The same tragedy has happened time and again.
An excellent prediction of a major weather-related threat is unheeded, leading to massive destruction and loss of life.
We need to do better. We can do better.
This blog will discuss the problem and how it might be addressed.
There are numerous examples of this failure mode; let me provide just a few.
Hurricane Katrina, 2005
In 2005, the landfall of Hurricane Katrina near New Orleans resulted in 1400 deaths and $125 billion in damage. Excellent forecasts by the National Weather Service and weather models.
LA Wildfires, 2025
The wildfires in LA led to 30 deaths and at least 100 billion in damage. Meteorological forecasts of strong, dry Santa Ana winds by the models were stunningly good and the National Weather Service put out an apocalyptic forecast (see below)
Power companies failed to de-energize powerlines, and local governments failed to pre-position fire-fighting capability and had emptied a critical reservoir, to name only a few of the mistakes made.
Maui Wildfire, 2023
Weather forecast models were emphatic that a major downslope windstorm would occur in the area around Lahaina. The National Weather Service had a red-flag warning for the lee sides of the islands, but did not identify the particular threat to Lahaina.
After the fire was started, the local response was very problematic, not staying with the fire when they thought it was out, blocking travel routes, and not facilitating an effective evaluation.
Hurricane Helene (2024)
Heavy precipitation and flooding from this storm resulted in 250 deaths and nearly 80 billion dollars in damage. Heavy rain reaching as much as 30 inches led to catastrophic flooding. NOAA/NWS forecast models did an excellent job in predicting the hurricane path and heavy rain (see below).
Texas Flooding (2025)
As documented in my earlier blog and many other sources, the National Weather Service provided timely warnings, but local communities lacked the warning capability to effectively remove individuals from harm's way. In addition, vulnerable camp facilities were located on threatened floodplains.
I could easily provide many other cases of excellent forecasts, but a lack of proper response, leading to massive unnecessary deaths and economic loss.
Why are we in this failure mode? How can it be fixed?
First, it must be recognized that weather prediction has gotten immensely more skillful over the past 30 years.
The combination of much more skillful global models plus high-resolution prediction capabilities has resulted in meteorologists now being able to forecast dangerous conditions with great skill days in advance.
For example, huge improvements in hurricane track forecasts (see below)
Second, it needs to be recognized that our ability to observe what is happening in real-time is immensely better due to far more comprehensive observations.
Improved weather radars and massive new satellite assets provide meteorologists and others with extraordinary knowledge of what is happening....abilities we did possess 20-30 years ago (see a sample below).
With better observations and predictions, meteorologists, hydrologists, and others in NOAA and other government agencies are in a FAR better position to provide actionable guidance for saving lives and property.
Third, with this knowledge, local and state governments, in concert with the Federal government, must take responsibility for using the improved forecast capabilities to save lives and property.
This means better communications to the public, better warning systems, better planning for adverse conditions, and more.
We can radically reduce deaths and losses due to storms and adverse weather by recognizing the extraordinary potential of improved observations and forecasts, and then applying this information to warn and protect our communities.
What should we NOT do? Blame climate change or political parties you don't like.
Climate change has only a very small impact on the intensity of extreme weather (there is very, very strong science to support this statement). Pushing climate as the origin of these extremes leads to inaction on the real problems. Even if climate change were important, adaptation can save most lives.
Both political parties have been in power as this situation has festered. This is a fully bipartisan problem. Name-calling and blame will lead to inaction and more deaths.
Total nonsense.
Cliff, I disagree with regard to the inland flooding from Helene (95 deaths). As I explain in a conversation with Andrew Revkin, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC7rWEkPQGM&t=2s , that took everyone step-by-step through the rainfall forecast and warnings, 2.5 days out they were forecasting "isolated urban flooding." By the time the forecasts got really ramped up, many had lost power due to heavy rain and lightning the day before Helene's rains arrived.
ReplyDeleteI also believe the warnings for Texas Sunday morning were subpar (not "terrible"). Again, a step-by-step explanation here: https://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com/2025/07/we-didnt-know-this-flood-was-coming.html Part of the problem is the NWS took three types of thunderstorm-type warnings (flash flood, tornado, severe thunderstorm) and split them into 9 and none of the public knows what they now mean.
Mike...several models had heavy rain in the critical locations days before...Are you saying this was a NWS communications failure?..cliff
DeleteThanks Cliff, very to the point at the end. Both sides ARE to blame, climate change activists routing resources to net zero objectives (which do nothing) and the other side not wanting to spend the resources for better alarm systems. Our county emergency management sends out notices, but it is flawed. During the cold springs fire which burned behind house. It sent Level 3 evacuation notices to people and peopled called me to make sure I got them. I am signed up and get notifications, but that one I never got. Thank God for family and neighbors, which is what gave me time to evacuate safely. Unfortunately, we take for granted that we will get earned by someone, but we cannot rely on just that. People need to also be aware of surroundings at all times, not always going to be someone to save you, and don't just think of self, spread the word as much as can. It this world of communication, where information can spread in seconds, shouldn't be this way, but we rely on inefficient governments for these warning far too much. Private apps (Such as watch duty or weather channel) or personal weather raidios can get you info better than governments can.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever felt there is a perpetual analysis-paralysis when it comes to decision making by local officials. Perhaps hurricane warnings have lulled people into thinking they will have a few days warnings and perhaps at least a day or two to evacuate people so you minimize loss of life. For tornados, you know there will be little warning less than 30 minutes and will likely have to shelter in an internal room or hall or an underground shelter that can be reached quickly. Because they are so widespread, it's impossible to predict where they might hit.
ReplyDeleteFlash floods and wildfires, while intermittent occur in predictable locations and there is likely, at least a few hours of warning and the opportunity to make decisions. In the case of the Eaton Fire, So. California Edison had a criteria of 60 mph winds to de-energize the lines. A fire got ignited by power lines before this threshold was reached. On the Guadalupe river there was a reluctance to call a flash flood emergency and when it was called, the information did not seem get to the people who needed to hear it.
The river flash floods are likely an easier emergency to deal with. First, don't build structures in the flash flood zone and have a buffer region for extraordinary rainfalls. There were cabins where children slept in Camp Mystic in the flood plain. Many RV's were also swept away. Given the mobility of RV and camps, perhaps the areas with potential to flood should be closed off when any type of warning is issued.
Wildfires likely need a three-pronged approach. Stop power line ignition by upgrading or burying power lines. Reduce the fuel through clearing brush or creating fire breaks. (This has been notoriously difficult in California.) Modify structures in fire prone areas to cover them with materials that don't burn or are very difficult to ignite then clear all the brush and easily ignitable material from near the structure. The local fire department had offered to provided guidance to people in the Palisades area after serious fires in Malibu Canyon but only 10% of the residents took them up on it.
The point is, warnings are important but they are really just a last line of defense. A multitiered defense against disasters using zoning and proper infrastructure to keep people out of harms way and property hardened to reduce its vulnerability.
This IS a partisan problem because the republicans have cut funding and staffing that could do the very thing you are correctly suggesting should be done, using improved forecast capabilities to save lives and property. People are needed to get the message out and it has been reported that several vacancies were present at the local NWS office, including the warning coordination meteorologist.
ReplyDeleteMany of the problems have occurred in democrat controlled areas...so fully bipartisan. The Texas NWS office in question had plenty of staff that night and provided the warnings. So did the NOAA Weather Prediction Center. So Republican hiring freezes had nothing to do with this event...cliff
DeleteRegarding the response to forecasts (by local emergency officials and/or the public), do you think there is a problem of tuning out weather warnings? I see at least 3 problems: [1] in addition to spot-on forecasts, there have been other forecasts/warnings that turned out wrong (i.e., "false alarm). [2] I think the general public gets confused with what terminology means: warning versus watch versus advisory, for example. In the recent Texas tragedy, it seems there was a more dire, emergency level. [3] A lot of these messages are issues for large geographic areas. I know people who have become worried when they realize there is a flash flood statement or a heavy snow advisory they think applies to their area, when in fact it was most relevant for somewhere else in King County.
ReplyDelete