40/70 Benchmark

Given that the vast majority of warming, at least locally, is being observed with respect to nighttime lows, I would venture to guess that any decrease in snow cover days is more at the bookends of the season...in December and March. I would actually strongly favor December given seasonal lag and increased propensity for blocking patterns during the spring. In short, I would guess December is seeing the lion's share of a decease in snowcover days (sorry rev) over the course of the past 30+ years.

No. Looks like it is a park?

That was my original contention in the post that John replied to. What are you referring to then?

I would characterize 2010-2011, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015 as pretty good retention winters over the course of the past decade....even 2017-2018 in March. I think achieving a snowpack of near 3' in eastern Mass twice in a decade is at least average frequency, and probably above.

There is also a theory that since the polar region is warming fastest by far, that we may be more prone to high latitude blocking, but that is more nebulous. I know that Will had an interesting counter to that theory a few years back, but I can't remember what it was. The rest of the support for snowfall not decreasing much around here anytime soon is really isn't debatable.

Well, given that we are in the fall, its the earlier season...ie 2008-2009, 1975-1976.

Exactly. Great post.

When our mean snowfall begins to decline, let me know.

Well, I agree with all of that. I did not mean to imply that global warming means a greater percentage of the precipitation is snowfall. Absolutely there is more precipitation, ie more rain and snowfall. I also agree RE extremes, and said is much a few posts ago in this very thread. As far as the question of whether or not snowfall suffers during our lives...no one knows for sure, but what I will say is that the vast majority of the warming, at least in this region, has manifested in night time lows more than daytime highs....which I think tends to minimize the mitigating impact on snowfall. IE we are now radiating to 16, as opposed to maybe 14-15 degrees 50 years ago. I would venture to say that this would have less of an impact on snowfall than if the positive anomalies were being observed more with respect to daytime highs. This past January was wonderful illustration of this in that the month finished with positive departures, despite going weeks on end not breaking 40....the positive departures were achieved while we slept.

False in terms of snowfall, which is what I am referring to. Warmer? More Velocity saturation issues? Sure, however, snowfall has not and is not suffering and I have explained why I believe that to be the case. As far as whether snowfall begins to decline in our lifetime is anyone's guess, but I do not believe so.

Agreed.

Ida, though not as intense a hurricane, reminded me a lot of Camille in both track and extreme inland flooding far away from landfall. Sometimes these TC setups over the ECONUS can lead to much greater loss of life than the initial impact at landfall. Yea, Camille was def. a solid analog.

2008 is def. high on my list, along with 1975.

Just remember that mother nature is very skilled at keeping the ledger balanced...ie engineering a counter to negate all of these changes as best she can. IE With all of this increased baro from global warming, why don't we get a blizzard of '78 every season?! Velocity saturation. Why isn't all of the baro gone due to global warming!? Thermal gradient tightening. In the end, it means a change in distribution via less middling events and more big dogs.

Long after we are gone....I would argue that the additional warmth has actually increased baroclinicity thus far, as the warmth along with John's expanding Hadley Cell has pressed north. Catch 22 bc with the increased gradient comes more velocity saturation, so it's a give and take....but when you can neutralize said propensity for velocity saturation....BOOM. All we are left with is augmented baro and matches being lit. Higher stakes today.

Well, I mean, I'll take a CJ over January 2012.

I am actually trying to incorporate more of matching weather patterns into my analog methods, as I have learned a great deal from you the past few years. It's good to be eclectic in methodology because this is an imperfect science and every method has a weakness. This is why I would never advise placing TOO much weight on synoptic timescale matching in analogs, or anything else for that matter. There are going to be good analogs that are not entirely in sync with the current weather....just too much chaos to be that precise. That said, I would be positively stunned if this December were not colder in the east than December 2001. Doesn't mean that season does not have value as analog. I did not do forecasting back then, but I do remember that the 2001-2002 season was a real curve ball bc the consensus was very cold and snowy in the east.

Yea, if you tell me I only have one index to work with, and the rest are crap...I would take EPO....at least you know cold will be around. You may still have track issues, but otherwise you could have a perfect track with marine puke and zero baroclinicity to even detonate a bonafide event. It is exceedingly difficult to have a high ceiling in the absence of cold and baroclinicity...best bet is bookened events. But good luck in mid winter.

Absolutely....my point is that it just doesn't get the attention that wind and surge do because its not as sexy. Its insidious in that its actually more dangerous because wind and surge are easier to escape if you act responsibly in advance.

That chart is brutal to diagnose, but the pattern displayed doesn't look awful IMO....looks -EPO, -PDO with maybe a hint of blocking?

The current orange is harmless and always was. A benchmark track is great if you're looking for a blizzard, but bonafide tropical system...not so much. Not to mention it will remain a weak system.

The devastation from Ida in general was a no-brainer...I explicitly called for a top ten natural disaster on Thursday and it hit Sunday.

Yea, it was always obvious that we would get slammed by the remnants...that was not a surprise. I didn't care to delve into it any further because I could not have cared any less if I had tried.

Completely different because that was from freshwater flooding. Anyone with a shred of common sense (not directed at you) knows that Scott and I are referring to severe tropical cyclone impacts in terms of wind and storm surge. I get that fresh water flooding is often more costly, but meteorologically speaking, I'd rather be tied to a chair with my my eyes taped open in an upslope thread.

Does not interest me at all. Non-event.