Tropical Storm Oscar Public Advisory


000
WTNT31 KNHC 210836
TCPAT1

BULLETIN
Tropical Storm Oscar Advisory Number   9
NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL       AL162024
500 AM EDT Mon Oct 21 2024

...OSCAR PRODUCING HEAVY RAINFALL AND LIFE-THREATENING FLASH
FLOODING OVER EASTERN CUBA...


SUMMARY OF 500 AM EDT...0900 UTC...INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------
LOCATION...20.2N 75.1W
ABOUT 5 MI...10 KM E OF GUANTANAMO CUBA
ABOUT 60 MI...95 KM W OF THE EASTERN TIP OF CUBA
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...50 MPH...85 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...W OR 270 DEGREES AT 2 MPH...4 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...999 MB...29.50 INCHES


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

None

SUMMARY OF WATCHES AND WARNINGS IN EFFECT:

A Tropical Storm Warning is in effect for...
* North coast of the Cuban Provinces of Las Tunas, Holguin, and
Guantanamo to Punta Maisi
* South coast of Cuban Province of Guantanamo
* Southeastern Bahamas

A Tropical Storm Watch is in effect for...
* North coast of the Cuban Province of Camaguey
* Central Bahamas

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

A Tropical Storm Watch means that tropical storm conditions are
possible within the watch area, in this case within the next 24 to
36 hours.

Interests in the remainder of the Bahamas should monitor the
progress of Oscar.

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


DISCUSSION AND OUTLOOK
----------------------
At 500 AM EDT (0900 UTC), the center of Tropical Storm Oscar was
located near latitude 20.2 North, longitude 75.1 West. Oscar is
moving toward the west near 2 mph (4 km/h). A turn to the northwest 
and north is expected later today, followed by a faster 
northeastward motion on Tuesday and Wednesday. On the forecast 
track, the center of Oscar is expected to continue moving
across eastern Cuba through this afternoon, then emerge off the
northern coast of Cuba late today or tonight and move near the
southeastern and central Bahamas on Tuesday.

Maximum sustained winds have decreased to near 50 mph (85 km/h) 
with higher gusts. Some additional weakening is likely while  
Oscar moves across the mountainous terrain of eastern Cuba, but 
Oscar is forecast to be a tropical storm when it moves north of Cuba 
late today and then moves near the southeastern and central Bahamas 
on Tuesday.

Tropical-storm-force winds extend outward up to 45 miles (75 km)
from the center.

The estimated minimum central pressure is 999 mb (29.50 inches).


HAZARDS AFFECTING LAND
----------------------
Key messages for Oscar can be found in the Tropical Cyclone
Discussion under AWIPS header MIATCDAT1 and WMO header WTNT41 KNHC
and on the web at hurricanes.gov/text/MIATCDAT1.shtml

WIND: Tropical storm conditions are expected in the warning area and
possible in the watch area of Cuba today. Tropical storm conditions
are expected in the warning area in parts of the southeastern
Bahamas and possible in the watch area in parts of the central
Bahamas tonight and Tuesday.

RAINFALL: Through Wednesday morning, rainfall amounts of 7 to 14
inches with isolated amounts of 20 inches are expected across
eastern Cuba, especially within the Sierra Maestra.  This rainfall
will lead to areas of significant, life-threatening flash flooding
along with mudslides.

Across the southeastern Bahamas, 3 to 5 inches are expected, with
isolated amounts around 8 inches.  This rainfall could cause
localized flash flooding.

For a complete depiction of forecast rainfall associated with Oscar,
please see the National Weather Service Storm Total Rainfall
Graphic, available at hurricanes.gov/graphics_at1.shtml?rainqpf

STORM SURGE: Elevated water levels in areas of onshore flow along
the coast of eastern Cuba will gradually subside later today and
tonight.  Near the coast, large and dangerous waves will continue
into early Tuesday.


NEXT ADVISORY
-------------
Next intermediate advisory at 800 AM EDT.
Next complete advisory at 1100 AM EDT.

$$
Forecaster Brown

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

Stay Updated with news.freeptomaineradio.com’s Daily Newsletter

Stay informed! Subscribe to our daily newsletter to receive updates on our latest blog posts directly in your inbox. Don’t let important information get buried by big tech.

Current subscribers:

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