5
$\begingroup$

If there were a perpetual storm, like a hurricane, but in the middle of a continent, what would be the ecological effects?

The storm is big enough that it would take 20 days for someone to walk from the outside edge to the eye, but I'm not sure of the dimensions.

For purposes of this question, please accept the storm as a given and all the strange pressure systems that implies.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ What has magic to do with the science based consequences of a storm? $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch
    Feb 18 at 18:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You seem to have three mutually exclusive tags for one question, that may be a record. You'd need to explain to make it make sense, please review the help center, particularly the on topic questions part. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 18:36
  • $\begingroup$ Whilst you have an interesting question, please edit it to include a description of worldbuilding context, as per the help center, and sort-out the tags. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 19:48
  • $\begingroup$ A hurricane would not allow passage by foot. Another interpretation to the present answers, it that if it can be traversed (half way) in 20 days, on foot, then it's not that bad. The question has elicited inconsistent answers. Please edit to clarify what you want by way of an answer. Preferably in future you should try to be more definitive in your purpose. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 22:21
  • $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch. You're right, thank you for pointing that out! I have reapplied tags that I believe better suit the question. $\endgroup$
    – Wh1tl0w
    Feb 19 at 4:42
9
$\begingroup$

Featureless mud.

This question is a bit confusing but it is an interesting premise if I'm interpreting it correctly. (If I'm not - say so and I'll edit). Something magical is generating and maintaining a hurricane in the middle of a continent, what is it doing to the environment?

The answer depends how long its lasted, what was there before, and rough wind speeds (hurricanes have strength levels that determine what structures survive), but putting this in central Australia (my continent), slowing it down enough that you can walk through it without blowing you away unconditionally, and leaving it going for a few years....

We get a featureless muddy swamp, totally uniform and boring..

Most vegetation will survive a normal low speed hurricane, but not an eternal one. The reduced light and the flooding for weeks will start to kill everything. Eventually itll die and be uprooted and blow away or be washed away. The removal of plant life will loosen the soil and turn all the ground to loose particles. Large rocks will be loosened and fall. Cliffs will collapse, etc.

The constant raining will turn that into mud, which will flow in waves around the eye in a spiral motion turning hills to mud and filling in valleys with them. Eventually you'll get a featureles mud pit

The eye may be pretty nice, as your magic hurricane maker suggest the eye is fixed in place, but if your journey there is fixed at 20 days, its 20 days of tracking through featureless mud and brown mist as your occasionally knocked into the mud by the odd gust. Sounds fun.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If the question is confusing you should not answer it, rather ask for clarifications. Now you have locked the OP into your interpretation. $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch
    Feb 18 at 19:09
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ From my experience with hurricanes, this is what I'd expect the land to be like under a perpetual hurricane. $\endgroup$
    – NomadMaker
    Feb 19 at 4:05
7
$\begingroup$

Hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes, and such are caused by a rising column of heat: hot air rises, creating a low pressure area, and the low pressure suck in colder air from nearby, heating it up and causing it to rise as well. For a constant hurricane you would need a constant and powerful source of heat to keep the process running. Remember, even long-term volcanic eruptions (as happen in Hawaii) don't produce enough of an updraft to create permanent cyclones. Tornadoes tend to be more focused and limited because soil releases heat much more quickly than water, leading to strong, localized updrafts. Water releases heat slower, so hurricanes build up more slowly over longer periods of time, and can thus develop much more powerful overall forces.

Part of the ecological issue you'll need to figure out is how 'wet' the cyclone is. 'Wet' cyclones (like hurricanes) tend to produce copious amounts of rain; 'dry' cyclones (tornadoes) are more prone to thunder and lightning. If your cyclone in on the dry side, you might find something like coastal California bluffs: scrub grasses and dwarf trees adapted to high winds, and either fire resistant or adapted to seasonal wildfires. If it's more on the wet side, you may see something like the Florida Everglades: mangrove swamps and marshland with tough reeds. The farther north the storm reaches, the more tundra-like the conditions will be; typically forests don't do well in high-wind conditions. And again, 'wetter' storms would make that tundra glaciated or deep snow-pack, while 'drier' storms might produce a region similar to Siberia.

Geography is going to play a large role: the presence and position of mountains, plains, and large bodies of water will change the character and effects of the storm significantly. But as long as enough sunlight makes it through the clouds and dust to maintain photosynthesis, the ecology shouldn't be too different than places we already know that consistently get high winds.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch.: Sigh... If you disagree with my answer, please offer a useful critique or write your own (different) answer. Your mere opinion that I've obfuscated something is not worth acting on unless you offer something more. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 20:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch.: "Pacific/Atlantic" is not 'fact' or 'evidence'. It's not even a valid proposition or claim to such; it is merely the juxtaposition of two words with no sense or context. Thus it is still your mere opinion that I've 'obfuscated'. When you make a valid, meaningful critique, then you get the time of day. If you don't, you don't. Badger me further without anything substantive, and I'll flag your comments as rude. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 21:24
  • $\begingroup$ I apologize, and withdraw my comments (and downvote), my subsequent research (prompted by your comments) contradicts my previous learning. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 21:35
  • $\begingroup$ Alright, the network won't let me. As soon as (according to the drop-down) you make any edit, I'll be able to up-vote the answer. Consider it done. Curious that I might have become so misinformed - it happens even to the worst of us. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 21:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch.: I sincerely doubt you're the worst of us; likely the opposite. But it happens to those people, too... 😀 I'll make some trivial edit just to free up that weirdness. $\endgroup$ Feb 18 at 22:04
2
$\begingroup$

I'm assuming a perpetual storm also has perpetual rain.

Given time, the rain will wash away all the soil. The soil will collect at the lowest topographical point whether it be within the storm zone or outside it.

What will be left behind will be exposed bedrock. Depending on the wind speeds, depressions in the bedrock might become rock pools. Some form of bacterial life, mold, algae or slime might be able to survive under such conditions.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.