Stronger NWS wording needed for freezing rain

[Dan Robinson]

(I also posted this on my blog, but I wanted to get some insight from ST members.)

On Tuesday, December 23, 2008, freezing rain took the lives of 32 people in the midwest. It happened again on Friday, December 26, when 10 people died - 7 in Indiana alone. Hundreds if not thousands of accidents - too numerous to realistically count - resulted in countless more injuries and no doubt millions of dollars in damage. The tractor-trailer crashes alone easily resulted in millions of dollars lost in equipment and shipments combined. Entire cities and counties were shut down. People were stranded on highways in traffic jams for hours.

Tornadoes, of course, are a fearsome and deadly phenomena. Decades of research, funding, forecasting and warning priority have been given to the cause of protecting life and property from this danger. Television stations go wall-to-wall when a tornado warning is issued. Sirens sound. People stop what they are doing and take cover. And as a result, lives are saved every year.

Freezing rain accidents are the most severe of all weather-related crashes because drivers can't see the hazard. And consequently, they are traveling faster, caught completely by surprise, and when their vehicles lose control, impacts are some of the most severe of all collisions. It doesn't take a well-warned ice storm - all it takes is a little freezing drizzle, a little rain shower that no one is watching.

So my question is, why does a developing freezing rain scenario get little more than a last-minute advisory? I've watched time and time again this winter as National Weather Service advisories are quietly issued in the middle of the night, during rush hour, in mid-afternoon - with little fanfare. Rain moves in with temperatures below 32 degrees, and no one notices - no wall-to-wall TV coverage, no sirens, no warning tones, nothing. People then get in their cars and get on the interstates, oblivious to the fact that they are facing a danger that is more likely to kill them that day than a tornado, hurricane, lightning strike or flood (or any other weather phenomena) in their entire lifetime.

So what can be done? Granted, it is well-known that even tornado warnings have a hard time getting to the people who need to hear them, as they often aren't prepared with the means to receive them. We've discussed that issue plenty. But at least the warnings are there. Freezing rain is a weather phenomena that definitely deserves much stronger wording and more aggressive public dissemination of the warnings than it's getting now.

For starters, I'm offering these suggestions:

• Expand and emphasize HPC freezing rain outlooks - NOAA's Hydrometeorological Prediction Center currently issues outlooks for freezing rain twice a day for the continental US (similar to the SPC convective outlooks - Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3). However, the outlooks only denote areas that are at risk from receiving a quarter of an inch or more of ice. The outlooks are more geared at alerting for ice storm potential, not icy roads. The criteria for an outlooked area needs to be expanded to include any area that is at risk for receiving light freezing rain - anything that could cause road hazards.
  
• More aggressive warning dissemination - No more "freezing rain advisories" - I think we need to see something akin to '(life-threatening) road ice warnings'. Sirens would be inappropriate, of course - but I think at the very least, tones should go out on commercial radio and TV airwaves. Anything to alert the public of the gravity of the situation. This hazard needs to be given the same treatment as a 'tornado emergency' - it's taking two to three times as more lives.
  
• More aggressive awareness campaigns - Awareness campaigns are already in effect for lightning, tornadoes, floods, severe weather and winter weather. I recommend that freezing rain and icy roads be given their own emphasis separate from the winter weather umbrella. I believe that the public needs to develop the same respect for icy roads as they do tornadoes and hurricanes, to the point of recognizing the warning signs and chainging their decision making process when icy roads threaten.

I'd be interested to hear any other ideas.

 

[Jim Saueressig]

To me freezing rains and icy roads are a given threat. If the road ices over it will be slippery. If there is an advisory its probably gonna happen, if there is a warning its happening.

This is just one of them things that people know and don't care about. If you do not realize that icy roads are dangerous then an enhanced warning will not do you much good.

T storms can range in severity, I would go as far as having a derecho warning if the wind might exceed 80 or something else we currently do not have .......

but Ice is Ice is Slippery!

 

[Chris Allington]

I'm not sure what you can do either other than road closures to stress the severity of the event.

 

[rdale]

On Tuesday, December 23, 2008, freezing rain took the lives of 32 people in the midwest.

I disagree with your premise right off the bat.

Tornadoes take lives. Lightning takes lives. Driving too fast for road conditions takes lives. Freezing rain DOES NOT take lives...

What would wall-to-wall TV coverage do? People know it's icy - they know the threat - yet they decide to hit the roads anyways... Interrupting all programming to say that over and over accomplishes nothing (other than a boatload of irate phone calls to the newsroom!)

HPC outlooks are general ideas for local offices to look at, nothing more. I don't see how that product could change any decisions - will you call in to work tomorrow and tell them you aren't coming if the HPC outlook says 1/10" of ice possible?

 

[Robert Dewey]

To me freezing rains and icy roads are a given threat. If the road ices over it will be slippery.

Same to me as well. However, it could be argued that heavy rains and water rushing across the road are also a given (or hand-in-hand) threat... but one that's obviously given a higher level of attention.

Ice is a lot more deceptive than street flooding, since you usually can't see the ice... hence I would think it would require even more attention.

 

[rdale]

I would go as far as having a derecho warning if the wind might exceed 80 or something else we currently do not have .......

Not to venture off-topic, but many offices (Michigan in particular) are adding special EAS phrases to SVR's with extreme winds. NWS HQ will not allow a "derecho" type warning because that would decrease the usefulness of "regular" SVR warnings.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Tornadoes take lives. Lightning takes lives. Driving too fast for road conditions takes lives. Freezing rain DOES NOT take lives...

Freezing rain causes accidents without any abnormal driver behavior, accidents that would not happen if the phenomena was not present. People presently are not trained in awareness of the situation and cannot visually identify the hazard until it is too late.

If awareness levels of the hazard were elevated, people could be given a chance to respond and change their behavior (IE, slow down).

 

[Bob Hartig]

I don't see freezing rain as being in the same league as a 1.7-mile-wide, violent tornado approaching a Kansas community. I don't think it merits what would be considered an enhanced warning. The scenarios are very different.

That being said, it couldn't hurt to reconsider the nomenclature. "Freezing rain" sounds pretty bland. As a Michigander, I can't imagine anyone living in my home state for any length of time who isn't familiar with the term. We make our choices to hit the road, freezing rain or not. But the wordsmith in me can't help but think it would be easy to add more muscle to the verbiage. Not enhanced wording, just different wording. Why not have a "black ice warning" instead of "freezing rain"? That switches public awareness from a weather phenomenon to the immediacy of actual road conditions. I mean, "black ice" just plain sounds dangerous, right?

Just a thought. Shoot it down and I won't care. I feel more strongly about enhanced language for "tornado emergencies," but that's a different topic, and, as I've said, a very different situation.

 

[rdale]

Freezing rain causes accidents without any abnormal driver behavior, accidents that would not happen if the phenomena was not present.

...and so does a quick burst of just 1-2" of snowfall... Freezing rain doesn't form out of thin air. It's rare that people have no idea the rain is freezing on the ground. Black ice is one thing - but that's not really predictable.

It comes back to predictability (hard to do on minor events) impacts on the public (they aren't going to change their driving needs based on a forecast) and getting that info to the public (I'd bet if you reviewed weathercasts from the areas in question they would have been talking up the ice threat.)

If awareness levels of the hazard were elevated, people could be given a chance to respond and change their behavior (IE, slow down).

If I could tell you the number of times I've been driving in a chain of cars at 35mph on the highway during snow events, and seen someone fly past me -- only to end up in the ditch -- you might change your mind. Somehow a majority of people knew to drive 35mph, even without the "icy road warning."

 

[Dan Robinson]

I don't see freezing rain as being in the same league as a 1.7-mile-wide, violent tornado approaching a Kansas community.

I would agree with that fact, except that one is currently producing two to three times the fatalities.

As a Michigander, I can't imagine anyone living in my home state for any length of time who isn't familiar with the term. We make our choices to hit the road, freezing rain or not.

There is truth to that. The numbers I'm seeing indicate that most of the deaths are occuring in a band of the midwestern states (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania) that are outside of the 'traditional' snow belt areas of the north - places where people apparently don't have the same type of awareness levels as a Michigan or Minnesota resident would have. Like you say, northerners don't need awareness campaigns - but people to the south do.

I'm looking at it purely from a numbers standpoint. The deaths are happening, and they happen at astounding rates and concentrations when freezing rain occurs.

 

[rdale]

In an average year, wind gusts kill more than all winter weather hazards combined...

http://www.weather.gov/os/hazstats/images/67-years.pdf

I don't suggest we start going wall-to-wall and shutting down travel when it gets breezy

 

[Dan Robinson]

...and so does a quick burst of just 1-2" of snowfall... Freezing rain doesn't form out of thin air. It's rare that people have no idea the rain is freezing on the ground. Black ice is one thing - but that's not really predictable.

It comes back to predictability (hard to do on minor events) impacts on the public (they aren't going to change their driving needs based on a forecast) and getting that info to the public (I'd bet if you reviewed weathercasts from the areas in question they would have been talking up the ice threat.)



If I could tell you the number of times I've been driving in a chain of cars at 35mph on the highway during snow events, and seen someone fly past me -- only to end up in the ditch -- you might change your mind. Somehow a majority of people knew to drive 35mph, even without the "icy road warning."

I see what you're saying - but snow is easily identified visually. Upon seeing snow on the road, a driver can make a choice to slow down (as you did when you slowed to 35mph). If another driver doesn't choose to slow down, then whatever happens is purely their responsibility. The accident rates during snowfall are much lower simply because it is visually apparent.

Black ice (created by freezing rain/drizzle) is not visually identifiable, and therefore people don't have the opportunity to adjust their speed before they encounter it. The data shows a huge spike in the accident/death rate during freezing rain as opposed to snowfall.

You're always going to have the people that ignore warnings (both visual and from media sources) and keep on going to their own peril. I'm more concerned with the people that would change their behavior if they knew what they were facing.

 

[Dan Robinson]

In an average year, wind gusts kill more than all winter weather hazards combined...

http://www.weather.gov/os/hazstats/images/67-years.pdf

I don't suggest we start going wall-to-wall and shutting down travel when it gets breezy

Maybe! I do think tornadoes and severe weather get a disproportionate amount of attention compared to other weather hazards that are more likely to kill or injure.

I don't think TV stations should go wall-to-wall with road ice - but at least give it more attention.

Does that chart take into account auto accidents caused by ice/snow? Those yearly numbers for winter deaths look way too low.

 

[rdale]

I guess to get much traction you'd need to have some actual research behind the cause...

I spend most of my 2:30 telling the viewers "we are getting ice tomorrow, slow down on the morning drive" that they will think extra in the morning. Then they tune in on the morning show and we have video of some slideoffs and the morning guy saying "roads are horrible, drive slow."

If ice that causes travel trouble is in the forecast, regardless of the amount, it's going to lead all our newscasts and be crawled periodically day and night.

I don't think that we also need to say "there is a traffic warning in effect" to get the point across as well... Either they heard it and didn't care, or they didn't check ANY forecasts, or we didn't forecast it and regardless of what phrase you use, it wouldn't matter anyways.

 

[Bob Hartig]

The numbers I'm seeing indicate that most of the deaths are occuring in a band of the midwestern states (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania) that are outside of the 'traditional' snow belt areas of the north - places where people apparently don't have the same type of awareness levels as a Michigan or Minnesota resident would have. Like you say, northerners don't need awareness campaigns - but people to the south do.

Seems like a legitimate point to me. Icy roads are part of Michigan culture, so to speak, but the same doesn't hold true outside the snow belt.

However, Dan, reread what I had to say about revisiting the terminology, because I think it speaks to your concern. Whether "black ice warning" is the right language isn't my point. Call it a "killer icy roads from Mars warning" if that's what it takes to get the idea across to the public. The point is, find a term that anyone--snow-belter or non-snow-belter--can connect instantly with potentially lethal driving conditions. And even as I suggest this, I agree with Rob that local stations are no doubt already warning the crap out of people to for crying out loud be careful on the roads.