Winter 2011-2012

[40/70 Benchmark]

I'll bet Scooter is pretty cautious with regard to winter

[CoastalWx]

I'll bet Scooter is pretty cautious with regard to winter

I think I share the same thought as Will wrt how we are almost "due" for a clunker. I hate saying we are due, but I guess what I'm saying is that I wouldn't be shocked if it happened.

However, there are some signs (like the QBO and weak ENSO) that seem to be on our side, and I can't really find a reason to be discouraged just yet. As far as the NAO goes..I'm a little shaky with that, simply because I don't think we are seeing the absolute monstrosity of a -NAO like we had last summer, but it is there currently. I have a feeling we may see the NAO go + later in the summer, but that could be a good thing, if you buy into the reversal that can happen by later in the fall. Again, I'm just speculating. I'm not a long range guy. Obviously I'm hoping for something decent, but I don't expect to repeat my 83.8" that I received this winter.

[40/70 Benchmark]

I think I share the same thought as Will wrt how we are almost "due" for a clunker. I hate saying we are due, but I guess what I'm saying is that I wouldn't be shocked if it happened.

However, there are some signs (like the QBO and weak ENSO) that seem to be on our side, and I can't really find a reason to be discouraged just yet. As far as the NAO goes..I'm a little shaky with that, simply because I don't think we are seeing the absolute monstrosity of a -NAO like we had last summer, but it is there currently. I have a feeling we may see the NAO go + later in the summer, but that could be a good thing, if you buy into the reversal that can happen by later in the fall. Again, I'm just speculating. I'm not a long range guy. Obviously I'm hoping for something decent, but I don't expect to repeat my 83.8" that I received this winter.

I disagree with that notion and I have stated why.

[CoastalWx]

I disagree with that notion and I have stated why.

Where was your reason?

I tried to clarify that I didn't necessarily expect it, but if it happened....it's not like it would completely take me by surprise. I'm relatively optimistic for now. That could change in the fall.

[Ginx snewx]

That paper is on my work computer but did save this little tidbit from another article

La Niña and other events make climate influence unclear

But the unusually wet December in southern California and heavy snowpack in the northern United States are also signs of Arctic air that dipped south as another weather pattern, the North Atlantic Oscillation, hit a negative phase, experts said. That sent cold air and winter storms farther south than normal until the weather pattern started fading away in mid-January.

"The effects of La Niña were sort of muddled together with the effects of the North Atlantic Oscillation," said Ed O'Lenic, chief of the operations branch at NOAA's Climate Prediction Center. "It's very difficult to separate the two."

Further muddling the picture, some research suggests that the unusual behavior of the North Atlantic Oscillation this year and during the winter of 2009-2010 may be a consequence of declining sea ice in the Arctic.

But it's not clear whether climate change has affected or will affect the behavior of La Niña and her counterpart, El Niño. "It's possible that [the El Niño cycle] impacts could be aided and abetted by climate," L'Heureux said, who said the ambiguity can be just as frustrating for climate scientists as it is for the public trying to make sense of unusual weather.

[CoastalWx]

Not SNE speaking but in this year of disaster is there any doubt the US gets struck by a major this year. Man just incredible. The increased WV hypothesis is most interesting, one of the better reads I have read this summer.

Let me guess...AGW leading to warmer temps and more water vapor into the atmosphere. If that's the article, at least the climatologist said there is no direct link that they can find to these specific events this year.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Where was your reason?

I tried to clarify that I didn't necessarily expect it, but if it happened....it's not like it would completely take me by surprise. I'm relatively optimistic for now. That could change in the fall.

Essentially that I have not seen that great of a surpus of snowfall over the course of the past several years, and I feel as though any small surplus accrued over the course of the past several decades is due to ehanced precip as a result of the warmer climate.

The globe is warmer than is was in the 1960s...fact, not opinion, thus is is not a large leap of faith to suggest that a warmer climate will result in a greater deal of precip, especially near the oceans and as you know, sne snowfall is more closely correlated to precip, not temps...so it makes sense that we would benefit from this.

Couple the aforementioned phenomenon with the phase of it's decadal cycle that the NAO has entered into, and I feel that, like the Bruins, our winter's are poised to rock out with their c*cks out for years to come.

[CoastalWx]

That paper is on my work computer but did save this little tidbit from another article

La Niña and other events make climate influence unclear

But the unusually wet December in southern California and heavy snowpack in the northern United States are also signs of Arctic air that dipped south as another weather pattern, the North Atlantic Oscillation, hit a negative phase, experts said. That sent cold air and winter storms farther south than normal until the weather pattern started fading away in mid-January.

"The effects of La Niña were sort of muddled together with the effects of the North Atlantic Oscillation," said Ed O'Lenic, chief of the operations branch at NOAA's Climate Prediction Center. "It's very difficult to separate the two."

Further muddling the picture, some research suggests that the unusual behavior of the North Atlantic Oscillation this year and during the winter of 2009-2010 may be a consequence of declining sea ice in the Arctic.

But it's not clear whether climate change has affected or will affect the behavior of La Niña and her counterpart, El Niño. "It's possible that [the El Niño cycle] impacts could be aided and abetted by climate," L'Heureux said, who said the ambiguity can be just as frustrating for climate scientists as it is for the public trying to make sense of unusual weather.

The thing that is interesting to me.... is the heat budget lately, of this planet. ACE has been down for a while now. Tropical cyclones have a very important job to do, and that is to transport heat energy, poleward. They transport it either directly by latent heat or advection, but also some of that is released through convection. So it makes you wonder how all this "heat" is distributed, when global tropical activity is down. http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Are these massive heat domes the product of this? Perhaps we have to think about things like this instead of blaming humans for record heat in Moscow? The heat has to go somewhere, afterall.

[Ginx snewx]

Let me guess...AGW leading to warmer temps and more water vapor into the atmosphere. If that's the article, at least the climatologist said there is no direct link that they can find to these specific events this year.

No no mention of GW, this was a scientific comparison of sat WV global wide and previous non active disaster years, very cool read. Just showing how juiced up the atmosphere has been and as you well know that's the fuel to fire.

[Ginx snewx]

The thing that is interesting to me.... is the heat budget lately, of this planet. ACE has been down for a while now. Tropical cyclones have a very important job to do, and that is to transport heat energy, poleward. They transport it either directly by latent heat or advection, but also some of that is released through convection. So it makes you wonder how all this "heat" is distributed, when global tropical activity is down. http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Are these massive heat domes the product of this? Perhaps we have to think about things like this instead of blaming humans for record heat in Moscow? The heat has to go somewhere, afterall.

It's all interrelated somehow, the research into the Sun's influence and Strato warming is groundbreaking and very interesting.

[CoastalWx]

Essentially that I have not seen that great of a surpus of snowfall over the course of the past several years, and I feel as though any small surplus accrued over the course of the past several decades is due to ehanced precip as a result of the warmer climate.

The globe is warmer than is was in the 1960s...fact, not opinion, thus is is not a large leap of faith to suggest that a warmer climate will result in a greater deal of precip, especially near the oceans and as you know, sne snowfall is more closely correlated to precip, not temps...so it makes sense that we would benefit from this.

Couple the aforementioned phenomenon with the phase of it's decadal cycle that the NAO had entered into, and I feel that, like the Bruins, our winter's are poised to rock out with their c*cks out for years to come.

LOL, well no real argument about the globe temp. What's causing it, is another story....not gonna do that here.

It's a valid point, but it doesn't mean we can't have a sucky winters. Those will happen and the factors that result in crappy winters can easily override any WV type argument...but again..valid point.

I also think the winters that were considered "great" for SNE as a whole, shows up much better closer to the coast, when it comes to anomalies. In other words, our departure from normals show up in areas that are more prone to wild swings in snowfall...like coastal areas. With your interior location, these + anomalies might not show up in the raw data, like they do in cities like BOS or NYC. It does make some sense if you think about it. Winters in SNE that are considered "great", are usually very kind to the coast.

[40/70 Benchmark]

LOL, well no real argument about the globe temp. What's causing it, is another story....not gonna do that here.

It's a valid point, but it doesn't mean we can have a sucky winters. Those will happen and the factors that result in crappy winters can easily override any WV type argument...but again..valid point.

I also think the winters that were considered "great" for SNE as a whole, shows up much better closer to the coast, when it comes to anomalies. In other words, our departure from normals show up in areas that are more prone to wild swings in snowfall...like coastal areas. With your interior location, these + anomalies might not show up in the raw data, like they do in cities like BOS of NYC. It does make some sense if you think about it. Winters in SNE that are considered "great", are usually very kind to the coast.

I understand that they will happen and I never implied that they would not; my contention is merely that we are not "due" for one and therefore they are no more likely to occur right now.

I had a deplorable winter just 5 years ago.....the winter before that was below normal and the winter before last season was below normal.

I entirely agree with your second point....I have mentioned to Will that I feel as though my area is especially resistant to large deviations from the mean, relative to the rest of the region.

[40/70 Benchmark]

'93-'94 was especially true, though out by Will it was still great.....I was in a relative hole that season.

[CoastalWx]

I understand that they will happen and I never implied that they would not; my contention is merely that we are not "due" for one and therefore they are no more likely to occur right now.

I had a deplorable winter just 5 years ago.....the winter before that was below normal and the winter before last season was below normal.

I entirely agree with your second point....I have mentioned to Will that I feel as though my area is especially resistant to large deviations from the mean, relative to the rest of the region.

Due might not have been the best word to use, but I'm a little nervous of it occurring. I know your locale didn't have a great winter in '09-'10, but we haven't seen a Bering Sea vortex of death in a while ('06-'07). Like I said, I don't see something that makes me nervous right now and you gotta like the overall persisting -NAO since '08. What we don't want is a violent + regime to take over. That can still happen in an overall -NAO regime. It's also debatable if we are even in a -NAO regime, but you can't deny its existence. One could argue we are in the period of Ginx NAO nudity.

[ORH_wxman]

Ray you still have to keep in mind that 63.7" for your "longterm" average is not quite apples to apples with other stations like ORH as I mentioned the other night...the Reading coop started in the late 50s and ends with last year....perfect end points for attaining the highest possible average for a 50+ year period. So while that is a true representative of the last 52 years or whatever, to compare perfectly with other sites, you'd have to use something like 72" for ORH and 45" for BOS....and most of us do not do that. Having a 66" 19-year average for a site that probably averages 60-61" since 1950 is a pretty nice run.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Ray you still have to keep in mind that 63.7" for your "longterm" average is not quite apples to apples with other stations like ORH as I mentioned the other night...the Reading coop started in the late 50s and ends with last year....perfect end points for attaining the highest possible average for a 50+ year period. So while that is a true representative of the last 52 years or whatever, to compare perfectly with other sites, you'd have to use something like 72" for ORH and 45" for BOS....and most of us do not do that. Having a 66" 19-year average for a site that probably averages 60-61" since 1950 is a pretty nice run.

Fair enough, but my point RE the warmer climate remains.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Due might not have been the best word to use, but I'm a little nervous of it occurring. I know your locale didn't have a great winter in '09-'10, but we haven't seen a Bering Sea vortex of death in a while ('06-'07). Like I said, I don't see something that makes me nervous right now and you gotta like the overall persisting -NAO since '08. What we don't want is a violent + regime to take over. That can still happen in an overall -NAO regime. It's also debatable if we are even in a -NAO regime, but you can't deny its existence. One could argue we are in the period of Ginx NAO nudity.

I don't think that is.....anything is debatable, but I'm sure that we are.

Again, doesn't preclude us from seeing a +NAO winter....

[CoastalWx]

I don't think that is.....anything is debatable, but I'm sure that we are.

Again, doesn't preclude us from seeing a +NAO winter....

Well I have to throw that caveat in there, but I think we are in or at least entering that period too.

[CoastalWx]

Fair enough, but my point RE the warmer climate remains.

The warmer climate argument is valid, but I'm not sure we are anywhere near the point of noticing a QPF increase. A few tenths of a degree on average isn't going to mean much wrt major evaporation from the Earth's oceans, but a continual increase in warming might. You gotta remember too, we are talking evaporation from the oceans, so while one part of an ocean might be warmer than normal and evaporate more moisture, this resulting moisture might mean more clouds and a cooler than normal ocean downwind of this evaporation. The Earth has many checks and balances.

[40/70 Benchmark]

The warmer climate argument is valid, but I'm not sure we are anywhere near the point of noticing a QPF increase. A few tenths of a degree on average isn't going to mean much wrt major evaporation from the Earth's oceans, but a continual increase in warming might. You gotta remember too, we are talking evaporation from the oceans, so while one part of an ocean might be warmer than normal and evaporate more moisture, this resulting moisture might mean more clouds and a cooler than normal ocean downwind of this evaporation. The Earth has many checks and balances.

Who knows, maybe the net result is just more dynamic systems.

[weathafella]

The sun for now has pulled the blanket up and gone to sleep. I must admit I'm surprised and daresay pleased as a winter weenie. Still very worried about the law of averages. It's been 5 years since BOS has had a serious clunker and prior to that it was 5 years, prior to that 2 years, prior to that 5 years, prior to that 3 years.

[OKpowdah]

Who knows, maybe the net result is just more dynamic systems.

remember that the majority of the warming is happening at high latitudes, so we're technically losing net baroclinicity

[Tropopause_Fold]

zucker is going to have an embolism when he comes in this thread and sees the AGW posts.

[Damage In Tolland]

zucker is going to have an embolism when he comes in this thread and sees the AGW posts.

His socks will lose all thir elasticity

[CoastalWx]

zucker is going to have an embolism when he comes in this thread and sees the AGW posts.

He's pretty level headed with that stuff. Skierinvermont might have a coronary, however.

[ORH_wxman]

zucker is going to have an embolism when he comes in this thread and sees the AGW posts.

AGW probably has very little to do with our winters in recent years anyway. The type of variability we are talking about supersedes any of that stuff on an extreme level.

If we want to compare to winters in the 1700s during the height of the LIA, then that is a different story, but its pretty irrelevant and fruitless anyway given how poor records are going back more than a century.

[CoastalWx]

Who knows, maybe the net result is just more dynamic systems.

Just admit it...you want warmer waters to enhance the coastal front.

I don't necessarily buy into the argument just yet, that are winters are wetter. That, and snow measurements aren't an exact science. Errors in that are enough to cause some years to be off by a couple of inches...perhaps more during more severe winters. We don't have to look too far to see that in our own backyard. Logan is one of them.

[OKpowdah]

AGW probably has very little to do with our winters in recent years anyway. The type of variability we are talking about supersedes any of that stuff on an extreme level.

If we want to compare to winters in the 1700s during the height of the LIA, then that is a different story, but its pretty irrelevant and fruitless anyway given how poor records are going back more than a century.

OMG we got a thunderstorm last weekend. I bet it was AGW!

[ORH_wxman]

Just admit it...you want warmer waters to enhance the coastal front.

I don't necessarily buy into the argument just yet, that are winters are wetter. That, and snow measurements aren't an exact science. Errors in that are enough to cause some years to be off by a couple of inches...perhaps more during more severe winters. We don't have to look too far to see that in our own backyard. Logan is one of them.

The past 19 years has definitely been wetter than the previous years of either good or lean snowfall. Breaking it up into 3 groups...1992-present (good snow), 1978-1992 (terrible snow), 1957-1977 (good snow again)

Its tough to blame any of these on climate change though. Its also a cherry pick as its not a surprise that "Good snowfall" periods will be wetter than poor snowfall periods. The next 20 years could look different and be much drier. We just do not know and have very little proof or predictive ability on a scale like that.

[tamarack]

The past 19 years has definitely been wetter than the previous years of either good or lean snowfall. Breaking it up into 3 groups...1992-present (good snow), 1978-1992 (terrible snow), 1957-1977 (good snow again)

Those maps surprised me a bit, given that much of NNE (Maine, at least) had record rain in Jan. 1979. Checking Farmington data (their rainiest of 118 Jans is indeed 1979) confirmed the maps' validity, not that I had any real doubt.

Period..........Dec-Mar

57-8 to 77-8....14.76"

78-9 to 91-2....12.82"

92-3 to 10-1....15.15

1/1893 on........14.06"