2024-2025 La Nina

[40/70 Benchmark]

6 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I just know that there is a PNA correlation. CDC correlation composites show that the PDO is higher correlated than Nino 4, 3.4, 3, 1.2, but if you compare it to subsurface conditions, ENSO correlates higher than the PDO in the N. Pacific. 

Perma-La Nina state has been ongoing since 1998:

I'm not really sure what you mean by east of the equator.. can you clarify?

There has def, been a large deviation from perma La Niña since 1998.

[mitchnick]

11 minutes ago, bluewave said:

But it’s not the subsurface east of the equator driving the pattern. This pattern also has a warmer surface component west of the Dateline. That warm pool at the surface over the WPAC  is what  has been producing the perma-La Niña background state since the 15-16 super El Niño.

Honestly, hard to believe that +.5C - +1.5C over that relatively small area of the globe is running the show, but that's just me.

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I just know that there is a PNA correlation. CDC correlation composites show that the PDO is higher correlated than Nino 4, 3.4, 3, 1.2, but if you compare it to subsurface conditions, ENSO correlates higher than the PDO in the N. Pacific. 

Perma-La Nina state has been ongoing since 1998:

I'm not really sure what you mean by east of the equator.. can you clarify? Do you mean east of the dateline? I disagree. The warming in the region you are referring is actually very +AMO-related, and is more an after-effect of things happening globally

https://ibb.co/C8kZdkV

I meant to say east of the Dateline. While that 500mb anomaly center south of the Aleutians has been steadily increasing, it has grown to unprecedented levels of strength and persistence since the 15-16 super El Niño. I zoomed into the 500mb anomaly center where you placed the arrow. I define the La Niña background state as record SSTs west of the Dateline along the equator in the MJO 4-6 regions and east of Japan to south of the Aleutians. So both the tropics to the mid-latitudes. We even had a ridge there last winter during the borderline super El Niño and during the uncoupled El Niños in 18-19 and 19-20. Anytime we have a strong enough ridge axis out south of the Aleutians it pumps up the Southeast ridge and or ridge over the Northeast. This is the main reason we have seen the first 9 year run of record to warmer than normal winters in a row for the Northeast. 

 

 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Well the Winter.. I was posting a 12-month average since 1998. The Winter RNA pattern has been especially strong after we turn the corner for coldest time of the year (~Jan 27th), this is a ridiculous anomaly for a 7-consecutive year period covering a 2-month span.. +120dm.

Do you have any idea why Strong El Nino's are head starting long term La Nina states? The 15-16 one was 1:8. I haven't yet figured it out, except to say that the base ENSO state is more long term and a +wave within that long term state is followed by an equal -wave. 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

4 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Do you have any idea why Strong El Nino's are heading starting long term La Nina states? The 15-16 one was 1:8. I haven't yet figured it out. 

 

For curiousity, what was 2009-10 and 2023-24? And if data was available, 1997-98?

[Stormchaserchuck1]

5 minutes ago, PhiEaglesfan712 said:

For curiousity, what was 2009-10 and 2023-24? 

09-10 only maxed out at +1.6, but was followed by 2 La Nina years, one being -1.6. 

23-24 is reversing to La Nina too. 

72-73 was followed by 3 La Nina's

82-83 was followed by 2 La Nina's right in the middle of +PDO

97-98 was followed by 3 La Nina's. 

But after the 15-16 El Nino, we basically had 7 years of -PNA (8 if you include 23-24). 

It just seems like since the 1970s, Strong El Nino events are more of a long term La Nina state than the former. 

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, mitchnick said:

Honestly, hard to believe that +.5C - +1.5C over that relatively small area of the globe is running the show, but that's just me.

I posted recent papers on this topic in these discussion threads. There has been a rapid expansion of the WPAC warm pool since the early 80s. So forcing in those areas has been steadily increasing. More forcing there results in warmer winters for the Northeast. The period since 15-16 has been unprecedented for winter warmth in the recorded climate record. The next 5 winters will be important in determining what happens in the future. A 15 year period of observations can be helpful in determining if a new climate threshold has been crossed or not. The thing about climate thresholds is that you won’t know whether you crossed one until it’s pretty far back in the rear view mirror. We usually don’t know where they are ahead of time. So if these very warm winters are still occurring regularly by around 2030 then we may have already crossed the invisible threshold. I will continue to take one winter at a time and collect more data before making a determination one way or another.

12 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Well the Winter.. I was posting a 12-month average since 1998. The Winter RNA pattern has been especially strong after we turn the corner for coldest time of the year (~Jan 27th), this is a ridiculous anomaly for a 7-year period covering a 2-month span.. +120dm.

Do you have any idea why Strong El Nino's are heading starting long term La Nina states? The 15-16 one was 1:8. I haven't yet figured it out. 

My guess is that the WPAC warming faster than the EPAC is increasing the trades along the equator in the Central Pacific leading to more frequent La Ninas. 

[George001]

3 hours ago, snowman19 said:

Possibly, but the issue is, this is not being shown on any model as an east-based La Niña (i.e.: 95-96, 10-11, 17-18) those years were true east-based Niña events or started out as true east-based Niña events. 13-14 was cold-neutral/Nada, with a cold region 1+2, so “east-based cold Nada”, if you want to call it that? At no time were the models depicting this one an east-based event and they’re still not.
 

Maybe @GaWx can chime in here? 

10-11 was not east based at all, guidance is more east based with the Nina than that winter, but less east based than 17-18 and 95-96. 

[mitchnick]

25 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I posted recent papers on this topic in these discussion threads. There has been a rapid expansion of the WPAC warm pool since the early 80s. So forcing in those areas has been steadily increasing. More forcing there results in warmer winters for the Northeast. The period since 15-16 has been unprecedented for winter warmth in the recorded climate record. The next 5 winters will be important in determining what happens in the future. A 15 year period of observations can be helpful in determining if a new climate threshold has been crossed or not. The thing about climate thresholds is that you won’t know whether you crossed one until it’s pretty far back in the rear view mirror. We usually don’t know where they are ahead of time. So if these very warm winters are still occurring regularly by around 2030 then we may have already crossed the invisible threshold. I will continue to take one winter at a time and collect more data before making a determination one way or another.

My guess is that the WPAC warming faster than the EPAC is increasing the trades along the equator in the Central Pacific leading to more frequent La Ninas. 

Thanks, but I'll probably by dead by 2030. 

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

41 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

09-10 only maxed out at +1.6, but was followed by 2 La Nina years, one being -1.6. 

23-24 is reversing to La Nina too. 

72-73 was followed by 3 La Nina's

82-83 was followed by 2 La Nina's right in the middle of +PDO

97-98 was followed by 3 La Nina's. 

But after the 15-16 El Nino, we basically had 7 years of -PNA (8 if you include 23-24). 

It just seems like since the 1970s, Strong El Nino events are more of a long term La Nina state than the former. 

I definitely agree with the strong el nino -> la nina trend. Every one since 1973 has gone that way except 1992, which was probably altered by Mount Pinatubo.

But what about the MJO states during those strong el nino years?

[FPizz]

1 hour ago, mitchnick said:

Thanks, but I'll probably by dead by 2030. 

 

They are just guesses, I wouldn't worry too much

[GaWx]

1 hour ago, George001 said:

10-11 was not east based at all, guidance is more east based with the Nina than that winter, but less east based than 17-18 and 95-96. 

 Until you mentioned this, I hadn’t checked closely. But sure enough I just did the calcs and the weekly data, indeed, suggests 10-11 wasn’t E based and was instead Modoki per this. Thus, the guidance for this year with its in-between E and W (warmest in 3/3.4 vs a bit cooler 1+2 and significantly cooler 4) is for a more E based than the Modoki of 2010-11 (see below) and way weaker per RONI.

  I just calced 95-6 and it was weak/flat across the regions making it a basin-wide weak. So, I’d call the guidance for this year (although not flat like 95-6) to be neither more nor less E based and about the same strength per RONI. So, 95-9 is kind of comparable to the progs for 24-5.

10-11 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -1.1

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.2

RONI was even stronger. Thus I’d call 10-11 Modoki RONI based strong.

95-96 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -0.8

3.4: -0.8

4: -0.6

 Thus I’d call 95-6 balanced/basin-wide weak.
 

17-18 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.8

3: -1.0

3.4: -0.8

4: -0.3

 Thus I’d call 17-8 slightly E based/RONI based moderate.

 So, how do 24-5 progs look compared to these 3? 
- Strength (RONI) similar to 95-6, a bit weaker than 17-18, and much weaker than 10-11. . 
- Pretty similar balance to 95-6, a little more W based than 17-8, and more E based than 2010-1.

 

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst9120.for

**Edit: Hasn’t it been said that Modoki Nina’s are the warmest on avg? Maybe they are on avg but 2010-1 itself doesn’t fit that idea.

[40/70 Benchmark]

17 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Until you mentioned this, I hadn’t checked closely. But sure enough I just did the calcs and the weekly data, indeed, suggests 10-11 wasn’t E based and was instead Modoki per this. Thus, the guidance for this year with its in-between E and W (warmest in 3/3.4 vs a bit cooler 1+2 and significantly cooler 4) is for a more E based than the Modoki of 2010-11 (see below) and way weaker per RONI.

  I just calced 95-6 and it was weak/flat across the regions making it a basin-wide weak. So, I’d call the guidance for this year (although not flat like 95-6) to be neither more nor less E based and about the same strength per RONI. So, 95-9 is kind of comparable to the progs for 24-5.

10-11 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -1.1

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.2

RONI was even stronger. Thus I’d call 10-11 Modoki RONI based strong.

95-96 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -0.8

3.4: -0.8

4: -0.6

 Thus I’d call 95-6 balanced/basin-wide weak.
 

17-18 avg of weeklies DJF:

1+2: -0.8

3: -1.0

3.4: -0.8

4: -0.3

 Thus I’d call 17-8 slightly E based/RONI based moderate.

 So, how do 24-5 progs look compared to these 3? 
- Strength (RONI) similar to 95-6, a bit weaker than 17-18, and much weaker than 10-11. . 
- Pretty similar balance to 95-6, a little more W based than 17-8, and more E based than 2010-1.

 

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst9120.for

**Edit: Hasn’t it been said that Modoki Nina’s are the warmest on avg? Maybe they are on avg but 2010-1 itself doesn’t fit that idea.

It was not Modoki.

it was basin-wide with an east tilt.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 hours ago, George001 said:

10-11 was not east based at all, guidance is more east based with the Nina than that winter, but less east based than 17-18 and 95-96. 

Incorrect.

[40/70 Benchmark]

This is what I am talking about..on what planet is this a Modoki???

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

THIS is more of a Modoki...

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

If you just look at strictly SSTs across the ENSO regions, I guess I could see the argument for more of a slightly westward lean in 2010, but you need to look on where the most extreme anomaly node and attendant Hadley Cell are centered.....this is what actually matters. The raw metrics can lead us astray sometimes.

[40/70 Benchmark]

41 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is what I am talking about..on what planet is this a Modoki???

 

I probably should have made that over a bit further west to fair, but you get the point....anyway, I have 2010-2011 calsified as a basin-wide/hybrid event.

[snowman19]

3 hours ago, George001 said:

10-11 was not east based at all, guidance is more east based with the Nina than that winter, but less east based than 17-18 and 95-96. 

Wrong. 10-11 absolutely started out east-based and moved west in late January 

[GaWx]

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

It was not Modoki.

it was basin-wide with an east tilt.

Ray,
 Per OISST based weeklies, I got this for avg for DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -1.1

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.2

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst9120.for
 

 

Per ERSST based monthlies, I got this:

1+2: -0.5

3: -1.2

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.3

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/ersst5.nino.mth.91-20.ascii

 So, both have 1+2 the weakest by far, 3.4 barely the strongest, 4 barely weaker than 3.4, and 3 barely weaker than 4. You’d have to agree based on these two sets of SSTa data that it clearly was not E based. Then the Q is whether it is closer to balanced, basin-wide, or Modoki. This suggests to me it isn’t really basin-wide or balanced because 1+2 is way weaker than the other regions. I suppose I can go with it not being a pure Modoki because 3.4 and 4 are only a little stronger than 3 rather than a lot stronger. Who knows exactly what it should be called? But  I think an argument could be made this is closer to Modoki than any other classification.

 What is the exact definition of Modoki?

[GaWx]

22 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

Wrong. 10-11 absolutely started out east-based and moved west in late January 

What are you looking at that suggests 10-11 absolutely started out E based? Here’s the data for Dec:

Weeklies (OISST)

1+2: -1.2

3: -1.3

3.4: -1.2

4: -1.2

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst9120.for

 

Monthlies (ERSST)

1+2: -0.9

3: -1.5

3.4: -1.6

4: -1.5

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/ersst5.nino.mth.91-20.ascii

[George001]

5 minutes ago, GaWx said:

What are you looking at that suggests 10-11 absolutely started out E based? Here’s the data for Dec:

Weeklies (OISST)

1+2: -1.2

3: -1.3

3.4: -1.2

4: -1.2

 

Monthlies (ERSST)

1+2: -0.9

3: -1.5

3.4: -1.6

4: -1.5

Yeah that’s not even close to east based, the monthly SST data for Dec reflects a strong modoki Nina if anything.

[40/70 Benchmark]

27 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 

Ray,
 Per OISST based weeklies, I got this for avg for DJF:

1+2: -0.7

3: -1.1

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.2

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst9120.for
 

 

Per ERSST based monthlies, I got this:

1+2: -0.5

3: -1.2

3.4: -1.4

4: -1.3

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/ersst5.nino.mth.91-20.ascii

 So, both have 1+2 the weakest by far, 3.4 barely the strongest, 4 barely weaker than 3.4, and 3 barely weaker than 4. You’d have to agree based on these two sets of SSTa data that it clearly was not E based. Then the Q is whether it is closer to balanced, basin-wide, or Modoki. This suggests to me it isn’t really basin-wide or balanced because 1+2 is way weaker than the other regions. I suppose I can go with it not being a pure Modoki because 3.4 and 4 are only a little stronger than 3 rather than a lot stronger. Who knows exactly what it should be called? But  I think an argument could be made this is closer to Modoki than any other classification.

 What is the exact definition of Modoki?

Larry, you can calculate weekly readings all you want, that event is not a Modoki. Its basin-wide.

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, George001 said:

Yeah that’s not even close to east based, the monthly SST data for Dec reflects a strong modoki Nina if anything.

You evidently don't understand what a Modoki is.

[40/70 Benchmark]

I think part of the issue is weighting 1.2 as heavily as the other regions when calculating..that is ill advised.

A- Region 1.2 is minuscule in size compared to the other regions. 

B- Its very volatile...considering that and viewing the maps, the event was clearly centered in regions 3 and 3.4.

[George001]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think part of the issue is weighting 1.2 as heavily as the other regions...that is I'll advised.

A- Region 1.2 is minuscule in size compared to the other region. 

B- Its very volatile...considering that and viewing the maps, the event was centered in regions 3 and 3.4.

Fair point, but Region 4 is massive, and the SST anomaly was equal to region 3 (-1.5). 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, George001 said:

Fair point, but Region 4 is massive, and the SST anomaly was equal to region 3 (-1.5). 

Well, to be fair, I can see why it can be argued that it was not east tiled strictly in terms of ENSO regions SSTS...but the Hadley Cell was definitely slightly east and the atmosphere behaved as such that season. Anyway, like I said...I have it down as hybrid, not east.

[GaWx]

9 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think part of the issue is weighting 1.2 as heavily as the other regions...that is I'll advised.

A- Region 1.2 is minuscule in size compared to the other region. 

B- Its very volatile...considering that and viewing the maps, the event was centered in regions 3 and 3.4.

 Why are you leaving out region 4 if you’re including 3? Region 4 was as I showed actually barely stronger than 3 (per weeklies or monthlies for DJF). If you had instead said it was centered in regions 3, 3.4, AND 4 rather than just 3 and 3.4, I’d agree.

[40/70 Benchmark]

4 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Well, to be fair, I can see why it can be argued that it was not east tiled strictly in terms of ENSO regions SSTS...but the Hadley Cell was definitely slightly east and the atmosphere behaved as such that season. Anyway, like I said...I have it down as hybrid, not east.

 

2 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Why are you leaving out region 4 if you’re including 3? Region 4 was as I showed actually barely stronger than 3 (per weeklies or monthlies for DJF). If you had instead said it was centered in regions 3, 3.4, AND 4 rather than just 3 and 3.4, I’d agree.

 

[snowman19]

14 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is what I am talking about..on what planet is this a Modoki???

 

If you look at all of the good La Niña and cold-neutral/Nada winters (95-96, 10-11, 13-14, 17-18) the common theme with all of them is the east-based forcing with the Hadley cell shifted east like you’re showing. Not a coincidence and you can clearly see the reason for it