bluewave

Yeah, this is still significant even allowing for under measurement of older storms by todays standards. The right blocking to force the classic benchmark track is a necessary ingredient. Otherwise, the record warm Gulf Stream just enhances the SE Ridge. https://theconversation.com/why-a-warming-climate-can-bring-bigger-snowstorms-176201 The warming ocean plays a role The historic blizzard that buried Boston under nearly 2 feet of snow in January 2022 was fueled by ocean waters in the western Atlantic that are warmer than normal. That’s also part of a consistent pattern. Top 10: Boston's and New York's biggest snow storms Seven of Boston's and New York's 10 biggest two- to three-day snowfall totals on record happened since 1995. Table showing the years of New York and Boston's biggest snow storms and the depth. The January 2022 blizzard was Boston's 7th largest snowfall total Boston Snow depth New York Depth 2003 28 inches 28 inches 2016 27 inches 27 inches 1978 27 inches 27 inches 2006 27 inches 27 inches 1969 26 inches 26 inches 1947 26 inches 26 inches 1997 25 inches 25 inches 1888 22 inches 22 inches 2013 25 inches 25 inches 2010 21 inches 21 inches 2015 24 inches 24 inches 1996 20 inches 20 inches 2022 24 inches 24 inches 2010 20 inches 20 inches 2005 23 inches 23 inches 2003 20 inches 20 inches 2015 22 inches 22 inches 2011 19 inches 19 inches 1978 21 inches 21 inches 1941 18 inches 18 inches The oceans have been absorbing more than 90% of the additional heat attributable to rising atmospheric greenhouse gases from human activities, particularly burning fossil fuels. The oceans now contain more heat energy than any time since measurements began six decades ago. Scientists are studying whether global warming may be driving a slowing of the ocean conveyor belt of currents that transport water around the globe. Satellite imagery and ocean measurements show that warmer waters have “piled up” along the East Coast, a possible indication of a slowing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Moisture evaporated from ocean water provides much of the energy for both tropical and mid-latitude extra-tropical cyclones, known commonly as nor’easters

Mostly smaller countries.

The weather forums are a microcosm of this pattern. We originally began with one big forum. But squabbles kept breaking out. So we split up into separate subforums for the local regions.

Yeah, their debt to gdp is much lower than ours. So its much easier to finance their programs. As you said, their tax structure is much different. They don’t mind the higher taxes since they get so much in return. Here we get tons of hidden taxes and fees that we don’t get much in return for. So people are rightfully angry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

There are some recent studies on why the Northeast has been one of few places that have seen snowfall increases into the 2010s. Record SSTs provided more fuel for the snowstorms when blocking forced favorable tracks. But at some point the blocking and storm tracks shift and the warmth ultimately reduces snowfall. We have been seeing more of this since 18-19. So we’ll have to see if the 2010s was some type of grand finale for record snowfall and declines become more common in 2020s along the I-95 corridor. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/wefo/29/6/waf-d-14-00056_1.xml Abstract On 8–9 February 2013, the northeastern United States experienced a historic winter weather event ranking among the top five worst blizzards in the region. Heavy snowfall and blizzard conditions occurred from northern New Jersey, inland to New York, and northward through Maine. Storm-total snow accumulations of 30–61 cm were common, with maximum accumulations up to 102 cm and snowfall rates exceeding 15 cm h−1. Dual-polarization radar measurements collected for this winter event provide valuable insights into storm microphysical processes. In this study, polarimetric data from the Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D) in Upton, New York (KOKX), are investigated alongside thermodynamic analyses from the 13-km Rapid Refresh model and surface precipitation type observations from both Meteorological Phenomena Identification Near the Ground (mPING) and the National Weather Service (NWS) Forecast Office in Upton, New York, for interpretation of polarimetric signatures. The storm exhibited unique polarimetric signatures, some of which have never before been documented for a winter system. Reflectivity values were unusually large, reaching magnitudes >50 dBZ in shallow regions of heavy wet snow near the surface. The 0°C transition line was exceptionally distinct in the polarimetric imagery, providing detail that was often unmatched by the numerical model output. Other features include differential attenuation of magnitudes typical of melting hail, depolarization streaks that provide evidence of electrification, nonuniform beamfilling, a “snow flare” signature, and localized downward excursions of the melting-layer bright band collocated with observed transitions in surface precipitation types. In agreement with previous studies, widespread elevated depositional growth layers, located at temperatures near the model-predicted −15°C isotherm, appear to be correlated with increased snowfall and large reflectivity factors ZH near the surface The pattern produced record 80° warmth at Newark in February 2018 before record March blocking produced 30” snows on Long Island. The Western Atlantic or SE Ridge has been at record levels during the winter since 2015-2016. So a first 8 warmer winters in a row NW Atlantic warm pool also at historic levels of warmth. NYC Feb 23…+5.2 Jan 23…+9.8 Dec 22…-0.6 …………..+4.8 Feb 22….+1.4 Jan 22….-3.2 Dec 21….+4.7 ……………..+1.0 Feb 21….-1.7 Jan 21….+1.1 Dec 20…+1.7 …………..+0.4 Feb 20…+4.8 Jan 20….+6.5 Dec 19….+0.8 …………….+4.0 Feb 19….+0.9 Jan 19….-0.1 Dec 18…+2.6 …………….+1.1 Feb 18…+6.7 Jan 18….-0.9 Dec 17…..-2.5 …………….+1.1 Feb 17…..+6.3 Jan 17….+5.4 Dec 16….+0.8 …………….+4.2 Feb 16….+2.4 Jan 16….+1.9 Dec 15….+13.3 …………….+5.9 Blocking since 2018-2019 has been building down toward this record NW Atlantic warm pool. So in concert with a hostile Pacific last December we had record low snowfall for such a-AO. Never before nearly -3 SD 2nd strongest December -AO block linking with SE Ridge. In past only much weaker blocks would link up with SE Ridge. The stronger -AO -PNAs in the past with colder SSTs off the East Coast didn’t have such prominent SE Ridge linkages in Northeast.

I don’t know what the answer is since everything is so disorganized here. Just put on the news every night to see how dysfunctional our systems and society have become. There are good people trying to make a difference but the system is working against them.

Each state is pretty much like it’s own country to some extent. But look at all the problems California is having with lack of housing. Appalachia is similar with extreme poverty but it’s more out of sight and not on the news every day.

It’s much easier with the small populations they have there. Each country only has about 5-10 million people.

The programs themselves aren’t well intentioned since they don’t pay enough for survival without family help. Plus spots in the programs only have enough openings for a small fraction of the people who need them. You would probably have to go to a small Scandinavian country with much smaller population to get better assistance for people in need. But even in some of those countries the programs aren’t enough. Just too many people in need here chasing too few resources.

Also too much groupthink denies the uniqueness of the individual in bigger organizations. One size fits all policy approaches leave many good folks behind. Especially people with various challenges or disabilities. We need much better support systems for people in these groups.

I was more asking a question rather than making a definitive statement in regard to snowfall. That’s why I mentioned that we will need more data to make a determination. We know with pretty high degree of certainty that the range between higher and lower snowfall seasons has been increasing since the 90s. Many high and low extremes rather than seasons falling more toward the middle of the distribution. So the increasing range may be indicative of a change in the system before warming skews toward the probability extreme lows becoming more common than extreme highs like in 14-15. Conditions are much warmer now than the 1960s and 1970s. So we are much closer now to the possibilities of approaching diminishing snowfall outcomes as is expected with climate change. The only question is what the exact timing will be.

I didn’t specifically address the reason for the 2007-2015 peak in snowfall at Boston. But you raise an interesting question. There have been several papers focusing on the long term warming in the WPAC in regard to the record snowfall at Boston that year. The Rossby wave train from WPAC lead to the record blocking in the EPO an PNA regions which set the table for what happened that winter.

We were trying to figure out when or if a snowfall threshold has been passed due to warming. But like I said, it will take much more data to determine. The 2007-2015 period is interesting in that it represents a peak in snowfall for our modern era at a place like Boston. If we can’t realize another peak like this in the coming decades, then the warming following the super El Niño may turn out to be threshold when the decline began. But the warming has been undeniable. The trick is at what point does the warming lead to reduced snowfall? Determining longer term climo is challenging for snowfall since measurement methods have changed over the years. Many older snowfall seasons would be higher with the more frequent measurement standards of modern times. So the slight rise at Boston could become closer to even or show a slight decline with corrected higher measurements in the earlier era. https://news.ucar.edu/14009/snowfall-measurement-flaky-history Earlier in our weather history, the standard practice was to record snowfall amounts less frequently, such as every 12 or 24 hours, or even to take just one measurement of depth on the ground at the end of the storm. You might think that one or two measurements per day should add up to pretty much the same as measurements taken every 6 hours during the storm. It’s a logical assumption, but you would be mistaken. Snow on the ground gets compacted as additional snow falls. Therefore, multiple measurements during a storm typically result in a higher total than if snowfall is derived from just one or two measurements per day. That can make quite a significant difference. It turns out that it’s not uncommon for the snow on the ground at the end of a storm to be 15 to 20 percent less than the total that would be derived from multiple snowboard measurements. As the cooperative climate observer for Boulder, Colorado, I examined the 15 biggest snowfalls of the last two decades, all measured at the NOAA campus in Boulder. The sum of the snowboard measurements averaged 17 percent greater than the maximum depth on the ground at the end of the storm. For a 20-inch snowfall, that would be a boost of 3.4 inches—enough to dethrone many close rivals on the top-10 snowstorm list that were not necessarily lesser storms! Another common practice at the cooperative observing stations prior to 1950 did not involve measuring snow at all, but instead took the liquid derived from the snow and applied a 10:1 ratio (every inch of liquid equals ten inches of snow). This is no longer the official practice and has become increasingly less common since 1950. But it too introduces a potential low bias in historic snowfalls because in most parts of the country (and in the recent blizzard in the Northeast) one inch of liquid produces more than 10 inches of snow. This means that many of the storms from the 1980s or earlier would probably appear in the record as bigger storms if the observers had used the currently accepted methodology. Now, for those of you northeasterners with aching backs from shoveling, I am not saying that your recent storm wasn’t big in places like Boston, Portland, or Long Island. But I am saying that some of the past greats—the February Blizzard of 1978, the Knickerbocker storm of January 1922, and the great Blizzard of March 1888—are probably underestimated. So keep in mind when viewing those lists of snowy greats: the older ones are not directly comparable with those in recent decades. It’s not as bad as comparing apples to oranges, but it may be like comparing apples to crabapples. Going forward, we can look for increasingly accurate snow totals. Researchers at NCAR and other organizations are studying new approaches for measuring snow more accurately (see related story: Snowfall, inch by inch). But we can’t apply those techniques to the past. For now, all we can say is that snowfall measurements taken more than about 20 or 30 years ago may be unsuitable for detecting trends – and perhaps snowfall records from the past should not be melting away quite as quickly as it appears. Update • January 29, 2015 | Thanks to thoughtful feedback by several colleagues, this article has been updated. Paragraph 3 now includes a description of how climate studies handle the data inconsistencies. Paragraph 9 was added to describe the pre-1950s practice, no longer in wide use, of recording liquid water content only, and not snow depth.

Some type of threshold or peak may have been crossed for snowfall at Boston following the 15-16 super El Niño. NYC started to see a decline in snowfall in 18-19. DC also saw less snowfall like Boston following the super El Niño. But we may need another 5-10 years of data in order to confirm since snowfall data can be very noisy. The warming of the winters has become really pronounced with 8 warmer to record warm winters in a row since 15-16. Total Snowfall for Boston Area, MA (ThreadEx) Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean 0.5 0.0 5.3 11.3 11.4 6.8 1.4 36.5 2022-2023 0.0 T 1.0 6.9 3.6 0.9 M 12.4 2021-2022 0.0 T 0.4 36.2 15.3 2.1 T 54.0 2020-2021 4.3 T 13.0 5.8 15.3 0.1 0.1 38.6 2019-2020 0.0 T 11.5 3.1 0.5 T 0.7 15.8 2018-2019 0.0 0.1 0.1 2.1 11.6 13.5 T 27.4 2017-2018 0.0 T 9.2 17.8 8.3 23.3 1.3 59.9 2016-2017 0.0 T 5.9 8.9 21.5 10.1 1.2 47.6 2015-2016 T 0.0 0.9 9.5 15.0 4.1 6.6 36.1 ick column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean 0.1 0.4 13.1 18.9 21.2 5.7 0.2 59.5 2014-2015 0.0 2.6 0.3 34.3 64.8 8.6 T 110.6 2013-2014 0.0 T 11.7 21.8 22.9 2.2 0.3 58.9 2012-2013 0.0 0.4 3.4 5.0 34.0 20.6 T 63.4 2011-2012 1.0 T T 6.8 0.9 0.6 0.0 9.3 2010-2011 0.0 T 22.0 38.3 18.5 1.3 0.9 81.0 2009-2010 0.1 0.0 15.2 13.2 7.0 0.2 0.0 35.7 2008-2009 0.0 T 25.3 23.7 6.2 10.7 0.0 65.9 2007-2008 0.0 T 26.9 8.3 15.0 1.0 0.0 51.2 Monthly Total Snowfall for NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean 0.0 1.3 2.6 4.2 6.6 2.2 T 16.8 2022-2023 0.0 0.0 T T 2.2 0.1 M 2.3 2021-2022 0.0 T 0.2 15.3 2.0 0.4 0.0 17.9 2020-2021 0.0 0.0 10.5 2.1 26.0 T 0.0 38.6 2019-2020 0.0 0.0 2.5 2.3 T T T 4.8 2018-2019 0.0 6.4 T 1.1 2.6 10.4 0.0 20.5 Monthly Total Snowfall for NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean 0.0 0.0 4.1 16.7 12.2 8.2 1.1 42.3 2017-2018 0.0 T 7.7 11.2 4.9 11.6 5.5 40.9 2016-2017 0.0 T 3.2 7.9 9.4 9.7 0.0 30.2 2015-2016 0.0 0.0 T 27.9 4.0 0.9 T 32.8 2014-2015 0.0 0.2 1.0 16.9 13.6 18.6 0.0 50.3 2013-2014 0.0 T 8.6 19.7 29.0 0.1 T 57.4 Monthly Total Snowfall for Washington Area, DC (ThreadEx) Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean 0.0 0.2 0.3 6.0 1.3 1.0 T 8.7 2022-2023 0.0 0.0 T T 0.4 T M 0.4 2021-2022 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 T 0.9 0.0 13.2 2020-2021 0.0 0.0 T 2.6 2.8 0.0 0.0 5.4 2019-2020 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 T 0.0 0.0 0.6 2018-2019 0.0 1.4 0.0 11.5 3.7 0.3 0.0 16.9 2017-2018 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.2 0.2 4.5 T 7.8 2016-2017 0.0 0.0 T 1.4 T 2.0 0.0 3.4 2015-2016 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.8 3.1 0.3 T 22.2 Monthly Total Snowfall for Washington Area, DC (ThreadEx) Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending. Year Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Season Mean T T 2.9 3.8 6.9 3.1 T 16.8 2014-2015 0.0 T T 3.6 9.8 4.9 T 18.3 2013-2014 0.0 T 1.5 6.6 11.2 12.7 T 32.0 2012-2013 0.0 T 0.2 0.9 0.4 1.6 0.0 3.1 2011-2012 T 0.0 T 1.7 0.3 T 0.0 2.0 2010-2011 0.0 T 2.1 7.3 0.5 0.2 T 10.1 2009-2010 0.0 0.0 16.6 7.4 32.1 T 0.0 56.1 2008-2009 0.0 T T 1.9 0.1 5.5 0.0 7.5 2007-2008 0.0 0.0 2.6 1.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 A record breaking 8 warmer than normal winters in a row since the 15-16 super El Niño in NYC. NYC Feb 23…+5.2 Jan 23…+9.8 Dec 22…-0.6 …………..+4.8 Feb 22….+1.4 Jan 22….-3.2 Dec 21….+4.7 ……………..+1.0 Feb 21….-1.7 Jan 21….+1.1 Dec 20…+1.7 …………..+0.4 Feb 20…+4.8 Jan 20….+6.5 Dec 19….+0.8 …………….+4.0 Feb 19….+0.9 Jan 19….-0.1 Dec 18…+2.6 …………….+1.1 Feb 18…+6.7 Jan 18….-0.9 Dec 17…..-2.5 …………….+1.1 Feb 17…..+6.3 Jan 17….+5.4 Dec 16….+0.8 …………….+4.2 Feb 16….+2.4 Jan 16….+1.9 Dec 15….+13.3 ……………..+5.9

Good question.

Wonder what percentage makes to type 1-3?

Any entity that gains unchecked power whether government or corporate is doing harm. I have always been for the underdog.

We use fossil fuels to power our human civilization. Renewables can’t scale up fast enough to make a difference. Nuclear fusion is always 10 -20 years away. So we will probably be relying on fossil fuels much longer than we should. Since there is so much inequality in this world, the people least able to adapt to climate change are often impacted the most.

He was talking about we didn’t know 150 years ago how big fossil fuel energy would become and change the planet. We pretty much just stumbled upon it which was true. Just like we just happened to find agriculture 10,000 ago which shifted civilization from hunter gatherer to settling in cities and building nation states. So the industrial revolution was a natural consequence of agriculture even though it took thousands of years. The oil companies knew about carbon emissions warming the planet since the early 80s. Their internal models were very accurate.

The debate about climate change is really about policy and politics and not the science. The models have done a pretty good job forecasting the rise in global temperatures with carbon emissions. But I agree that politicians shouldn’t try to shut down policy debates or seek to curtail individual liberties.

Yeah, I thought the perspective on climate change from Adam Frank was a more helpful way of looking at it. https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/10/06/446109168/climate-change-is-not-our-fault It's time to change the way we talk about climate change. Political leaders have acknowledged human-driven (or "anthropogenic") global warming since 1964 (when President Lyndon Johnson mentioned it in a speech to Congress). Since then, however, we've done almost nothing to address its dangers. As everyone knows, the problem is the political polarization of an issue that is, at its root, a scientific question. But it's more than that, too. Our inability to even get past "yes, it's happening" stems from the stories we've been telling about how climate change happened as well as what means about us and for us in terms of the human future. So, today, I want to hit you with a different story and different perspective on this thing called climate change. You ready? Here it goes. It's not our fault. Climate change is not our fault. Now, let me be clear about exactly what I mean. Yes, global warming is happening and, yes, it's because of human activity. Specifically, climate change is occurring because the massive use of fossil fuels to power our global, social, industrial, etc., etc., etc., civilization. That part of the story is just science and it is unassailable. Anyone who says otherwise is living in a fantasyland. But here's the crux of the issue: 150 years ago when we started building that fossil-fuel based civilization, we had no idea of what we were doing. We'd found this black goo seeping up from the ground and it turned out you could do awesomethings with it. In the winter, you could burn it in a furnace and keep your house warm. In the summer, you could burn it in a power plant and use the electricity to keep your house cool. You could also burn it in an internal combustion engine and travel hundreds of miles in a single day. And all that electricity you were generating from the power plant? You could use that to keep the lights on at night and watch moving pictures of stuff happening on the other side of the planet. And don't even get me started on fertilizer and the plastics you get from fossil fuels. That stuff is versatile! Now, the story we usually tell ourselves about the world we built from fossil fuels — and the climate change it created — is that humans are evil and greedy. We're a plague on the planet and global warming is just the way the planet is getting rid of us. But there is another way to tell that story. We didn't change the climate because we were greedy. We did it by mistake. We did it using the gifts evolution bequeathed to us. Human beings have been building civilizations out of whatever we could get our hands on for at least 8,000 years: stone, rope, canvas, iron. It's just kind of how we roll. From my perspective as an astronomer, human beings and the cultures we've created are just another expression of the planet. We're not inherently bad or anti-nature. We're just something the Earth has done and, if you look at it, we've done it pretty well. Without intending to, we changed the atmospheric radiation transport properties of an entire planet. That's kind of remarkable for a bunch of hairless apes. So, I think it's time for us to go beyond of these narratives of our inherent greed and unworthiness. They are inherently divisive and they have nothing to do with the science of climate change. That's because the real truth is this: While triggering climate change might not be our fault, not doing everything we can about it now that we know it's happening — that would be our fault. Worse, it would be our failure as a species. For all our capacity to render horror and stupidity, we human beings have done some pretty awesome things. Many times across our history we've shown the gift of genius and compassion. That, too, is a planetary expression. So, let's start telling ourselves a different kind of story about the challenge we face. After all, we'll need everyone on board helping to figure out the next steps in keeping this great project of civilization moving forward.

Yeah, I had a subscription to accuweather back in my 56K modem pentium 150 CRT screen days. The debates were fun. I believe PB that used to post here several winters ago was good friends with him. So he must have showed several threads to JB. I think PB was a trader from Monmouth County. I don’t know what happened to him.

I actually started listening to JB on 1010 WINS back in the late 70s here in NY. He was very passionate about the weather. Then I followed him in late 90s to early 00s on accuweather. If you watched the old counterpoint weatherpoint videos, I often would debate points with him through email questions I would send in that the late Ken Reeves would read on air. We emailed back and forth quite a bit. I personally never though about climate change until around 2010 when the evidence became hard to miss. It was around this time that JB started making really poor long range calls about future global cooling by 2030 and a return to the 1970s climate. I thought of it mostly as sad to let politics get in the way of weather forecasting. JB seems like he would be a fun person to sit down to dinner and just discuss old storms and weather patterns with. I actually agree with some of JB’s criticisms on climate change polices enacted around the world. I think being critical of policy is fair game. But JB mixes the political criticism with the hard science criticism which are two completely different fields. Don’t throw out all the good climate science just because you disagree with political policies. I don’t care what anyones political views are in this country. I can find common points of interest with people from many political backgrounds. I think what gets said on these forums finds its way back to JB since he has contacts that read this forum. I have seen comments he made about some of the posts in here. He said that there are amateurs or citizen scientists on these forums that are as good or better than people he meets on the professional side. So JB if you are reading this, I welcome you to chime in here. We could probably find something in common to discuss. Or even come out here and share a fine Italian meal.

Future temperatures and snowfall in Boston will come down to which emissions path we follow.

Yeah, saw this tweet from VA.