Ida Awakening, Election Is Not The Answer

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio hopes to change the city’s resumption of climate change Hurricane Ida.

On Monday, he announced a many answers, including the basic rules for evacuation of the basement, restrictions on travel, and emergency declarations for the release of their property. Of these requirements, however, one odd one was identified. The mayor said the city is writing to a meteorological company to, in Blasio’s words, offer a “second opinion” on the National Weather Service’s statement. He also said that the NWS does a “good and necessary job,” but said the allegations and warnings “were vague or late and we need something urgent.”

Accurate commentary on the NWS is part of what is happening and concerns about the distribution of government contributions in favor of private forecasting. This in turn eliminates the need for disaster preparedness and responds at a time when governments need to take action to address climate change.

Let’s make it clear that there is nothing wrong with Ida’s NWS predictions. It was correct and in due course; two days before New York was hit by Ida, the NWS local forecasting office set up a flood control and He said in a tweet storms “can bring about three to five inches of rain, and there is a lot of rain in your area.” I have written on this blog about The danger of a hurricane to New York City on. Writing the message made me less nervous, and I left the trip the same night. The point is, the NWS has shown what is coming.

By asking a business company to review the predictions, Blasio dismisses the case against his superiors. It also contributes to a decade-long battle to be fought by forecasting companies such as AccuWeather and Weather Channel that seek to change the content, especially on the market segment. The project uses the parent body of the NWS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for amazing equipment, weather balloons, and much more as well as future forms of the federation to predict.

While there’s certainly space for helpful interpretations of NWS warnings, private forecasting services have also been involved in trying to chip away at the federal agency. A 2005 bill, introduced by then-Sen. Rick Santorum and supported by top brass at AccuWeather (which is based in Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania), proposed eliminating the NWS’ public face altogether, forcing it to provide its publicly funded data to private companies that could then sell their services to said public.

Things kicked into high gear in the Trump era, when the then-president nominated AccuWeather CEO Barry Myers to serve as the chief of NOAA, a move that was met with great criticism of scientists. After Myers was elected, a spokesman for the NWS trade union federation told the Washington Post that Administrator Myers “has transformed the Weather Service into a company supported by AccuWeather taxpayers.” (Myers has never heard of it for sure.)

Trump fraudulently took Sharpie to the picture of the NOAA storm magnifying the hurricane limits so that the agency’s predictions are consistent with the erroneous tweet he wrote. Hurricane Dorian had just left the Bahamas in ruins, and Trump’s frustration eased public confidence in the government’s weather forecast. (Request for public registration later revealed where high-profile copper in NOAA tried to block NWS staff so as not to upset Trump.)

de Blasio raising the specter of secret companies that include this integration also shows the same attitude. But prioritizing work for a business company to reconsider the NWS will not save things. Just add another word to the mix that is based on the same tools and data that the NWS has already provided – and create another barrier between predictions already made to the public and public reception predictability.

So far, NWS forecasting is the best source of weather. The causes are publicly available and whether you are Jeff Bezos or not Amazon store clerk, you get the same opportunity. How to Save Planet Writer Kendra Pierre-Louis said on Twitter, federal forecasts have made life safer for hurricanes.

Allowing private companies to control public funds or participate in the development of disaster risk management strategies could be at risk for these benefits. If the NWS is sidelined, are we looking to the future where only the rich can predict accurately? The council also issues well-written warnings in each area. Cultivation in the private sector can lead to a variety of warning systems or strategies, which can confuse people during bad weather.

In investigating why warnings about floods in New York appear to have been ignored, University of Georgia meteorologist Marshall Shepherd wrote in his Forbes group that the proliferation of climate programs on its own may have contributed to a more cautious approach. These programs may provide local weather information, but sometimes they may not accurately reflect NWS warnings.

Even a temporary prediction that it might hit good government jobs and have the same credibility would not prepare others for the worst of climate change: poverty, financial inequality, and poor planning. Most of the dead in the city were people living in slums.

It is not difficult to see the connection between insecure homes and the serious problem of low-cost housing. New York City’s subways are flooded not only by heavy rains now, but also by years of mismanagement and corruption. Before De Blasio can properly criticize the government, he has to rely on his supervisors to find out what caused the storm to hurt and kill.