El Nino 2023-2024

[snowman19]

It is, but it doesn’t mean that the mean forecast is more likely to be correct. 
Did these models predict that the trades would stay this strong all throughout May? Or did they underforecast those trades? 
[mention=564]bluewave[/mention] might know because he’s been tracking this closely. 

As the SOI gets more and more negative and the +IOD blossoms, I kind of doubt it stays that way. We’ll have to wait and see

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, Terpeast said:

It is, but it doesn’t mean that the mean forecast is more likely to be correct. 

Did these models predict that the trades would stay this strong all throughout May? Or did they underforecast those trades? 

@bluewave might know because he’s been tracking this closely. 

@jconsor showed how the models beyond 10 have been underestimating the strength of the trades east of the Dateline. So the El Niño forecasts from various models won’t be very reliable longer range if this bias continues. Nino 3.4 will continue to lag 1.2 and the WPAC warm pool. The April monthly forecasts for May also overestimated the Nino 1+2 forcing and under estimated the WPAC warm pool forcing.

April Forecast for May vs verification so far

http://seasonal.meteo.fr/content/PS-previ-cartes?language=en

 

 

 

[George001]

The may IRI update has even more spread than the April one did

[GaWx]

2 hours ago, bluewave said:

@jconsor showed how the models beyond 10 have been underestimating the strength of the trades east of the Dateline. So the El Niño forecasts from various models won’t be very reliable longer range if this bias continues. Nino 3.4 will continue to lag 1.2 and the WPAC warm pool. The April monthly forecasts for May also overestimated the Nino 1+2 forcing and under estimated the WPAC warm pool forcing.

April Forecast for May vs verification so far

http://seasonal.meteo.fr/content/PS-previ-cartes?language=en

 

 

 

 Interesting! Could this be indirectly related to the cold bias of most models in the E US, especially in winter, that results from underestimation of the southeast ridge that has been cited by some pro mets as being largely due to the underestimation of tropical forcing from the near record warm Maritime Continent/W Pacific?
 
 I've learned about the idea that record warmth in the MC often makes the atmosphere in the US act as if the MJO is in the MC phases even when it isn't officially in addition to lengthening and strengthening actual MC phases. So with MC MJO phases tending to favor an SER, the models underestimating the forcing from the MC means underestimating the SER.
 
 This appears to be the main reason why it is underestimated though the underestimate of the blocking from the near record +AMO is likely an additional factor. Between these two factors, the SER is strongly underestimated, which often results in a NW shift in storm tracks and other features as model forecast time gets closer and closer.

 So if anyone ever wondered why modeled storm tracks so often shift NW, this appears to be the explanation.

 So, back to my original question to Bluewave, @jconsorand others. Is what they're talking about here related at all to the same underestimate of MC/W Pac forcing from record warmth that causes the SER to be undermodeled?

[snowman19]

The may IRI update has even more spread than the April one did

There was spread between the dynamic and statistical models because a couple of the statistical models are on crack and showed a La Niña developing again by fall. There was very good agreement among the dynamic models actually

[SnoSki14]

If the Nino forcing can't get going by mid-late summer and given very high Atlantic SSTs, then this hurricane season has the potential to really catch folks off guard. 

[bluewave]

3 hours ago, GaWx said:

 Interesting! Could this be indirectly related to the cold bias of most models in the E US, especially in winter, that results from underestimation of the southeast ridge that has been cited by some pro mets as being largely due to the underestimation of tropical forcing from the near record warm Maritime Continent/W Pacific?
 
 I've learned about the idea that record warmth in the MC often makes the atmosphere in the US act as if the MJO is in the MC phases even when it isn't officially in addition to lengthening and strengthening actual MC phases. So with MC MJO phases tending to favor an SER, the models underestimating the forcing from the MC means underestimating the SER.
 
 This appears to be the main reason why it is underestimated though the underestimate of the blocking from the near record +AMO is likely an additional factor. Between these two factors, the SER is strongly underestimated, which often results in a NW shift in storm tracks and other features as model forecast time gets closer and closer.

 So if anyone ever wondered why modeled storm tracks so often shift NW, this appears to be the explanation.

 So, back to my original question to Bluewave, @jconsorand others. Is what they're talking about here related at all to the same underestimate of MC/W Pac forcing from record warmth that causes the SER to be undermodeled?

There are several papers on the expansion of the WPAC and NW Atlantic warm pools which have lead to the model biases that you mentioned. MJO stalling out longer in phases 4-6. Plus the long range under modeling of the SE Ridge or WAR.

 

 

 

 

 

[bkviking]

I am a NYC subforum member but since I’m on LI I spend a lot of time in NE subforum and I must say we should give credit to @Typhoon Tip for having  speculated about ENSO “normal “ influences due to new state of SST anomalies. He’s been saying this for years and now with discussion of “RONI” it’s pretty clear Tip was onto something. 

[bluewave]

44 minutes ago, bkviking said:

I am a NYC subforum member but since I’m on LI I spend a lot of time in NE subforum and I must say we should give credit to @Typhoon Tip for having  speculated about ENSO “normal “ influences due to new state of SST anomalies. He’s been saying this for years and now with discussion of “RONI” it’s pretty clear Tip was onto something. 

It’s why the models have been struggling so much with their El Niño forecasts since 2012. Record warmth in the WPAC drives stronger trade winds closer to the Dateline. So the models underestimate this influence longer range leading to too much El Niño warming in 3.4. The only model success was 15-16. 

 

[snowman19]

Very rapid PDO changes now

[snowman19]

JB all in on a very strong El Niño….never thought I’d see the day

[SnoSki14]

52 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

JB all in on a very strong El Niño….never thought I’d see the day

That alone should warrant caution 

[GaWx]

On 5/20/2023 at 8:48 AM, snowman19 said:

Very rapid PDO changes now

On May 10, @bluewaveposted this:

"I know that these seasonal forecasts aren’t great. But they are forecasting the -PDO to weaken a bit in the coming months. This would be expected if some of the stronger forecasts for the El Niño worked out."

 I responded to his post with this:

 

 "That's quite a rise forecasted for the PDO between April and July with still another 5 months to go even after that before winter starts. That suggests that a rise to low -1s is quite possible in July. That wouldn't be all that far from +0.50 being that there'd be five months to go."

 So, being that the recent PDO rise was forecasted, this is following model  forecasts thus far.

 I'm keeping these three past cases of very sharp PDO rises during a new Nino in mind, which tell me there's a small chance that the upcoming DJF PDO will exceed +0.5:

1. Nov-Apr 1883-4 was -1.4. DJF of the very cold 1884-5 was way up at +1.98. That's a 3.38 rise!

2. Nov-Apr of 1975-6 was -1.9. DJF of 1976-7 was up at +1.32. That's a rise of 3.22!   

3. Nov-Apr of 2001-2 was -1.3. DJF of 2002-3 was up at +1.42 for a rise of 2.72!

 

[Terpeast]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

On May 10, @bluewaveposted this:

"I know that these seasonal forecasts aren’t great. But they are forecasting the -PDO to weaken a bit in the coming months. This would be expected if some of the stronger forecasts for the El Niño worked out."

 I responded to his post with this:

 

 "That's quite a rise forecasted for the PDO between April and July with still another 5 months to go even after that before winter starts. That suggests that a rise to low -1s is quite possible in July. That wouldn't be all that far from +0.50 being that there'd be five months to go."

 So, being that the recent PDO rise was forecasted, this is following model  forecasts thus far.

 I'm keeping these three past cases of vey sharp PDO rises during a new Nino in mind, which tell me there's a small chance that the upcoming DJF PDO will exceed +0.5:

1. Nov-Apr 1883-4 was -1.4. DJF of the very cold 1884-5 was way up at +1.98. That's a 3.38 rise!

2. Nov-Apr of 1975-6 was -1.9. DJF of 1976-7 was up at +1.32. That's a rise of 3.22!   

3. Nov-Apr of 2001-2 was -1.3. DJF of 2002-3 was up at +1.42 for a rise of 2.72!

 

Yep, I’ve been keeping a close eye on the pdo, which has just as important (if not more) effects on our winters as enso does. 

This kind of progress is what we want to see. Otoh, the pdo was as negative as it could possibly get so some rise was inevitable. We just need enough of a rise to break the -pdo/-pna that has plagued our winters since 2016. 

[snowman19]

That alone should warrant caution 

Not to worry, even if it goes strong/super he will still predict a cold and snowy winter in the northeast. Back in the fall of 2015 he used 57-58, 02-03 and 09-10 as his analogs with a raging super El Niño in place. Quite possibly the worst choice of analogs in history, but he needed retweets, likes and follows as he always does

[GaWx]

 Based on the site noted below, the last two days have been the coldest on record for the date (back to 1958) in the Arctic (80-90N) at 4-5 C BN, which is just colder than 2015, 1962, and 1964.

https://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

 The AO has been way up at +2.6 to +2.7 the last two days, the highest on record for the period (since 1950).

[Ed, snow and hurricane fan]

3 hours ago, snowman19 said:

Not to worry, even if it goes strong/super he will still predict a cold and snowy winter in the northeast. Back in the fall of 2015 he used 57-58, 02-03 and 09-10 as his analogs with a raging super El Niño in place. Quite possibly the worst choice of analogs in history, but he needed retweets, likes and follows as he always does

I used to be a subscriber, both AccuWeather, and WxBell of JB.  Weather Bell tripled my intro rate, and JB's focus shifted to politics.  I agreed with a lot of his politics, but he went down the DJT rabbit hole, and I was paying for weather, not politics.  Did I mention WxBell tripled my annual subscription?

 

Anyway, I don't think he operates for clicks or retweets.  I know only amateur weenies are supposed to wish-cast, but he is a degreed wish-caster.  He sees hurricanes every year in the Northeast because he grew up in Rhode Island, and also sees snowy winters.  But because it is what he honestly wants.  Just my opinion.  Maybe he is monetizing weenie-ism, but I don't think he thinks that is what he is doing.

[Typhoon Tip]

Seems like some of the atmospheric pieces to the El Nino puzzle are falling into place before the ocean beneath. 

STJ S of HA ... Nice b-leaf structure fanning over Texas originating from that feature as it runs up over old Mexico

[George001]

5 hours ago, snowman19 said:

Not to worry, even if it goes strong/super he will still predict a cold and snowy winter in the northeast. Back in the fall of 2015 he used 57-58, 02-03 and 09-10 as his analogs with a raging super El Niño in place. Quite possibly the worst choice of analogs in history, but he needed retweets, likes and follows as he always does

I’d go by NOAA instead. 55% chance of at least strong, 80% chance of at least moderate, and only a 5-10% chance of no nino at all. Super nino is unlikely but regardless the nino is expected to grow and become quite powerful. There are increasing signs that the dynamical guidance is on to something, and they are favoring a strong peak. Like you said, the statistical guidance is on crack with a couple of the models saying we are getting a 4th Nina. Too early to say what the implication for winter is but I understand leaning snowless and warm until proven otherwise. 

[GaWx]

Today's SOI came in at ~-26. I'm very roughly estimating the next four days to come in at -35, -57 (lowest daily since 2/6/2010), -50, and -33 followed by a rapid rise. We appear to be looking at ~-12 for May as a whole, a solid indicator for an upcoming Nino of difficult to predict magnitude.

[snowman19]

[Typhoon Tip]

On 5/19/2023 at 10:29 AM, bluewave said:

@jconsor showed how the models beyond 10 have been underestimating the strength of the trades east of the Dateline. So the El Niño forecasts from various models won’t be very reliable longer range if this bias continues. Nino 3.4 will continue to lag 1.2 and the WPAC warm pool. The April monthly forecasts for May also overestimated the Nino 1+2 forcing and under estimated the WPAC warm pool forcing.

April Forecast for May vs verification so far

http://seasonal.meteo.fr/content/PS-previ-cartes?language=en

 

 

 

V-p chart immediate above situates the values somewhere around 90 degrees out of sync wrt to the base-line Walker model.  Interesting

[Typhoon Tip]

5 hours ago, GaWx said:

Today's SOI came in at ~-26. I'm very roughly estimating the next four days to come in at -35, -57 (lowest since 2/6/2010), -50, and -33 followed by a rapid rise. We appear to be looking at ~-12 for May as a whole, a solid indicator for an upcoming Nino of difficult to predict magnitude.

Or worse for prognostic science yet ... with the present state of background climate forcing, even if one were to predict the ensuing SD to within a reasonable margin of error ... there are deeper questions (valid ones) relating to the integration/dispersion mechanics into the mid latitudes.  

This is both theoretically questionable, but also empirically suggested too, spanning recent cool and warm ENSO phases, with increasing frequency of occurrences of partial or more complete decoupled states since circa 1998

[bluewave]

7 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

with increasing frequency of occurrences of partial or more complete decoupled states since circa 1998

[Typhoon Tip]

25 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Well .. yeah, there's that too. There's a definite seasonal/circumstantial sort of 'constraint' to this. 

In autumn, just before the advance of cooling hemispheres reaches the "triggering" latitudes ...yup, those gradients where the Hadley Cell terminates into the westerlies are concomitantly weak.  At that time ...circa late August through hgt of the tropical seasons, the HC arrives to its largest perennial extension ( and getting larger due to CC ). 

Perhaps counter-intuitive, that the spatial increased in that eddy field actually weakens the circulation of the HC ... The region within ends up pock-marked and perforated by more trough meanders and TUTTS, with TC turning right early type behavior.  

Mind us ...all these peregrinations described are in the sense of tendencies ...

El Nino summers obviously do impact TC - or always used to.  This isn't even a deep dive into statistical science to bear that out. A straight up linear comparison between cool and warm ENSO ( perhaps yes considering lags, okay ) would demonstrate a correlation.  But it has been read that El Nino autumns "shut down" TC genesis earlier than other years.  There's also a QBO marker in that discussion that's rather robust. But I wasn't intending to get into TC stuff  haha...

Anyway, with CC modulating the HC into large spatial arrays and then now having to contend with warming mid latitude oceans ( thermocline discussion notwithstanding/ nor wind ss stressing factors) this does present some problems when considering the gradients overall.

I've been arguing this for years.   The simplest principle has to be achieved or none of this conversation happens.  A has to be differentiable to B. That's why the Universe exists ( lol ) much less the shenanigans of Terrain atmosphere.   If A = B  ... nothing happens.  If A >< B ... forces do everything in their power to get A to = B.  This latter aspect is both why the wind blows, and hearts beat.  And ... starts the whole discussion about how the ENSO states integrate into the rest of the planetary system.

[snowman19]

Well .. yeah, there's that too. There's a definite seasonal/circumstantial sort of 'constraint' to this. 
In autumn, just before the advance of cooling hemispheres reaches the "triggering" latitudes ...yup, those gradients where the Hadley Cell terminates into the westerlies are concomitantly weak.  At that time ...circa late August through hgt of the tropical seasons, the HC arrives to its largest perennial extension ( and getting larger due to CC ). 
Perhaps counter-intuitive, that the spatial increased in that eddy field actually weakens the circulation of the HC ... The region within ends up pock-marked and perforated by more trough meanders and TUTTS, with TC turning right early type behavior.  
Mind us ...all these peregrinations described are in the sense of tendencies ...
El Nino summers obviously do impact TC - or always used to.  This isn't even a deep dive into statistical science to bear that out. A straight up linear comparison between cool and warm ENSO ( perhaps yes considering lags, okay ) would demonstrate a correlation.  But it has been read that El Nino autumns "shut down" TC genesis earlier than other years.  There's also a QBO marker in that discussion that's rather robust. But I wasn't intending to get into TC stuff  haha...
Anyway, with CC modulating the HC into large spatial arrays and then now having to contend with warming mid latitude oceans ( thermocline discussion notwithstanding/ nor wind ss stressing factors) this does present some problems when considering the gradients overall.
I've been arguing this for years.   The simplest principle has to be achieved or none of this conversation happens.  A has to be differentiable to B. That's why the Universe exists ( lol ) much less the shenanigans of Terrain atmosphere.   If A = B  ... nothing happens.  If A >

[bluewave]

10 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

 

 

 

Trade winds have always been a red herring. The important effect is in the thermocline, where the tidal forces rule.

9:14 AM · May 17, 2023

 

Necessary but not sufficient without the trades relaxing also.

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/why-making-el-niño-forecasts-spring-especially-anxiety-inducing

1. The heat in the subsurface tropical Pacific Ocean is a necessary precursor for El Niño but it is not always sufficient.

Let’s focus on #1 first: the persistence of the surface winds. Dr. Capotondi has published research exploring the relationship of surface winds across the tropical Pacific with ENSO. She used a very detailed satellite-based wind dataset for her analysis and found that the interannual changes in the surface winds are the key ingredient for triggering El Niño (footnote #2). Without persistence of these tropical winds, many El Niño events struggle to achieve lift off and can fizzle. It is this interannual wind variability that determines whether you get a major El Niño (e.g. 1997-98) or an El Niño “bust” (e.g. 2014).

Let’s examine the figures below to visualize this. Starting in March 1997, westerly wind anomalies (warm colors) began to form over the western tropical Pacific Ocean (left panel). In the 1997 case, the interannual variability in the winds (middle panel) was especially strong and long lasting, extending over a year and shifting very gradually eastward with time. A major El Niño event formed and peaked during the 1997-98 winter.

Now let’s look at the same period of months during 2014, which, in the spring, was predicted to be a potentially major El Niño event. Right on cue, similar to 1997, the westerly wind anomalies began early in the calendar year and lasted through April (left panel below). However, for some unknown reason, the westerly winds began dissipating and the interannual wind variability was very weak-to-nonexistent for the rest of 2014 (middle panel below).

 

[Typhoon Tip]

13 minutes ago, bluewave said:

 

Trade winds have always been a red herring. The important effect is in the thermocline, where the tidal forces rule.

9:14 AM · May 17, 2023

 

Necessary but not sufficient without the trades relaxing also.

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/why-making-el-niño-forecasts-spring-especially-anxiety-inducing

1. The heat in the subsurface tropical Pacific Ocean is a necessary precursor for El Niño but it is not always sufficient.

Let’s focus on #1 first: the persistence of the surface winds. Dr. Capotondi has published research exploring the relationship of surface winds across the tropical Pacific with ENSO. She used a very detailed satellite-based wind dataset for her analysis and found that the interannual changes in the surface winds are the key ingredient for triggering El Niño (footnote #2). Without persistence of these tropical winds, many El Niño events struggle to achieve lift off and can fizzle. It is this interannual wind variability that determines whether you get a major El Niño (e.g. 1997-98) or an El Niño “bust” (e.g. 2014).

Let’s examine the figures below to visualize this. Starting in March 1997, westerly wind anomalies (warm colors) began to form over the western tropical Pacific Ocean (left panel). In the 1997 case, the interannual variability in the winds (middle panel) was especially strong and long lasting, extending over a year and shifting very gradually eastward with time. A major El Niño event formed and peaked during the 1997-98 winter.

Now let’s look at the same period of months during 2014, which, in the spring, was predicted to be a potentially major El Niño event. Right on cue, similar to 1997, the westerly wind anomalies began early in the calendar year and lasted through April (left panel below). However, for some unknown reason, the westerly winds began dissipating and the interannual wind variability was very weak-to-nonexistent for the rest of 2014 (middle panel below).

 

Yeah, this interpretive description of her work ( Dr Capotondi's) goes a step deeper into the mechanics of the broader principles I discussed above. 

The weakening and areal expansion of the HC is going to definitely have an impact on that "...interannual changes...," in terms of both timing and mass-flux of the surface wind distribution in question.  No question -

[GaWx]

19 minutes ago, bluewave said:

 

Trade winds have always been a red herring. The important effect is in the thermocline, where the tidal forces rule.

9:14 AM · May 17, 2023

 

Necessary but not sufficient without the trades relaxing also.

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/why-making-el-niño-forecasts-spring-especially-anxiety-inducing

1. The heat in the subsurface tropical Pacific Ocean is a necessary precursor for El Niño but it is not always sufficient.

Let’s focus on #1 first: the persistence of the surface winds. Dr. Capotondi has published research exploring the relationship of surface winds across the tropical Pacific with ENSO. She used a very detailed satellite-based wind dataset for her analysis and found that the interannual changes in the surface winds are the key ingredient for triggering El Niño (footnote #2). Without persistence of these tropical winds, many El Niño events struggle to achieve lift off and can fizzle. It is this interannual wind variability that determines whether you get a major El Niño (e.g. 1997-98) or an El Niño “bust” (e.g. 2014).

Let’s examine the figures below to visualize this. Starting in March 1997, westerly wind anomalies (warm colors) began to form over the western tropical Pacific Ocean (left panel). In the 1997 case, the interannual variability in the winds (middle panel) was especially strong and long lasting, extending over a year and shifting very gradually eastward with time. A major El Niño event formed and peaked during the 1997-98 winter.

Now let’s look at the same period of months during 2014, which, in the spring, was predicted to be a potentially major El Niño event. Right on cue, similar to 1997, the westerly wind anomalies began early in the calendar year and lasted through April (left panel below). However, for some unknown reason, the westerly winds began dissipating and the interannual wind variability was very weak-to-nonexistent for the rest of 2014 (middle panel below).

 

SOI monthlies in 2014:

After an early solid -SOI in Mar and an accompanying notable Nino 3.4 SST anomaly rise in early spring, Apr-Jul SOIs were ~neutral and SST anomalies became steady. Then -SOI finally came back solidly Aug-Dec, which coincided well with SST anomalies finally rising Sep onward:

Jan +11 

Feb -2

Mar -12

Apr  +6

May +4

Jun -1

Jul -4

Aug -10

Sep -7

Oct-Dec -8

 

2015: -SOIs dominated entire year with 3 month largest dip (Aug-Oct) way down at -19. SOI didn't rise to neutral til May of 2016, when SST anomalies finally rose to neutral.

[GaWx]

12 minutes ago, bluewave said:

The El Niño development has leveled off for present time due to the stronger trade wind surge.  
 

 Though far from perfect, I've found based on looking at many years of SOI/SST anomaly data that monthly SOI drops are often a pretty good 30-60 day leading indicator for Nino 3.4 SST anomaly rises. So, with a solidly -SOI in May, I'll be looking to see if there's a significant 3.4 anomaly rise in June-July.