Satellite Problem - Inaccurate Hurricane Warnings

This is just peachy -

MIAMI - An aging weather satellite crucial to accurate predictions on the intensity and path of hurricanes could fail at any moment and plans to launch a replacement have been pushed back seven years to 2016.

In a letter obtained by The Associated Press, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s chief said the failure of the QuikScat satellite could bring more uncertainty to forecasts and widen the areas that are placed under hurricane watches and warnings.

If the satellite faltered, experts estimate that the accuracy of two-day forecasts could suffer by 10 percent and three-day forecasts by 16 percent, which could translate into miles of coastline and the difference between a city being evacuated or not.

“We would go blind. It would be significantly hazardous,” said Wayne Sallade, emergency manager in Charlotte County, which was hit hard by Hurricane Charley in 2004.

Evacuating for a hurricane is expensive. It’s essentially a spur of the moment vacation; no time to plan or find low prices, just jump in the car and go somewhere. If you wait until the last minute to be sure evacuation is really necessary, you have to drive a good deal further to get a room. If you book a room close by well in advance of the hurricane, you risk having to pay for a room you don’t need. Then there’s gas, food, and associated expenses. If this satellite fails, it’s going to make hurricane season that much more expensive. And the problem is just going to get worse:

Even if money were immediately available, a replacement satellite is estimated to take at least four years and cost approximately $400 million to build. The AP first reported those estimates in a March interview with Proenza, one of the loudest voices calling for a replacement satellite.

If the satellite fails, the options are few. Other satellites have instruments to measure wind speed and direction over water, but they are less accurate.

A European satellite called ASCAT is available, but it does not give scientists as clear a picture as QuikScat because the distance between the readings it takes is larger. Using ASCAT would be like a person who wears glasses taking them off, seeing a once-sharp world blurred, said National Hurricane Center senior hurricane specialist Rick Knabb.

A NASA and Department of Defense satellite called WINDSAT also measures wind speed and direction, but it too is beyond its expected lifespan, and scientists have had trouble using it to observe tropical weather systems.

My family spends about $500 for a short evacuation, where either the storm doesn’t hit, or hits with no appreciable damage so we can come right home. New Orleans had about 500,000 people before Katrina, and I’ll guesstimate that half used to leave for evacuations before Katrina. So that’s 250 million dollars right there, for a small/medium sized city evacuation. After Katrina, you can bet that more people will bug out.

So do we spend hundreds of millions on satellites, or hundreds of millions due to inaccurate weather forecasts? Satellites are cheaper, even when you don’t consider the value of potentially saving lives.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Rightlinx, third world county, stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, Right Pundits, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Azamatterofact, The Random Yak, DeMediacratic Nation, Maggie’s Notebook, Adam’s Blog, Webloggin, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, Conservative Cat, Allie Is Wired, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Planck’s Constant, High Desert Wanderer, OTB Sports, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.