METHODOLOGY IN CALCULATING ACE POINTS:
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Forum rules
The posts in this forum are NOT official forecasts and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or STORM2K. For official information, please refer to products from the National Hurricane Center and National Weather Service.
- Audrey2Katrina
- Category 5
- Posts: 4236
- Age: 74
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Metaire, La.
METHODOLOGY IN CALCULATING ACE POINTS:
I have followed hurricanes since 1957 (Hence the Audrey in the name--should be Audrey to Ida by now)... and I've learned a lot about accumulated cyclone energy, or ACE. This is often used NOW to make it seem they're so much higher now than in the past, and yet, I noticed for the ACE they are giving 2023, the total INCLUDES a January storm it took them 4 or 5 months to recognize, and will include any up to January 1. I don't know and I trust some of the experts can answer this for me. I checked the records for 2005 which, depending on source, grants the season either 249 or 245.3 points. However in checking the archives at Colorado State U. Atmospheric Science archives. They didn't show anything before June 1, (and maybe there wasn't) but they STOPPED on October 31 with Beta. I KNOW there was a Delta, a Gamma, a Hurricane Epsilon, and another TS. Zeta, NONE of which are calculated into 2005's ACE total. Were those four storms added (I looked at dates and times as named storms) the ACE total would be close to or over 280--surpassing 1933. Now while some will think this is a "my year was worse than yours" post, it really isn't. I could care less, if anything I was pleased to see some of the high ACE scores so long ago. But what I would like to know is -- is there a reason why they cut off the ACE for 2005 at October 31? Meanwhile this year which should be considered "near normal" at best, they count ACE from a January thing, and will, should it occur which I doubt, count any right on up to Dec. 31. This makes ACE comparisons somewhat irrelevant. Not the ACE scores... but the ACE comparisons. Can someone explain why? https://tropical.colostate.edu/Forecast/Archived_Forecasts/2000s/2005-11.pdf scroll down to table 1, and note how they stop ACE points at Beta.
0 likes
Flossy 56, Audrey 57, Hilda 64*, Betsy 65*, Camille 69*, Edith 71, Carmen 74, Bob 79, Danny, 85, Elena 85, Juan 85, Florence 88, Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 3:45 am
- Location: Florida State University
Re: METHODOLOGY IN CALCULATING ACE POINTS:
Audrey2Katrina wrote:I have followed hurricanes since 1957 (Hence the Audrey in the name--should be Audrey to Ida by now)... and I've learned a lot about accumulated cyclone energy, or ACE. This is often used NOW to make it seem they're so much higher now than in the past, and yet, I noticed for the ACE they are giving 2023, the total INCLUDES a January storm it took them 4 or 5 months to recognize, and will include any up to January 1. I don't know and I trust some of the experts can answer this for me. I checked the records for 2005 which, depending on source, grants the season either 249 or 245.3 points. However in checking the archives at Colorado State U. Atmospheric Science archives. They didn't show anything before June 1, (and maybe there wasn't) but they STOPPED on October 31 with Beta. I KNOW there was a Delta, a Gamma, a Hurricane Epsilon, and another TS. Zeta, NONE of which are calculated into 2005's ACE total. Were those four storms added (I looked at dates and times as named storms) the ACE total would be close to or over 280--surpassing 1933. Now while some will think this is a "my year was worse than yours" post, it really isn't. I could care less, if anything I was pleased to see some of the high ACE scores so long ago. But what I would like to know is -- is there a reason why they cut off the ACE for 2005 at October 31? Meanwhile this year which should be considered "near normal" at best, they count ACE from a January thing, and will, should it occur which I doubt, count any right on up to Dec. 31. This makes ACE comparisons somewhat irrelevant. Not the ACE scores... but the ACE comparisons. Can someone explain why? https://tropical.colostate.edu/Forecast/Archived_Forecasts/2000s/2005-11.pdf scroll down to table 1, and note how they stop ACE points at Beta.
Klotzbach is many things and worldly talented, but that would have required fore telling the future, since the summary was posted on November 18 (and those systems occured at the end of November/December). Those ACE vales hadn't occured yet in the summary you linked, but the archived ACE value by season accurately accounts for those systems:
https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Re ... thatlantic
You are correct, there were no preseason storms in 2005 (Arlene in June was about it before a busy and historic July). It's not uncommon to include preseason/postseason storms (and they have negligible contributions to ACE in the grand scheme of things).
0 likes
Re: METHODOLOGY IN CALCULATING ACE POINTS:
Firstly the seasonal summary was published before several of the late season storms formed which is why the report misses the last few of them. Secondly, what you claim is ACE is not ACE, it is Net Tropical Cyclone Activity (NTC) which is a different metric to ACE. Clearly Phil didn't amend the report post-season.
0 likes
- 1900hurricane
- Category 5
- Posts: 6044
- Age: 33
- Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:04 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
- Contact:
Re: METHODOLOGY IN CALCULATING ACE POINTS:
This is the season total ACE (and a few other metrics) for the 2005 NAtl season, including breakdown per storm.
3 likes
Contract Meteorologist. TAMU & MSST. Fiercely authentic, one of a kind. We are all given free will, so choose a life meant to be lived. We are the Masters of our own Stories.
Opinions expressed are mine alone.
Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/
Opinions expressed are mine alone.
Follow me on Twitter at @1900hurricane : Read blogs at https://1900hurricane.wordpress.com/
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: cycloneye, Google Adsense [Bot], KirbyDude25, Pas_Bon, skyline385, TheAustinMan and 81 guests