2014 Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Thread

[tacoman25]

This is the time of year that snow melt always happens rapidly.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Ignoring the obvious misdirection of the post above.

We have seen a recent massive change in the snow cover melting earlier and earlier.

This year a record pattern put the brakes on that threw April.

Now the pattern has changed and instead of going to normal or being above normal in a week the snow cover is going back to super negative.

[PottercountyWXobserver]

This is the time of year that snow melt always happens rapidly.

This is intellectually dishonest. How do you sleep at night.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Snow cover retreated a bit more in Asia and NA. 

 

The blob of blue South of the Hudson Bay is going to be gone within two days of now.  Southerly flow with 70s nearly reaching the SW shores of the Hudson on Tuesday with near 80F just South of there will ensure that.  Obviously most of that same area tomorrow will be warm into the 60s and 70s.

 

The area West of the Hudson will melt some and according to Environment Canada snow depth over Central Canada isn't that deep.  You can see this on Visible Sat as well.  Not sure how deep it is supposed to be but I would expect that area to lose some the next two days.  Then a cold front come through but it's not that cold but should slow melt a bit.  Temps will still be in the 40s and 50s there.

 

The wild card the next three days in NA is East of the Hudson Bay.  The visible satellite and Environment Canada show the snow pack there very weak overall. Could see a big retreat with two days of 40s and 50s and then a surge of 60s.

 

 

 

 

This is the Climo for May 12th.  The two images above this one are from may 5th.  As you can see between now and then not much changes in terms of climo. Nothing is set in stone but this is the time of year recently when the huge departures would start coming out.

 

 

 

We can see cold on the Russian side is hard to come by. 

 

 

[Jonger]

Looks like the start of the satellite era coincides with the sudden snow anomalies almost perfectly....

[SVT450R]

[tacoman25]

This is intellectually dishonest. How do you sleep at night.

 

Lol, seriously? It's a true statement.

 

On April 28, Friv predicted the snow cover anomaly to become negative "within a week". That would mean by May 5. On May 1, he predicted the anomaly would fall "deeply into negative territory" within 5-7 days, so May 5-7. Doesn't look like that happened, probably because he wasn't accounting properly for the fact that climo has a lot of melt this time of year anyway.

 

While the snow cover in Siberia has been mostly decimated and the pattern continues to look unfavorable there, it looks like much of west/central Russia should be able to maintain and perhaps even expand snow cover over the next week compared to climo, as the blocking pattern sends several cold air masses down into that area. The pattern over central/northern Canada and Alaska is favorable to preserving snow cover as well over the next 5 days or so, while overall it remain unfavorable for western Canada.

[tacoman25]

To be fair, I do agree with Friv that the May anomaly will be significantly negative when it's all said and done. I just think he overestimated how fast and how far the anomaly will fall.

[bluewave]

April 2013 is tied for second highest April North American snow cover with 1982 and just behind 1975.

It was our best showing since we set the snowiest record for December in 2009.

 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

 

Lol, seriously? It's a true statement.

 

On April 28, Friv predicted the snow cover anomaly to become negative "within a week". That would mean by May 5. On May 1, he predicted the anomaly would fall "deeply into negative territory" within 5-7 days, so May 5-7. Doesn't look like that happened, probably because he wasn't accounting properly for the fact that climo has a lot of melt this time of year anyway.

 

While the snow cover in Siberia has been mostly decimated and the pattern continues to look unfavorable there, it looks like much of west/central Russia should be able to maintain and perhaps even expand snow cover over the next week compared to climo, as the blocking pattern sends several cold air masses down into that area. The pattern over central/northern Canada and Alaska is favorable to preserving snow cover as well over the next 5 days or so, while overall it remain unfavorable for western Canada.

 

 

 

 

 

Climo has nothing to do with it. 

 

 

Let's see.  April 28th the snow cover was very positive.  On May 1st the Eurasian side was starting to go negative.  While the NA side was still very positive.

 

Now we go to yesterday.  The Eurasian side is highly negative.  Except for the blue dots over the ceiling of the Earth.  Encase you are wondering. Climo shows there shouldn't be snow there.  Going all the way back to January it's extremely rare for snow to be there. 

 

So you say I didn't take in account for climo.  I assumed there wouldn't be snow there today because of CLIMO. 

 

Since I do not trust you're intellectual honesty.  I added an edited May 6th image that only took out the rare snow event in the Tibet region only to show that Tacomans bull crap notion that I don't get Climo and that apparently in May snow melt's rapidly is the reason May 6th isn't highly negative in terms of the snow cover anomaly. 

 

Let's change the color so it stands out because historically on this board someone is going to go on a tirade saying I am falsifying data.  It's just a precautionary measure.  After years of dealing with people having no interest in a straight forward conversation such disclaimers must be stated.  It doesn't change the fact that the snow cover anomaly isn't highly negative yet, that is obvious.

 

It's just to show that tacoman wanted to try and make me look bad vs having a real conversation about the snow cover anomaly. 

 

 

So below is climo for May 1st and climo for May 6th.  Yes everyone I know those images look almost identical.  Below the those images is the actual snow cover for May 1st and 6th.  No Tibet snow.  Huge losses in Russia and North America. 

 

Looks like the rare Tibet Snow and the snow South of the Hudson Bay is the reason my prediction was off.  Not climo. 

 

 

 

 

April 28th/May 1st/May 6th/May 6th edited without the unforeseen snow event at the ceiling of the world that has nothing to do with not grasping climo.

 

 

This has been a huge waste of time.  And a big distraction to the discussion at hand. I proved my case above unequivocally.  My prediction was wrong but not by much which is a bit funny but it's still wrong.

 

I don't care if my predictions don't pan out.  It is what it is.  I put great detail into my prediction and lay out my thoughts and reasons.  If I am wrong, I am wrong.  But I won't allow people to personally smear my work here.

 

On top of that they always do it in a drive by fashion.  To lazy to actually back up their claims, it's left to me to defend myself and waste my time. 

 

Ironically, it still further educates me on things and just makes me better at this.

[The_Global_Warmer]

April 2013 is tied for second highest April North American snow cover with 1982 and just behind 1975.

It was our best showing since we set the snowiest record for December in 2009.

 

 

http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/table_area.php?ui_set=1

 

4 million above last year.

 

 

No where near what I thought it was going to be.

 

 

[bluewave]

http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/table_area.php?ui_set=1

 

4 million above last year.

 

 

No where near what I thought it was going to be.

 

 

 

Yeah, much of the cold was focused in North America while Eurasia wasn't nearly as cold.

It was a reversal from the December pattern where the bulk of the cold was on the Eurasian side.

 

 

[tacoman25]

 

 

 

Climo has nothing to do with it. 

 

 

Let's see.  April 28th the snow cover was very positive.  On May 1st the Eurasian side was starting to go negative.  While the NA side was still very positive.

 

Now we go to yesterday.  The Eurasian side is highly negative.  Except for the blue dots over the ceiling of the Earth.  Encase you are wondering. Climo shows there shouldn't be snow there.  Going all the way back to January it's extremely rare for snow to be there. 

 

So you say I didn't take in account for climo.  I assumed there wouldn't be snow there today because of CLIMO. 

 

Since I do not trust you're intellectual honesty.  I added an edited May 6th image that only took out the rare snow event in the Tibet region only to show that Tacomans bull crap notion that I don't get Climo and that apparently in May snow melt's rapidly is the reason May 6th isn't highly negative in terms of the snow cover anomaly. 

 

Let's change the color so it stands out because historically on this board someone is going to go on a tirade saying I am falsifying data.  It's just a precautionary measure.  After years of dealing with people having no interest in a straight forward conversation such disclaimers must be stated.  It doesn't change the fact that the snow cover anomaly isn't highly negative yet, that is obvious.

 

It's just to show that tacoman wanted to try and make me look bad vs having a real conversation about the snow cover anomaly. 

 

 

So below is climo for May 1st and climo for May 6th.  Yes everyone I know those images look almost identical.  Below the those images is the actual snow cover for May 1st and 6th.  No Tibet snow.  Huge losses in Russia and North America. 

 

Looks like the rare Tibet Snow and the snow South of the Hudson Bay is the reason my prediction was off.  Not climo. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

April 28th/May 1st/May 6th/May 6th edited without the unforeseen snow event at the ceiling of the world that has nothing to do with not grasping climo.

 

 

 

 

This has been a huge waste of time.  And a big distraction to the discussion at hand. I proved my case above unequivocally.  My prediction was wrong but not by much which is a bit funny but it's still wrong.

 

I don't care if my predictions don't pan out.  It is what it is.  I put great detail into my prediction and lay out my thoughts and reasons.  If I am wrong, I am wrong.  But I won't allow people to personally smear my work here.

 

On top of that they always do it in a drive by fashion.  To lazy to actually back up their claims, it's left to me to defend myself and waste my time. 

 

Ironically, it still further educates me on things and just makes me better at this.

 

 

You are way too defensive and try way too hard to justify yourself. I wasn't trying to smear you. All I said was you "probably" underestimated climo melt. I didn't see any other reasonable reason why you would have expected things to go into deeply negative territory as quickly as you had predicted. But I didn't make any concrete statement about your reasoning.

 

And you'll notice my response was actually to someone smearing me, by calling me "intellectually dishonest", as you did above as well.

[ORH_wxman]

April didn't really come close at all to record snow cover extent, but it did finish well above average as many of us already speculated. It ranked 9th highest out of 47 years

 

 

 

North American Snow cover was 3rd highest for April

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Models are indicating some changes over the next week.  They will likely change a lot themselves.  I have noticed over the last few years that the models this time of year play catch up with the warmth over the higher lats in the medium to long range. 

 

The images are snow cover top left.  Departure top right.  Today's climo bottom left, 6 days from now bottom right.  Obviously that is a huge snow hole in Siberia is way early vs climo.  This will have some pass it along effects on the cryosphere.

 

 

 

 

Currently it's pretty warm in most of Eurasia.  the remaining deep cold is centered over the Canadian Archipelago where winter is still laying the smack down.  One thing to remember about Russia is that it's really far North.

 

To give an idea of how this effects the snow and ice melting process.  The image to the right is snow cover climo for two weeks from today.  The third image is snow cover climo three weeks from today.  The open area of land is now much lower albedo than it was with snow and melting snow.  Solar strength all the way to the arctic sea ice right now is very powerful.  The only thing refrigerating the cryosphere is obviously ice, snow and the slower warming of water.

 

One of the main reasons I started this thread was to witness day by day first hand what kind of role the Spring time diminished snow cover plays in the demise of the arctic sea ice. 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Unless I am reading the graphs wrong a large portion of the snow in the West Central China Mountains has never happened going back to 1966 for this time of year.  Looking at the legend.  White areas in the image on the right are 0-10% for this date. 

 

 

 

 

Anyways it's a pretty rare event and it's pretty wide spread it seems.

 

On the opposite side of the coin.  Look at the large, still expanding red blob over Siberia.  Quite a bit of that is in the 91-100 percent range.  On top of that.  Bare Ground has made it almost to the arctic coast. 

 

Climo shows in that region of Siberia the snow cover line shouldn't retreat that far until May 30th-June 1st.

 

On top of that.  The 12z Globals bring a torch for at least a week to that side of Russia.  If this heatwave materializes I would expect the negative departure to be pretty huge in Russia.

 

Instead of being at a .55 to .75 albedo during sunny skies the albedo is .15 to .35.  Some of the extra heat goes into thawing the ground below the top soil layer but that will also help green things up very fast, which obviously will darken things up and lower albedo even more.  The rest will go into warming the atmosphere not only does this mean temps will be warmer at the surface the lower atmosphere over this area will warm more than it would have before. 

 

 

Besides warming up Siberia this opens a direct channel to the transport large amounts of heat to the arctic sea ice.

[The_Global_Warmer]

I Forgot to add that Rutgers updated through week 18.  This puts 2013 at 7th of 46th for lowest snow cover for the first week of May.

 

 

Week 16: 2013 had 5.26 million square kilometers of snow cover over 2012.

Week 17: 2013 had 2.92 million square kilometers of snow cover over 2012.

Week 18: 2013 had 0.80 million square kilometers of snow cover over 2012.

 

 

 

 

Week 18 Snow - 2013

 

 

Weekly Snow

Week start: 2013-04-30
Week end: 2013-05-06

Area of Snow Extent

Northern Hemisphere:
 21.73 million sq. km

Eurasia:
 10.35 million sq. km

North America:
 11.38 million sq. km

[LithiaWx]

Snow cover is right at normal. It's been pretty much above normal for the last 6 months as well.

This only covers the last 18 or 19 years. If there is a graph like this that goes back farther I'd love to see it.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Snow cover is right at normal. It's been pretty much above normal for the last 6 months as well.

This only covers the last 18 or 19 years. If there is a graph like this that goes back farther I'd love to see it.

image.jpg

 

 

You post a graph using 1995-2009 as climo and talk about the snow is normal while everyone else in the thread is using satellite derived snow data that started in 1966.

 

http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/

 

 

I would start by reading the thread instead of cherry picking for your agenda.

[LithiaWx]

You post a graph using 1995-2009 as climo and talk about the snow is normal while everyone else in the thread is using satellite derived snow data that started in 1966.

http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/

I would start by reading the thread instead of cherry picking for your agenda.

Friv, I don't have an agenda. I've stated my beliefs a hundred times and it never sinks in for you. I believe the arctic ice is in bad shape. I believe in AGW. What I don't buy are the most extreme predictions and models that are out there. Using 19 years of data isn't cherry picking. If there is a beetter chart to use with more data that is easy to read like the one I posted I would still love to see it.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Alright, my apologies.  That data set is really good for tracking the snow everyday.  But it's climatology is only from 1995-2009.  So it just tells us how the snow cover is doing vs the most recent era which defeats the purpose.  Rutgers goes back to the early Nimbus satellites.  With a reliable intact snow data set which has been modified as time went on with better retrieval techniques before the much easier remote sensing.  Anyways.  Since the mid 1980s nearly every Spring the snow cover goes into a negative by March.  But it get's worse as the Spring goes on. 

 

On top of that since 2005 there has been an acceleration by May in snow cover loss coinciding with the onset of Max solar insolation.  The snow cover would become reduced like this for several reasons. 

 

This is a general post trying to figure out why this is inevitably happening and happening with a vengeance. 

 

1.  Thawing of the permafrost.

Allows an earlier onset of heat trapping because when the snow leaves and more energy goes to the ground and the albedo is much lower. 

This leads to another positive feedback because the the ground starts to unfreeze faster, dry out faster so it would be able to warm more also would turn the place green faster leading to an even lower albedo and maximizing the potential time of the most favorable albedo during the solar max.  This becomes another reinforcing positive feedback It allows air masses(especially closer to the surface) coming in from the North to not have a blanket of snow to help reinforce cold.  Instead they would warm faster.  On the flip side the faster the snow melts the faster warmer air can be pushed into regions with snow this feedback helps melt the snow faster and eventually the arctic ice. 

 

 

This is nothing new.  What is new is that this is happening faster and regardless of weather pattern or how much winter snow is left eventually it falls apart and melts out early earlier. 

 

This year the weather pattern was extreme, record -AO left both sides of the NH above normal in April as you can see below.  Outside of the Volcano induced snow cover in April of 1994 and 1995. 

 

There is no doubt the snow cover crapping the bed in May-July like the Sea Ice is connected in some ways, we don't know exactly, but there are some really good ideas about it.

 

 

 

 

This year has been pretty unique to say the least.  The extreme weather pattern at the end of winter which is not effected as much as the transition from Spring to Summer is.  This is most likely due to the change in solar forcing being weaker still.  And the snow albedo effect still having more pull. Most recent years by March or April the accelerated melting is taking place but it's much more pattern dependent.  As the snow melts and the Sun angle rises it's the trigger for multiple positive feedback's to amplify creating a quicker seasonal transition.

 

This is pretty logical in a climate system that starts it's seasonal transition with 47,000,000km2 to 50,000,000km2 of Earth that is covered in snow.  This is not including the additional 14,000,000km2 to 15,500,000km2 of sea ice that is covered with snow as well.  So the total of 65,000,000km2 of Earth where the albedo is reduced to .65 to .85 to start the process of going from solar min to solar max ends up at .10 to .30(mostly .10 to .20 at the peak growing season in the NH.)  That is a huge change.

 

While this is rather abrupt, the positive feedback's are much weaker than the solar influence which keeps this stable.  If the climate was cooling and the forcing mechanisms weaker it would be in reverse of this.

 

I made some bold predictions based off of what I thought was the case, the simple accelerated transition from Spring to Summer because of positive feed-backed increased energy flux.  2013 show's me that while yes the pattern changed.  It's not mattered in the last 30 years and regardless of pattern the snow melt continues to accelerate.

 

Below is April 20th/April 30th/May 10th. 

 

Tibet has a positive snow anomaly but that is because of the seasonal monsoon and when it comes.  It will melt in the next week as the torch there has started.  However much you can torch at 15-23K feet. 

 

We can see in Siberia conditions have gone from a decent negative anomaly in mid April to even by the end of the month.  To an enormous positive anomaly that continues to expand under warm conditions that are amplified by the solar insolation being in essentially peak levels.  While the NA side has been below normal over South Central Canada, it's just to far South at that elevation to hold onto snow cover. 

 

Most of the snow cover anomaly is always in Eurasia.  while NA in May can't get much past -1,000,000km2. 

 

 

 

This is the 00z GFS at 12 hour increments out to 96 hours.  The Western  side of NA is going to go way above normal.  The positive anomalys have already started to increase.

 

Russia outside of a small region by the Kara Sea is pretty warm.  Solar energy is equal right now to lower latitudes or getting even stronger up to the peak but it's spread out over longer periods of time.  This doesn't allow temps to go buck wild but have far less swings from night to day.  The 06Z snapshot below shows temps in Central to Eastern Russia in the mid 40s to near 60F pending elevation and snow cover.  And obviously weather. 

 

This is the solar path today at 65N.  Powerful, but spread out.

 

 

 

 

 

The Canadian Archipelago and Western Siberian regions are safe for now. Historically this is a common set up.   It's just happening 2-3 weeks ahead of the time it used to go down.

 

Given the four day forecast below.  I expect the snow anomaly's to keep growing negative.  Climo is obviously slower at this point. 

 

 

 

 

[bluewave]

^^^^^^

 

There was a recent paper on the Siberian snow signal:

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010JD014007/abstract

 

 

[1] The impact of declining sea ice in amplifying surface air temperatures (SAT) over the Arctic Ocean is readily visible, and this “Arctic amplification” will become more pronounced as more sea ice is lost in the coming decades. The effect of sea ice loss on atmospheric temperatures and circulation patterns is of utmost significance as these changes will affect the terrestrial climate. Land-surface snow is vulnerable to these changes; hence, we search for any link between changes in Arctic sea ice and Northern Hemisphere snow cover. Analyses of observational data sets suggest that the increasing snow cover over Siberia during fall and early winter is correlated with the decreasing September Arctic sea ice over the Pacific sector. We also examine modeled covariance between sea ice and snow using historical and future simulations of the Community Climate System Model (CCSM3). Results indicate the emergence of a Siberian snow signal during the last half of the 21st century most strongly during late winter. Moreover, CCSM3 future simulations show diminishment of snow at a hemispheric scale outside of the Siberian region, which is correlated with the loss of Arctic sea ice. These results indicate that we may be seeing the first, albeit weak, signs of “Arctic amplification” on the terrestrial Arctic snowpack; that only a weak and therefore inconclusive signal would be expected at this time; and that the signal should strengthen over the coming decades.

 

 

 

 

On the Spring snow cover decline:

 

 

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/pip/2012GL053387.shtml

 

Spring snow cover extent reductions in the 2008-2012 period exceeding climate model projections

 

Key Points

• N. Hemisphere spring snow cover extent reductions since 1967 are significant
• Rate of June snow loss exceeds the rate of September sea ice loss (1979-2011)
• Snow reductions since 2005 exceed an ensemble of CMIP5 simulations

Authors:

Chris Derksen

 

Ross Brown

 

Analysis of Northern Hemisphere spring terrestrial snow cover extent (SCE) from the NOAA snow chart Climate Data Record (CDR) for the April to June period (when snow cover is mainly located over the Arctic) has revealed statistically significant reductions in May and June SCE. Successive records for the lowest June SCE have been set each year for Eurasia since 2008, and in 4 of the past 5 years for North America. The rate of loss of June snow cover extent since 1979 (-21.5% decade-1) is greater than the loss of September sea ice extent (-10.8% decade-1) over the same period. Analysis of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) model output shows the marked reductions in June SCE observed since 2005 fall below the zone of model consensus defined by +/-1 standard deviation from the multi-model ensemble mean.

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

 

^^^^^^

 

There was a recent paper on the Siberian snow signal:

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010JD014007/abstract

 

 

[1] The impact of declining sea ice in amplifying surface air temperatures (SAT) over the Arctic Ocean is readily visible, and this “Arctic amplification” will become more pronounced as more sea ice is lost in the coming decades. The effect of sea ice loss on atmospheric temperatures and circulation patterns is of utmost significance as these changes will affect the terrestrial climate. Land-surface snow is vulnerable to these changes; hence, we search for any link between changes in Arctic sea ice and Northern Hemisphere snow cover. Analyses of observational data sets suggest that the increasing snow cover over Siberia during fall and early winter is correlated with the decreasing September Arctic sea ice over the Pacific sector. We also examine modeled covariance between sea ice and snow using historical and future simulations of the Community Climate System Model (CCSM3). Results indicate the emergence of a Siberian snow signal during the last half of the 21st century most strongly during late winter. Moreover, CCSM3 future simulations show diminishment of snow at a hemispheric scale outside of the Siberian region, which is correlated with the loss of Arctic sea ice. These results indicate that we may be seeing the first, albeit weak, signs of “Arctic amplification” on the terrestrial Arctic snowpack; that only a weak and therefore inconclusive signal would be expected at this time; and that the signal should strengthen over the coming decades.

 

eurasia_season1.gif

 

eurasia_season2.gif

 

 

On the Spring snow cover decline:

 

 

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/pip/2012GL053387.shtml

 

Spring snow cover extent reductions in the 2008-2012 period exceeding climate model projections

 

Key Points

• N. Hemisphere spring snow cover extent reductions since 1967 are significant
•  
• Rate of June snow loss exceeds the rate of September sea ice loss (1979-2011)
•  
• Snow reductions since 2005 exceed an ensemble of CMIP5 simulations
•  

Authors:

Chris Derksen

 

Ross Brown

 

Analysis of Northern Hemisphere spring terrestrial snow cover extent (SCE) from the NOAA snow chart Climate Data Record (CDR) for the April to June period (when snow cover is mainly located over the Arctic) has revealed statistically significant reductions in May and June SCE. Successive records for the lowest June SCE have been set each year for Eurasia since 2008, and in 4 of the past 5 years for North America. The rate of loss of June snow cover extent since 1979 (-21.5% decade-1) is greater than the loss of September sea ice extent (-10.8% decade-1) over the same period. Analysis of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) model output shows the marked reductions in June SCE observed since 2005 fall below the zone of model consensus defined by +/-1 standard deviation from the multi-model ensemble mean.

 

 

 

thank you for posting this.

 

I am 90 percent confident of the bolded.  Which was also published in 2010. Two more years and this one in progress prove that idea fully.

 

And it's not surprising that models are better at predicting this vs ice floating in water.

[bluewave]

thank you for posting this.

 

I am 90 percent confident of the bolded.  Which was also published in 2010. Two more years and this one in progress prove that idea fully.

 

And it's not surprising that models are better at predicting this vs ice floating in water.

 

I found a more recent study by that group of researchers going into a little more detail with

the full paper online.

 

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/cdeser/Docs/ghatak.snowcover_arctic.jgr12.pdf

 

 

 

1] The loss of Arctic sea ice has wide-ranging impacts, some of which are readily apparent and some of which remain obscure. For example, recent observational studies suggest that terrestrial snow cover may be affected by decreasing sea ice. Here, we examine a possible causal link between Arctic sea ice and Siberian snow cover during the past 3 decades using a suite of experiments with the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Atmospheric Model version 3. The experiments were designed to isolate the influence of surface conditions within the Arctic Ocean from other forcing agents such as low-latitude sea surface temperatures and direct radiative effects of increasing greenhouse gases. Only those experiments that include the observed evolution of Arctic sea ice and sea surface temperatures result in increased snow depth over Siberia, while those that maintain climatological values for Arctic Ocean conditions result in no snow signal over Siberia. In the former, Siberian precipitation and air temperature both increase, but because surface air temperatures remain below freezing during most months, the snowpack thickens over this region. These results suggest that Arctic Ocean surface forcing is necessary and sufficient to induce a Siberian snow signal, and that other forcings in combination can modulate the strength and geographic extent of the response.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Snow cover/depth is increasing in Fall/Winter but melting faster and faster in Spring.

Sounds about right at this point

[ORH_wxman]

Snow cover/depth is increasing in Fall/Winter but melting faster and faster in Spring.

Sounds about right at this point

 

 

Originally snow cover in all seasons was supposed to decrease. But obviously that thinking has changed from several years ago.

 

Its a great example of how we still have a long ways to go in learning about the specific effects of climate change.

[GaWx]

Snow cover/depth is increasing in Fall/Winter but melting faster and faster in Spring.

Sounds about right at this point

I still wonder if this is a natural way that the earth will fight back against runaway warming. Increased fall/winter snowcover should, itself, help lead to some albedo related cooling to at least hold warming back to some extent. Why is this idea not talked about more? Is there a bias? What say you?

Aside: I still say there's a lot of uncertainty about how much a factor is the sun in reality. I think we'll know a lot more over the next five years or so as what I expect to be the deepest min. in perhaps 200+ years develops and this coming after the highest 50 year max. 1950-2000 of at least the last 400 years. I recommend an open mind about alternative possibilities.

[dan11295]

Any guesses where the May NH snowcover anomaly will end up. Obviously will be negative, but by how much? Will also have to watch the ice pack in the Laptev/East Siberian Sea area with the melt pretty much all the way to the coast now.

[TerryM]

I still wonder if this is a natural way that the earth will fight back against runaway warming. Increased fall/winter snowcover should, itself, help lead to some albedo related cooling to at least hold warming back to some extent. Why is this idea not talked about more? Is there a bias? What say you?

Aside: I still say there's a lot of uncertainty about how much a factor is the sun in reality. I think we'll know a lot more over the next five years or so as what I expect to be the deepest min. in perhaps 200+ years develops and this coming after the highest 50 year max. 1950-2000 of at least the last 400 years. I recommend an open mind about alternative possibilities.

Alternative possibilities to what?

 

Terry

[GaWx]

Alternative possibilities to what?

 

Terry

 

Alternative possibilities to the predictions of warming that assume only minor past and, therefore, only minor future influence from the sun.