Category 6 Isn't Enough

[ysabetwordsmith]

I have said for some time that the current hurricane scale, which has 5 categories, is insufficient and needs a Category 6. Looking at the actual numbers on the scale and in recorded storms, this turns out to be insufficient also. It doesn't need one more category, it needs TWO.


The current categories average a range of about 20, some lower, some higher. Positing a scale that uses categories of similar size would yield something like:

Category 1 = 74-95 mph (range of 22)
Category 2 = 96-110 mph (range of 15)
Category 3 = 111-129 mph (range of 19)
Category 4 = 130-156 mph (range of 27)
Category 5 = 157+ mph [new 157-176] (standard range of 20)
Category 6 = 177-196 mph
Category 7 = 197-216 mph

At that, the revised scale would just barely cover Hurricane Patricia's ominous 215 mph peak sustained wind speed. O_O That means we should be ready to activate Category 8 (217-236 mph) in the foreseeable future.

Now, the government doesn't want to panic people, or get blamed for the fact that climate change is making hurricanes a lot more violent than they used to be and also now clustering. But wouldn't it be useful to know that the official "Category 5" now contains a wider range (58) than Categories 3 and 4 combined (46)? (Some people may argue that we only need three action-based categories: Ignore It, Batten the Hatches, and Run For Your Lives.) Happily, the forecasts customarily include the actual wind speed, so you can simply adjust the scale on your own.

Of course, wind speed isn't the only thing that makes a hurricane dangerous. As mentioned, clustering means they are now more likely to come in twos or threes. Even a sideswipe by a later storm after the first storm has cracked open a city will be more devastating. Global warming seems to increase the storms that show rapid intensification, which can turn a minor storm into a major one with little warning. Rising sea levels boost storm surges. Warmer air also means that hurricanes can dump more rain. Storm surge and rainfall make even the lower categories more destructive.

Don't expect the politicians and the people they direct to give reliable interpretations. Be glad that pretty accurate weather information is available for you to analyze yourself. Here's a list of weather apps and weather websites with varying degrees of detail. For the hardcore weather nerds, you can also get raw data. Explore the parts of a text Hurricane Forecast/Advisory.

Comments

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

A studio apartment isn't suited for long-term use either. It's fine for a young single person who doesn't have much stuff, but people tend to collect things, especially in this culture. Most want to get married and have kids, which requires more space. Just being able to store emergency supplies takes up space.

You can make some tradeoffs between private and public space, but only so much.

Re: Thoughts

[(Anonymous)]

I currently don't have kids or a partner, and while I do have some stuff, I am kinda deeply suspicious about acquiring too much given how often my generation moves.

In fact I keep thinking I should winnow down, minimalist-style, but I actually like my stuff and getting it down to a nomadic-by-car level would involve giving up a lot.

Also, space requirements vary by culture. Americans trend towards more space, but folk who've lived in poverty or come from large families will need less.

Outside of America, there are places where it is perfectly normal for all 20+ relatives to sleep in the same room. (Or folks on the fronteir, 200 years back.)

Personally, right now I'd be happy with someplace where I could have a kitchen and bathroom, but if living by myself I wouldn't need much space. And the more rooms you add, the pricier it gets.

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> I currently don't have kids or a partner, and while I do have some stuff, I am kinda deeply suspicious about acquiring too much given how often my generation moves. <<

Sadly so, and all that moving is often not by choice, which causes a lot of problems.

>> In fact I keep thinking I should winnow down, minimalist-style, but I actually like my stuff and getting it down to a nomadic-by-car level would involve giving up a lot.<<

A lot of people have that problem.

>> Also, space requirements vary by culture. Americans trend towards more space, but folk who've lived in poverty or come from large families will need less.

Outside of America, there are places where it is perfectly normal for all 20+ relatives to sleep in the same room. (Or folks on the fronteir, 200 years back.) <<

There are different aspects to this.

One is physical. Each species has a territorial minimum, based on body size and diet. Now humans have managed to jigger this around a bit, by inventing privacy and civilization, so they could live closer without too much conflict. But it remains true that if you put humans in a room with a ceiling that's too low, it undermines mental health. A tipi isn't a problem because its center is much taller, most of the time you're in it you are sitting or lying down, and you spend more time outdoors. But a room with a flat ceiling quickly becomes an issue.

Another aspect is cultural. Those other cultures have had far fewer material demands on people. They also had far more group living skills. That made smaller spaces feasible. Here, there's almost nothing left of privacy and people are going to find out the hard way that you can't have civilization without it because humans are fucking aggravating.

Plus which, humans need nature or their mental health suffers. Now I've seen some lovely layouts for tiny house villages that would work fine to house individuals for short or maybe even medium-term stays, with the houses in clusters and a lot of greenspace and a common building. But I don't think that's what will pan out. I think they'll wind up like trailer courts, which everyone already knows are shitty, the units crammed close together and filled with mostly miserable people. And trailers are MUCH bigger than tiny houses, bigger than many apartments, but small enough to cause definite problems especially when crammed together.

In looking at tiny houses and microapartments, I think people are pushing the lower limit of what is safe and sane for humans more than briefly. It's okay for a short time, but it is not prudent for a long time. Those cramped conditions not only crush mental horizons, they also create a lot of extra work, and sometimes expense. A good example is the Murphy bed, popular in small apartments. It saves space ... if you have the energy to raise and lower it every day. If not, you leave it down all the time and a cramped space gets even tighter. Another is clothes; if you can't afford to store 4 seasons at home, you have give away or sell the off-season stuff and replace it, keeping only the most versatile items.

>>Personally, right now I'd be happy with someplace where I could have a kitchen and bathroom, but if living by myself I wouldn't need much space. And the more rooms you add, the pricier it gets.<<

Needs do vary. As long as someone is happy with their home, it's fine. What worries me is that, as usual, America makes decisions based on money rather than science or ethics. They're going to cram people into way too little space for too long and then get some sharp reminders why that is a bad idea. Why, in fact, there were laws passed to ban the kind of ant-farm tenements that wrecked several cities in various ways, from the Chicago Fire to New York's nearly-civil-war level of gang violence.

What can be done, what should be done, and what will be done are often quite different. I see people doing things that are very predictably going to cause problems, and that bothers me.

Re: Thoughts

[(Anonymous)]

>>One is physical.<<

Huh, like fish. 1 gallon of water per inch of fish in the tank. I wonder what the rate of cubic feet to mass-of-human would be.

>>Here, there's almost nothing left of privacy...<<

Conversely, privacy doesn't solve everything. I've had people not want to deal with me in a bad mood...then complain I'm always hiding somewhere (because I'm upset and/or don't want to fight with folks). And our discussions about fixing things...don't really help.

>>I think they'll wind up like trailer courts, ...<<

So then we ask "What is the least bad alternative?"

...at least with a house you have access to a bed and toileting facilities.

>>As long as someone is happy with their home, it's fine.<<

Who knows? Maybe I'll be miserable living by myself in a tinier home. But if so, it will at least involve different problems.

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> Huh, like fish. 1 gallon of water per inch of fish in the tank. I wonder what the rate of cubic feet to mass-of-human would be. <<

For most fish, that formula works, but you need more water volume for messier ones like goldfish or cichlids.

With humans, the issue is less about messiness than having room to move around and do different things, so that part is closer to tank size. A good-sized room -- say, at least 12' x 12' x 9' -- is reasonable for medium-term use by one human, or two in a pinch. Cramming a dozen people into a room or cabin that size is doable but not advisable because it runs up stress, disease, and violence. Just like if you put too many fish in a tank, they start fin-nipping and such.

For mental health, it's better if a residence has divisions of space. A one-bedroom apartment is plenty for a single human or even a couple, provided they have other opportunities for activity and they don't have a job or hobby that requires a lot of storage space. If they have offspring, a second bedroom is preferable; if they have more than one sex/gender of offspring, then three bedrooms is better. If someone has a job/hobby that needs lots of stuff (e.g. books, craft supplies) or a home business, they probably need a room or garage for that.

Also, the more people living together, the more they need group space; a large household should have both a living room and a family room with noise separation, and that's where you start seeing specialized things like a craft room, library, rec room, exercise room, etc. To some extent, group facilities can make up for this -- a common gym is bigger than a home gym -- but you have to remember that's a privilege, not a right, and not necessarily available. Only the stuff you own or rent personally counts as "yours" that people can't shut you out of on whim, and that you can reach in inclement weather.

>> Conversely, privacy doesn't solve everything. I've had people not want to deal with me in a bad mood...then complain I'm always hiding somewhere (because I'm upset and/or don't want to fight with folks). And our discussions about fixing things...don't really help. <<

Privacy doesn't solve everything, but it is critical to civilization. Lack of privacy kills even animals; any zookeeper can tell you this, it's why every enclosure has hideaways even though those annoy the viewers. Also lack of privacy induces humans to kill each other, because then they find out who's fucking their wife or they get fed up with snoring or whatever.

I've had similar issues, but as far as I'm concerned, my responsibility is to go out only when I am reasonably civil, not to be other people's party toy. People don't get to bitch about me avoiding them if they also bitch about my behavior when I am with them.

The people who are unhappy with you? Watch how they treat each other and how they behave individually. Took me a while to notice, because everyone complained about similar things with me so I thought they had grounds, but it turns out most people aren't actually very nice or socially ept. They're just into dominance games. If they are genuinely nice to each other, they may be worth emulating. If not, fuck 'em, do what makes you happy and comfortable.

>> So then we ask "What is the least bad alternative?"

...at least with a house you have access to a bed and toileting facilities. <<

Least bad alternative in what range? America doesn't have a shortage of resources; it has more than enough housing for everyone. It has a shortage of compassion and would prefer to let people freeze to death under bridges while buildings stand empty. I have no sympathy for this. If people are crammed into tiny houses or microapartments, the problem is less visible than if others are tripping over them on sidewalks.

Is it better? I'd leave that to individuals to decide. Likely some of them would take a home of any size over a bridge, but definitely not all of them, because many homeless people are homeless because they don't find the strings attached to society bearable. Plenty prefer the freedom to come and go as they please to being locked in at night and having their bodies violated in a shelter.

I'm very much a fan of housing-first ventures, but I think it should be standard housing, not stuff built to much lower qualifications. One of the best approaches I've seen is for a town to buy houses scattered all over, where they can put 4-5 people, rather than trying to zone for a 200-head homeless shelter that literally nobody wants in their neighborhood.

>>Who knows? Maybe I'll be miserable living by myself in a tinier home. But if so, it will at least involve different problems.<<

:D Now that is an awesome approach. Make exciting new mistakes! Hey, it's how we run our relationship, and it's lasted a couple decades.

I could certainly see preferring a smaller solitary home to a larger crowded one.

Of course, the design matters a lot too. I've seen tiny houses that were horrid little shoeboxes, and some that were big enough for 2-3 sleeping areas especially if they had an upstairs. Compare:

This one has two levels and multiple options for customization. At a squeeze you could fit 4 people in here; it has options for a queen loft, a twin or bunk bed, and an office/bedroom. It has divisions so people could split up. Not spacious, but not unbearably cramped.

This is all one space except the tiny 3/4 bath. There are no divisions for audio or visual privacy, unless you take up some of the scarce space by using bookcases to make partial walls. That's not great even for one person, let alone more. If you have guests, do you want them in what amounts to you bedroom? Most people wouldn't.

You can do a lot more with the divided space, just because it has multiple rooms, than with one big room.

Re: Thoughts

[(Anonymous)]

So it sounds like if height of person is h:

2h^2

Adding multiple people (p), we get:

2hp^2

Adding in cubic space (9ft ceilings):

(2hp^2)9

I think... I'm not perfect with math, and Algebra has been awhile...

But square footage = persons height, doubled than squared sems consistant. (So I'd need, what, a minimum of 11-12ft^2, I guess.)

>>For mental health, it's better if a residence has divisions of space.<<

I once was invited to visit someone who juryrigged around this by hanging bedsheets from the ceiling, to subdivide the house.

>>They're just into dominance games. If they are genuinely nice to each other, they may be worth emulating. If not, fuck 'em, do what makes you happy and comfortable.<<

I think there are gender and age demographics in play.

One tries to advise me...but doesn't seem to get what I am upset about a lot.

Also, given our respective genders, my lower willingness/ability to do emotional labor and their lack of skill in it may be an issue.

The other person and I have difficultly-compatible personalities to begin with, and then she decided to bond with me in the one area I'd said Absolutely Not to.

And then it's my fault for flying of the handle, and I have the feeling she'd flip out if I did the exact same thing to her. Which I haven't because manners. (Barring safety issues.)

So now theres issues around that, and people complain about the issues. And then aren't helpful if I try to fix them. ("Don't do [baby step that inconveniences me] do [bigger step that fizzled the last time you tried.]")

Yeah, I know the situation isn't great.

>>Least bad alternative in what range?<<

I've done volunteering that essentially amounts to 'unpaid teacher/social worker.'

Between that and [waves hands] everything, I'm basically mentally in emergency triage mode.

Fix this, next thing. Do this, next thing. Hallelujah, someone had a clue and provided quality resources for the thing, so I can scrap my half-assed juryrigging. Next thing...

I can't fix America as a whole. I can't even fix my own life as a whole. But I can try to do one thing at a time and hand of what I can't deal with [lack of spoons or resources] to folks who can.

>>...because many homeless people are homeless because they don't find the strings attached to society bearable.<<

Some parts of society are...annoying.

>>:D Now that is an awesome approach. Make exciting new mistakes! Hey, it's how we run our relationship, and it's lasted a couple decades.<<

Congratulations to you!

Thanks for the approval.

At least one of my current issues likely won't be fixed unless I leave, and leaving it unfixed would be bad.

Of course the what-might-have-beens are disappointing, but no point inviting your ghosts in for tea, so to speak.

>>If you have guests, do you want them in what amounts to you bedroom? Most people wouldn't.<<

Of course this assumes you will /have/ guests. Some people like entertaining out, and some just hate people.