Trevor Pettit
Earth Science
Current Event Quarter 2
Summary:
Jeffery Donnelly, a
researcher at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, believes
that several storms with Super-storm-Sandy-like winds have hit the Northeast in
the past 1500 years. This is largely based on the sediment records of the Northeast.
For example, a piece of sediment from Crab Meadow, New York, shows that there
have been at least a dozen storms in the past 1500 years that paralleled or
surpassed the strength of Sandy. The largest of these storms, which occurred in
1821, Donnelly reconstructed using a computer model. This model estimates it
was approximately a category 3 hurricane, however it contrasts Sandy in that
Sandy hit exactly during low tide, was geographically smaller, and was slower.
However, these are the circumstances that made Sandy so devastating: high water
levels, and a slow speed so that its effects lasted longer when it hit.
Donnelly goes on to explain that Sandy-like storms are not unprecedented, and
will occur with or without a rise in global temperatures. He believes that
hurricanes are appearing more and more devastating as time passes because of
the increase in population density, not due to global climate change.
Relevance:
This belief that
global climate change is not the source of the increasing deaths as a result of
hurricanes could prove to be an important one. It is important to understand what
is causing the higher number of deaths, so that we can work to improve out
preparation for these events. Therefore, if the higher number of deaths is due
to an increase in population in costal cities, we will have to refocus some of
our efforts into creating better coastal defenses as well as increasing
preparation and awareness in these coastal cities. It is crucial to society as
a whole to understand what the source of these deaths is, therefore we can work
to prevent it, and therefore, Donnelly’s new finding should be of interest to
society, as it may help us become more prepared and save more lives.
Critique:
This article is
written in a way that highlights the new data found by Donnelly, and clearly
relates it to his hypothesis, making it very easy to follow his point. It also
uses parallel structure very effectively to contrast hurricanes of the past to
hurricanes of today, making it easy to compare the qualitative observations. However,
this article did not include a lot of quantitative data to support Donnelly’s
hypothesis. In the future, I would like to see more comparative data, to even
further support Donnelly’s hypothesis. In conclusion, however, this article was
very well written in a way that made it very easy to follow Donnelly’s
reasoning.
Citation:
Gorski,
Chris. "Other East Coast Storms Matched Or Exceeded Superstorm Sandy's
Power." LiveScience.com.
N.p., 16 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013.
I believe that this was a very well written review. There were a few things that I thought were presented clearly. For example, I think that the writer made the topics understandable by providing examples, such as the description of the sediment from Crab Meadow, New York. Also, I believe that the author did a good job backing up his ideas with explanations. For instance, when he said that super-storm-Sandy-like storms were the most deadly, he backed it up by saying that the last longer, causing a longer duration of treacherous winds. In addition, I think that the relevance part of this review was well done and that valid reasons were provided for why understanding this topic was necessary, such as the comprehension of how to better prepare for a catastrophe like this when it occurs again. I was surprised by a couple of things, but the main surprise for me was how so much information was able to be gained from solely the sediment records of the Northeast. I also found it very interesting how slower storms are more dangerous, since they last longer and have more time to cause destruction. I had never thought of storms this way before, but it is a good point. Finally, there was just one thing that I thought could have been done better in this review, and that is that I do not think it flowed as well with the sections being divided up by titles, but would suggest just trying to make one paragraph transition into another.
ReplyDeleteNice review Trev! Lots of interesting information in this review. Storms are something that gives me lots of interest so this review was an enjoyable one to read. You also made the article easy to understand, we all know that sometimes explaining complex things like these can be tough. I was shocked when the writer compared past storms to "super storm sandy" because I never realized that other storms came near to that one. I also learned many new thing while reading this like how destructive storms can truly be and what makes a storm more destructive. Another thing that I liked was how you made your paragraphs separate making it easier for the reader. One thing that I would improve is that it seemed like a little bit of information was missing. Other then that great job.
ReplyDelete