TheClimateChanger

Probably not quite as bad as officially recorded, but still bad no doubt. Lots of "traces" - in fact, a lot of trace depths with only trace accumulation. Don't really see this today. Suspect a lot of these would be small accumulations today (0.1-0.3"). On top of the fact, that most bigger snowfalls are inflated by about 15-20 percent with 6 hourly measurements versus once daily: Snowfall measurement: a flaky history | NCAR & UCAR News

Hmm, well, at least in the case of 1936-37, xmACIS appears correct, and not the local NWS office. I calculate 12.9 inches, not 13.4.

Looks like Josh is using xmACIS with a small adjustment to 1881-1882. NWS Detroit amounts are similar, but a little higher for some of the early years. I'd probably assume the local NWS numbers are more accurate. I believe a lot of this data is retrieved through automated means and it sometimes makes mistakes - especially with snow. I noticed similar discrepancies in the Pittsburgh records, and when I compared to the actual records (where available - some of the earliest years aren't available), the local NWS numbers were correct, not xmACIS.

It's even worse than Toledo, which Josh always likes to pretend gets completely different weather patterns. Note that the 5th lowest at Toledo is 16.0" versus 15.4" for Detroit. 10th lowest is 18.4" versus 18.0" for Detroit.

Yeah, this is what I was getting at. Detroit's record snowfalls are very low, because it's often in a snow hole. Just look when compared to locations further south in Ohio: Akron/Canton Cleveland Mansfield Youngstown

Looked into this a bit more. Last year was only 44th lowest through the end of January in the threaded record, but ended up as 8th least on the season. The 3.3 inches from February 1st onwards tied 1884 for lowest on record (officially - of course there are some low biasing factors in the early decades of the threaded record). Doubt we will see a near total shutout after Groundhog's Day this year... odds would certainly say no, anyways.

Not in Pittsburgh. Maybe it was elsewhere in the northeast.

Good question. We are staring down the barrel of our eighth consecutive warmer than average month. Even these inflated normals can't keep up with 2024. No notable cold to speak of. In fact, the minimum temperature this month has been quite mild.

You have to admit Detroit somewhat underperforms given its latitude. Your big storm climatology [since 1904, as that's the first year of any snowfall records at CRW] is worse than Charleston, West Virginia, which is in the south. And this is a low elevation site for a fair comparison, obviously the mountainous locations get way more. Detroit, Top 1- and 2-day snowfalls (1904-present): Charleston, Top 1- and 2-day snowfalls (1904-present):

To be honest, I'm not seeing it. Looks like the Detroit River area was 1-2 feet last winter on the NOHRSC national map.

Every single climate site in NWS CLE's CWA averages more snowfall that DTW, except for TOL (which itself is within the SE Michigan zone of influence - heck, it was supposed to be a part of Michigan originally) and more representative for places like Adrian, Lambertville and Monroe. And all of them except for ERI are outside of the main snowbelt. Even PIT's average of 44.1" is about the same at DTW, despite being nearly 2 degrees further south. I don't know how you can deny the I-75 corridor / upwind lake plain region frequently misses out on a lot of big storms, that impact places further east and west.

And yet it was the third least ever at Toledo, just a short jog down I-75. The DTW numbers are inflated, and not representative of what many experienced in southeast Michigan last winter. You know I've been all over the place, and southeast Michigan is often in a snow hole with more snow to the east, west, north and south. Regarding the TOL data, A LOT of very warm years too - look at that! 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023. Can they make it a FIVE-peat? Talk about a dynasty.

There were 6 counterexamples in the FOUR decades from the 1960s-1990s - that is pretty much every single year, as I claimed. Older data is worthless for this comparison, since it was collected 400-500 feet lower in elevation on a rooftop in the middle of the city.

I mean things aren't so hunky-dory even in the upper Midwest this year. I know MSP missed out on last year's disaster, but 9th lowest total to date with a blowtorch moving in.

Ouch. Nearly 40 inches below normal for the season to date, and adding at a rate of an inch per day during this blowtorch. I guess I was wrong, and climate change isn't happening.

How about Mansfield, Ohio? 2019-20, 2021-22, and 2022-23 not looking too great. And this winter is just bleak with nearly 5 inches less to date than last year's disaster.

Should I comment instead on the fact that last winter was one of the least snowy on record in many areas, and a lot of them are doing even WORSE this season to date with little hope of any snowfall for the foreseeable future? Here's Akron/Canton area (KCAK), for an example: Least snowy winters on record And the most recent climate summary showing a deficit of over 2 inches compared to last season's paltry total.

Why do I need to comment on typical "run of the mill" wintry weather? NWS says we finish the month 3-4F above normal, on the whole. The coldest low at Pittsburgh was 7F. It used to drop below zero almost every single winter. It was like 22 below 30 years ago.

Actually, it's not just old winters. I counted 27 winters where there is a discrepancy, including multiple recent ones (1996-97, 1998-99, 2000-01, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2010-11, 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22). The vast majority of the time NWS Pittsburgh's count is a bit higher but there are exceptions. Most of the differences are small - less than an inch or two. But some of the early winters, there are discrepancies of up to 10 inches.

That's a significant error too. Drops the sixth highest calendar day snowfall to a two-way tie for 10th place.

Looking at snowfall numbers earlier and I noticed that xmACIS is sometimes wrong with early snow totals. I noticed there's a discrepancy in some years between the numbers given by xmACIS and the NWS totals. The error was most glaring for 1950-1951, which xmACIS gives as 80.0" but the NWS tally has 82.0". So I looked into it, and it looks like xmACIS has some errors. They have screwed us out of some of our snow from the November 1950 storm, showing 12.0" on the 24th, rather than the 14.0" that was actually observed.

No highest was 10.7 inches on December 17 (11.0" if you count the 0.3" that fell on the 18th as a single event). That's the highest 2- and 3-day total since February 2010.

Surprisingly, we still need 2.7" before the end of the month at PIT just to keep pace with last year's total there. We are currently at 11.6" for the season. Last season had 14.3" through the end of January, and that ended up being the 8th lowest on record, and least since 1990-1991. Actually looking at the list, the top 5 lowest were all from the city station. And the only two since moving out to either airport that were less were basically negligible differences, so that was about as bad as it gets climatologically. Of course, we had almost zero winter once the calendar turned to February last year. Probably won't duplicate that.

Dropped to 8 degrees on my weather station. Low of 9 at PIT.