Please Don’t Try to Shoot Diaper Gel Into a Tornado

I’ve spent the better part of my career chasing and studying tornadoes across the heartland of America. I’ve witnessed their raw power and destructive force firsthand, felt the adrenaline rush as we raced to intercept them, and shared in the relief when they dissipated.

In contrast to the lighter tone of its predecessor, I find “Twisters” to be a more serious film. The absence of flying cows is a clear indication of this shift in tone. Instead of merely studying tornadoes, the protagonists aim to prevent their formation with the use of hyperabsorbent polymers and silver iodide. Their goal is not just to observe but to intervene.

Is it possible that something similar to what’s portrayed in the movie could happen? I had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Jana Houser from Ohio State University, an expert on tornadoes and their formation, as well as a storm chaser who worked on the film “Twisters.” She accompanied cinematographer Sean Casey during the filming of real storms for its special effects and additional footage. I put all my questions to Dr. Houser regarding the scientific accuracy of the movie’s storyline, including whether it is safe to release chemical substances into a tornado. Please refrain from sending her any further suggestions!

From my perspective as a moviegoer, I found the film thrilling with an engaging plot. However, as a scientist, I had some reservations. The one aspect that didn’t quite meet my expectations was the portrayal of Kate’s mother. I had imagined Helen Hunt in the role, but unfortunately, that wasn’t the case. Yet, I knew beforehand about this discrepancy.

A scientist’s work was marked by both successes and challenges. I must acknowledge their dedication, as they collaborated with experts from the National Severe Storms Lab, the Storm Prediction Center, and the National Weather Service. These partnerships significantly enhanced their research. They frequently discussed specific indicators and atmospheric circumstances. “Outflow,” “storm interactions,” and “the cap” are technical terms used in meteorology that help us understand complex weather patterns.

Javi’s phased-array radar and triple-radar network have some merit, but achieving this technology has proven difficult for scientists for decades. The complexity of the task makes success elusive, and considering we’ve been trying for 30 years, it’s not surprising. Moreover, approaching a tornado within 300 meters is impractical and risky; instruments would likely be destroyed each time.

What’s your actual process for this?
We position ourselves about ten kilometers away from the tornado most of the time, and typically work with just two radars. Placing the third one in there often means being at the back, which is difficult since it’s hard to set up behind a moving storm. We can’t get into position without the storm essentially running us over first.

One facet of tornadoes that “Twister” and “Twisters” bring to light is the significant ambiguity regarding the specific methods of their genesis. In the field, we are often left pondering, “Will that storm generate a tornado in five minutes, ten minutes, or thirty minutes?” While we comprehend the essential elements for a tornado’s formation – a robust rotation at ground level drawn up by a powerful updraft above it – the enigma persists: how does this ground-level rotation originate? What triggers its emergence? And how can we accurately anticipate when the storm’s updraft will be forceful enough to lift and elongate the rotation into a tornado?

In a similar scenario, there can be two storms located around 20 miles apart, seemingly in identical conditions. However, only one of these storms generates a tornado while the other does not. What made that specific storm distinctive is still a mystery. We’ve come a long way from where we were just ten years ago, but there are still unsolved details. A primary reason for this lack of understanding is due to limited data on the underlying process.

In the film, they plan to approach a tornado closely and insert something inside it for observation. In contrast, in real life, we keep a safe distance and use radar to examine it. Radar functions like an X-ray for tornados, allowing us to determine the three-dimensional wind field by analyzing data from multiple angles. However, it does not provide information on temperature, pressure, or moisture levels. Understanding the intricacies of the temperature profile is crucial in interpreting the storm’s complexities. Unfortunately, obtaining this three-dimensional thermodynamic data remains a technological challenge.

In theory, absorbing polymers from diapers could theoretically be used to neutralize a tornado, but the practicality is highly questionable. Given that a tornado consists of vast amounts of moisture and air, the idea of using a baby diaper’s worth of absorbent material to suppress it is unrealistic. To effectively affect a tornado, you would need an enormous quantity of these polymers, which poses significant environmental concerns. Furthermore, considering the potential consequences of releasing large quantities of silver iodide – a common ingredient in diapers – into the environment, addressing the tornado may become the least of our worries.

As a scientist with years of experience in my field, I find it disconcerting when I come across fictional scenarios that blur the line between science and fiction, especially when they involve potentially dangerous actions. Take for instance, the idea of shooting “tons of gel” into the sky and having it come down “wherever.” This concept was a part of a storyline I recently came across, and while I can appreciate the writers’ intent to create an explosive scene, both literally and figuratively, my scientific mind cannot help but be alarmed.

As a film enthusiast, I’ve come across some truly unusual emails in my inbox. People have proposed ideas that seem straight out of a science fiction movie! For instance, they’ve suggested shooting missiles into tornadoes to explode them. Some believe that the phase of the moon and Earth’s magnetic field can predict tornadoes. And then there are those who propose building a massive wall across the central plains to stop tornadoes in their tracks. I find these suggestions intriguing, even if they don’t hold up to scientific scrutiny!

Returning to the movie’s central idea, imagine if a massive tornado was approaching Oklahoma City, and we managed to annihilate it. However, an important consideration arises: Even though we eliminated the tornado at that moment, the external environment remains unchanged. You may halt the storm for several minutes, but this does not ensure that it won’t regain its destructive power within 20 or 30 minutes. Furthermore, if we destroy or disrupt it, what potential consequences might ensue? What unforeseen effects could we inadvertently trigger?

Could shooting fireworks into a tornado be considered harmless? I’d argue that’s a risky endeavor even for smaller EF0 or EF1 tornadoes with relatively calm winds. If you manage to get the fireworks into such a tornado, it implies you’re already within its destructive path. For larger and more intense tornadoes, there’s often an obstacle course of debris, rain, and clouds that would hinder any attempt at creating a spectacular display.

I’ve had the chance to witness the power of tornadoes firsthand, having worked with storm chasers for over two decades. One question that often comes up is whether a small corkscrew-like device attached to the bottom of a truck could offer any protection against these destructive forces.

There’s been some back-and-forth over whether the movie should have mentioned climate change. The director, Lee Isaac Chung, has said that was partly because the science is unclear on how much climate change affects tornadoes. Can you fill me in on the current scientific consensus?He’s absolutely right. The science just isn’t there. And the reason why the science isn’t there is because there is such a spatial and temporal gap between climate and tornadoes. Climate is long-term, hundreds, thousands of years, and regional climate conditions are hundreds of miles wide. Tornadoes last seconds, maybe an hour if you’re lucky, with spatial scales of max 2.6 miles, the widest tornado ever recorded. So they’re much smaller, and much shorter-lived.

Based on my personal experience as a meteorologist and data analyst, I have come to the conclusion that the generation of tornadoes is primarily linked to small-scale processes within the storms themselves, rather than being a direct result of larger climate trends. When examining long-term data on tornado occurrences, I have not found any compelling evidence to suggest that we are experiencing more frequent or intense tornadoes in comparison to past decades.

Over the past decade, there has been a noticeable change in where tornadoes occur, with an upward trend in states like Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa. These areas have become more conducive to tornado formation. In other words, the focus of tornado activity is beginning to spread beyond the traditional Tornado Alley region, which includes the central plains, towards the southeastern United States and New England.

Could the occurrence of this phenomenon be influenced by climate change? It’s plausible since larger-scale environments are interconnected climatically. When surface temperatures rise and humidity levels increase, while cold air remains above and strong large-scale low-pressure systems exist, these conditions can make low-pressure systems more powerful due to greater temperature contrasts.

I’ve lived in the Midwest all my life, and I’ve seen my fair share of tornadoes. But it seems that things are changing. Wintertime tornado outbreaks used to be rare where I come from, but lately, they’re becoming more frequent. And summertime tornadoes, which we were always braced for, seem to be declining.

A tornado touched down in Brooklyn not too long ago, an unexpected occurrence for some of us, eliciting a response of surprise and disbelief. In examining the history of tornadoes in that region, we find they tend to be brief and less powerful compared to those in the central plains. However, their impact is still significant as urban areas like Brooklyn have more at risk than expanses of farmland with minimal structures. Consequently, people’s lives are affected, trees get uprooted, and houses sustain damage.

2024-07-25 17:54

Please Don’t Try to Shoot Diaper Gel Into a Tornado

Read More

Minority Mindset