The massive market transformation this month that some on Wall Street called a "once in a decade opportunity" might have just been a one-off technical move because of taxes.Marketsread more
The Pentagon will deploy U.S. forces to the Middle East on the heels of the attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, United States Secretary of Defense Mark Esper announced...Defenseread more
CNBC did a deep dive through the most recent Wall Street research to find stocks that analysts say are underappreciated.Marketsread more
Shares of MasterCard are up 46% this year, and 1120% since 2011, getting a boost from the strong U.S. consumer.Investingread more
CNBC sat in on an "empathy training" at Amazon PillPack's Somerville offices, which is part of new hire orientation.Technologyread more
Trade with China is the 'big unknown' for the Federal Reserve as it decides how best to support the U.S. economy, says Council on Foreign Relations Director of International...Futures Nowread more
Lobbying experts said the visit is likely an attempt to be in lawmakers' ears as they consider legislation that would impact Facebook.Technologyread more
Yardeni Research's Edward Yardeni believes the U.S. economy is picking up steam.Trading Nationread more
Iran's audacious drone and cruise missile attack on Saudi Arabia's oil producing facilities has provided a critical test yet for the Trump administration's foreign policy. A...Politicsread more
Chinese trade negotiators suddenly canceled a visit to meet U.S. farmers after they wrapped up trade talks in Washington this week.Marketsread more
As hurricane season comes upon us on June 1, we will be treated to a variety of hurricane forecasts, with different guesses about when and where landfall will hit, how intense the storm will be, and how much flooding we might expect.
All those forecasts will change each day.
And some of those forecasts will look very different than the rest.
So which forecast is the best? Which one do we trust?
This question matters because it's estimated to cost $1 million in lost economic output for each mile of evacuated coast land. The key for local officials is to minimize the evacuation zone—and a model that forecasts landfall needs to be as close as possible. Being off by 50, 100 or 150 miles is a major problem, and it hurts the ability for the public to trust the models in the future.
According to most people in the industry—or just plain statistics—the European model is the best, and has been for years. Almost any report will describe it as the best. Technically, you want to look for the acronym it goes by—ECMWF—which stands for the European Center for Medium-range Weather Forecasting.
A big factor in its dominance recently is due to a 2006 improvement in its model. The Europe model's advantage comes from several sources: Powerful supercomputers that can analyze larger amounts of data, taxes paid by the member nations of the European Union to help keep funding up, and charging money to other forecasters who want its data.
"They don't have any top secret things," University of Miami meteorologist Brian McNoldy told National Geographic. "Because of their (computer) hardware, they can implement more sophisticated code."
One of the reasons the U.S. suffers is a lack of cooperation between government officials and academics. Another big factor is the way research is funded (and defunded) in the U.S.: by the whims of Congress. This creates instability, and a generally permanent always-catching-up status for the U.S. models. The technology isn't there to keep up with what Europe has to offer.
Known as GFS, for Global Forecast System, the U.S. model might sometimes beat ECMWF, but for the most part it doesn't. "The Euro is the king of the global models," said Greg Nordstrom, a meteorologist at Mississippi State University.
This year is a big one for the U.S. models, as the NOAA announced that its two supercomputers will see a "nearly tenfold increase from the current capacity" by October, which will allow for more specific resolution on its forecasts.
No matter which model is the single best, human forecasters can find more accurate results by averaging the specific models to see what the overall trends suggest. This is true for prediction models in all sorts of fields, not just hurricanes.
"The more skilled models you have running, the more you know about the possibilities for a hurricane's track," said McNoldy.
Other top forecast models—beyond the ECMWF and GFS—come with strange acronyms as well: GFDL (American), UKMET (English), HWRF (American) and NOGAPS (U.S. Navy). There exist many more models—dozens, in fact—each with its own strengths and weaknesses, used for different types of tracking and predictions. Remember it's not just about tracking location and timing, but also storm intensity, air and water effects and other environmental factors.
The NOGAPS model has struggled in recent years, and as a result of poor accuracy the National Hurricane Center in 2011 dropped it from its list of "consensus models." NOGAPS wasn't specifically designed to forecast hurricanes and is better used as tracking-only model.
As you can see from the chart above, the lines keep going lower each year, suggesting better accuracy over time. The red line is the 24-hour forecast, which will always be better than the blue line (120-hour forecast).
As technology improves, data increases, and the computers get faster, more thorough analysis can occur, for a better assessment of where and when exactly hurricanes will hit land.
Even if the models are off by 50 miles, that's still a big difference for who will be affected once a hurricane hits shore. This is why governments are still investing in trying to improve the models.
There has been some talk that we might soon reach a "prediction horizon," meaning the forecasts just can't get any better, but for now, that doesn't seem to be the case. Each year, the trend is toward better forecasts, and that trend should continue for a while.