[HN Gopher] The elusive future of San Francisco's fog
___________________________________________________________________
The elusive future of San Francisco's fog
Author : anyonecancode
Score : 117 points
Date : 2022-09-15 11:03 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
| glerk wrote:
| https://archive.ph/OJYqz
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| Redwood trees need the moisture in the air. Some of those trees
| are a couple thousand years old. Is this the end for Redwoods?
|
| https://www.nps.gov/redw/learn/nature/about-the-trees.htm
| hedora wrote:
| The redwood forests around south bay / santa cruz are showing
| stress. There are many dead ones in parks in silicon valley.
| Here's an article about drought and albino redwoods from last
| year:
|
| https://www.sfgate.com/california-parks/article/California-a...
|
| This year was even drier.
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| Our forests are in really sad shape in 2022. Nothing like
| what I remember as kid, so many dead trees now.
| spatulon wrote:
| One of the more memorable and surreal experiences I had on my
| visit to SF was walking around Golden Gate Park, and suddenly
| seeing what looked like the mast of an alien sailing ship looming
| out of the fog in the distance.
|
| It turned out to be Sutro Tower.
| mertd wrote:
| Had you acquired chocolate bars from some hippies by any
| chance?
| azinman2 wrote:
| You know you can just go to a store for that now, and they're
| not run or frequented by hippies.
| baby wrote:
| Depends if it has mushroom in it
| azinman2 wrote:
| Fair enough
| cheriot wrote:
| You'll be able to go to a store for that soon as well!
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/us/san-francisco-
| decriminaliz...
| MyChurch wrote:
| You can find that too at zide door
| FutureZeitgeist wrote:
| gfd wrote:
| I was curious what that looked like and turns out there are
| videos on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60fqruVDrjs
|
| Pretty cool!
| julianeon wrote:
| There's also the "fog 2.0" we're seeing now, which is really
| smoggy air which is visible because of the particulate matter
| from wildfires.
|
| I'd say we see this type of "fog" more often than real fog in SF
| today.
| shagie wrote:
| https://fire.airnow.gov has the map of the smoke plumes,
| locations of fires, and air quality sensors.
|
| For a given sensor, you can pull up the hourly data for the
| past 7 days.
| clpm4j wrote:
| I can't recall a single day this year during which we've had
| what you've described. Certainly the "more often than real fog"
| statement is completely false.
| julianeon wrote:
| I'm not sure what we're disagreeing about here.
|
| Do you doubt there's been smoggy air here in SF, which you
| can see due to particulate matter from the wildfires? This
| happens often. I mean it's basically just slightly thicker
| than normal smog. And there have been many fires. It's an
| unremarkable, common occurrence in the Bay Area today, this
| smog that is made worse by fires.
|
| When it's moist out - not enough for real fog, mind you - it
| can pass for a fake fog.
|
| Due to the heat, there's also been much less real fog.
|
| So all I'm saying is that there have been more days w/visible
| smog than fog in SF in 2022. Which I stand by, as something
| I've observed, which is also something you'd expect, given 1)
| number of fires increasing smog and 2) heat wave decreasing
| real fog.
| bragr wrote:
| I grew up in the central valley in California and it is already
| very noticeable how much less tule fog [1] there is from just a
| few decades ago. It just doesn't get as cool at night and
| humidity is lower on average and that significantly reduces the
| fog formation.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tule_fog
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| I once drove through Dinuba with my head out the window to try
| to see past the hood of my car, it was crazy.
| refurb wrote:
| What is with all these "experts fear this might happen" articles?
|
| It's weird. Not enough _actual_ news to cover?
| colinmhayes wrote:
| News is highly undifferentiated. If you want to stand out among
| the copycat news sources you also need to provide long form
| articles and a distinctive slant, which NYT has spent the last
| decade building.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Also, this kind of long form investigative journalism is what
| has died out in most newsrooms in an effort to reduce costs.
|
| We already pretty much killed local news, no need to reduce
| everything to an AP feed.
| woodruffw wrote:
| Normally we ask experts to give their expert opinions.
|
| I don't think the NYT (or anyone, really) is hurting for news
| to cover either. It's been an exciting year.
| carapace wrote:
| Surprisingly deep article.
|
| A little known fact is that the coastal forests exhale fog. You
| can watch them breath out drifts of cloudstuff at the right time
| of day and weather conditions.
|
| They are releasing moisture, but also microscopic pollen that act
| as the nuclei of fog/cloud droplets and actually cause
| condensation.
|
| The California Coastal Commission is more important than you
| might realize. Keeping the coastal forest intact and operational
| effectively "air-conditions" the whole state to the Sierras. The
| Central Valley would be an oven without the coastal forests.
| femiagbabiaka wrote:
| Yes. Many of my favorite places in the PNW (so far) are the
| coastal forests and beaches in Mendocino County, around Eureka.
| A similar phenomenon can also be observed in the forests around
| Marin/Mill Valley. I always imagine Karl starting the trip from
| there.
| bitxbitxbitcoin wrote:
| The coastal forests in Northern California are beautiful. One
| geographical note: Eureka is in Humboldt County.
| jhu247 wrote:
| Biking across the golden gate bridge when the fog and wind is
| blowing through from the Pacific is one of the most immersive
| (and scary) experiences ever. Highly recommend!
| whiplash451 wrote:
| Try doing it from the top of a Big Bus too! Amazing!
| sammalloy wrote:
| > The general consensus among the small cadre of scientists who
| study coastal fog is that it is decreasing, not just in
| California, but around the world.
|
| It's true. The last time I saw thick fog in the city, the kind
| where you almost had to pull your car over because there was a
| chance you might hit another car, was 1989.
| prpl wrote:
| we would get it in the Richmond. The thickest fog in the bay
| area right I know if is always around Skyline between Westmoore
| and Hickey - it still gets that thick there.
| boringg wrote:
| Fogust seemed to be getting lighter when I was living there as
| well. Anecdotal but noticeable.
| spike021 wrote:
| You should visit Daly City; Skyline (35) still gets shrouded in
| fog fairly often.
| fennecfoxen wrote:
| Also, if you miss the fog, both Skyline and US-1 in that part
| of the world are absolutely gorgeous.
| acchow wrote:
| I heard most of the city used to be very foggy for months on
| end. But now most of the city is sunny all year round before
| noon till early afternoon (about 11am-3pm) except maybe parts
| of outer sunset and outer richmond. In Bayview, fog doesn't
| even usually roll in until after 10pm (except in July)
| lambdasquirrel wrote:
| This is true. I've lived in the Bay Area since '05, and have
| met many people who were there since the 80's and 90's.
| Actually, I think most of them have left. But by the mid
| 2010's, many of them would comment on how unusual it was that
| the fog just wasn't rolling in anymore.
|
| One person I knew was sensitive to certain allergies that
| would become markedly worse without the fog. So she _knew_.
|
| It isn't just SF proper. Along the peninsula, on Highway 35,
| the fog used to be so thick you couldn't see more than 30 ft
| in front of you - maybe even 10 ft some days, and especially
| in the evening. I lived in those mountains around the
| 2006-2007 timeframe, and it was fun to drive down the 35 by
| memory (at least if you were an indestructible-feeling
| 20-something), since it wasn't possible to see down the road
| for any safe distance. Nowadays, there might be fog, but it's
| invariably "safe."
| whiplash451 wrote:
| Another bit of history. The first navigators kept passing
| by the bay for years because they could not see the bay
| from the sea due to the fog. This is why people settled in
| SF later than in other places in the region. So, the fog
| was probably damn thick at the time.
| Melatonic wrote:
| And from what I remember Skyline drive was the original
| way to go north and south on the peninsula (dirt road)
| aerostable_slug wrote:
| No telling stories about how great the Lucky Penny was.
| sammalloy wrote:
| > And from what I remember Skyline drive was the original
| way to go north and south on the peninsula (dirt road)
|
| PTSD, activated! I had a sadist as a DMV driving
| instructor who forced me to take my test on that road.
| Melatonic wrote:
| When I hear people complain about the weather in SF now I
| always think "if only you knew...."
| eweise wrote:
| I lived in SF from 1989 to 2006. In the summer, downtown was
| usually sunny during the day while sunset and richmond were
| socked in. Fog moved further in towards the
| afternoon/evening. I lived in the sunset and richmond the
| whole time and didn't see any change. In 1989 I sometimes
| didn't see the sun for weeks and 2006 still didn't see the
| sun for weeks, in those districts. Maybe something has
| changed in the last 15 years?
| [deleted]
| renewiltord wrote:
| Happened last year in Ingleside Terraces. Could barely see the
| curb.
| dekhn wrote:
| I had a nice view from UCSF 1995-2001. Fog came in full and
| thick nearly every day. When I drive from San Mateo to South SF
| I frequently see a large offshore flow causing massive fog at
| Mt San Bruno. Any possibility your data is mainly anecdotal?
| BoorishBears wrote:
| If we're going by anecdotes... when I came to this city I was
| told thick blinding fog is a daily occurrence, but I was here
| a good week or two before the "real" fog came in, and while
| fog does come often, _that_ honestly doesn 't come often.
| Maybe 3 times a week.
|
| I classify "real" fog as days where I go from being able to
| see half of SF and even a bit of Alameda... to not seeing the
| houses a block down from my balcony.
|
| I'll admit it's impressive and straight up disorienting
| sometimes, (looking out at what was a skyline 20 minutes
| before and seeing nothing but grey), but if the locals'
| anecdotes about how often it used to happen are even somewhat
| accurate, it sounds like it's on the decline.
| dekhn wrote:
| It's not daily- there is more like a cycle caused by
| changes in offshore flow and temps in the inland valleys.
| I'd see a week without any fog, then a two weeks of in-and-
| out fog, then a week of total fog, including times when I
| couldn't see more than a few avenues towards sunset, or the
| park looked like some misty dream.
| bartread wrote:
| Concur: I spent perhaps 10 days in the city in 1995 split
| into two blocks at end of June and beginning of September.
| Definitely foggy on multiple days, especially over towards
| Golden Gate Park and the bridge.
| vorador wrote:
| This must depend on where you live in the city - just yesterday
| we had massive fog in the morning and at night in the sunset.
| arethuza wrote:
| We still get haar a lot here in Scotland - its very common on
| the Firth of Forth:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haar_(fog)
|
| Edit: I have no idea whether haar occurs more or less
| frequently - I moved to a spot where it is very visible a few
| years back so it certainly looks more common to me!
| [deleted]
| changoplatanero wrote:
| One good thing about less fog: fewer canceled flights from SFO.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| More pollution yay
| hedora wrote:
| SFO flights usually get cancelled because of cross winds, not
| fog.
| cbhl wrote:
| Increasing the separation between runways would be sufficient
| to get most of the way there; planes can be landed solely on
| instruments if the runways are far enough apart.
| ThinkingGuy wrote:
| There's more to it than runway spacing, of course. The runway
| and the aircraft both must have the necessary equipment
| installed, and the flight crew has be trained and certified
| in its use.
| acchow wrote:
| Is there physical space for this?
| cbhl wrote:
| You may find historical maps of SFO helpful:
|
| - https://www.sfomuseum.org/about/blog/interactive-
| historic-ma...
|
| - https://millsfield.sfomuseum.org/map/
|
| Much of the current runways are on what was part of the
| water in the bay just 100 years ago.
| boringg wrote:
| The cost is greater than the benefit.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| It's definitely getting less foggy in the summers. People in the
| east side of San Francisco are installing AC or wishing they had
| AC.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| Could that also be due to transplants? 80% of people in SF
| apparently don't stay that long and move out. I can easily
| imagine someone moving to SF and enjoying the nice temps most
| of the year.
|
| The two weeks of high heat that everyone on California coasts
| experiences can cause such people to freak out and want an AC
| instead of dealing with it or going outside. I live in a
| coastal city where it's 70 basically every day except for 10
| days of the year when it can be high 80s/90s. Just get a fan.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| No, these are not transplants freaking out because of two
| weeks per year.
| _jal wrote:
| I moved here in '93. I'm not a native, but I don't think I
| can be considered transient.
|
| I got an AC unit for the first time two years ago. Following
| tradition, it didn't arrive until I didn't need it, but I ran
| it last year, and then a lot this year.
|
| I live in SOMA, it is usually a couple degrees warmer here
| than the city average. But that doesn't account for the 99F
| reading on my outside thermometer last week.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| I'm not talking about you because you've been there for
| years now.
|
| I meant that most people move to SF for a couple years and
| then move out due to costs or whatever reason. I read
| somewhere that 80% or so of SF is this way. Students, job
| hoppers, workers, etc.
|
| How was SF in the 90s?
| keepquestioning wrote:
| Is it possible to destroy the fog completely via weather
| engineering?
| trillic wrote:
| If the land and the ocean are the same temperature there won't
| be fog so just make the ocean 100 degrees problem solved.
| shagie wrote:
| The archive.ph link for the article lacks much of the interactive
| experience.
|
| The gift link for it -
| https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/14/climate/san-f...
| encoderer wrote:
| Yes it would be sad if it were totally gone but let's not imagine
| that it's great living in a super foggy place where you lose the
| ability to appreciate the natural beauty of your neighborhood.
| The foggiest parts of the city also generally have the worst
| weather overall. I'm sure there are some people that really like
| it but generally speaking it's not desirable to have high winds
| and dense fog.
| Sirened wrote:
| the fog is part of the natural beauty
| Helmut10001 wrote:
| I once did a film about the fog and its fundamental importance to
| Windsufing in San Francisco [1]. I hope it stays.
|
| [1]: https://vimeo.com/77666233
| subsubzero wrote:
| Who knows, dense fog could be an artifact of the abnormally wet
| 20th century that California has seen, looking back 2000 years
| the typical state for California is very dry. Back 1200 years
| there were a few megadroughts that lasted centuries, here is an
| article that shows history of drought/rain in California, (on the
| infographic showing wet and dry periods) notice the huge peaks in
| the 20th century, and the steep drop in the 21st century.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-histo...
| mellavora wrote:
| yes, but also look at the age of the trees in the coastal
| forest (or the age of the trees which didn't get cut down by
| us). Suggests that they might be a different "micro" climate;
| also note the earlier comments that they create fog.
| trillic wrote:
| I assume this consistent fog is an function of higher latitudes
| with dry hot inlands and cool oceans. Especially in the desert,
| fog will form near the coast.
|
| As SF Bay adds a lot of coast line, meaning more cool ocean
| closer to more hot land than most coastal cities, I'd imagine
| that has a large effect on why fog forms.
|
| If ocean temps rise faster than average land temps, the average
| difference between them will shrink, perhaps bringing on
| average less fog?
|
| Interesting reading: https://ggweather.com/sf/narrative.html
| cammikebrown wrote:
| I grew up in Sacramento. The fog has gone from ubiquitous to
| nearly completely gone.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| The offshore california current transports cold surface water
| from the Gulf of Alaska down coast, and there's wind- and
| current-forced upwelling of deep, cold nutrient-rich water from
| the deep Pacific Basin. The interaction of cold water and warm
| air leads to condensation at the near-ocean surface, aka fog
| (marine layer) formation. This effect persists as far south as
| Point Conception north of the Los Angeles basin. A warmer climate
| implies an atmosphere capable of holding more water vapor before
| condensation takes place, but the transition from clear moist air
| to opaque cloud is complicated and hard to model precisely:
|
| https://www.usgs.gov/centers/western-geographic-science-cent...
|
| > "Fog pushes against, over, and through gaps in the coastal
| mountains, transporting water and other aerosol materials into
| coastal ecosystems. If the temperature or pressure differences
| (gradients) are too strong, winds will be generated and the
| additional turbulent mixing will dissipate the fog."
|
| Across most of California the Coast Ranges block the inland
| movement of the offshore marine layer in summer, with the break
| in the ranges at the San Francisco Bay the marine layer can flow
| in and out without having to climb the ranges and waterfall down
| the other side (that's an impressive sight when it does). As far
| as climate, the physical flow of the California Current is driven
| by planetary rotation, but the Gulf of Alaska has been generally
| warming and experiencing heatwaves, so perhaps some warming of
| the California Current is expected:
|
| https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/central-gulf-al...
|
| Sometimes the atmospheric outflow from the hot Central Valley
| through the Bay gap is strong enough to keep the fog bank well
| offshore (or dissolve it altogether). It comes down to the
| dynamics of local winds, the temperature differential (colder
| ocean = more fog, hotter valley air outflow = less onshore fog).
| Climate-wise, the California Central Valley is getting warmer
| with more extreme heat days:
|
| https://blog.ucsusa.org/pablo-ortiz/climate-change-impacts-o...
|
| Thus, less fog coming into the SF Bay is a reasonable prediction.
| sliken wrote:
| Not sure how the Tule fog related to the SF fog, but:
|
| https://news.berkeley.edu/2019/04/10/falling-levels-of-air-p...
| hindsightbias wrote:
| Not sure if there would be anyone old enough here - but all the
| old San Francisco Film Noirs from the 40s and 50s show SF and
| pouring rain.
|
| Was that real or just a Hollywood thing?
| xvedejas wrote:
| SF does pour rain fairly often between January and March, those
| films could have chosen the time of year for the desired
| atmosphere.
| tristanb wrote:
| Not anymore. It used too every year, hardly ever now.
| Melatonic wrote:
| I grewup in the bay area (peninsula) and was in SF a lot. It
| definitely rained a hell of a lot more. The weather now is
| practically like what people used to think of as Santa Monica
| weather half the year (or maybe Santa Barbara)
| hindsightbias wrote:
| They say SF will be San Diego in 50 years, so perhaps still
| liveable.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-09-15 23:00 UTC)