El Nino 2023-2024

[bluewave]

9 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/gtmba/taotriton-map

There is a way to archive data back to 1979. 

12z GFS ensembles have a -PNA throughout the next 15 days. It was a big shift, again, from 06z. -PNA correlates to central-subsurface cooling, or at least a stop in the warming. 

Thanks. do they have these same assorted charts on the site somewhere back to 1979?

 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/drupal/flux/index.html

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Not typically what you see in an El Nino here (RNA). 

https://ibb.co/8Bb2btg

[raindancewx]

The Shiveluch volcano that is erupting now has sent ash 12 miles up into the atmosphere.

Interestingly, for those of you who like 1957 as an analog, there was also a major eruption that year. Also 1854. The winters of 1957-58 and 1854-55 are both pretty severe. I'd say for New Mexico and Colorado the three most severe winters since 1800 are 1854-55, 1914-15, and 1972-73. I would think a lot of the ongoing gains in +WPO setups/strength has been tied to this volcano semi-continuously erupting and shooting ash up over Kamchatka.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiveluch

March 1958 is another crazy month - doubt we reach that level of severity though.

[raindancewx]

Also, the Jamstec has an east-central El Nino with a -PDO look.

[csnavywx]

No reason to think we get subsurface cooling over the next 3-4 weeks with a powerful EWR and resultant WPac WWB.

Also, atmospheric response lags behind SST changes, so still being in "Nina mode" is expected.

This Nino isn't building like recent events and the event so far has started almost entirely from more distant forcing. In fact, the trigger for the end of the Nina can be traced back to a large Indian Ocean WWB in January and the resulting "sloshing" of the warm pool into the WPac. Careful on leaning too hard on analogs. They should only ever form a part of your toolkit. Ma Nature throwing out some strong hints that this evolution will be different from most modern ones.

 

 

[raindancewx]

Anti-logs will be pretty useful again this winter to correct for the unusual-ness of the event.

There are quite a few recent La Ninas with +PDO setups - I suspect a few of them will show as useful opposites later on.

There are a couple years on the old data sets in the 1930s/1940s where Nino 1.2 gets real warm, for a sustained period, but it never really spreads out (-PDO, super warm 1.2 look)

[GaWx]

Have 1+2 anomalies recently warmed the fastest on record? 
 

- it has risen 3.5 the last 13 weeks/3 months, the fastest on record (since 1982) for 13 weeks just beating the old of 3.3 set Feb-May 1983

- fastest in 2 weeks is 2.3, set in March of 2003, twice as fast as the fastest two weeks this time

 Going back to 1870 (monthly), the fastest one month rise has been 1.95, set April to May, 1905. I don't think that will be broken.

 The fastest two month rise has been 2.65, set in Jan to March of 1957. It exceeded 2.0 two other times:

- rose 2.32 Feb to April 1935

- rose 2.19 April to June 1997

 - depending on how well the rest of April holds the warmth, there will be a chance for Feb to Apr to exceed 2.0.

[snowman19]

No reason to think we get subsurface cooling over the next 3-4 weeks with a powerful EWR and resultant WPac WWB.
Also, atmospheric response lags behind SST changes, so still being in "Nina mode" is expected.
This Nino isn't building like recent events and the event so far has started almost entirely from more distant forcing. In fact, the trigger for the end of the Nina can be traced back to a large Indian Ocean WWB in January and the resulting "sloshing" of the warm pool into the WPac. Careful on leaning too hard on analogs. They should only ever form a part of your toolkit. Ma Nature throwing out some strong hints that this evolution will be different from most modern ones.
 
 

This one is way different in that it’s forming in ENSO regions 1+2 and 3, something that has been extremely rare since 1997, which was also an eastern Pacific/EP Nino. I’ve read research which found that EP Ninos are more common in -PDO regimes, which would fit

[snowman19]

Moderate to strongly positive IOD developing…this is only going to facilitate further Nino development as it constructively interferes

[40/70 Benchmark]

19 hours ago, bluewave said:

Wonder if Nino 1.2 peaks early in the next few months like 57-58 did? These Nino 1+2 maxes typically occur later on in the event. Then there is the possibility of a secondary peak a few months after that like we saw with 97-98 and 82-83.

 

 

This is my point....region 1.2 is so volatile that there isn't a ton of value inferring too much about next winter from its current behavior....it probably makes a true modoki pretty unlikely, but that eastern flank is very volatile.

Here is last November:

 

 

Compared to January:

 

 

Consensus was also pretty emphatic that it remain east-based and whiffed at like 1-2 months lead....so, good luck declaring east based in April.

[40/70 Benchmark]

11 hours ago, raindancewx said:

Anti-logs will be pretty useful again this winter to correct for the unusual-ness of the event.

There are quite a few recent La Ninas with +PDO setups - I suspect a few of them will show as useful opposites later on.

There are a couple years on the old data sets in the 1930s/1940s where Nino 1.2 gets real warm, for a sustained period, but it never really spreads out (-PDO, super warm 1.2 look)

Surprising that 1945-1946 featured above normal snowfall in Boston...wouldn't have guessed that. El nino must have been weak if it was east based in order to allow that much blocking.

[snowman19]

Surprising that 1945-1946 featured above normal snowfall in Boston...wouldn't have guessed that. El nino must have been weak if it was east based in order to allow that much blocking.

IMO this one will either be basin-wide or east-based. I think Modoki/CP is off the table at this point. I also think this one goes strong, I doubt “super” at this point but I think there is a well above average chance at strong. The +IOD is only going to encourage further development through constructive interference

[40/70 Benchmark]

8 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

IMO this one will either be basin-wide or east-based. I think Modoki/CP is off the table at this point. I also think this one goes strong, I doubt “super” at this point but I think there is a well above average chance at strong. The +IOD is only going to encourage further development through constructive interference

I do not.

[40/70 Benchmark]

If I had to guess, I would say like 1.5 to 1.7 ONI basin wide event...but I do think this is going to have a strong westward tug its sleeve.

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is my point....region 1.2 is so volatile that there isn't a ton of value inferring too much about next winter from its current behavior....it probably makes a true modoki pretty unlikely, but that eastern flank is very volatile.

Here is last November:

 

 

Compared to January:

 

 

Consensus was also pretty emphatic that it remain east-based and whiffed at like 1-2 months lead....so, good luck declaring east based in April.

Yeah, true east based El Niño events have become very rare since the 1980s. The 82-83 and 97-98 events developed with strong WWBs in the CPAC in March. That didn’t happen this year. So we haven’t had strong east based event developing from the rare EPAC WWBs like we recently saw. That’s why we don’t have any good analogs for how this one may evolve.
 

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

37 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Yeah, true east based El Niño events have become very rare since the 1980s. The 82-83 and 97-98 events developed with strong WWBs in the CPAC in March. That didn’t happen this year. So we haven’t had strong east based event developing from the rare EPAC WWBs like we recently saw. That’s why we don’t have any good analogs for how this one may evolve.
 

 

Just that one line there makes it silly to strongly favor an east based event at this early juncture IMO....who knows, maybe east based events are going by the wayside due to climate change, since we blame it for everything else. Never mind the fact that this event isn't evolving in the same fashion as other powerhouse east based events. How anyone can conclude that modoki is off of the table based upon that is beyond me. Maybe it gives you pause, sure....

[GaWx]

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is my point....region 1.2 is so volatile that there isn't a ton of value inferring too much about next winter from its current behavior....it probably makes a true modoki pretty unlikely, but that eastern flank is very volatile.

Here is last November:

 

 

Compared to January:

 

 

Consensus was also pretty emphatic that it remain east-based and whiffed at like 1-2 months lead....so, good luck declaring east based in April.

 In developing El Niños since 1982, the fastest 3 month warmings in Nino 1+2 prior to the current 3.5 were:

 - In 1997, it was 3.0 (Apr 16-July 16 of 1997): rose only 0.2 subsequent 4 weeks to that Nino's max followed by fall of 0.9 the two weeks after that

- It also rose 3.0 Feb 26-May 28

- Fastest in 1982 only 2.3 

- Looking back at other Niños that reached 2.0 in Nino 3.4 (1972-3, 1965-6, 1888-9, 1877-8), the fastest 3 month warming in Nino 1+2 was only 2.25.

- So, with Jan of 2023 being -0.35, climo suggests that it won't be easy for April of 2023 as a whole to average much more than about +2. Thus, the +2.7 that was just released smells strongly like a max at least for awhile.

 So, I kind of expect a "correction" or at least a stall of sorts in Nino 1+2 for at least the rest of this month as history suggests this highly volatile relatively small region's 3.5 warming in 3 months has sort of gotten ahead of itself. It wouldn't at all surprise me if it cools notably in the update to be released this coming Monday though that isn't an outright prediction.

[40/70 Benchmark]

8 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 In developing El Niños since 1982, the fastest 3 month warmings in Nino 1+2 prior to the current 3.5 were:

 - In 1997, it was 3.0 (Apr 16-July 16 of 1997): rose only 0.2 subsequent 4 weeks to that Nino's max followed by fall of 0.9 the two weeks after that

- It also rose 3.0 Feb 26-May 28

- Fastest in 1982 only 2.3 

- Looking back at other Niños that reached 2.0 in Nino 3.4 (1972-3, 1965-6, 1888-9, 1877-8), the fastest 3 month warming in Nino 1+2 was only 2.25.

- So, with Jan of 2023 being -0.35, climo suggests that it won't be easy for April of 2023 as a whole to average much more than about +2. Thus, the +2.7 that was just released smells strongly like a max at least for awhile.

 So, I kind of expect a "correction" or at least a stall of sorts in Nino 1+2 for at least the rest of this month as history suggests this highly volatile relatively small region's 3.5 warming in 3 months has sort of gotten ahead of itself. It wouldn't at all surprise me if it cools notably in the update to be released this coming Monday though that isn't an outright prediction.

I would strongly hedge towards a correction west over the ensuing months...it has to if el nino is indeed going to develop and flourish.

[snowman19]

Regardless of where the Nino is centered, it looks like it’s going to be a very major event

[brooklynwx99]

isn't strong 1.5-2C, very strong 2-2.5C, and super 2.5+C? the mean is advertising a strong Nino, not super 

i hate twitter lmao

[csnavywx]

Weak 0.5

Mod 1.0

Strong 1.5

Super 2.0

[roardog]

I remember all the tweets snowman 19 posted last year about how we were going to have a strong Nina this past Winter. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

I remember when nobody posted if it wasn't about future snow chances. 

Here's a cool map. 5-month change

https://ibb.co/1sst316

We need the event to be this extreme to be independent from global random right now. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

46 minutes ago, roardog said:

I remember all the tweets snowman 19 posted last year about how we were going to have a strong Nina this past Winter. 

It end up right where I said it would intensity wise....its the orientation that messed me up.

[roardog]

7 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

It end up right where I said it would intensity wise....its the orientation that messed me up.

Yeah. You were right on with intensity despite all of twitter telling us it was going to be the strongest in 5000 years(maybe I exaggerated a bit there).

[40/70 Benchmark]

6 minutes ago, roardog said:

Yeah. You were right on with intensity despite all of twitter telling us it was going to be the strongest in 5000 years(maybe I exaggerated a bit there).

Same dynamic at play this year to a degree, IMO...albeit it should be more potent than this la nina....at least ONI wise.

[snowman19]

I remember all the tweets snowman 19 posted last year about how we were going to have a strong Nina this past Winter. 

Wrong as usual. I doubted strong I said high end moderate but I understand you have serious reading comprehension and memory problems

[bluewave]

4 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Just that one line there makes it silly to strongly favor an east based event at this early juncture IMO....who knows, maybe east based events are going by the wayside due to climate change, since we blame it for everything else. Never mind the fact that this event isn't evolving in the same fashion as other powerhouse east based events. How anyone can conclude that modoki is off of the table based upon that is beyond me. Maybe it gives you pause, sure....

None of the El Niño events following 09-10 evolved in a way that were familiar to us from what happened in the past.

Models were indicating an El Niño in 12-13 that began to dissipate after Labor Day with the strong trades and -PDO. But it still acted in some ways like like an El Niño winter. Front loaded warmth and the historic Nemo in February. 

The spring of 2014 saw strong WWBs and the talk turned to a strong El Niño in 14-15. But the trades picked back up and we had one of the farthest west Modokis for that winter. The big event was delayed a year to 15-16 and produced the record Nino 4 temperatures. Front loaded historic warmth with the first strong MJO 4-6 in December during a super El Niño. But the westward lean back to the CP during the 2nd half of the winter with blocking gave us the historic January snowstorm. 

The 18-19 El Niño never coupled due to all the warm water in the WPAC mimicking a La Niña. So we got the Aleutian Ridge-Western Trough-SE Ridge combo. 

This event is starting out east based before Nino 3.4 had a chance to catch up. So we could see Nino 1-2 begin to decline before an actual El Niño is declared using 3.4. Not many analogs for what happens when these two regions are out of phase. We will probably need much stronger and sustained CP WWBs to get a trimonthly ONI of +1.5 or higher in Nino 3.4. This could happen if the trades can relax enough. But we have never seen a super before with such strong trades like we had in March. Seems like the atmosphere gets an early start in March ahead of super El Niño’s. But some strong events can see a pick up in WWB activity later in the spring. So these individual model forecasts may not yet have a good handle of how this El Niño will develop until the CP WWB activity comes into better focus.

[roardog]

48 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

Wrong as usual. I doubted strong I said high end moderate but I understand you have serious reading comprehension and memory problems

I never said anything about what you thought would happen. lol