El Nino ?

[WXheights]

I don't disagree with your assertion of extreme weather...I disagree with your metric on power companies being a proxy to your conclusion of more extreme events.

 

People have no idea what will happen with the 50s and 60s come roaring back to New England regarding TCs. Then what will be the excuse? I wonder what utiility companies will say then? Afterall, we will eventually get more landfalling TCs in SNE whether climate change effects it or not. 

I'm trying figure out those things weather related that might change due CC.  If we absolutely knew why TC 's were what they were 50s and 60s of natural variation we might have much better climo for the state of the world. Of course we'd have to factor in AMO or all things. to see trends above noise. but I'm sorry the statement there is no extremes is ludicrous at least in NNE I really don't see why a whole more encompassing index might be developed as proxies for better measurement. Think what you like but Utilities are very front-line.

[CoastalWx]

I'm trying figure out those things weather related that might change due CC.  If we absolutely knew why TC 's were what they were 50s and 60s of natural variation we might have much better climo for the state of the world. Of course we'd have to factor in AMO or all things. to see trends above noise. but I'm sorry the statement there is no extremes is ludicrous at least in NNE I really don't see why a whole more encompassing index might be developed as proxies for better measurement. Think what you like but Utilities are very front-line.

 

There is likely some relation to decadal cycles I'm sure. We've been lucky even in the US as a whole regarding major landfalling hurricanes recently....but the clock is ticking both the US and in New England.  If you ever go back in time...you'll see we have a flurry of activity it seems in New england for a period of 20-30 yrs give or take and then it's quiet. Utility companies will be completely overwhelmed if a legit Cat 2 makes landfall over HVN. 

 

I just think there are a lot of variables...too many in fact to say that utility companies can give a good idea to more extreme weather. Don't forget employees as one of them....as we have found out too many times in SNE...some of these companies are being cheap and streamlining their operations..or just simply not preparing for any event simply because of money. Well, then a nice 7 day outage occurs when it could have been fixed in 3-4 days. This is just one of many I can think of that simply makes it difficult to diagnose extreme events via utilities. At least IMHO and it sounds like others too.

[The_Global_Warmer]

I think it's a double edged sword.

 

On one hand folks bring up the last 15 years or so to talk about the "hiatus."

 

If the topic was about the last 15 years.  Natural variation would be brought up.  Back after the 2010 NINO faded and such.  Skeptics pushed very hard that natural variation still had a lot of control. 

 

Like the PDO and Solar.  We also have reason to believe China/India really did a number on the regional climate out there with aerosols.  Which could have implications on tropical  heat uptake in the West Pacific.

 

 

Either way.  I have seen the PDO get attributed with .2 to .3C of warming or cooling pending the phase.  The sun another .1C down with the long minimum.

 

Right now we are still no where near the last solar max.

 

We saw global land ice loss dramatically increase during this hiatus.  When I say dramatically increase I mean it.  This is everywhere on Earth. 

 

NH Spring/Summer snow cover has also seen a huge downturn in snow cover during this period with the worst years most recently in the 2010s.

 

 

Arctic Sea Ice obviously has changed a lot.

 

GIS has seen a dramatic increase in ice mass loss during this hiatus.

 

Antarctica has also seen an increase in ice mass loss during the hiatus.

 

Sea ice down there has gone up while land ice mass loss has accelerated. 

 

That is a major outlier in the same obvious trend.  I know some folks might try to latch on that and give it substance or meaning that is misplaced but we have an entire globe of commonalities in terms of change of ice mass/snow cover.  Many areas have seen record or above normal snow depth going into Spring to only see it melt out faster than ever.

 

 

This most logically implies that solar forcing itself is probably playing a role in this.  Direct solar forcing can increase while the lower troposphere doesn't warm.  Obviously more heat is being released or stored.

 

 

Co2 was about 365PPM when the hiatus started.  It's at 402PPM now. 

 

Some deniers will say this is proof it's not a powerful GHG.  But we know better then that.

 

We may not have all the answers but we know for a fact that AGW is real and still happening. 

 

 

Hopefully we get a lot more clarity about the last 15yrs+ by 2020 or so.

 

 

[tacoman25]

Yeah, you cannot have 400+ ppm CO2 in the atmosphere and nothing happen as a result. Weather will progressively become more extreme and ocean circulations will change, leading to different climates.

 

I conclude that the increased damage reports are a culmination of rampant development and a more unstable atmosphere.

 

Well, that's all the science I need!

[tacoman25]

I'm not sure why people without power is not extreme to you? the metric is actually better because it fills data holes where you have none. Yes granted population changes etc could be factored algorithm. It's also real world not theory extrapolation. Like I said before your utilities know there are changes in the weather.  just like snow removal people, Road crews transportation all on the front lines -

 

Um, theory extrapolation is exactly what you are doing. 

 

And please direct me to the national or international survey of utility people reporting these obvious climate changes. Surely you aren't just referring to some folks in New England you've talked to? Some might call that completely anecdotal evidence.

[tacoman25]

He was responding to a post that said 5C by 2100 was plausible. TCR is likely more in the range of 1.5C....which suggests we might warm another 1-2C by 2100.

 

 

As for a long term response...even the IPCC doesn't put 5C in their wide ECS likely range.

 

I forget...I know the numbers have trended more conservative, but what was the probable range the IPCC was giving in its first couple reports?

[ORH_wxman]

I forget...I know the numbers have trended more conservative, but what was the probable range the IPCC was giving in its first couple reports?

 

 

I actually think their original report in 1990 had 1.5-4.5 for ECS....they then in later reports upped the lower bound to 2.0 and kept the high bound at 4.5C.

 

 

Then in the latest report they went back to the 1.5-4.5.

[Jonger]

I actually think their original report in 1990 had 1.5-4.5 for ECS....they then in later reports upped the lower bound to 2.0 and kept the high bound at 4.5C.

Then in the latest report they went back to the 1.5-4.5.

1.5℃ would be pretty good news, we can deal with that. Fossil fuels will be done with and hopefully temps plateau. Maybe some of those GMO fast growing trees can be planted to bring down co2 levels.

[Dsnowx53]

I think your logic train on negative tilted troughs is good envisioning in a warmer world, but FV12 slowing meandering jet would overcome this on those occasional alla Sandy - super -NAO/-AO omega blocking. Sandy could be one of those coming attractions if said things line up perfectly. but how often, probably infrequent.

 

This is how I feel as well, and Dr. Jennifer Francis has plenty of publications on this matter. A weaker jet will tend to be a more amplified jet, due to Rossby Wave physics, leading to more blocking patterns and an increased likelihood of phasing/capturing northward propagating TCs. I think that a more amplified jet that may start out further north would still often have net southward displacements compared to the jet that starts further south, but is less amplified. 

[ORH_wxman]

This is how I feel as well, and Dr. Jennifer Francis has plenty of publications on this matter. A weaker jet will tend to be a more amplified jet, due to Rossby Wave physics, leading to more blocking patterns and an increased likelihood of phasing/capturing northward propagating TCs. I think that a more amplified jet that may start out further north would still often have net southward displacements compared to the jet that starts further south, but is less amplified. 

 

 

The Barnes et al paper was a pretty good argument against the Francis paper. I don't completely buy the "meandering jet" theory and it is certainly debated in the peer review literature.

 

http://barnes.atmos.colostate.edu/FILES/MANUSCRIPTS/Barnes_DunnSigouin_etal_2014_GRL_wsupp.pdf

[WXheights]

The Barnes et al paper was a pretty good argument against the Francis paper. I don't completely buy the "meandering jet" theory and it is certainly debated in the peer review literature.

 

http://barnes.atmos.colostate.edu/FILES/MANUSCRIPTS/Barnes_DunnSigouin_etal_2014_GRL_wsupp.pdf

There was a time ms-match between the two as I understand it. and then there was

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/014036

 

But I think we are all waiting on more. As far as the blocky high amplitude pattern and future projection  -- we are in one right now of course this is rather common springtime. I'm guessing francis will stand as the new regime, only because I think we are seeing this anecdotally more often recently. And then look at this winter more a function of -EPO -PDO

 

That debate is one to watch in the nearer term for sure.

[ORH_wxman]

There was a time ms-match between the two as I understand it. and then there was

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/014036

 

But I think we are all waiting on more. As far as the blocky high amplitude pattern and future projection  -- we are in one right now of course this is rather common springtime. I'm guessing francis will stand as the new regime, only because I think we are seeing this anecdotally more often recently. And then look at this winter more a function of -EPO -PDO

 

That debate is one to watch in the nearer term for sure.

 

 

Yes, I don't think the Francis paper has been falsified or anything....but just that there were some issues with it. The arguments in the Barnes paper certainly leads to more caution when trying to make attribution to blocking patterns.

[WXheights]

Yes, I don't think the Francis paper has been falsified or anything....but just that there were some issues with it. The arguments in the Barnes paper certainly leads to more caution when trying to make attribution to blocking patterns.

Of all the discussion in climate -- I think this area is really the most exciting intriguing of the whole kit and kabutle 

[ORH_wxman]

Of all the discussion in climate -- I think this area is really the most exciting intriguing of the whole kit and kabutle 

 

 

Well it is certainly a huge part of our winter climate in North America....so I would definitely agree.