Edhat Staff
Update by the edhat staff
February 23, 2023
FLOOD WATCHES have been issued by the National Weather Service for the county’s interior mountains, Santa Ynez mountains, and coastal areas from Point Conception through Carpinteria beginning at 4am on Friday, February 24, 2023 and are currently forecast to last until 6pm on Saturday, February 25, 2023.
Excessive runoff may result in flooding of rivers, creeks, streams, and other low-lying and flood-prone locations. Those living in areas prone to flooding, and in and below recent burn areas should stay aware of changing conditions and be prepared to take protective actions such as moving to high ground.
The National Weather Service has also issued a BLIZZARD WARNING for the county’s interior mountains beginning at 4am on Friday, February 24, 2023 and may last through 4pm on Saturday, February 25, 2023. This means that the county’s interior mountains (not the coast) could experience heavy snow with winds gusting up to 75 miles per hour with near zero visibility. Avoid traveling in these dangerous conditions.
The current storm forecasted for this weekend differs substantially from last month’s storm. In the last 35 days, our area has only received 0.17 inches of rain. By contrast, 7.5 inches of rain fell 10 days prior to the January 9 storm.
The Public Works Department is working with County Flood Control to assess debris in the creeks. Both agencies have conducted post January 9/10 storm analysis and removed debris from areas of concern.
There is no evacuation warning at this time, however rainfall can be unpredictable. If you live in a flood prone area and feel unsafe or if the storm rapidly intensifies, residents are encouraged to make plans to voluntarily evacuate ahead of the storm.
Please contact the Public Works Streets division for clogged/blocked storm drains or streets related emergencies at (805) 564-5454.
The Sandbag Station will open if a flash flood warning is declared. Please click the following link for sandbag information: Sandbag Information | City of Santa Barbara (santabarbaraca.gov)
Winter Storm Shelter
For those needing shelter from the weather:
- PATH Santa Barbara at 816 Cacique St. has 26 beds open for inclement weather starting today Feb. 22 through Sunday Feb. 26. The shelter will open at 4 p.m. on a first come/first serve basis.
- The Freedom Warming Center will open starting Thursday Feb. 23 through Saturday Feb. 25 from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. at Unitarian Society – 1535 Santa Barbara St.
-
Carpinteria Community Church – 1111 Vallecito Road, Carpinteria
-
Peace Lutheran – 1000 West Ocean, Lompoc
-
Cornerstone Church of the Nazarene – 1026 Sierra Madre, Santa Maria
Be Ready for Cold and Windy Weather
Be prepared for the next few days by:
- Signing up for emergency alerts at http://readysbc.org
- Monitoring weather
- Ensuring you have canned foods and water
- Prepping for power outages
Precautions and tips to stay safe:
- Be careful when driving through wet and potentially snowy road conditions. Roads may be slippery. Drive slowly and be careful. When possible avoid routes that may be impacted by winter weather.
- Strong winds can cause power outages. Charge important electronic devices and be prepared in case an unannounced power outage occurs.
- Secure belongings that could get impacted by strong winds such as outdoor furniture.
- Take care of those who might not be aware of the cold weather hazard or be able to react accordingly – especially the elderly, young children, and pets.
- Avoid areas and roadways that appear to be flooding.
- Be aware of your surroundings and travel routes. Leave the area if you don’t feel safe and conditions permit safe travel.
Winter Weather Pet Safety
Some pets are especially vulnerable to the cold, including puppies, kittens, birds, reptiles, seniors, and pregnant pets. SBCAS offers the following tips on how to keep your pets safe during wintry weather HERE.
For more information sign up for Ready SBC.org. More weather forecast information is available at: https://www.weather.gov/lox/
High Wind and Winter Weather Warning
By the Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Management
February 21, 2023
Winter weather conditions are forecast for Santa Barbara County starting 2/21/23 through the weekend. The National Weather Service has issued a High Wind Warning for coastal areas from Point Conception to the San Marcos Pass, effective from 2/21/23 at 6pm to 6am on 2/22/23.
A Winter Storm Warning was also issued by the National Weather Service for the county’s interior mountains and is in effect from 2/22/23 at 4am to 4pm on 2/25/23.
Extreme cold temperatures, continued wind, and rain are possible through the weekend. Snow levels are forecast for lower elevations and may impact transportation routes including potentially Highway 154 and Highway 166 (Cuyama area).
The lowest snow levels in the county are forecast to be roughly 1,500 feet for interior mountains and the Cuyama Valley. Countywide the snow level is forecast to be 2,000 feet-2,500 feet.
This weather system will also bring very cold temperatures throughout the county. Gale force winds are also expected at sea. More weather forecast information is available at: https://www.weather.gov/lox/
Precautions and tips to stay safe:
- Be careful when driving through wet and potentially snowy road conditions. Roads may be slippery. Drive slowly and be careful. When possible avoid routes that may be impacted by winter weather.
- Strong winds can cause power outages. Charge important electronic devices and be prepared in case an unannounced power outage occurs.
- Secure belongings that could get impacted by strong winds such as outdoor furniture.
- Take care of those who might not be aware of the cold weather hazard or be able to react accordingly – especially the elderly, young children, and pets.
- Avoid areas and roadways that appear to be flooding.
- Be aware of your surroundings and travel routes. Leave the area if you don’t feel safe and conditions permit safe travel.
Se pronostican condiciones climáticas invernales para el condado de Santa Bárbara a partir del 21 de febrero hasta el fin de semana. El Servicio Meteorológico Nacional ha emitido un Aviso de Vientos Fuertes para las áreas costeras desde Point Conception hasta San Marcos Pass, efectivo desde el 21 de febrero a las 6pm hasta el 23 de febrero a las 6am. Una Advertencia de Tormenta de Invierno también fue emitida para las montañas del interior del condado y está en efecto desde el 22 de febrero a las 4am hasta el 25 de febrero las 4pm. Temperaturas extremadamente frías, viento continuo y lluvia son posibles durante el fin de semana. Niveles de nieve son pronosticados para elevaciones mas bajas y pueden impactar rutas de transporte incluyendo potencialmente la Carretera 154 y la Carretera 166 (area de Cuyama). Los niveles mas bajos de nieve en el condado se pronostican a aproximadamente 1,500 pies para las montañas interiores y el Valle de Cuyama. En todo el condado se pronostica un nivel de nieve de 2,000 pies-2,500 pies. Este sistema meteorológico también traerá temperaturas muy frías en todo el condado. También se esperan vientos con fuerza de tempestad en el mar. Más información sobre el pronóstico del tiempo está disponible en: https://www.weather.gov/lox/
Precauciones y consejos para mantenerse seguro:
- Tenga cuidado al conducir por carreteras mojadas y potencialmente nevadas. Las carreteras pueden estar resbaladizas. Conduzca despacio y con cuidado. Cuando sea posible, evite las rutas que puedan verse afectadas por el tiempo invernal.
- Los fuertes vientos pueden provocar cortes de electricidad. Cargue los dispositivos electrónicos y esté preparado por si se produce un apagón.
- Sujete las pertenencias que puedan verse afectadas por los fuertes vientos, como los muebles de exterior.
- Cuide de las personas que puedan no ser conscientes del peligro del frío o no puedan reaccionar, especialmente las personas mayores, los niños pequeños y los animales domésticos.
- Evite las áreas y carreteras que parezcan inundadas.
- Esté atento a su entorno y a sus rutas de viaje. Váyase del área si no se siente seguro y las condiciones permiten un viaje seguro.
The weather sure has not cooperated with the predictions this year. The predictions of “new normal” unending drought were upended by massive rains. Now the predictions of resumed drought have been upended by rain once again. And to top it all off, global warming is bringing unusually low temperatures and more snow at lower elevations than has been seen in decades.
Again, you deniers ignore the facts that have been explained to you on countless occasions. Radiative forcing from CO2 is adding energy to the atmosphere. The result is a disruption of our weather patterns, and more intense weather. Although the atmosphere averaged over the whole planet is getting warmer, it doesn’t preclude extreme cold events when the normal winds are disrupted.
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24021772
Climate myth #23 – “But Its’ COLD Out!”
https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-cold-weather.htm
In the old days, science meant that one was required to develop a theory, use it to make a prediction, and test that prediction. It was considered very important that the theory could be proven incorrect, or falsified, if the prediction failed. This was actually known as the scientific method at one time. Now many people who “believe” in something they call science make lots of predictions that consistently fail. However, they reject the traditional approach of the scientific method that requires testing theories in a manner that renders them false if they fail to correctly predict an outcome. Instead, their faith based “science” holds their theory to be true regardless of whether it can accurately predict observable outcomes. They focus on attacking those who question their failures rather than making an effort to improve their understanding of how the world works. In this example, many people believe the earth is warmer than it was 100 years ago. Based on this belief, they predicted hot and dry weather conditions would be observed. This year has clearly defied these predictions on a local scale and on a global scale. The traditional scientific approach would call for questioning the theory used to make the failed prediction and considering alternatives. For old time sake, I’ll bring up a couple questions and alternatives the way people following the scientific method used to do it when their predictions failed. Is it really hotter than it used to be? Perhaps the process used to adjust historical thermometer data and convert it to a format that is comparable to recent satellite data erroneously made the past appear colder than it really was. If it really is warmer than it used to be, do warmer temperatures actually cause drought? Perhaps warmer conditions lead to more rain, not less.
You denier idiots that keep posting the NOAA article always fail to mention that the study showed that, although there might be fewer tropical storms from year to year, the storms that did occur were of much more devastating intensity. But, cherry-picking being what it is, you ignore what doesn’t fit your agenda.
Neither NOAA or the NWS has said that the tropical storms are getting worse. Science indicates that there simply are fewer tropical storms (hurricanes, cyclones, etc.). To many, these storms seem worse because of the simple fact that they receive double/triple the coverage now than in years past. Media outlets LOVE to cover weather-related disasters because viewership goes up, which in turn drives advertising revenue (Really? Yes, really). That’s not new, but the gullible will keep falling for the same old trick over and over and over. Do the research and stop focusing on the national tv and cable news coverage. When an Anderson Cooper, Tucker Carlson, Lawrence O’Donnel, or a Don Lemon is covering a disaster (or USED to cover disasters before his own disaster last week). Pay attention and follow your own path….don’t be fooled and don’t condemn others who are not group thinkers and go along with the status quo.
“devastating intensity” isn’t even mentioned in the article, and it’s a stretch calling the intro/summary paragraph “cherry picking”. Closest the article mentioned to your exaggeration was “POTENTIALLY amplifying the damages to humans and coastal communities”. Of course as we continue to develop coastal areas even if the same exact storm hit 10 years ago hit today, the damages today will definitely be amplified.
Babycakes, you hit the nail on the head, there is science, there are facts, and then there are feelings. Too often today we’re led by feelings rather than facts.
When you’re a hammerhead, everything looks like a nail.
Well said Babycakes. Those getting ‘their opinions’ from watching hours of cable news storm coverage need to get off the couch and get outdoors once in a while and stop parroting the news.
According to NOAA, we’re not deniers: “The annual number of tropical cyclones forming globally has decreased by approximately 13% during the 20th century, and scientists say the main cause is a rise in global warming, according to a new study in Nature Climate Change by a group of international scientists including NOAA scientists”
Show proof or as usual you are FOS
Chip, I would add the emphasis is always on the negative changes climate change will bring, but never any mention of the good. Climate change also makes drought stricken areas more arable, more people die as a result of extreme cold vs. extreme heat, crops are more productive in a higher C02 environment, etc. but no we seem incapable of acknowledging these facts.
Hey CHIP and VOICE – can you take your offtopic ranting elsewhere so this can stay open and clear for emergency updates? Really selfish to see you two dragging politics into the weather again. Move along please.
Of course, BC started out with a falsehood in his very first sentence, but it fits the political narrative of his sycophants, so that’s all that matters.
Can’t even get a typical weather warning on edhat with out the far-right extremists Chip and VOR playing the victim card.
It’s some heavy reading, but anyone interested in learning about the effects of AGW on extreme weather events like Tropical Cyclones, and on agricultural productivity, can find numerous peer-reviewed articles in the archives of Nature. You’ll see how asinine the proclamations of the deniers in this thread really are. Here are just a few examples:
Warming reduces global agricultural production by decreasing cropping frequency and yields
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01492-5
Observed influence of anthropogenic climate change on tropical cyclone heavy rainfall
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01344-2
Constraining the increased frequency of global precipitation extremes under warming
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01329-1
Tropical cyclone climatology change greatly exacerbates US extreme rainfall–surge hazard
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01272-7
Double benefit of limiting global warming for tropical cyclone exposure
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01157-9
There is zero politics and no extremism in this thread. Unless now NOAA and its scientist are far-right extremist?
CHILLIN – it’s really a shame these are left up. We have a serious storm coming and this should be a place to provide updates and alerts.
VOR, under the law, corporations are people.
Everyone “here”, by that you mean everyone commenting on Edhat?
Wow, that is slightly less than seven billion.
And, no not everyone “here” is on board with not destroying our environment. I’m sure there are folks posting on Edhat who have worked for companies with abysmal records polluting and destroying the environment anywhere but where they live.
You really can’t help but make the most asinine generalizations, can you.
I know critical thinking is hard to use, but is AOC a climate scientist?
VOICE – not my job to prove your claims for you. Stop being lazy. Pull up those bootstraps!
AOC is 1 person, pussycat.
There’s a good book out which addresses the sort of willful ignorance we see with these prolix denier types:
Ignorance : A Global History, by Peter Burke.
A relevant quotation is from Linda Alcoff, referring to MAGA and other right-wing proponents of politically-motivated disinformation:
“Their lack of knowledge is the product of some concerted effort, a conscious choice or, in actuality, a series of choices. Certain news articles, or news sources, are avoided, certain college courses are kept away from, certain kinds of people are never asked for their opinion on the news of the day.”
2:48 – the real world is terrifying to them, they spend the entirety of their waking hours trying to ignore or ban anything that isn’t ‘Merican or tradishunal!
Cherry picking doesn’t count. Sorry!
Quoting only a segment that has no bearing on the severity of the tropical cyclones, which is what was at issue, is most definitely cherry picking! No need to apologize – we know it’s your signature move.
But, luckily, you’re just speculating, without any domain knowledge.
I went to one of the links and it was behind a paywall, just from the abstract: “These constraints suggest that historical global precipitation extremes will occur roughly 32 ± 8% more often than at present by 2100 under a medium-emissions pathway (and 55 ± 13% more often under high emissions).” You’re following Science™ and not science if you think they can accurately predict the frequency of global precipitation extremes 80 YEARS INTO THE FUTURE!
I think you nailed it Voice. Claiming to make predictions at accurate that many decades in the future is pure BS. They couldn’t even predict this winter with a halfway reasonable degree of accuracy.
“I know more than actual scientist and experts in any given field. My opinions are infallible facts and anyone who doubts me is wrong and just hates me because I’m conservative.”
All fun and dandelions arguing over whose future predictions are more accurate, but you all are missing the point of the whole climate change “scare” – STOP DESTROYING OUR ENVIRONMENT. Yep, you’re going to have to put a little effort into something. Despite how much you all love “pulling up your bootstraps” and putting in an “honest day’s work,” conservatives and whatever you guys call yourselves, DESPISE most efforts to protect our home. Why? Don’t want to pay the money? Don’t want to do the work? I could care less if future weather predictions are accurate. The goal is we have to make changes NOW so we don’t keep polluting and destroying our environment.
By all means, keep bickering over percentages and sources. Facts are facts.
I think everyone is on board with not destroying our environment, the disagreement is whether anthropogenic C02 emissions are destroying the environment in the sensational/apocalyptic/’climate crisis’ agenda driven way where we’re all going to die in a decade unless we me make dramatic and immediate changes – changes that have real and serious quality of life consequences particularly for the middle and lower class. But go on, keep believing scientists can predict rainfall intensities 80 years from now and using that to justify your personal beliefs (scientists creating a model based on existing data and extrapolating what may happen a century from now doesn’t make it a fact)
“we’re all going to die in a decade unless we me make dramatic and immediate changes” – not many actual scientists saying that, so dial back on the hyperbole. No, we won’t all die, but we can’t stop working to clean up our act or our kids won’t have much of a clean planet to leave to their kids, YOUR grandkids.
VOR, LOL, you are so entirely disingenuous.
“Everyone is on board with not destroying our environment”.
Multinational corporations have been raping the resources of the third world for years and years, leaving behind clear cut forests, toxic ponds, polluted rivers, and sick people.
“Everyone”.
Man, I would love to know the secret of how you secure that flock of sheep to your face.
Provide some evidence of them saying we will all die in 10 years.
Again, hyperbole and absolutes are your downfall.
Alex, everyone refers to people not corporations but how about everyone ‘here’ is on board, better? Sacjon, have you not seen ANY of the speeches at the recent WEF, or AOC’s, or Kerry, or Gore, or literally any other “climate champion”.
8:58 – When you’re a hammerhead, everything looks like a nail.
LOL figured you couldn’t back that claim. Sure some doom and gloom out there but “those making and driving policy” are not saying we will “all going to die in a decade.” You need to learn to avoid absolutes and hyberbole in just about every comment you make.
Santa Barbara overall has pretty much very stable weather. It’s hot for two or three weeks a year and “cold” by our standards for about the same amount of time. My concern is just how many trees and branches are coming down in these high winds, especially after the recent heavy rains. According to predictions, we’re going to get a bit more rain (in addition to the miniscule amount last night and this morning), with the possibility of snow. All of this “weather” has happened before and has nothing to do with climate change. More storms hurricanes? No, we’ve not had any increase and have had less in the past 10 or 15 years….but I suppose we could get more in the future. Polar bear population diminishing? No, we have more polar bears now than ever. Polar caps disappearing? No, there still there according to satellite imagery. Islands disappearing because oceans rising? No Islands have disappeared…there all still there. Drought in Cali? Normal. Cachuma never going to fill up or spill EVER? No….spilling. Weather and climate in 20/30/50 years from now? Uhhhhhh….I dunno…. possibly partly cloudy with a chance of rain and a nice big fat massive south swell hitting the backside of Rincon due to a hurricane off Baja….Mesa Lane “going off.” Hey, you tell me (LOL!!!).
Per the county hydrology website, they have begun to release water from Cachuma in advance of the storm. You can find it here:
https://rain.cosbpw.net/
The climate crazies definitely high jacked this thread. It’s like watching vampires vs werewolves.