I ran almost this exact topic as what's called a "style case" at a university debating tournament a year or two ago. It was one of my favourite things of life.<p>(A "style case" is one where the facts or logical reasoning behind an argument are secondary to how funny and entertaining your arguments and persuasive efforts are.)<p>According to what we concluded in that round, we <i>need</i> to start destroying tropical cyclones, and any other of Mother Nature's "attacks" on us, in order to better condition her and bend her to our will. It's Psychology 101, folks.<p>Apparently the NOAA disagrees. If this were the McCarthy era, I'd call them communists and be done with it.
Why is it every two days someone is conspiring a new way to take my waves? In summertime, east coast surfers ONLY get to surf hurricanes. We love hurricanes. Its the only time we get overhead waves, glassy smooth water surface and offshore winds.
This NOAA FAQ covers the infeasibility of doing this, but even if it were possible, via nuclear detonation or otherwise, there is still the conversation of whether it is wise to do so even if we could. What lasting effects this might have upon the climate?<p>As I've understood, the hurricanes that form every year are actually part of a process of advecting heat energy from the surface tropical regions to the higher altitudes and higher latitudes. I remember seeing a ocean temperature analysis just before and after Hurricane Rita traveled across the Gulf of Mexico, and the drop in ocean temperature was quite noticeable. Similar drops, to a lesser degree, can be observed with all tropical storms.<p>This process is really important to keeping temperatures around the planet more balanced that they would be otherwise. It also keeps the temperature of tropical oceans somewhat in check, so they don't spawn even more energetic cyclones later on. If we start trying to control this, there is the risk that we will screw ourselves by making tropical storms less frequent but much more severe.
Reading the article raises an old question: When will we be able to retrieve the power from a hurricane? Let the thunderstorm occur and using the [YET-TO-INVENT]-technique, to power our civilization for... let's say a year.
<sarcasm>Or better yet, why don't we try to destroy our nuclear arsenal by dropping it in cyclones? Two birds, one stone.</sarcasm><p>Now let's see. First, there is a question of what effect it would have. How powerful should a nuke be in order to actually destroy a medium sized hurricane, and how will it affect the atmosphere and biosphere and the earth surface near the epicenter? Second, what should we do with the nuclear fallout? I am sure there are more questions to ask.
Their "scientific" explanation is nonsense. Their compare the "energy" of the hurricane system with that of a detonation. Then they say you could change the Category of a hurricane by just increasing the ambient pressure.<p>Angular momentum is conserved. If you create a detonation in the middle of a spinning storm, you'll get the usual explosion effect (fast) overlaid on the spinning storm (relatively slow). That's even more nasty than either effect on its own.