of work and funding for this study. Special thanks go to the Venice City Council and City Manager George Hunt for their approval and support of the study. MAYOR: MERLE L. GRASER CITY COUNCIL: EARL MIDLAM, VICE MAYOR CHERYL BATTEY ALAN McEWEN DEAN CALAMARAS BRYAN HOLCOMB MAGGIE TURNER A study of this type requires time for the gathering of information from a variety of sources along with the assembling of these resources into a presentable format. Approximately six months were needed for the development of this study. The Venice Planning Department consisting of Chuck Place, Director, and Cyndy Powers need to be recognized for their encouragement and support of this document from the beginning to the end.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL SUMMARY Atlantic Hurricane Season of 2005
    MARCH 2008 ANNUAL SUMMARY 1109 ANNUAL SUMMARY Atlantic Hurricane Season of 2005 JOHN L. BEVEN II, LIXION A. AVILA,ERIC S. BLAKE,DANIEL P. BROWN,JAMES L. FRANKLIN, RICHARD D. KNABB,RICHARD J. PASCH,JAMIE R. RHOME, AND STACY R. STEWART Tropical Prediction Center, NOAA/NWS/National Hurricane Center, Miami, Florida (Manuscript received 2 November 2006, in final form 30 April 2007) ABSTRACT The 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was the most active of record. Twenty-eight storms occurred, includ- ing 27 tropical storms and one subtropical storm. Fifteen of the storms became hurricanes, and seven of these became major hurricanes. Additionally, there were two tropical depressions and one subtropical depression. Numerous records for single-season activity were set, including most storms, most hurricanes, and highest accumulated cyclone energy index. Five hurricanes and two tropical storms made landfall in the United States, including four major hurricanes. Eight other cyclones made landfall elsewhere in the basin, and five systems that did not make landfall nonetheless impacted land areas. The 2005 storms directly caused nearly 1700 deaths. This includes approximately 1500 in the United States from Hurricane Katrina— the deadliest U.S. hurricane since 1928. The storms also caused well over $100 billion in damages in the United States alone, making 2005 the costliest hurricane season of record. 1. Introduction intervals for all tropical and subtropical cyclones with intensities of 34 kt or greater; Bell et al. 2000), the 2005 By almost all standards of measure, the 2005 Atlantic season had a record value of about 256% of the long- hurricane season was the most active of record.
    [Show full text]
  • Sensitivity Analysis of Hurricane Arthur (2014) Storm Surge Forecasts to WRF Physics Parameterizations and Model Configurations
    OCTOBER 2017 Z H A N G E T A L . 1745 Sensitivity Analysis of Hurricane Arthur (2014) Storm Surge Forecasts to WRF Physics Parameterizations and Model Configurations FAN ZHANG AND MING LI Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Cambridge, Maryland ANDREW C. ROSS Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania SERENA BLYTH LEE Griffith School of Engineering, Griffith Climate Change Response Program, Griffith Centre for Coastal Management, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia DA-LIN ZHANG Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland (Manuscript received 13 December 2016, in final form 17 July 2017) ABSTRACT Through a case study of Hurricane Arthur (2014), the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model and the Finite Volume Coastal Ocean Model (FVCOM) are used to investigate the sensitivity of storm surge forecasts to physics parameterizations and configurations of the initial and boundary conditions in WRF. The turbulence closure scheme in the planetary boundary layer affects the prediction of the storm intensity: the local closure scheme produces lower equivalent potential temperature than the nonlocal closure schemes, leading to significant reductions in the maximum surface wind speed and surge heights. On the other hand, higher-class cloud microphysics schemes overpredict the wind speed, resulting in large overpredictions of storm surge at some coastal locations. Without cumulus parameterization in the outermost domain, both the wind speed and storm surge are grossly underpredicted as a result of large precipitation decreases in the storm center. None of the choices for the WRF physics parameterization schemes significantly affect the prediction of Arthur’s track.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Hurricanes and Tropical Storms
    FLORIDA HURRICANES AND TROPICAL STORMS 1871-1995: An Historical Survey Fred Doehring, Iver W. Duedall, and John M. Williams '+wcCopy~~ I~BN 0-912747-08-0 Florida SeaGrant College is supported by award of the Office of Sea Grant, NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,grant number NA 36RG-0070, under provisions of the NationalSea Grant College and Programs Act of 1966. This information is published by the Sea Grant Extension Program which functionsas a coinponentof the Florida Cooperative Extension Service, John T. Woeste, Dean, in conducting Cooperative Extensionwork in Agriculture, Home Economics, and Marine Sciences,State of Florida, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, U.S. Departmentof Commerce, and Boards of County Commissioners, cooperating.Printed and distributed in furtherance af the Actsof Congressof May 8 andJune 14, 1914.The Florida Sea Grant Collegeis an Equal Opportunity-AffirmativeAction employer authorizedto provide research, educational information and other servicesonly to individuals and institutions that function without regardto race,color, sex, age,handicap or nationalorigin. Coverphoto: Hank Brandli & Rob Downey LOANCOPY ONLY Florida Hurricanes and Tropical Storms 1871-1995: An Historical survey Fred Doehring, Iver W. Duedall, and John M. Williams Division of Marine and Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology Melbourne, FL 32901 Technical Paper - 71 June 1994 $5.00 Copies may be obtained from: Florida Sea Grant College Program University of Florida Building 803 P.O. Box 110409 Gainesville, FL 32611-0409 904-392-2801 II Our friend andcolleague, Fred Doehringpictured below, died on January 5, 1993, before this manuscript was completed. Until his death, Fred had spent the last 18 months painstakingly researchingdata for this book.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction and Application of a Spatial Hurricane Climatology Kelsey Nicole Scheitlin
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2010 Construction and Application of a Spatial Hurricane Climatology Kelsey Nicole Scheitlin Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION OF A SPATIAL HURRICANE CLIMATOLOGY By KELSEY SCHEITLIN A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Geography in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2010 The members of the committee approve the dissertation of Kelsey Scheitlin defended on June 4, 2010. James Elsner Professor Directing Dissertation Robert Hart University Representative Victor Mesev Committee Member Tingting Zhao Committee Member Thomas Jagger Committee Member Approved: Victor Mesev, Chair, Department of Geography David Rasmussen, Dean, College of Social Sciences and Public Policy The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members. ii To my parents, B and Jude, for supporting me through nine years of college, and my fianc´eJason, who patiently allowed me to put our lives on hold while I produced this document. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Elsner for his level of commitment to these papers and to my success. Dr. E, your mentorship, life lessons, and all of the wonderful opportu- nities you provided me will forever be appreciated. I promise you- I did not forget to put your name on the paper! I also thank my committee members- Dr. Zhao, Dr. Mesev, and Dr. Hart- for their time and effort in this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Season
    SEPTEMBER 2017 Storm season Thirty years ago this week, Hurricane Emily hit Bermuda. She was a Cat 1 storm—and the first major tempest of its kind that many islanders can remember. The previous hurricane that strong was back in 1948. Emily made landfall on September 25, 1987, packing 90-mile-per-hour winds, gusts up to 112, and even a few tornadoes. Emily’s impact was all the more dramatic because she pre-dated the era of preparedness that makes the modernday Bermuda community so resilient. Meteorology hadn’t evolved to its cutting-edge prescience. There was no Emergency Measures Organisation. Neither forecasters nor islanders could approximate the path or strength of the storm, which uprooted trees, flipped cars, sank boats, and tore the roofs off 230 Bermuda buildings, including the airport, which had to close temporarily. Many residents were injured due to Emily’s extreme winds that caused damage totalling $50 million. Fast-forward to 2017, when another Emily, this time only a tropical depression, reminded us of her namesake as she rained out parts of Cup Match week—and set in motion an Atlantic storm season that has turned out to be unprecedented in its intensity and resulting devastation. Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria have wreaked havoc not only on our neighbours to the south and west, but also on the global insurance industry, where observers say some of the early figures for predicted losses ($100 billion-plus) could be game-changers. Concrete tallies on claims remain murky. Our market, like other major insurance industry hubs, will have to await the fiscal outcome—from Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and other hard-hit territories in the Caribbean.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of 2010 Atlantic Seasonal Tropical Cyclone Activity and Verification of Author's Forecast
    SUMMARY OF 2010 ATLANTIC TROPICAL CYCLONE ACTIVITY AND VERIFICATION OF AUTHOR’S SEASONAL AND TWO-WEEK FORECASTS The 2010 hurricane season had activity at well above-average levels. Our seasonal predictions were quite successful. The United States was very fortunate to have not experienced any landfalling hurricanes this year. By Philip J. Klotzbach1 and William M. Gray2 This forecast as well as past forecasts and verifications are available via the World Wide Web at http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu Emily Wilmsen, Colorado State University Media Representative, (970-491-6432) is available to answer various questions about this verification. Department of Atmospheric Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 Email: [email protected] As of 10 November 2010* *Climatologically, about two percent of Net Tropical Cyclone activity occurs after this date 1 Research Scientist 2 Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science 1 ATLANTIC BASIN SEASONAL HURRICANE FORECASTS FOR 2010 Forecast Parameter and 1950-2000 Climatology 9 Dec 2009 Update Update Update Observed (in parentheses) 7 April 2010 2 June 2010 4 Aug 2010 2010 Total Named Storms (NS) (9.6) 11-16 15 18 18 19 Named Storm Days (NSD) (49.1) 51-75 75 90 90 88.25 Hurricanes (H) (5.9) 6-8 8 10 10 12 Hurricane Days (HD) (24.5) 24-39 35 40 40 37.50 Major Hurricanes (MH) (2.3) 3-5 4 5 5 5 Major Hurricane Days (MHD) (5.0) 6-12 10 13 13 11 Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) (96.2) 100-162 150 185 185 163 Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) (100%) 108-172 160 195 195 195 Note: Any storms forming after November 10 will be discussed with the December forecast for 2011 Atlantic basin seasonal hurricane activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Layout 1 (Page 6)
    Hurricane History in North Carolina ashore. Dennis made landfall just below hurricane strength nine inches THE EXPRESS • November 29, 2017 • Page 6 at Cape Lookout on Sept. 4. The storm then moved of rain on the capitol city. Major wind damage and flood- North Carolina is especially at risk of a hurricane hitting through eastern and central North Carolina. It dumped 10 ing were reported along the North Carolina coast. Major the state. Below is a list of tropical storms and hurricanes to 15 inches of rain, causing a lot of flooding in southeastern damage was reported inland through Raleigh. Damages that have caused problems in the state in recent years. North Carolina. Because the storm had stayed off the coast topped $5 billion. Thirty-seven people died from Fran. 2011 Hurricane Irene – August 27. Hurricane Irene for many days, there was a lot of beach erosion and damage 1993 Hurricane Emily - August 31. Hurricane Emily made landfall near Cape Lookout as a Category 1. It to coastal highways. Residents of Hatteras and Ocracoke Is- came ashore as a Category 3 hurricane, but the 30-mile- brought two to four feet of storm surge along parts of the lands were stranded for many days due to damage to High- wide eye stayed just offshore of Cape Hatteras. Damage Outer Banks and up to 15 feet along parts of the Pamlico way 12. Two traffic deaths were credited to the storm. estimates were nearly $13 million. No lives were lost. Sound. Irene caused seven deaths and prompted more • Hurricane Floyd - September 16.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Microphysical Schemes on Hurricane Intensity and Track
    Asia-Pacific J. Atmos. Sci. 47(1), 1-16, 2011 DOI:10.1007/s13143-011-1001-z The Impact of Microphysical Schemes on Hurricane Intensity and Track Wei-Kuo Tao1, Jainn Jong Shi1,2, Shuyi S. Chen3, Stephen Lang1,4, Pay-Liam Lin5, Song-You Hong6, Christa Peters-Lidard7 and Arthur Hou8 1Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA 2Goddard Earth Sciences and Technology Center, University of Maryland at Baltimore County, Maryland, USA 3Rosentiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA 4Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland, USA 5Department of Atmospheric Science, National Central University, Jhong-Li, Taiwan, R.O.C. 6Department of Atmospheric Sciences and Global Environment Laboratory, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea 7Hydrological Sciences Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA 8Goddard Modeling Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA (Manuscript received 5 February 2010; revised 11 June 2010; accepted 6 July 2010) © The Korean Meteorological Society and Springer 2011 Abstract: During the past decade, both research and operational 1. Introduction numerical weather prediction models [e.g. the Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF)] have started using more complex micro- Advances in computing power allow atmospheric prediction physical schemes originally developed for high-resolution cloud re- models to be run at progressively finer scales of resolution, using solving models (CRMs) with 1-2 km or less horizontal resolutions. WRF is a next-generation meso-scale forecast model and assimilation increasingly more sophisticated physical parameterizations and system. It incorporates a modern software framework, advanced dy- numerical methods.
    [Show full text]