I can think of other examples - but the message I am trying
to convey
is that it should be the impact rather than the actual
meteorological
values that is important - and the warning system reflects
this.

I think we're agreed.

I agree that part of the assessment of a warning should be the
extent to which the expected weather deviates from the average,
or norm, for the area affected. However I am not sure that the
number of people affected should be any part of the assessment
undertaken by the MetO. For each of the affected individuals,
the effect is every bit as great regardless of how many others
are in the same plight.

One would have thought that the emergency services, generally
speaking, are aware of roughly how many people live where, and
hence are capable of assessing for themselves the likely demands
on them resulting from a weather event. But perhaps I assume too
much.

None of which addresses my actual question (in the 'What
triggers a custard warning?' thread here), which is why a
forecast wind event triggered a warning starting at the time
when the wind rose above 12 mph gusting 24, but a forecast
***for the same area*** two days later of 24 mph gusting 46 did
not.

Anne