Lightning-Caused Fires

Lightning-Caused Fires

786 JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY VOLUME 41 The 2000 Fire Season: Lightning-Caused Fires MIRIAM L. RORIG AND SUE A. FERGUSON Paci®c Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Seattle, Washington (Manuscript received 22 May 2001, in ®nal form 9 February 2002) ABSTRACT A large number of lightning-caused ®res burned across the western United States during the summer of 2000. In a previous study, the authors determined that a simple index of low-level moisture (85-kPa dewpoint depression) and instability (85±50-kPa temperature difference) from the Spokane, Washington, upper-air soundings was very useful for indicating the likelihood of ``dry'' lightning (occurring without signi®cant concurrent rainfall) in the Paci®c Northwest. This same method was applied to the summer-2000 ®re season in the Paci®c Northwest and northern Rockies. The mean 85-kPa dewpoint depression at Spokane from 1 May through 20 September was 17.78C on days when lightning-caused ®res occurred and was 12.38C on days with no lightning-caused ®res. Likewise, the mean temperature difference between 85 and 50 kPa was 31.38C on lightning-®re days, as compared with 28.98C on non-lightning-®re days. The number of lightning-caused ®res corresponded more closely to high instability and high dewpoint depression than to the total number of lightning strikes in the region. 1. Introduction storms. The Haines index contains a moisture factor in combination with a stability factor to produce a single The summer of 2000 was notable for the number of categorical index used to quantify the risk of wild®re large wild®res that burned across the western United growth. The unstable, dry conditions identi®ed by the States. In 2000, more than 122 000 wild®res ignited, Haines index also occur in conjunction with high-based burning more than 3.2 3 106 ha. This is in comparison thunderstorms (see below) that produce ®re-igniting with the annual average for the previous 10 years of lightning strikes (Werth and Ochoa 1993), but the use- about 100 000 ®res and 1.5 3 106 ha. Lightning causes most wild®res in the western mountainous states, in- fulness of this index for our purpose is limited because cluding Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Idaho, the categories are too coarse. Montana, Wyoming, and Utah. A database compiled by The problem of estimating the risk of ®re from dry the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Ser- lightning is a complicated one. Whether a lightning vice, including the period of 1986±96 and consisting of strike will result in an ignition depends on many factors, locations, dates, and causes of ®res, reveals that light- including fuel moisture conditions, atmospheric mois- ning starts almost 60% of ®res on public land in these ture conditions, concurrent rainfall amounts and dura- states (Schmidt et al. 2002). Therefore, there is a need tion, and ®re suppression efforts. In unusually dry years, for better forecasts of the dry, unstable conditions that such as 2000, ®res may start despite signi®cant rainfall give rise to lightning that ignites ®res. because fuel moistures are extremely low. In addition, In addition to atmospheric instability, low-level mois- a simple de®nition of dry lightning itself is somewhat ture de®cit is a key ingredient for ``dry'' lightning (light- elusive. Lightning can occur without signi®cant precip- ning that strikes the ground with little or no accompa- itation if a thunderstorm is high based, with rainfall nying rainfall). Fire-weather forecasters try to anticipate evaporating before it reaches the ground; it can occur episodes of dry lightning using existing tools such as outside the rain shaft of a ``wet'' thunderstorm; or it traditional stability indices (e.g., lifted index and K in- can occur in conjunction with a fast-moving thunder- dex) and the Haines index, which is an indicator of ®re storm when signi®cant rainfall amounts do not accu- growth (Haines 1988). The stability indices are effective mulate at any one location. Nevertheless, the importance in predicting periods of convection but were not de- of dry lightning strikes has long been recognized by the signed to distinguish between dry and wet thunder- ®re-research community. For example, the lightning ac- tivity level, a component of the National Fire Danger Rating System, includes a special case for high-based Corresponding author address: Miriam L. Rorig, Paci®c Northwest thunderstorms that produce no precipitation at the Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 4043 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105. ground (Fuquay et al. 1979). E-mail: [email protected] The National Centers for Environmental Prediction JULY 2002 RORIG AND FERGUSON 787 (NCEP) Storm Prediction Center recently began fore- TABLE 1. Mean values of sounding variables (8C) at Spokane, WA, casting the potential for dry thunderstorms (those that for ®re and other days, 1 May±20 Sep 2000 (DD is dewpoint de- pression; TD is temperature difference). produce less than 2.5 mm of rain) as part of its Fire Weather Program (Naden 2001). These forecast prod- 85-kPa DD 85±50-kPa TD ucts include maps that depict convective available po- Fire days 17.7 31.3 tential energy and the average relative humidity in the Other days 12.3 28.9 lowest 6 kPa of the atmosphere (about 600 m above the t* 5.34 4.25 t ** 3.97 3.12 surface). This product indicates where thunderstorms crit(0.95,140) are expected and where there is a moisture de®cit, but * t 5 value of the t statistic. there is no indication of how dry and unstable the con- ** tcrit(0.95,140) 5 critical t value for the 95% signi®cance level with ditions must be for dry lightning to be of concern to sample size of 140. ®re-weather forecasters and there is no estimation of risk. Lightning-strike locations alone cannot be used to and 86 other days. No large ®re ignitions were reported estimate risk of ®re. Lightning-strike densities do not after 20 September. Lightning occurred on both ®re days correlate well with ®re start locations for several rea- and other days (lightning was recorded on 134 of the sons, including fuel type, fuel condition, and atmo- 143 days somewhere in the four-state region). Therefore, spheric conditions (Rorig and Ferguson 1999). This pre- it is important to discriminate those days on which the vious study showed an improvement in the ability to atmosphere is particularly unstable and dry, leading to estimate risk of ®re starts by using separate indicators a higher risk of ®re starts from lightning. of stability and moisture from upper-air soundings to Because Rorig and Ferguson (1999) found the 85- discriminate between dry and wet lightning days in the kPa dewpoint depression and 85±50-kPa temperature Paci®c Northwest. A maximum likelihood discriminant difference were most useful for discriminating between rule was developed using sounding data, precipitation wet and dry lightning days, the means of these variables records, and thunderstorm occurrence records from Spo- kane, Washington, and lightning-strike data from the were computed at Spokane for ®re days and other days National Lightning Detection Network (Cummins et al. (Table 1). The Student's t test was used to test for dif- 1998). The results of the study indicated the 85±50-kPa ference of means. The t test requires independence of temperature difference and 85-kPa dewpoint depression the data and is not robust against deviations from this were the most useful variables for classifying convective requirement. The daily data used to compute the means days into dry and wet categories. The discriminant rule are not independent; therefore, an alternative to the con- was then used to compute a probability of wet or dry ventional t test was used to compensate for autocorre- lightning in the Paci®c Northwest. The purpose of this lation in the data (von Storch and Zwiers 1999). The t article is to describe how this simple index, developed statistic is computed in the conventional manner and from historical data, identi®ed days in the summer of then is compared with a critical value of t that is ap- 2000 that had a greater risk of dry convection and, propriate for the sample size and the lag-1 autocorre- hence, lightning-caused ®res. lation coef®cient. If t is greater than tcrit, then the dif- ference in means is assumed to be signi®cant. Table 1 includes the computed t values and the critical t values 2. Methods and results for the 95% signi®cance level for each set of means. Dates and locations of large (more than 40.5 ha; The means from ®re days were signi®cantly higher (dri- smaller ®res are not included in the database) wild®re er and more unstable) than those from other days. Tables ignitions in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and western 2 and 3 include the means for both groups computed Montana were collected for May±September of 2000. from the Boise and Great Falls soundings. The 70-kPa The 0000 UTC upper-air soundings and daily precipi- dewpoint depression and 70±50-kPa temperature dif- tation amounts were compiled from Spokane, Boise, ference are also included, because the 85-kPa level is Idaho, and Great Falls, Montana, and lightning-strike closer to ground level at those sites and may be less data (which include location, date, and time) were ob- indicative of conditions above the boundary layer than tained for the northwestern United States. In addition, is the 70-kPa level. Like Spokane, the differences be- daily precipitation data were collected from 11 other tween all the means at Boise (Table 2) and Great Falls National Weather Service (NWS) sites and 108 Remote (Table 3) are signi®cant at the 95% level or higher, Automated Weather Station (RAWS) sites located indicating there is less moisture and more instability on throughout the four-state area from the Cascade Range ®re days than on other days in southern Idaho and Mon- to the Rocky Mountains.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    6 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us