Extended summer stormlover74 future snow hole banter thread 23

[hudsonvalley21]

Maybe NWS can create a new advisory for those snowbirds down there. 
 

[Allsnow]

Perhaps next winter nyc can break the 2 inch record 

[MJO812]

2 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Perhaps next winter nyc can break the 2 inch record 

Patience 

[MJO812]

Jan 21 2014

[Allsnow]

3 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Patience 

It’s almost February 

[MJO812]

2 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

It’s almost February 

I'm still remaining patient on a backloaded winter.

[LibertyBell]

5 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

It’s almost February 

it could just as easily be broken in March by a renegade storm in the middle of a warm pattern like March 1998 had.

 

[Allsnow]

10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

it could just as easily be broken in March by a renegade storm in the middle of a warm pattern like March 1998 had.

 

Surface temps and accumulation will be a bigger issue for the city then back in 3/98. I doubt the city can get a big March storm anymore without artic air 

[LibertyBell]

11 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Surface temps and accumulation will be a bigger issue for the city then back in 3/98. I doubt the city can get a big March storm anymore without artic air 

Tell me about it.... it's been decades since this area has seen a double digit March storm, regardless of what less urbanized areas have received (they did great in March 2018).

 

[vegan_edible]

GO BILLS

[Rjay]

[vegan_edible]

between the weeklies and the bills its been a rough sunday

[LibertyBell]

11 hours ago, vegan_edible said:

between the weeklies and the bills its been a rough sunday

the Ravens will squash the Chiefs into submission

they would have done the same to the Bills too

 

[LibertyBell]

12 hours ago, Rjay said:

I loved the smooth graphics and even smoother easy listening music from back then lol

 

[rclab]

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

the Ravens will squash the Chiefs into submission

they would have done the same to the Bills too

 

“Incoming” …… As always …..

[Volcanic Winter]

I’ve always been fascinated by the Little Ice Age and have wondered for a long time what winters here would’ve been like , especially the earlier period 4-500 years ago, prior to colonization. 

I mean, if you take ~1C off the 1850-1900 baseline, you’re talking the possibility that the entire EC was extremely snowy. The only real contention here that makes sense is that it may have been colder and significantly drier, so perhaps averages weren’t too crazily different. But I have to believe during the coldest and stormiest decades of that period, this area had to be regularly pulling down 40-60 inches and probably had multiple seasons above our snowiest of the past hundred years or so. Again, perhaps the cold was offset by drier air overall and the region saw more frequent less amplified systems that perhaps didn’t drop snow as heavily as amplified storms do today with the oceans the way they are now. I had always heard the North Atlantic was an icebox during much of the LIA. 

If you go back to before the start of the Holocene (which wasn’t that long ago, crazily enough), the Laurentide ice sheet extended to NYC’s present location. Glaciers are compacted snowfall that doesn’t melt the rest of the year and compiles over centuries and millenia. Go back far enough and the area might just be the winter wonderland I dream of .

But seriously, I have to imagine there were periods of the LIA that were extremely prolific for snowfall throughout the Mid Atlantic and New England. 

This is an excellent article from my favorite science blog on the internet (covers much more than just volcanology) that discusses this subject and touches on the LIA with some interesting speculation. It’s a very good read. 

https://www.volcanocafe.org/ice-age/

[Cfa]

Greetings from Wisconsin, snow lovers (which I’m not).

It’s been years since I’ve seen anything like this, this picture doesn’t even do it justice. I’ve never seen *old* snow clinging to the sides of trees, buildings, etc. until now.

The car was, and still is, entombed in ice this morning from freezing rain and/or mixed precip overnight. Roads that were salty yesterday were iced over (or snowy in some areas) this morning.

I’m just grateful I came this week and not last week when temps were much colder than anything I’ve experienced.

[LibertyBell]

44 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I’ve always been fascinated by the Little Ice Age and have wondered for a long time what winters here would’ve been like , especially the earlier period 4-500 years ago, prior to colonization. 

I mean, if you take ~1C off the 1850-1900 baseline, you’re talking the possibility that the entire EC was extremely snowy. The only real contention here that makes sense is that it may have been colder and significantly drier, so perhaps averages weren’t too crazily different. But I have to believe during the coldest and stormiest decades of that period, this area had to be regularly pulling down 40-60 inches and probably had multiple seasons above our snowiest of the past hundred years or so. Again, perhaps the cold was offset by drier air overall and the region saw more frequent less amplified systems that perhaps didn’t drop snow as heavily as amplified storms do today with the oceans the way they are now. I had always heard the North Atlantic was an icebox during much of the LIA. 

If you go back to before the start of the Holocene (which wasn’t that long ago, crazily enough), the Laurentide ice sheet extended to NYC’s present location. Glaciers are compacted snowfall that doesn’t melt the rest of the year and compiles over centuries and millenia. Go back far enough and the area might just be the winter wonderland I dream of .

But seriously, I have to imagine there were periods of the LIA that were extremely prolific for snowfall throughout the Mid Atlantic and New England. 

This is an excellent article from my favorite science blog on the internet (covers much more than just volcanology) that discusses this subject and touches on the LIA with some interesting speculation. It’s a very good read. 

https://www.volcanocafe.org/ice-age/

There is a way to get some idea of what it might be like.

I'm borrowing the idea that during a total solar eclipse, just before totality, we get to see what the sun would look like from Pluto in terms of incoming light....

 

So, the ice sheets made it down as far as NYC and Long Island at their furthest extent southward.  This means the mean temperature for the year was around 32F (0C).  Now just go north along the north american east coast until you hit the place that has an average annual temperature around that mark and see what kind of snowfall they have and you'll have an approximate idea of what it would have been like around here.  You'll probably need to go to Greenland (or maybe northern Newfoundland) to find it.

 

[LibertyBell]

44 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I’ve always been fascinated by the Little Ice Age and have wondered for a long time what winters here would’ve been like , especially the earlier period 4-500 years ago, prior to colonization. 

I mean, if you take ~1C off the 1850-1900 baseline, you’re talking the possibility that the entire EC was extremely snowy. The only real contention here that makes sense is that it may have been colder and significantly drier, so perhaps averages weren’t too crazily different. But I have to believe during the coldest and stormiest decades of that period, this area had to be regularly pulling down 40-60 inches and probably had multiple seasons above our snowiest of the past hundred years or so. Again, perhaps the cold was offset by drier air overall and the region saw more frequent less amplified systems that perhaps didn’t drop snow as heavily as amplified storms do today with the oceans the way they are now. I had always heard the North Atlantic was an icebox during much of the LIA. 

If you go back to before the start of the Holocene (which wasn’t that long ago, crazily enough), the Laurentide ice sheet extended to NYC’s present location. Glaciers are compacted snowfall that doesn’t melt the rest of the year and compiles over centuries and millenia. Go back far enough and the area might just be the winter wonderland I dream of .

But seriously, I have to imagine there were periods of the LIA that were extremely prolific for snowfall throughout the Mid Atlantic and New England. 

This is an excellent article from my favorite science blog on the internet (covers much more than just volcanology) that discusses this subject and touches on the LIA with some interesting speculation. It’s a very good read. 

https://www.volcanocafe.org/ice-age/

In spite of all this, the NYC-Long Island-NJ area was hit by a megahurricane sometime in the 1400s in the "pre Columbian era."

 

[LibertyBell]

10 minutes ago, Cfa said:

Greetings from Wisconsin, snow lovers (which I’m not).

It’s been years since I’ve seen anything like this, this picture doesn’t even do it justice. I’ve never seen *old* snow clinging to the sides of trees, buildings, etc. until now.

The car was, and still is, entombed in ice this morning from freezing rain and/or mixed precip overnight. Roads that were salty yesterday were iced over (or snowy in some areas) this morning.

I’m just grateful I came this week and not last week when temps were much colder than anything I’ve experienced.

question-- why did you go there? lol

 

[Volcanic Winter]

12 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

In spite of all this, the NYC-Long Island-NJ area was hit by a megahurricane sometime in the 1400s in the "pre Columbian era."

 

I had heard this in passing, do we have any estimations on intensity? Speculation?

I had also read a very strong hurricane hit our area in I believe 1815 (or thereabouts, just going from memory). 

Seems like for a hurricane to maintain serious intensity up to our latitude it must have tremendous forward speed to dampen any weakening before landfall, which I believe checks out with estimations at least for the 19th century storm I read about. 

Weren’t the great LIE hurricane and Great Atlantic hurricane of ‘38 and ‘44 also very quick movers? Again, that sort of appears to be a pre-requisite for high intensity hurricanes up to this latitude, which does make sense. 

[LibertyBell]

10 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I had heard this in passing, do we have any estimations on intensity? Speculation?

I had also read a very strong hurricane hit our area in I believe 1815 (or thereabouts, just going from memory). 

Seems like for a hurricane to maintain serious intensity up to our latitude it must have tremendous forward speed to dampen any weakening before landfall, which I believe checks out with estimations at least for the 19th century storm I read about. 

Weren’t the great LIE hurricane and Great Atlantic hurricane of ‘38 and ‘44 also very quick movers? Again, that sort of appears to be a pre-requisite for high intensity hurricanes up to this latitude, which does make sense. 

Yep, at our latitude the westerlies usually speed them up.

1815 was Tambora and the first Year Without a Summer.

There was a hurricane in 1804 that sliced through Central Long Island and up the CT River Valley in early October and it was so cold that we changed to sleet on the backside with temps in the mid 30s.  It was a Cat 2 at landfall.  Rated as F2 prior to the SS scale because back then tornadoes and hurricanes were rated on the same scale.

The hurricane you're talking about was probably the Great Massachusetts Bay Colony hurricane which may have been a Cat 4 at landfall (or at least Cat 3.5-- which is 130 MPH) which hit in the late 1700s (I forget the exact year.)

That Pre Columbian hurricane speculation about the 1400s is that it was either a really big hurricane or a megatsunami (which could either happen from a big earthquake near the Canary Is. or the impact of an asteroid.  The latter has already happened; Chesapeake Bay was created from an impact, the asteroid split in two parts and the second part fell into the ocean just east of Toms River.)

[LibertyBell]

16 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I had heard this in passing, do we have any estimations on intensity? Speculation?

I had also read a very strong hurricane hit our area in I believe 1815 (or thereabouts, just going from memory). 

Seems like for a hurricane to maintain serious intensity up to our latitude it must have tremendous forward speed to dampen any weakening before landfall, which I believe checks out with estimations at least for the 19th century storm I read about. 

Weren’t the great LIE hurricane and Great Atlantic hurricane of ‘38 and ‘44 also very quick movers? Again, that sort of appears to be a pre-requisite for high intensity hurricanes up to this latitude, which does make sense. 

Oh, you must mean the 1821 Norfolk and Long Island Hurricane which made landfall near Cape May, NJ as a Cat 4 and went due north and hit Manhattan as a Cat 3, the only major hurricane to ever make landfall in NYC.  It came in at low tide (but still had a very high surge.)

 

[Volcanic Winter]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

Yep, at our latitude the westerlies usually speed them up.

1815 was Tambora and the first Year Without a Summer.

There was a hurricane in 1804 that sliced through Central Long Island and up the CT River Valley in early October and it was so cold that we changed to sleet on the backside with temps in the mid 30s.  It was a Cat 2 at landfall.  Rated as F2 prior to the SS scale because back then tornadoes and hurricanes were rated on the same scale.

The hurricane you're talking about was probably the Great Massachusetts Bay Colony hurricane which may have been a Cat 4 at landfall (or at least Cat 3.5-- which is 130 MPH) which hit in the late 1700s (I forget the exact year.)

That Pre Columbian hurricane speculation about the 1400s is that it was either a really big hurricane or a megatsunami (which could either happen from a big earthquake near the Canary Is. or the impact of an asteroid.  The latter has already happened; Chesapeake Bay was created from an impact, the asteroid split in two parts and the second part fell into the ocean just east of Toms River.)

Very fascinating stuff, thanks for that!! And yep I’m familiar with the Chesapeake impactor which fell during the Eocene something like ~33mya. Was a 1-2km bolide IIRC, certainly wouldn’t be a great time for us would that repeat today!

Have you heard about the Australasian Strewnfield from less than 1mya?? It may have impacted an active volcano on the Bolaven Plateau in SE Asia, and subsequent lava flows buried the crater. It’s an insane possibility and one of the most fascinating subjects in recent geologic history. It was a relatively large impact event. Here’s a paper on it I read recently:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1904368116

And of course the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis had me hook line and sinker for a while, just because the possibility of a large airburst event significantly bigger than Tunguska only thousands of years ago is extremely intellectually appealing. But it’s heavily, heavily contentious and it’s not necessary to explain the Younger Dryas cooling excursion. The final pulse of melting from the Laurentide shutting down the AMOC is sufficient to explain that. Of course it could’ve still happened and simply not been the primary driver of the cooling episode, but again the supposed platinum anomalies found at Clovis culture sites from the time period are heavily disputed in literature. I always find that in and of itself kind of crazy, that material is either “there” or it isn’t. But I suspect that’s a major oversimplification. That sort of material analysis isn’t really my forte. 

[Volcanic Winter]

19 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Oh, you must mean the 1821 Norfolk and Long Island Hurricane which made landfall near Cape May, NJ as a Cat 4 and went due north and hit Manhattan as a Cat 3, the only major hurricane to ever make landfall in NYC.  It came in at low tide (but still had a very high surge.)

 

And yep, that’s the one I was thinking of! Conflated the dates with Tambora, which of course is pure lol as that stuff is always on my mind. Thanks!

[LibertyBell]

36 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

Very fascinating stuff, thanks for that!! And yep I’m familiar with the Chesapeake impactor which fell during the Eocene something like ~33mya. Was a 1-2km bolide IIRC, certainly wouldn’t be a great time for us would that repeat today!

Have you heard about the Australasian Strewnfield from less than 1mya?? It may have impacted an active volcano on the Bolaven Plateau in SE Asia, and subsequent lava flows buried the crater. It’s an insane possibility and one of the most fascinating subjects in recent geologic history. It was a relatively large impact event. Here’s a paper on it I read recently:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1904368116

And of course the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis had me hook line and sinker for a while, just because the possibility of a large airburst event significantly bigger than Tunguska only thousands of years ago is extremely intellectually appealing. But it’s heavily, heavily contentious and it’s not necessary to explain the Younger Dryas cooling excursion. The final pulse of melting from the Laurentide shutting down the AMOC is sufficient to explain that. Of course it could’ve still happened and simply not been the primary driver of the cooling episode, but again the supposed platinum anomalies found at Clovis culture sites from the time period are heavily disputed in literature. I always find that in and of itself kind of crazy, that material is either “there” or it isn’t. But I suspect that’s a major oversimplification. 

This is all fascinating stuff and the idea that impact events can stimulate volcano formation!  I have heard about the Australia event is that the one that might have created a genetic bottleneck? I thought it was in New Zealand but it could be either.  It supposedly wiped out 10% of the hominids alive at that time and created the largest volcanic eruption we know of on this planet?

 

[Volcanic Winter]

25 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

This is all fascinating stuff and the idea that impact events can stimulate volcano formation!  I have heard about the Australia event is that the one that might have created a genetic bottleneck? I thought it was in New Zealand but it could be either.  It supposedly wiped out 10% of the hominids alive at that time and created the largest volcanic eruption we know of on this planet?

 

Toba Catastrophy Theory. The Toba eruption 75kya was 3-5x larger than the most recent Yellowstone supereruption. It was as big as 5000 cubic kilometers of erupted material which is mind boggling. For reference, Mt St Helens was about 1.2 cubic kilometers of erupted material and a low end VEI 5. If you want to know why I have such a burning interest in volcanology, the scale we’re talking about here is precisely the reason. It’s beyond comprehension and not even really all that long ago, 75kya is geologically last week. Events of similar magnitude will occur again, though of course not likely tomorrow.

With that said, the genetic bottleneck component is disputed. There’s absolutely no doubt an eruption that monstrously large would’ve had a huge climate impact, however it’s not always that simple. There is evidence that Toba erupted huge (I mean HUGE) lava fountains around the circular caldera ring fault and then the primary ash column would’ve been something called a co-ignimbrite plume. This is sort of a secondary eruption column that follows a less explosive episode and creates strong thermal updrafts that lofts material high, but not quite as high as a primary explosive (plinian) sequence. Semeru had an eruption a couple years ago that demonstrated co-ignimbrite plumes well.

Long story short, it may not have had as enormous an impact as the volume alone would suggest as climate disrupting gases may not have completely and consistently reached the stratosphere. We don’t really know for sure, but this is plausible. It definitely caused a volcanic winter don’t mistake me, I’m just speaking about the absolute magnitude of the event. 

The evidence against comes from a lakebed in Africa which shows little climate disruption from this time period. However, playing devil’s advocate we know even very large volcanic eruptions tend to regionally have varying impacts. Averaged globally there are pronounced effects, but certain regions may be more or less impacted than others. So it’s interesting but also not conclusive IMHO. There is probably more evidence and discussion about this nowadays, I haven’t read into Toba in quite a while. 
 

Regardless, an eruption that large - hominids at the time weren’t having very much fun. Indonesia would’ve been absolutely destroyed. 

[Dark Star]

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

In spite of all this, the NYC-Long Island-NJ area was hit by a megahurricane sometime in the 1400s in the "pre Columbian era."

 

Sounds like the mega hurricane was likely due to global warming?

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, Volcanic Winter said:

Toba Catastrophy Theory. The Toba eruption 75kya was 3-5x larger than the most recent Yellowstone supereruption. It was as big as 5000 cubic kilometers of erupted material which is mind boggling. For reference, Mt St Helens was about 1.2 cubic kilometers of erupted material and a low end VEI 5. If you want to know why I have such a burning interest in volcanology, the scale we’re talking about here is precisely the reason. It’s beyond comprehension and not even really all that long ago, 75kya is geologically last week. Events of similar magnitude will occur again, though of course not likely tomorrow.

With that said, the genetic bottleneck component is disputed. There’s absolutely no doubt an eruption that monstrously large would’ve had a huge climate impact, however it’s not always that simple. There is evidence that Toba erupted huge (I mean HUGE) lava fountains around the circular caldera ring fault and then the primary ash column would’ve been something called a co-ignimbrite plume. This is sort of a secondary eruption column that follows a less explosive episode and creates strong thermal updrafts that lofts material high, but not quite as high as a primary explosive (plinian) sequence. Semeru had an eruption a couple years ago that demonstrated co-ignimbrite plumes well.

Long story short, it may not have had as enormous an impact as the volume alone would suggest as climate disrupting gases may not have completely and consistently reached the stratosphere. We don’t really know for sure, but this is plausible. It definitely caused a volcanic winter don’t mistake me, I’m just speaking about the absolute magnitude of the event. 

The evidence against comes from a lakebed in Africa which shows little climate disruption from this time period. However, playing devil’s advocate we know even very large volcanic eruptions tend to regionally have varying impacts. Averaged globally there are pronounced effects, but certain regions may be more or less impacted than others. So it’s interesting but also not conclusive IMHO. There is probably more evidence and discussion about this nowadays, I haven’t read into Toba in quite a while. 
 

Regardless, an eruption that large - hominids at the time weren’t having very much fun. Indonesia would’ve been absolutely destroyed. 

Maybe most of SE Asia!  How much more powerful would it have been than the tsunami that hit SE Asia on Christmas Eve 2004? That killed hundreds of thousands of people!

Can energy release of different types be compared?

 

[Volcanic Winter]

16 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Maybe most of SE Asia!  How much more powerful would it have been than the tsunami that hit SE Asia on Christmas Eve 2004? That killed hundreds of thousands of people!

Can energy release of different types be compared?

 

Yes! I’ve seen eruptions computed into joules and compared to earthquakes, but that kind of mathematics is far beyond me. It’s possible though, and I’ve seen multiple eruptions compared to earthquake energy releases (and nuclear events like Tsar Bomba).