# Presentation: 683565

## HURRMIT

**HURRMIT**
**The Identification and Testing of Hurricane**
**Mitigation Hypotheses**
**Sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)**
**Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate**

## BACKGROUND

** ****Because natural disasters are a continuing threat to the security **
**of the of the United States, they come under the purview of DHS**
**[The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296)]**
** ****In most cases the challenge is coping with their aftermath**
** ****In limited cases it may be possible to proactively mitigate their destructive effects**
** ****Hurricane mitigation is a better possibility now due to new published concepts and instrumentation, powerful computers and advanced numerical models**
** ****The HURRMIT effort is the outgrowth of the February 2008 DHS/ESRL workshop in Boulder, Colorado**

## Key Scientific Objectives of HURRMIT

** ****Quantitatively Test Most Promising Hurricane Mitigation Hypotheses by Mean of Rigorous Numerical Simulations that are Interactive with and Validated by Hurricane Observations**
** ****Coordinate/Use Data from WISDOM and UAS Projects and NOAA Aircraft Missions**

## KEY HURRMIT SCIENTISTS

**Dr. Joe Golden, CIRES/GSD**
**Dr. William Woodley, WWC, Inc.**
**Prof. William Cotton, CSU/CIRA**
**Prof. Daniel Rosenfeld, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel**
**Prof. Alex Khain, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel**
**Prof. Isaac Ginis, U. of Rhode Island and GFDL Collaborator**

## PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS TESTING

**Seeding with tiny hygroscopic aerosols to suppress warm rain (Rosenfeld et al. 2007 and Cotton et al., 2007)**
**Seeding with radiation-absorbing  aerosols (i.e., carbon black) at the storm periphery (Gray et al, 1976)**
**Seeding with radiation-absorbing aerosols (i.e., carbon black) at storm top (Alamaro et al., 2006)**
**Pumping cool water from the depths to the ocean surface in front of the hurricane (Ginis and Kithil, 2008)**
**  **

## LIKELY OUTCOME OF HURRMIT

** ****Better understanding of hurricane structure and behavior**
** ****Improved hurricane forecasts, especially forecasts**
**of hurricane intensity (Likely helpful to NOAA’s HFIP)**
** ****Evaluation of the hurricane mitigation hypotheses based on scientific credibility and operational feasibility**
** ****Panel of experts will prioritize the field testing of HURRMIT hypotheses and make recommendations to DHS**

##  Investigation of the scientific basis, possibilities and limitations of  hurricane seeding with ultra-fine hygroscopic particles to decrease intensity

** ****Investigation of the scientific basis, possibilities and limitations of  hurricane seeding with ultra-fine hygroscopic particles to decrease intensity**
** ****Two groups (Rosenfeld et al. and Cotton et al.) have pursued this investigation independently and published**
** ****in refereed scientific journals**
** ****Both indicate that seeding with ultra-fine hygroscopic particles can decrease hurricane intensity**
** ****These groups have merged into the HURRMIT group  that has expertise with meteorological observations and numerical modeling**

##  The development and evaluation of hurricane mitigation hypotheses must involve modeling 

**AND observational validation**

_**Conceptual Steps**_
** ****The ingestion of ultra-fine hygroscopic aerosols decreases droplet sizes, suppresses coalescence and **
**increases cloud vigor**
** ****The original concept was to invigorate the periphery of a hurricane by hygroscopic seeding, thereby robbing the **
**storm core of energy and decreasing its intensity**
** ****The effects of the seeding were investigated numerically**

## Simulations of Hurricane seeding at HUJI

**(Rosenfeld et al., 2007)**
- Model description:
- The Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF)
- 2 Nested grids of 9 and 3 km.
- Initiation using Katrina on 27 August 2005 00 GMT
- Bulk-microphysics parameterization by Thompson et al. (2004)
- Seeding simulated by shutting off drop-drop collisions.
- Sea spray simulated by restoring drop-drop collisions where surface wind>22 m/s.
- Three numerical experiments:
- CONTROL:  Warm rain allowed everywhere.
- NWRP: Warm rain suppressed where surface wind<22 m/s.
- NWR: Warm rain suppressed everywhere.

## Control

- Warm rain suppressed for wind<22 m/s

**W**arm **R**ain

**N**o **W**arm **R**ain **P**eriphery

## Warm rain suppressed for wind<22 m/s 

- Warm rain suppressed for wind<22 m/s

- Warm rain suppressed everywhere

**N**o **W**arm **R**ain

**N**o **W**arm **R**ain **P**eriphery

## Vertical wind [cm/s]

**Aug 27:15**

**Aug 28:21**

**NWR -CONTROL**

**NWR P -CONTROL**

**Vertical wind [cm/s]**

##  Azimuthal winds [m/s]

**Aug 27:15**

**Aug 28:21**

**NWR -CONTROL**

**NWR P -CONTROL**

****** ****Azimuthal winds [m/s]**

##  Cloud water [g/kg]

**Aug 27:09**

**Aug 27:15**

**Aug 28:21**

**NWR -CONTROL**

**NWR P -CONTROL**

****** ****Cloud water [g/kg]**

##  Relative Humidity [%]

**Aug 27:15**

**Aug 28:21**

**NWR -CONTROL**

**NWR P -CONTROL**

****** ****Relative Humidity [%]**

##  Temperature [oC]

**Aug 27:15**

**Aug 28:21**

**NWR -CONTROL**

**NWR P -CONTROL**

****** ****Temperature [****o****C]**

## Slide 17

## Suppression of warm rain causes low level cooling  weakening the storm as measured by area covered with hurricane force winds

- Suppression of warm rain causes low level cooling  weakening the storm as measured by area covered with hurricane force winds

## CONCLUSIONS FROM ROSENFELD ET AL. (2007) STUDY REGARDING SEEDING AT THE PERIPHERY OF A TC WITH ULTRA-FINE HYGROSCOPIC AEROSOLS

** ****Clouds in the seeded area are invigorated and evaporative **
**cooling is enhanced**
** ****Sea spray will work against this effect and must be considered **
**in the model simulations**
** ****The buoyancy of the inflowing air is decreased and the inflowing air will rise at a smaller radius due to its decreased buoyancy**
** ****The area of hurricane force winds is decreased substantially, meaning potentially decreased storm surge**
** ****Despite the overall weakening, the shrinking of the eye keeps the eyewall winds about the same**
** ****These results will be further evaluated with observations and new simulations during HURRMIT**

## Aerosol influences on deep convection and tropical cyclonesBy William Cotton

** ****Clean – 100 cm****-3**
-   **Polluted – 1000 cm****-3**
-   **Double – 2000 cm****-3**

**Simulated storm intensity decreased with increasing CCN concentration.**** **

- Aerosol influences on deep convection and tropical cyclonesBy William Cotton

## Practical Seeding Considerations

- 	Seeding 1 kg of hygroscopic particles having diameter of 0.1 m and density of 2000 kg m-3 can fill homogeneously 1 km3 with a concentration of nearly 1000 particles cm-3. If the seeding is applied around the storm into the converging marine boundary layer that feed the storm clouds, the seeding rate should be matched to the influx rate.  With average inward radial winds of 5 ms-1 at the 0.6 km deep boundary layer along the nearly 2000 km circumference of the radial distance of 300 km the influx of 6 km3s-1.  This corresponds to a seeding rate of 6 kg s-1, or 21.6 ton per hour. This is practical with large cargo airplanes having payloads exceeding 10 tons.
- 	This means that seeding the full depth of the marine boundary layer with 0.1 mm hygroscopic particles at concentrations of several thousands particles cm-3 can be done by dispersing hygroscopic smoke from 5 to 10 cargo airplanes flying in the boundary layer just outside the typhoon spiral cloud bands so that the particles would be drawn into the storm by the low level convergence after having sufficient time to mix well in the boundary layer.
- 	Ultra fine sea spray technology can produce 1017 CCN s-1  of 0.20 m  diameter (dry-equivalent) particles  by using 28 kg s-1 sea water. The required rate of 6x1018 s-1 can be achieved by using 60 small vessels with  a spray device costing about $600K, or a total of about $36M, excluding the costs of the ships.

## Slide 22

## Simulations of aerosol effects on isolated deep convective clouds (Responsible: Prof. A. Khain, HUJI)

- 1.  Utilization of the cloud model
*with **spectral bin microphysics*

- 2. Size distributions (43 bins doubling mass bins) are calculated at each time step for
- (a) water drops; (b) Columnar, (c) plates- and (d) branch-type crystals; (e) Aggregates (snow), (f) Graupel,  (h) Hail,

**HURRMIT**

- 4. Aerosol size distributions are described by size distribution containing 43 bins with sizes from 0.005          to 3            )

- 3. The aerosol budget is taken into account

- 5. Model input: aerosols and sounding; No tuning of model parameters is required to simulate different clouds

- 6. Computational area 50 km x 16 km, model resolution 25 m

**Typical cloud models**

- 1.  Utilization of the cloud model   *with **bulk-parameterization*

- 2. Shape of size distributions is preset, Mass contents or mass/concentrations are calculated

- 3. No aerosol budget

- 4. No aerosol size distributions

- 5. To simulate clouds under different conditions the tuning of model parameters is needed.

- 6. Typical model resolution is from 300 m to ~3 km

## SIMULATION OF HURRICANES: 

- Responsible: Prof. A. Khain, HUJI, Prof. Ginis (Rhode Island University

- 1.  Utilization of the TC model
*with **spectral bin microphysics (WRF_SBM)*

- 2. Size distributions (33 bins doubling mass bins) are calculated at each time step for (a) water drops; (b) crystals, aggregates (snow), (f) Graupel,  (h) Hail,

**HURRMIT**

- 4. Aerosol size distributions are described by size distribution containing 33 bins with sizes from 0.005          to 3            )

- 3. The aerosol budget is taken into account

- 5. TC-ocean interaction will be included during the project.

- 6. The resolution of the finest movable grid ( 800 x 800 km)  should be 2 km

**Typical TC models**

- 1.  Utilization of the cloud model   *with **traditional convective parameterization (no microphysics)** or **bulk-parameterization*

- 2. No microphysics /or the shape of size distributions is preset, Mass contents or mass/concentrations are calculated

- 3. No aerosol budget

- 4. No aerosol size distributions

- 5. TC-ocean interaction is included (traditional convective parameterization)  to be included for bulk-parameterization schemes

- 6. Typical model resolution is from 3 km to 10 km

##                  Advantages of spectral (bin) microphysics

**1. The ability to describe *****microphysical processes***** adequately (i.e. latent heat release, evaporative cooling, etc.)**

**2.  The ability to describe *****precipitation rate and precipitation spatial distribution***** adequately**

**3.  The ability to describe *****aerosol effects***** of microphysical processes and cloud dynamics adequately**

**4. The ability to describe *****evolution of spay size distribution***** and its effect on surface fluxes and on cloud microphysics (precipitation)**

**5.  The ability to calculate radar reflectivity (according to its definition) and size distribution which allows  adequate *****comparison with satellite, radar and in situ aircraft observations*****.**

## GRAUPEL MASS

- Simulation of hurricane KATRINA

**Maritime aerosols                         Penetration of continental aerosols**
-                                                                           **from the land**

**Stronger convection at Tc periphery, more graupel**

**GRAUPEL MASS**

## RWC

- Simulation of hurricane KATRINA

**Maritime aerosols                            Penetration of continental aerosols**
**                                                                          ****from the land**

**Stronger precipitation at Tc periphery**

**RWC**

## W

- Simulation of hurricane KATRINA

**Maritime aerosols                          Penetration of continental aerosols**
**                                                                          ****from the land**

**W**

**Stronger vertical velocities  at TC periphery**

## W

- Simulation of hurricane KATRINA

**Maritime aerosols                          Penetration of continental aerosols**
**                                                                          ****from the land**

**W**

**Stronger vertical velocities  at TC periphery**

## Conclusions

** **
- It may be possible to decrease the area covered by hurricane force winds in a TC by injecting small CCN at the periphery.
- The seeding window decreases when the storm intensifies due to the increased sea spray that enforces warm rain.
- This mechanism suppresses low level diabatic heating by warm rain and promotes low level evaporative cooling.
- The decreased low level air buoyancy delays its rising until closer to the center and so causes the eye to shrink.
- The area covered by hurricane force wind decreases substantially. This is important for the storm surge.
- Despite the overall weakening, the shrinking of the eye keeps the eyewall winds little changed.

## IKE FORECAST: GFDL MODEL

## IKE FORECAST: HWRF MODEL

## NHC MODEL SPAGHETTI PLOTS

## LESSONS LEARNED FROM STORMFURY

** ****Time of rudimentary instrumentation and numerical models**
** ****Several steps in the conceptual model were verified**
**  ****Key supercooled liquid water assumption **
**could not be verified**
** ****If current technology existed in the 1960’s, the original Stormfury would not have been conducted**
** ****The Stormfury mistakes need not be repeated**
**  ****Before field studies hurricane mitigation hypotheses should be evaluated objectively**
** ****A panel of experts should help set testing priorities**