Summary for Tropical Depression Nineteen (AT4/AL192024)


000
WTNT34 KNHC 140847
TCPAT4

BULLETIN
Tropical Depression Nineteen Advisory Number   3
NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL       AL192024
400 AM EST Thu Nov 14 2024

...POTENTIAL TROPICAL CYCLONE BECOMES TROPICAL DEPRESSION...
...LIFE-THREATENING FLASH FLOODING EXPECTED IN HONDURAS LATER THIS
WEEK AND OVER THE WEEKEND...


SUMMARY OF 400 AM EST...0900 UTC...INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------
LOCATION...15.9N 81.7W
ABOUT 280 MI...455 KM E OF ISLA GUANAJA HONDURAS
ABOUT 120 MI...190 KM ENE OF CABO GRACIAS A DIOS ON NIC/HON BORDER
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...35 MPH...55 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...W OR 265 DEGREES AT 16 MPH...26 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...1004 MB...29.65 INCHES


WATCHES AND WARNINGS
--------------------
CHANGES WITH THIS ADVISORY:

None.

SUMMARY OF WATCHES AND WARNINGS IN EFFECT:

A Hurricane Watch is in effect for...
* Punta Castilla to the Honduras/Nicaragua Border
* The Bay Islands of Honduras

A Tropical Storm Warning is in effect for...
* Punta Sal to the Honduras/Nicaragua Border
* The Bay Islands of Honduras

A Tropical Storm Watch is in effect for...
* Honduras/Nicaragua Border to Puerto Cabezas

A Hurricane Watch means that hurricane conditions are possible
within the watch area.  A watch is typically issued 48 hours
before the anticipated first occurrence of tropical-storm-force
winds, conditions that make outside preparations difficult or
dangerous.

A Tropical Storm Warning means that tropical storm conditions are
expected somewhere within the warning area within 36 hours.

A Tropical Storm Watch means that tropical storm conditions are
possible within the watch area, generally within 48 hours.

Interests elsewhere in Honduras, and in Belize and the Yucatan
Peninsula should monitor the progress of this system.  For storm
information specific to your area, please monitor products issued by
your national meteorological service.

For storm information specific to your area, please monitor
products issued by your national meteorological service.


DISCUSSION AND OUTLOOK
----------------------
At 400 AM EST (0900 UTC), the center of Tropical Depression Nineteen 
was located near latitude 15.9 North, longitude 81.7 West. The 
depression is moving toward the west near 16 mph (26 km/h). This 
motion should continue through today, taking the system across the 
western Caribbean Sea. The depression is expected to stall and 
meander near the north coast of Honduras late Friday and through the 
weekend.

Maximum sustained winds are near 35 mph (55 km/h) with higher gusts.
Some strengthening is forecast during the next 48 hours. The
depression is forecast to become a tropical storm later today and
continue strengthening, if it remains over water.

The estimated minimum central pressure is 1004 mb (29.65 inches).


HAZARDS AFFECTING LAND
----------------------
Key Messages for Tropical Depression Nineteen can be found in the
Tropical Cyclone Discussion under AWIPS header MIATCDAT4 and WMO
header WTNT44 KNHC and on the web at
hurricanes.gov/text/MIATCDAT4.shtml

RAINFALL: Through early next week, rainfall amounts of 10 to 20
inches with isolated storm totals around 30 inches area expected
over northern Honduras. This rainfall will lead to widespread areas
of life-threatening and potentially catastrophic flash flooding and
mudslides, especially along and near the Sierra La Esperanza.

Elsewhere across the rest of Honduras, Belize, El Salvador, eastern
Guatemala, and western Nicaragua, Tropical Depression Nineteen is
expected to produce 5 to 10 inches of rain with localized totals
around 15 inches through early next week. This will result in areas
of flash flooding, perhaps significant, along with the potential of
mudslides.

For a complete depiction of forecast rainfall associated with
Tropical Depression Nineteen, please see the National Weather
Service Storm Total Rainfall Graphic, available at
hurricanes.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/205755.shtml?
rainqpf#contents

WIND: Hurricane conditions are possible within the watch area by
Friday. Tropical storm conditions are expected in the warning area
and possible in the watch area beginning late today.

STORM SURGE: Storm surge could raise water levels by as much as 1
to 3 feet above normal tide levels along the immediate coast in
areas of onshore winds along the northern coast of Honduras. Near
the coast, the surge will be accompanied by large and destructive
waves.


NEXT ADVISORY
-------------
Next intermediate advisory at 700 AM EST.
Next complete advisory at 1000 AM EST.

$$
Forecaster Hagen

Originally Posted at:
NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER and CENTRAL PACIFIC HURRICANE CENTER
At The NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION

zerohedge
Economics , News , Politics , Science
November 22, 2024
2 views

Utility Companies Are Not On Our Side

Authored by Linnea Leuken & H. Sterlin Burnett via RealClearPolitics,

When electric power was a novel idea and just beginning to be adopted in urban centers, the industry had a Wild West feel to it as multiple companies strung wires, opened power plants, and sold electricity on an unregulated market. Competition was fierce, but state and local governments concluded that the inefficiencies and redundancies endangered the public and imposed higher costs.

So states set up service territories with monopolistic or oligopolistic service providers, who were entrusted with providing reliable power and sufficient reserve for peak periods in return for being guaranteed a profit on rates proposed by the utilities but approved or set by newly established state public utility commissions (PUCs). These commissions were charged with ensuring public utilities served the general public universally within their territory, providing reliable service at reasonable rates.

Much has changed since then. Politicians began to supplant engineers to decide, based on self-interested calculations, what types of power should be favored and disfavored, and what types of appliances and modes of transportation Americans could use. As the 21st century dawned, a new consideration entered the picture: Climate change.

Under the banner of combatting global warming, utilities were at first encouraged and then coerced into adopting plans and policies aimed at achieving net zero emissions of carbon dioxide. The aim of providing reliable, affordable power – the rationale for the electric utilities’ monopolies in the first place – was supplanted by a controversial and partisan political goal. Initially, as states began to push renewable energy mandates, utilities fought back, arguing that prematurely closing reliable power plants, primarily coal-fueled, would increase energy costs, compromise grid reliability, and leave them with millions of dollars in stranded assets.

Politicians addressed those concerns with subsidies and tax credits for renewable power. In addition, they passed on the costs of the expanded grid to ratepayers and taxpayers. Effectively, elected officials and the PUCs, with a wink and a nod, indemnified utilities for power supply failures, allowing utilities to claim that aging grid infrastructure and climate change were to blame for failures rather than the increased percentage of intermittent power added to the grid at their direction.

Today, utilities have enthusiastically embraced the push for renewable (but less reliable) resources, primarily wind and solar. PUCs guarantee a high rate of return for all new power source (wind, solar, and battery) installations, which has resulted in the construction of ever more and bigger wind, solar, and battery facilities. The costlier, the more profitable – regardless of their compromised ability to provide reliable power or the cost impact on residential, commercial, and industrial ratepayers.

A new report from The Heartland Institute demonstrates the significant financial incentives from government and financiers for utilities to turn away from affordable energy sources like natural gas and coal, and even nuclear, and instead aggressively pursue wind and solar in particular. All of this is done in the name of pursuing net zero emissions, which every single major utility company in the country boasts about on their corporate reports and websites. Reliability and affordability come secondary to the decarbonization agenda.

Dominion Energy is a good example, as they are one of the most aggressive movers on climate-focused policy. Dominion CEO Robert Blue speaks excitedly about government-forced transitions to a wind- and solar-dominated grid in interviews. During one interview with a renewable energy podcast, he said:

“[S]ometimes the government needs to focus on outcomes. We’re trying to address a climate crisis, and we are going to need to move quickly to do that.” In the same interview, he expressed enthusiasm about federal policy that would achieve a government-directed transition.

And why wouldn’t he? Dominion, like most utilities, is granted government tax credits and guarantees on returns for investing in large, expensive projects like offshore wind, the most expensive source of electric power. The bigger the project, the bigger the profit with guaranteed returns.

Also, onshore wind companies have received special “take limits” from the Fish and Wildlife Service to kill protected bald eagles and golden eagles, while prosecuting oil companies if birds are injured or killed on their sites.

Net zero policies are not the environmental panacea that climate change activists proclaim. Industrial-scale wind and solar use substantially more land than conventional energy resources, disrupting ecosystems and destroying wildlife habitats in the process.

And despite recent technological advances, wind and solar are still not dispatchable resources, meaning they cannot provide consistent power at all times needed. Refuting claims made by environmentalists and utilities that wind and solar are the cheapest sources of electric power, costs have risen steeply as the use of wind and solar has increased. Customers of Duke Energy in Kentucky, for example, are paying 78% higher rates in the wake of coal-fired plant closings.

Politicians and utilities are pushing for even more electrification for appliances and vehicles despite the fact that Federal Energy Regulatory Commission officials have repeatedly warned in recent years that adding more demand for electric power while replacing reliable power sources with intermittent renewables is destabilizing the power system.

It appears that the utilities prioritize short-term profits over grid reliability or keeping costs reasonable – and the government officials who are supposed to keep them in check are only encouraging them. It doesn’t need to be this way. The U.S. grid was not always this way. Only in recent years, with the obsessive pursuit of net zero, have rolling black and brownouts become so common.

Today, utility companies are sending lobbyists to conservative policymakers in order to convince them that the utilities have our best interests in mind. Their track record tells another story. Meanwhile, Americans have less reliable electricity at higher costs.

Linnea Lueken (llueken@heartland.org, X: @LinneaLueken) is a research fellow with the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/22/2024 – 06:30