2016 Bagnell Dam Operations Summary

Multi-Year Level and Flow Averages

Here are the graphs for average lake levels, Osage River levels, and flow rates since 2010. As we can see, 2015 was an exceptional year for lake levels due to flooding.  Keep in mind, these are averages for the entire year as numbers for the summer months would be almost identical from year to year since Ameren does a pretty good job of keeping the lake at full pool (659-660ft) from May 31 through September 1st.

Next, for the Osage River as measured about a mile below the dam, again per annum.

Finally, the average flow rate per annum. Averaging about 10,500cfs a day is considered sustainable.

New 5 Year Moving Average Lake Level Chart (2013-2017)

Here's the average lake level chart for the past five years (averaged, 2013-2017) and will be used this year for all monthly reporting. Notice you can still see the impact of flooding in July and December (two little bumps in the graph) of 2015. Those flooding events left a scar on the data we'll be seeing for a few more years. For those wondering why the lake predominantly stays above the ideal level, simply remember the purpose of the lake, at least from Ameren's point of view, and that is to generate electricity. This is best accomplished when the lake is basically as full as it can be, maximising what is called "head height".  In Bagnell Dam's case head height averages about 100 feet throughout the year.

The five year average levels still conform nicely to the ideal guide (grey), with largest deviation coming from the draw down period in late winter early spring.  It is apparent that Ameren has no real need to strictly adhere to the lowest ideal levels for the draw down, but one of these years they're going to exercise their right and reach lower guide minimums (yellow), nearly four feet lower than the lake has seen in a long time, and shock the hell out of a lot people.

Here's the updated summary data table.

December 2016 Lake Levels and Flow Rates

Another year comes to a close and the final monthly report for 2016.  Please forgive the slight delay in posting due to the holidays.  Here's hoping for a great 2017. But let's be honest, besting 2016 shouldn't be too hard.

Levels started in sync with the 5 year moving average until mid-month when it appears Ameren decided on getting an early start to the winter draw down, dropping the lake nearly a foot below the average for this time of year. The upward spike in the moving average (grey line) around Christmas is due to last years flooding skewing the numbers.  This anomaly is something we'll see for another four years in the data, barring a record low during that same period in the coming years to offset it.

Hopefully, I'll get all of that fun end of year statistics done and posted by the end of the week!

Record Setting Wave

"It's like an ocean out there!", I've heard many say on Lake of the Ozarks on a busy weekend. Hell, I've even said it, but it is obviously an exaggeration. When it comes to big waves, the Lake of the Ozarks doesn't come close to what awaits a sailor out on the open ocean.

There are lots of headlines today over an announcement by the World Meteorological Organization of a record wave height measured by a sensor buoy.  It was 19 meters (62.3ft) high, and not just some "rogue wave".  More interestingly, everyone is reporting this as if it just happened, when in fact the data point was collected on April 2, 2013.

Buoy Location 59°07.3'N, 11°42.5'W

The record measurement is called: "Highest Significant Wave Height as measured by a Buoy", but what does "highest significant wave height" actually refer too?
In this instance, "Significant wave height recorded is four times the RMS value of the water level above the average level of the water surface measured over a 17½ minute period. The factor of 4 applied to the RMS value is because the waves are trochoidal in nature. (Waves at sea, especially those growing under the influence of the wind, tend to be short-crested, i.e. the wave crests project further above the mean level than the troughs are below it.) The ‘average’ wave period, again over a 17½ minute sample, is the average of the periods over 7 successive 2½ minute samples (each determined from the number of wave cycles in the sample)." - WMO

Okay, that's a lot to unpack, but basically it means we're not talking about a single wave calculation. For all the non-math nerds, what this essentially says is that the number represents a sampling of waves over a period of time, and the "root mean squared" (RMS is a calculation typically used to find peak magnitudes for a set of numbers) value of those wave heights was multiplied by a factor of 4 to account for the shape of the waves (wind driven in this case) and the buoy's heave (up and down) sensor sampling rate.  So what we're talking about is not a 19 meter rogue wave, but a brief series of waves that statistically calculate to be of that average height.
Those are monster waves. I've been in 40ft seas in the Pacific on a 180ft Buoy Tender and can say it was an amazing, if somewhat frightening experience. Not one I'd like to repeat.

November 2016 Lake Levels and Flow Rates

A fairly uninteresting plot, as it usually is this time of year.  Lake levels remained slightly above the 5 year moving average.  Power generation was light due to unseasonably warm weather and a lack of precipitation.

Next month, it's end of year statistics!

2016 Camden County General Election Results - President

Data provided by www.camdenmo.org

To say Trump had local support would be an understatement. With a 78% voter turnout, a 75% majority isn't a landslide, it is a landslide induced tsunami, politically speaking.