Regional Climate Trends and Scenarios for the U.S. National Climate Assessment Part 4. Climate of the U.S. Great Plains

This document is one of series of regional climate descriptions designed to provide input that can be used in the development of the National Climate Assessment (NCA). As part of a sustained assessment approach, it is intended that these documents will be updated as new and well-vetted model results are available and as new climate scenario needs become clear. It is also hoped that these documents (and associated data and resources) are of direct benefit to decision makers and communities seeking to use this information in developing adaptation plans. There are nine reports in this series, one each for eight regions defined by the NCA, and one for the contiguous U.S. The eight NCA regions are the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Great Plains, Northwest, Southwest, Alaska, and Hawai‘i/Pacific Islands. These documents include a description of the observed historical climate conditions for each region and a set of climate scenarios as plausible futures – these components are described in more detail below. While the datasets and simulations in these regional climate documents are not, by themselves, new, (they have been previously published in various sources), these documents represent a more complete and targeted synthesis of historical and plausible future climate conditions around the specific regions of the NCA. There are two components of these descriptions. One component is a description of the historical climate conditions in the region. The other component is a description of the climate conditions associated with two future pathways of greenhouse gas emissions

From Too Much to Too Little: How the central U.S. drought of 2012 evolved out of one of the most devastating floods on record in 2011

Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction....................................................................... 1 Section 2: Regional Drought Perspective................................. 2 Section 3: State Drought Perspectives........................................ 3 Section 3.1: Colorado........................................................................... 20 Section 3.2: Illinois.................................................................. 25 Section 3.3: Indiana................................................. 29 Section 3.4: Iowa...................... 36 Section 3.5: Kansas............................................................... 42 Section 3.6: Kentucky............................................................................ 46 Section 3.7: Michigan.............................. 52 Section 3.8: Minnesota............................................................ 58 Section 3.9: Missouri..................................................... 63 Section 3.10: Nebraska................................................. 67 Section 3.11: North Dakota............................................ 73 Section 3.12: Ohio................................................... 79 Section 3.13: South Dakota..................................... 85 Section 3.14: Wyoming........................................... 96 Section 4: Conclusions.............................................................. 9

Heurísticas para balanceamento de carga de máquinas em infraestruturas de nuvem.

Em ambientes de Computação na Nuvem, principalmente os que utilizam o modelo de infraestrutura como um serviço, a característica de elasticidade no provisionamento de recursos traz consigo a necessidade de gerenciar os recursos físicos de forma apropriada para preservar a qualidade de serviço aos seus usuários, e o bom desempenho da infraestrutura. Este trabalho propõe heurísticas que são capazes de auxiliar no balanceamento de carga dos servidores em uma infraestrutura de nuvem, propondo migrações para diminuir a sobrecarga nos servidores que foram identificados como sobrecarregados,visto que, como passar do tempo há uma variação natural na quantidade de recursos em uso. Esta variação é uma consequência da remoção ou adição de aplicações, ou até mesmo de tentativas de melhoramento do desempenho das aplicações através do provisionamento vertical. Uma ferramenta foi implementada para fazer uso dos algoritmos das heurísticas e assim auxiliar nos experimentos para a validação das mesmas. As métricas utilizadas vem diretamente de servidores heterogêneos da nuvem OpenStack do Laboratório de Sistemas Distribuídos. Os resultados obtidos mostram que além da diminuição no consumo de CPU dos servidores dos quais que estavam sobrecarregados, também é possível melhorar o desempenho destes servidores em alguns casos.In CloudComputingenvironments,especiallythoseusingtheinfrastructureasaservice model, theelasticitycharacteristicinresourceprovisioningcomeswiththeneedtomanage resources sothequalityofservicecancontinuetobeguaranteedtousersandalsoto maintain agoodperformanceoftheinfrastructure.Thisworkproposesheuristicsthat are abletoassistintheloadbalancingoftheserversinaCloudinfrastructure,proposing migrations toreducetheoverheadintheserversthatwereidentifiedasoverloaded,since with thepassageoftimethereisanaturalvariationintheamountofresourcesinuse.This variationinaconsequenceofremovaloradditionofapplicationsandevenoftheusageof verticalscalingtoimproveapplication’sperformance.Atoolwasimplementedtomake use oftheheuristicalgorithmsandthustoaidintheexperimentsandtheirvalidation,the metrics usedcomedirectlyfromheterogeneousserversoftheOpenStackCloudofthe DistributedSystemsLaboratory.TheresultsshowthatinadditiontothedecreaseinCPU consumption ofserversthatwereoverloaded,itisalsopossibletoimprovetheperformance of theseserversinsomecases

Regional Climate Trends and Scenarios for the U.S. National Climate Assessment Part 4. Climate of the U.S. Great Plains

This document is one of series of regional climate descriptions designed to provide input that can be used in the development of the National Climate Assessment (NCA). As part of a sustained assessment approach, it is intended that these documents will be updated as new and well-vetted model results are available and as new climate scenario needs become clear. It is also hoped that these documents (and associated data and resources) are of direct benefit to decision makers and communities seeking to use this information in developing adaptation plans. There are nine reports in this series, one each for eight regions defined by the NCA, and one for the contiguous U.S. The eight NCA regions are the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Great Plains, Northwest, Southwest, Alaska, and Hawai‘i/Pacific Islands. These documents include a description of the observed historical climate conditions for each region and a set of climate scenarios as plausible futures – these components are described in more detail below. While the datasets and simulations in these regional climate documents are not, by themselves, new, (they have been previously published in various sources), these documents represent a more complete and targeted synthesis of historical and plausible future climate conditions around the specific regions of the NCA. There are two components of these descriptions. One component is a description of the historical climate conditions in the region. The other component is a description of the climate conditions associated with two future pathways of greenhouse gas emissions

From Too Much to Too Little: How the central U.S. drought of 2012 evolved out of one of the most devastating floods on record in 2011

Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction....................................................................... 1 Section 2: Regional Drought Perspective................................. 2 Section 3: State Drought Perspectives........................................ 3 Section 3.1: Colorado........................................................................... 20 Section 3.2: Illinois.................................................................. 25 Section 3.3: Indiana................................................. 29 Section 3.4: Iowa...................... 36 Section 3.5: Kansas............................................................... 42 Section 3.6: Kentucky............................................................................ 46 Section 3.7: Michigan.............................. 52 Section 3.8: Minnesota............................................................ 58 Section 3.9: Missouri..................................................... 63 Section 3.10: Nebraska................................................. 67 Section 3.11: North Dakota............................................ 73 Section 3.12: Ohio................................................... 79 Section 3.13: South Dakota..................................... 85 Section 3.14: Wyoming........................................... 96 Section 4: Conclusions.............................................................. 9