Aurora!

There is a significant chance you can see an aurora around here tonight---assuming you can get away from the infernal low clouds.

There was a major solar storm yesterday and the impact is starting to be felt today in the earth's upper atmosphere.   Here is a plot from the NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC).

You can see the jump in the proton flux yesterday and if you look at the estimated Kp on the fourth line down (a measure of the disturbance of the earth's magnetic field) we have a fairly major event (estimated Kp values of around 8).  The SWPC has a handy map in which they estimate how far south the aurora will go relative to the Kp number.  Here is is:

The yellow line is for a Kp of 7 and it appears we have that....so the aurora could well be visible tonight if you have a view of the sky.

The NOAA polar orbiting satellite can actually view auroras and here is the latest graphic (2243 UTC, 3:43 PM our time). The reddish color indicates the aurora and the position of solar noon by the red arrow.

 

Compare this to one day ago.  A big difference.

There are no guarantees in this aurora business, but there is a decent chance you can see an aurora tonight if the sky is clear.   

Major problem for those west of the Cascades...the low clouds.  Here is the latest visible satellite image.  Eastern Washington and above roughly 3000 ft  will be clear.  You simply have to get over the crest.  Possibly ok, at least initially, in the Willamette valley and near Victoria and north of Bellingham.  But the low clouds will deepen and spread again this evening on the west side. 

One of the most magic events of my youth was seeing a major aurora...with the shimmering curtains of color.   I hope many of you can share this...good luck

Do We Need the National Weather Service When There is a Weather Channel?

Several years ago during a budget hearing, a Congressman supposedly asked why we needed the National Weather Service when lots of forecasts are available on the Weather Channel.  This guy was serious, but misinformed, since much of the material on the Weather Channel--the observations, the model output, the warnings---all came from the National Weather Service.  President Obama  knows--it seems that in nearly every speech when he talks about agencies we dare not cut the National Weather Service is mentioned.

At times I have criticized some National Weather Service policies or forecasts, but let me assure you, their forecasters are experienced and highly trained, and they make substantial sacrifices for all of us (like accepting rotating shifts).   Often TV weathercasters talk about "my forecast" or the "KXXX custom doppler-radar forecast" or whatever, but let me tell you a secret--they look at and rarely deviate far from NWS predictions.  Twice I had my 101 classes write down the TV forecasts for an extended period and then we compared them to the NWS predictions--no statistically significant difference.  (In fact, one of the leading local TV weathercasters called the chair of my department complaining about such activities!  This is why tenure is good.)

What do you have to do to become a NWS meteorologist?  You need a real degree in meteorology (at least a B.S.)--which means you had a lot of math, physics, and atmospheric sciences.   Getting into the NWS is quite difficult and they only have a few positions a year open--so those that get in are strong candidates.  The NWS then has an extended and comprehensive training program and intern forecasters have to spend several years working their way up until they become journeyman staff.

Here in Seattle the local office is at the NOAA Sand Point facility, and they have a nice office with a wonderful view of Lake Washington.   The "Meteorologist in Charge"--the head weather honcho-- is Brad Colman, who has exceptional academic credentials (Ph.D. from one of the top programs, MIT), and deep operational experience. 

Brad Colman, Seattle NWS Head Guy.  He likes blue shirts.

He is so highly thought of by NWS management that he was asked to help write the NWS vision document for 2020.   The local office also has a Warning Coordination Meteorologist (Ted Buehner), who deals with local agencies and the media, particularly during major weather, and a Science and Operations

Ted Buehner working on an AWIPS Workstation

Officer (Kirby Cook), who works on software development and training.   Under them there are roughly 15 forecasters and interns.  And there is more--there is a Service Hydrologist, working on floods and heavy precipitation, and the NW Avalanche Center, which provides mountain forecasts for the region.  Plus meteorological technicians that keep everything working and administrative support staff.

NWS Forecaster Working.  Looks like a good storm!

The way they make and communicate their forecasts has changed radically during the past decade.  In the old days, a forecaster would type out the forecast, after looking a a variety of computer-based weather forecasts, satellite and radar imagery, and a wide range of other observations.  Not anymore.  Now they play around with graphical renditions of the weather--drawing the fields on a screen and then the forecast text is created by a computer. You thought video games are fun.  Making forecasts on their graphically oriented system--AWIPS--is better.

This is the Graphical Forecast Editor (GFE) used by NWS forecasters to create forecasts. Not for color-blind folks.

There are over a hundred similar offices around the U.S., each one associated with a Doppler radar.  Our office will have more than one soon when our new radar is online. With so many offices, forecasters can become masters of their local weather--which is very important.  How often do you hear the Weather Channel folks talk about the convergence zone, the Enumclaw winds, or the Sequim rainshadow?  And it is well known that the Weather Channel ignores the West Coast.  They will even admit it.

Behind each office there is a huge and expensive infrastructure--the observation systems, the computer forecasts on large supercomputers, the satellite and radar networks, and much more.  It is amazing it all works so seamlessly.   And there is more.  There are major NWS centers for specific forecasting issues:  a Storm Prediction Center for severe convection, a Aviation Weather Center for aviation meteorology, a Marine Prediction Center for the seas, etc.  All the numerical weather forecasts are made by the Environmental Prediction Center in Maryland (I was there last week).  They are located in an old and decrepit building worthy of a wrecking ball (no I wouldn't waste a good wrecking ball on it)--but next year they are moving to a state-of-the-art facility near the University of Maryland.

There is a lot of carping about supporting the Federal government these days, but some agencies, like the National Weather Service, are worth every penny and provide a huge benefit to the nation.

Saving Seattle's Schools Requires New School Board Members

This year we can take a huge step in turning around the troubled Seattle School District, but to do so will require replacing the current board members that are up for election.

The multitude of problems in this poorly run and poorly performing district are manifest, and ultimately the origin of these deficiencies can be traced to a lack of leadership, energy and curiosity among several of  the school district's directors.  It seems that local newspapers run another depressing story every few weeks about a major Seattle School failure or scandal.  A few examples include:

(1)  Multiple reports of financial irregularities, including an out of control Small Business Development Program that wasted 1.8 million dollars.

(2) Poor administrative control and lack of transparency by superintendent Marie Goldloe Johnson that resulted in her firing

(3)  Lack of progress on student achievement, particularly by minority and low-income students.

(4)  Firing of a highly competent and beloved principal of Ingraham High School and an unwillingness to admit error over the incident.

(5) Selling Martin Luther King Elementary to a group with inside connections, for a loss of near 7 million from what could have been secured from the Bush School.

(6)  Selection of a high school math curriculum found to be mathematically unsound by the State Board of education.

(7) Deliberate deception about the college readiness of Seattle students.

(8)  Acceptance of an influx of untrained "Teach for America" "teachers" when a large pool of experienced or properly trained teachers are available

(9)  The State Board of Auditors 2010 audit produced a highly damning audit of district finances, citing mismanagement of district resources and noted that the school board failed to properly oversee the superintendent.
I could go on and on..but you get the message--poor student performance, poor administrative structures and oversight, cronyism, corruption, and much more.

Ultimately, the Seattle School Board is responsible for the school district and it is clear they have not done a very good job.   Many of them have been content with rubber-stamping the Superintendent's recommendations, have shown little curiosity about  obvious failures, have provided minimal oversight,  and have shown little interest in taking strong steps to turn around a sinking district.

But the waterfall of failures have gotten the community's attention and the worst school directors are now up for reelection.  Retiring the current incumbent directors up for reelection and replacing them with active, questioning individuals could have a huge impact. particularly since the remainder of the board is much stronger (DeBell, Patu, Kay Smith Blum) .  If you are a Seattle voter, this year you can have a major impact for good--here are my suggestions.

District 1:   Sharon Peaslee over the incumbent Peter Maier.  Maier is one of the worst of the current board members, and it is has been reported that he knew about some of the financial shenanigans early and chose not to act.  He also voted for the terrible Discovering Math series, even after he was told it was unsound (I was there...he really didn't care).   Sharon Peaslee has substantial teaching education and experience, was a key player in saving Ingrahm HS principle Martin Floe, and has been a real activist for better math and other issues.

District 2:  Kate Martin or Jack Whelan over the incumbent Sherry Carr.   Sherry Carr has a lot in common with Peter Maier--lack of curiosity, lack of vision, stay the course, support the superintendent.   Kate Martin has great vision, amazing knowledge about education, is willing to ask hard questions, and has the experience in management to back it up.  And extraordinarily articulate.  Jack Whelan, a member of the the Foster School of Business at the UW, is the poet of the campaign, writing cogently and insightfully about the districts problems.  He will not rubber stamp.

District 6:  Marty McLaren over the incumbent Steve Sundquist. Steve was supporting Goodloe Johnson to the end and rarely questioned the Superintendent's direction.  He STILL believes that the selection of poor Discovery math books was a good idea and has pushed the idea of bringing  barely qualified Teach for America recruits into our classrooms.  Amazing.  Marty McClaren is an extraordinary individual, with substantial teaching experience and was the force behind the initially successful math textbook lawsuit, for which she took personal financial responsibility (one of the most selfless acts I have seen in a while).  She is the kind of person that will ask questions...a lot of them.

Folks...elect 2 or 3 of the above and the majority of the board will change from stay-the-course rubber stamp types to inquisitive, intelligent individuals ready to show considerable leadership.

Announcement:  There will be a candidate forum for Seattle Public Schools, District 1 on August 10th at Enlighten Cafe and Art Gallery at 5424 Ballard Avenue NW. Time- 8pm