Thursday, October 29, 2026

How AI is transforming hurricane forecasts


A satellite image provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows Hurricane Isaias approaching the Gulf Coast of Alabama and Florida on Friday, Oct. 9 2026.NOAA/NOAA

From NPR by Jessica Meszaros
 
Hurricane forecasters are increasingly using artificial intelligence to make predictions — and they say the technology is rapidly transforming the field.

When the first hurricane of the Atlantic season formed this month, an AI model beat out traditional models at predicting where it would go.

In early October, Hurricane Isaias made landfall near Destin, Fla., as a Category 2 storm.
Conventional forecasting models initially predicted it would head further west, toward southeastern Louisiana.

But Google DeepMind's artificial intelligence model called it right out of the gate: the hurricane was going to hit the western Florida Panhandle.
"Google DeepMind, in particular, has really proven itself the last few years as the gold standard model," says Michael Lowry, a longtime meteorologist and hurricane expert in Miami, who has previously advised both the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Hurricane Center (NHC).
"That model has been, by far and away, the best performing computer model that we've ever seen. Period."

A different kind of model

The National Hurricane Center first started incorporating the Google DeepMind model into its official forecasts last year.

By the end of the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, it was already one of the best at predicting a storm's path and strength, says Brian McNoldy, a hurricane researcher for the University of Miami.

Usually, new models take years to refine after first being introduced.
"It's something we're not used to – to have a model, the new kid on the block, very quickly becoming the best model out there," McNoldy says. 
"This pretty much came out of the gate in first place, and that's a pretty impressive feat."

Traditional physics-based hurricane models use real-time atmospheric data, like temperature, humidity, pressure and wind shear, as measured by satellites and aircraft.
Then they use complicated equations to predict what path a storm might travel and how strong it could get.

An AI model operates very differently: it relies more on history.
It identifies patterns by analyzing thousands of past storms along with atmospheric data.

"The AI models don't really know anything about the atmosphere other than the current picture," Lowry says.
"Beyond that, it's not leaning on the governing equations of the atmosphere, the physics, to make predictions."

Most of the people designing and developing these models aren't even meteorologists, Lowry notes: "They're software engineers, and they're developing neural networks."

A "neural network" is a set of computer algorithms modeled on the human brain and trained to find patterns in massive amounts of data.
As a result, the models can seem like a "black box," Lowry says: "We don't know why they might get a forecast right. We also don't know why they might get a forecast wrong."

It can be unsettling for meteorologists to depend on a system they don't totally understand – especially during storms when millions of people might be relying on their forecasts.
"It makes us a little uncomfortable, because we like to know why you're getting the right answer," McNoldy says. 
"And I feel like we don't – or at least I don't know why."

Not all AI models have performed well, though.
There are lots of unproven weather forecasting AI models out there, Lowry says.

The two that have so far proven to be the most accurate, despite some pitfalls, are the models developed by Google DeepMind and by the U.K.-based European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF).



People retrieve belongings from a collapsed boat house in the aftermath of Hurricane Isaias in Destin, Fla., Saturday, Oct. 10, 2026. An AI model from Google Deepmind beat out traditional physics-based models at predicting the path of the storm, though it didn't do as well in forecasting the storm's strength.
Gerald Herbert/AP

Relying on a "blend" of models

Forecasters at the National Hurricane Center use several proven models – both AI and traditional – when putting together their official forecasts.

"Every storm has different forecast challenges," says NHC Director Michael Brennan.
"That's why we take that consensus approach and use that blend of the best models."

And it's still humans who have to interpret the results of those models before deciding what to tell the public.

The NHC provides updates every six hours during active hurricanes.
The models by themselves can sometimes show drastic changes from one update to the next. Forecasters have to translate those shifting predictions into clear guidance that people can act on.

"That's one thing that the human forecaster provides a lot of, is continuity," Brennan says.
"We're using our expertise and our understanding to translate that hurricane forecast into the hazard space, and that's what people really need to pay attention to."

Scientists expect rapid advances

The Google DeepMind model still needs some work, Brennan says.
While it topped other models in tracking the path of Isaias, it didn't do as well as the NHC's blended forecast in determining the intensity, or strength, of the storm.

Brennan's team gives regular feedback to Google DeepMind to help improve the model.
Google didn't respond to questions from NPR for this story.

The "future of forecasting has always been changing," Brennan says. 
"It's never just one thing that's driving those improvements."

It wasn't that long ago when forecasters couldn't predict how strong a storm would be even within a couple of days, he notes.
That changed, because of advances in prediction models and better data collected by satellites and planes.
"Errors are about half of what they were, say, at the time of [Hurricane] Katrina, in terms of intensity forecasting," Brennan says.

The exciting thing about AI, says meteorologist Michael Lowry, is how quickly it's improving.
AI updates take only months or even weeks, unlike traditional models, which are updated annually at best.
"They are making advancements in skill and hurricane predictions over the course of a year that would have taken us 10 years, a decade or more, to make," Lowry says.

But even with AI coming in fast and strong, Lowry says he's not worried about artificial intelligence replacing people.
"For me, I don't feel some sort of existential crisis with AI," Lowry says. 
"If anything, I think it is a boon for our business."

Links :

Wednesday, October 28, 2026

Spain layer update in the GeoGarage platform

3 new nautical charts added
see GeoGarage news

Who do you call in the Mediterranean?

. Mid Mediterranean map

From Pulse by Antonio Martorell Dominguez


The question nobody could answer

It started in the Indian Ocean.
In every maritime security meeting I attended during my time with EUNAVFOR, with shipping companies on one side of the table and navies, agencies and rescue centers on the other, the same question came up: if something happens to one of our ships in this area, who exactly do we call?

Nobody was quite sure, and the answers did not agree.

The network already existed.
Most people in the room knew the centers, the agencies and the operations.
What nobody had was their details in one place: the numbers were scattered across documents and websites, hard to find, and sometimes out of date.

So we put order on it, for that ocean first: we identified every stakeholder, established who does what, checked one way to reach each of them, and put all of it on one map where anyone could find it in seconds.

Then we saw the same thing in every sea we looked at: the same question, the same scattered and outdated numbers, and nowhere more than in the Mediterranean, with more agencies than any sea we knew.

Then we saw that the Indian Ocean was no exception.
The same question, and the same scattered and outdated numbers, came up in every sea we looked at, and nowhere more than in the Mediterranean, with more agencies than any sea we knew.
So we kept going, and this time we built a team for it: David Parla Duque on the design and the platform, Hector Salvador, who had worked on the Indian Ocean map with us, and Caroline Abu Sa'da with the Foundation for Humanitarian Action at Sea (FHAS), who opened the rescue center network to us.

Where it started

The first map was the Western Indian Ocean Maritime Emergency Contact Map.
David Parla Duque and I built it together, under the organizations we each worked for at the time; it was published on the MSCIO website and sponsored by MSCIO.

One map: every rescue center, every reporting center with the primary one marked, the regional fusion centers, the naval presence and its areas, with a checked number for each.

The problem was bigger than one operation or one ocean, so we decided to go further: map every sea, one region at a time, as an independent effort.
That decision is the Abyssal Initiative.
The Indian Ocean map came with it, and the Mediterranean was the first map built under its name.

Where it started: the Western Indian Ocean Maritime Emergency Contact Map, Edition 1, July 2025.
The Mediterranean, with FHAS


The Mediterranean took about a year and three maps, Western, Mid and Eastern, from Gibraltar to the Black Sea.
We built it with Foundation for Humanitarian Action at Sea, whose co-founder and director, Caroline Abu Sa'da, brought the rescue center network and current contacts we could not have reached alone.

The maps carry:
  • Every rescue center, with its phone number, its email, and the languages its staff speak, so you know before you dial.
  • The international contacts in their own box: NATO Shipping Centre, UKMTO and Frontex on every map, plus EUNAVFOR MED IRINI and the Italian and Maltese coast guards on the Mid map.
  • Civil organizations that can pass on a distress call when no official line answers.
  • The area of every naval and agency operation, drawn on the map: EUNAVFOR MED IRINI, Mediterraneo Sicuro, NATO Noble Shield and Sea Guardian, and the Frontex operations.

 
The Eastern Mediterranean map

Put it in the hands of an officer of the watch with a security incident developing.
The officer sees which rescue region the ship is in and the center that owns it, which operation areas the ship is inside, and the reporting centers on their own lines.

Do the numbers work?

We did our best to make sure they do.
Together with FHAS, we checked every contact against official sources and then with the center itself: a call to confirm the number, the email and the languages.

Even so, the maps will have mistakes. Numbers change, people move, and a line that was right in September may be wrong by December.
That is why the network matters more than the paper: the people who use the maps are the ones who will keep them right.
If you see an error, tell us, and we will check it with the center and fix it.

The map goes digital

We wanted the maps to be easy to use, so we built a digital version as well: the Abyssal SAR Map.
It is free, and it does more than paper can.
Both regions sit on one globe.
You can filter by rescue regions, centers or operations, search for a center by name, click on it to get the number and the languages, and switch on the operations layer to see every area drawn.

We still recommend printing the maps and keeping them on the bridge.
Connections at sea are not always good, and the day you need a number may be the day the screen is blank.
The digital map is for everyone else, and for the bridge when the connection holds.

This is not only for seafarers.
Anyone who works in maritime safety, security or shipping, ashore or at sea, can use it alongside the tools they already have.
On every screen there is a button to report a correction.

The platform is the work of David Parla Duque and his team, and it shows.
They keep improving it, and the website with it, so what you see today will be better next month.

 
The Abyssal SAR Map: both regions on one globe.

Example: Tunis MRCC, with its contact details

Example of the operations layer: Frontex Themis drawn on the map, with its contact at the top of the screen.

Example of the operations layer: Frontex Themis drawn on the map, with its contact at the top of the screen.

Who keeps it current


People do. The Foundation for Humanitarian Action at Sea, the Maritime Search and Rescue Council, the NATO Shipping Centre, EUCRIMARIO are part of this network.
Each of them does a great deal for the wellbeing of seafarers.

Since the launch, rescue coordination centers and people with deep local knowledge have written to us on their own to correct a line or add one.

So this is a thank you.
To Caroline and the FHAS, to the partners, to the centers that picked up the phone, and to everyone who has written in with a correction or feedback.
This is a joint effort, the result belongs to all of us, and it is for everyone working to make the sea safer.
The network is what makes the maps worth printing.

Next: the Pacific

Next is the Pacific, and Latin America follows.
We will report the whole process, step by step, on the Abyssal Initiative page as the map is built, so anyone who wants to follow it or contribute can do so from the first draft.

Thank you to everyone who is contributing and to everyone who wants to be part of this network.

No vessel sails alone.

Tuesday, October 27, 2026

Oil spills wreak havoc on the bottom of the ocean, even a decade later


Photo: Getty Images

From Wired by Bob Berwyn
THIS STORY ORIGINALLY appeared on Inside Climate News and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

While oil is known to float, new research finds that over time it can permeate even extremely deep marine habitats, with animal populations declining by as much as 80 percent.


ACROSS HUNDREDS OF miles of the northern Gulf of Mexico, a deepwater ecosystemcollapsed after the massive 2011 Deepwater Horizon oil and gas spill, and recovery is uncertain, new research concludes.

The study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that animal populations—including octopus, krill, squid, and shrimp—declined by 60 to 85 percent in the three and a half years after the spill, with few signs of recovery since.
Krill and lanternfish, both foundational species in the Gulf’s food web, were among the hardest hit.
The findings also suggest that the die-off is causing genetic bottlenecks that could further hinder ecosystem recovery.

The researchers identified it as the “fastest and most severe faunal decline reported for Earth’s largest ecosystem type” ever documented.
The widespread die-off of marine organisms may also reduce the ocean’s ability to transport carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to the deep sea.
After ruling out other factors, such as water temperature and oxygen levels, the researchers identified the Deepwater Horizon blowout as “the most parsimonious explanation” for the ecosystem’s collapse.

Comprehensive natural resource damage assessments and restoration efforts involving federal, state, and tribal trustees are ongoing.
In 2016, BP agreed to a $20.8 billion settlement, including up to $8.8 billion for environmental restoration.

The 4.9 million barrels of oil that spewed out of BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling operation after the rig exploded in 2011 spread widely through the Gulf of Mexico, and a new study documents the damage and limited recovery to species in remote deep-water habitats.
Credit: NOAA
 
Remote ocean depths and habitats miles below the surface may seem buffered from the impacts of human activity, the authors wrote, but their findings suggest an industrial disaster pushed part of it into a diminished state with “limited resilience to facilitate recovery.” They said their findings also show that proposed industrial deep-sea mining could damage the ecosystem before baseline conditions are assessed.

A transoceanic drilling rig, operating for BP about 50 miles southeast of the Mississippi Delta, exploded on April 20, 2010.
The explosion and fire killed 11 people and triggered the largest accidental marine oil spill in history.

Oil and gas spewed uncontrollably from the broken well nearly a mile deep for 87 days, ejecting 4.9 million barrels of oil at a rate of about 400 tanker trucks per day, enough to fill up 1.2 million cars.
The spill also released about 7.7 billion cubic feet of fossil gas into the deep sea at a rate of 88 million cubic feet per day, enough to supply about 820,000 US homes.
State and federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, also authorized BP to apply 1.84 million gallons of chemical dispersants to try to reduce the impacts.

Some of the oil and gas dissipated and was transported out of the deep Gulf of Mexico region.
Some coated barrier islands and devastated coastal wetlands and shellfish habitat, and some settled onto the ocean floor, where currents can stir it back into the water.
But enough hydrocarbon and chemical-dispersant remnants stayed suspended long enough to do almost immeasurable harm.

A series of studies since the spill have shown a wide range of toxic effects on marine organisms, from impaired development and reproduction to increased mortality and lasting health problems in dolphins and whales.
The new paper suggests that lingering pollutants may interfere with some species’ ability to find mates in the dark by disrupting their highly developed sense of smell.

The impacts continue to ripple through the ecosystem, said lead author Tracey Sutton, a professor of marine and environmental sciences at Nova Southeastern University in Florida.
A 2024 study found an 80 percent decline in deep-diving toothed whales, he said.

“We used to have a big resident population of sperm whales right off the Mississippi River, but we haven’t seen a sperm whale in 10 years,” he said.
Large predators need big, occasional dense patches of prey, and those have disappeared, he added.

Scientists have developed accurate ways to count fish.
For this study, they started with a baseline from nine months of sampling in 2011 and compared it with nine subsequent surveys between 2015 and 2023.
The researchers sampled deep-pelagic habitat along a large grid around the spill site from about 650 feet below the surface to about a mile down.
The deep-pelagic zone accounts for about 90 percent of the Gulf’s total volume.

Across a grid of stations, scientists on slippery decks lowered and hoisted nets that open and close at different depths, with experts from different species groups to identify the catch.
They sampled around noon and midnight to account for species that migrate vertically each day.
Ship-mounted scientific echosounders provided an independent check, measuring sound reflected by marine life in the water column.

The research is “comprehensive and carefully composed,” marine biologist Bruce Robison, a senior scientist at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, said via email.
“There is no other study that I know of with such an incredible number of net samples,” added Robison, who did not participate in the new study.

The research focuses on species that are not commercially fished and shows for the first time that human impacts can deplete marine life even in very deep ocean water, he said.

“It is important for the public to understand just how disastrous this oil spill was,” Robison said.
“The Gulf has not recovered, and it’s been over 15 years.”
Robison said other activities, such as deep-sea mining, could also have severe negative consequences for deepwater pelagic ecosystems by discharging wastewater containing metals or lubricants.

Three lines of evidence—net hauls, acoustic surveys, and genetic sampling—corroborate each other, which is “unusually strong evidence to support his conclusions,” said Jeffrey Drazen, a marine ecologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, who did not participate in the new study.

The study examines all possible causes of the decline and shows only one aligns with the scientific evidence, he said.

“Through logical elimination,” he said, “and without actually pointing a finger, they leave no doubt that the oil spill is the cause of the decline.”

Monday, October 26, 2026

Germany launches cleanup to remove dumped munitions from WWI and WWII

Munitions on the seabed just off Lubeck, Germany (GEOMAR)

From The Maritime Executive

Germany has embarked on an immediate project to recover tons of munitions that were scattered on the floor of the North and Baltic seas at the end of World Wars I and II.
The discarded bombs and shells are becoming a threat to the marine environment due to the release of toxic chemicals.

More than 1.5 million tons of ordnance were intentionally dumped in German waters at the end of WWII, with around 300,000 tons of unexploded ordnance lying in the German Baltic Sea and the rest in the German North Sea.

A study by the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel last year found that the ordnance was increasingly becoming a risk to the marine environment owing to corrosion and the release of toxic chemicals.
Ammunition-related chemicals were detected in water samples collected from the Baltic Sea, with concentrations in some samples approaching critical toxicological thresholds.
(The concentrations in most samples were well below all relevant limits for health and safety, including drinking water limits.)

As corrosion progresses, contamination is expected to increase, raising the risk to the environment.
The threat is exacerbated by rising temperatures and increased storm activity due to climate change, which further accelerate the release of chemicals.

Following a push for the dumped ordnance to be classified as “historical contaminants of emerging concern,” the German federal government has launched a project to remove the munitions.
As an immediate task, the government has contracted for the construction and operation of a platform that will be used to remove dumped ordnance.

As part of the project, the research vessel Heincke has also been deployed on a two-week expedition to visit several dumping sites in the German Bight to map hidden munitions under the sand and prepare a pilot recovery operation.
The research team aboard the 55-meter vessel, which is operated by the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), will also investigate how chemicals released by the munitions are affecting marine life by sampling water and sediments around wrecks lying on the seabed, most of which have been mapped and documented.

During the expedition, the team intends to survey the wreck of SMS Mainz, a German World War I light cruiser that sank in the North Sea in August 1914 during the Battle of Heligoland Bight and is among the wrecks that have already been the subject of research.
The team will also visit the wreck of the battle cruiser Blücher.
For both wrecks, the researchers will analyze their condition, and specifically the threat their munitions pose to the marine environment.

“After over 100 years on the sea floor, there is a heightened risk that the wrecks will collapse.
That is why it’s important to monitor their condition.
In addition, with increasing corrosion, toxic and carcinogenic explosives are released from the remaining munitions.
These pollutants pose a threat to marine life, food safety and human health,” said Matthias Brenner, leader of the REMARCO project.
 
Links :