Naming blizzards is a good idea. Yesterday some website referred to the

[raccoon]

current winter storm as "Draco." I thought, and I'm sure others did, including one Du'er who posted here, that somebody was naming blizzards the way we name hurricanes.

This is a good idea, too. Yall from cold states, think of the advantages. Instead of saying, "Remember the blizzard we had back in ought-five? We were without power for X days, had X inches of snow...",
you can say, "Remember Hortense? We were without power for X days, had X inches of snow..."

You might want to say, "Blizzard Hortense," for clarity. I leave it up to you in the cold states.

[Renew Deal]

1. It's Weather Channel hype that is not supported by NOAA

TV weathercasters criticize unilateral action by The Weather Channel on storm naming


A day after The Weather Channel (TWC) announced plans to name winter storms, a number of broadcast meteorologists are expressing significant concerns about the initiatve.

Most don’t have a conceptual problem with the act of naming storms, but TWC’s failure to coordinate with the rest of the meteorological community on the initiative is being viewed by many as self-serving and not in the interest of effective weather communication.

Andrew Freiden, a broadcast meteorologist in Richmond, put it bluntly: “Weather Channel to name Winter Storms! First Thought: “Who died and made them King?!”

Going quite a bit deeper, Nate Johnson, a broadcast meteorologist in Raleigh, thoroughly breaks down the flaws in TWC’s failure to engage partners in this effort on the blog Digital Meteorologist:

In making this change unilaterally, The Weather Channel has essentially tossed effective risk communication out the window and their partners in the National Weather Service and other corners of the “weather community” under the bus. One of the tenets of good risk and emergency communication is that communicators speak with “one voice”. That doesn’t mean everyone says the same thing; rather, it means those involved should speak in harmony with others. ... By setting their own standards and making their own categorizations of winter storms behind closed doors, away from peer review and scientific scrutiny, they are jumping out and expecting the rest of the weather community to follow along...In other words, they’re telling the NWS, local TV stations, and local officials that “we will name the storms, and the rest of you should speak our language or you’ll be the one causing confusion.”
<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/tv-weathercasters-criticize-unilateral-action-by-the-weather-channel-on-storm-naming/2012/10/03/2b975a92-0d64-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_blog.html