“The size of rainstorms hitting Los Angeles has been getting bigger over the past 60 years, according to a new report released today by the Environment California Research and Policy Center.“
That much could certainly be true. Cities do heavily influence local weather through a variety of effects – paving absorbing more insolation, trombe wall effect, wind spoiling and so on. This tends to create additional lofting and accentuate local storm activity (may even create local thunderstorms). IIRC studies in Tokyo began highlighting this back in the 1980s.
The environmental advocacy group measured rainfall in the Los Angeles metro area since 1948 and found that a storm large enough to occur only once a year decades ago is now happening every 8.8 months.
Similar trends were seen throughout much of California and nationwide. Overall, California experienced a 13 percent increase in extreme rainstorms and snowstorms between 1948 and 2011, one of 43 states to see statistically significant increases.
Increased frequency of 8.8 months vs. a year?
Has anyone factored in the major drought throughout the Central U.S. along with that rainfall data?
I could possibly see some relevance if rainfall was unchanged elsewhere in the U.S. and there was an increase in frequency on the coast, but considering drought in the midwest, ( precip. 9 in. below normal in my area ) the crop losses, the livestock losses, the increase in forest fires, I’m kinda jealous of the extra rainfall californians may be getting.
I’d like to see the comparative costs of the coastal rainfall vs the midwest drought and which one is affecting the economy more.
That’s what I was thinking. More rain is a good thing.
Environment California Research and Policy Center.“
Who are these guys? You might just as well take the opinion of some nut on the street. Give yourself a green name and call a press conference. When is the media going to start ignoring these numb-nuts (Chris Christy)