• Member Statistics

    15,777
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    mansour
    Newest Member
    mansour
    Joined
Holston_River_Rambler

Wild Speculation for Winter 20 -21

Recommended Posts

 I don't think it is off topic at all @Save the itchy algae!. Good questions and a fair point. I think it definitely is, as raindancewx states and you suggest, "relative" given the major recent losses in sea ice up there. I had actually not looked at it and just from hearing what people had been saying, assumed the ++++AO and +++EPO had to rebuild quite a bit. However, sho nuff, you're right. 

https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/

 

Since it was in banter and raindancewx didn't cite sources, it could be that this article: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-017-3618-9#Sec15 was the one he was using for the claim (conclusions from that study):

 

The spatial pattern of those CI persistent anomalies that lead the NAO by 1 year is quasi-annular about the Arctic-high latitudes coast, extending over the West Baffin Bay-Davis Strait-Labrador coast and the North-East Okhotsk sea (with positive anomalies leading the NAO positive phase). The maximal phase of this co-variability is triggered when a high pressure anomaly develops 1 year before the NAO+ (low pressure for NAO-) over the Central Arctic extending over North Greenland-Canadian Archipelago-Baffin Bay with centres also over the Laptev Sea and North Barents Sea. This “Arctic bridge” appears as a pre-conditioning feature of the maximal NAO phase, being systematic under transient climates. Its role is linked to cold advection over both: the North-Western Atlantic and North-Western Pacific with evaporative ocean cooling, low pressure formation and persistent latent heat advection over the mid-latitudes land. So a persistent, annular, negative meridional thermal gradient is achieved about the Arctic coast, leading positive vorticity over Central Arctic the following year (when leading NAO+). A mode of CI variability captures this pattern and is leading the NAO index by 1 year, having similar spectral properties to the NAO index. The highest leading correlation of this mode is obtained over ([35°N–90°N]), domain that couples the Arctic with the high-latitudes.

 

Another thing to consider is that the NAO is measured at sea level, not higher up where we usually want it for blocking and I'm guessing most researchers, even if they like snow like us, have to go by how the measurement is taken to get their results published. 

 

While he may be on shakier ground concerning the sea ice, there has also been talk of the lag after the solar minimum producing an NAO, so I thought I'd look at that too. 

Probably the most famous once of these is 2009 - 10:

Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.15.41 PM

and here is the solar plot:

Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.21.15 PM

 

That hypothesis also checks out in 1998 or so:

Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.15.37 PM

 

Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.16.44 PM

It gets less evident in the late 80s though:

Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.16.13 PM Screen Shot 2020-02-23 at 12.16.32 PM

As you go further back there is a correlation again, but that was also with an favorable AMO, so that could have had a say too.   

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to roll with moderate to strong La Nina, -QBO, MJO 4-6 quiet, more blocking than normal.  Lots of conflicting signals which result in periods of extreme warmth and extreme cold that result in slightly AN temps, but bouts of severe cold at times.  Going to be moderate/strong Nina vs high latitude blocking.  I am not sold on a -NAO, but do feel the EPO/PNA and AO will cooperate at times.  I feel it is a decent gamble to say that it will be cooler than DJF from this winter.  Just hoping the La Nina doesn't take hold during summer as it will get very hot and dry if so.  I suspect August and September have the potential to really be warm and dry.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2012 ended up being the lowest summer ice extent on record due to a very unfavorable pattern that developed in spring and summer over the Arctic. 2012 at this time of year wasn't remotely the lowest ice extent on record. We are slightly ahead of 2012 right now and overall this winter has seen gains in Arctic ice that easily outpaced average.  Currently sea is is ahead of 2019 on this date, well ahead of 2018 on this date, well ahead of 2017 on this date, well ahead of 2016 on this date, ahead of 2015 on this date, ahead of 2014 on this date, roughly tied with 2013 on this date, ahead of 2011 on this date, roughly tied with 2010, behind 2009 and 2008, ahead of 2007, ahead of 2006, ahead of 2005, behind 2004-2001. So in the last 20 years we are currently ahead on Arctic sea ice vs 14 of the 20 years. So the +AO has done pretty good work in the Arctic this year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In moderate Ninas its a crap shoot for the Valley.Unless we get the right teleconnections -AO/+PNA we will see a more of the cold locked up above us,but what's new theses last winters,but Carver is right  with his teleconnection discussion up above.To be honest all Ninas in avg,if its neutral,weak or moderate your chances of cold winters would weigh slightly warmer than colder and strong Ninas from the past would just make you think about the folllowing winter and forget the one you are in

In typical strong IOD years, like this year the ENSO would seem to go more negative into winter.I.E 95,98,07.So the IOD would seemingly be a non-player with the MJO signal,like this year.

In some of these years 95,98,07 looking at SSWE years,1995 didn't have one,.1998 had one Dec 16th while 2007 was Feb 23rd,so no help here.But SSWE's would result in the same out coming because it would depend on blocking and when it actually does occur.In the winter of 1995 was a cold winter without a SSWE.

But the coldest winter,i'm just basing this on the strong IOD years was back into the 1995-96 winter without a SSWE

3) Winter 1995/96

The 1995/96 winter (DJF) season featured abnormally cold and snowy conditions in the northern plains, the eastern half of the Midwest, the Northeast, the mid-Atlantic states, and much of Canada. For the season as whole, temperatures averaged 3°-5oC below normal across western and central Canada, and 1°-2oC below normal across the northern tier of the United States and throughout the eastern seaboard from Florida to New England (see section 5, Fig. 59a ). In the East, these conditions contrasted with the abnormally warm temperatures and low snowfall totals (less than 25% of normal) observed during the 1994/95 winter.

One prominent aspect of the 1995/96 winter season was a recurring pattern of enhanced northwesterly flow, which extended from northern Alaska and the Bering Sea to southeastern Canada and the north-central United States. This flow brought a series of major winter storms and severe winter outbreaks to the northern and eastern United States, resulting in record-breaking cold and snowfall totals in many regions. The season also featured considerable variability over large portions of the United States and Canada, with periods of extreme cold and snow followed by brief periods of warmth and rain.

The most notable cold-air outbreak occurred during 29 January-6 February 1996, when temperatures averaged 11°-17oC below normal from the southern Canadian prairies southeastward through the northern and central plains and western Great Lakes and more than 6oC below normal throughout the rest of the United States with the exception of the Southwest. Temperatures dropped below -40oC throughout interior Canada during the period and below -46oC in some portions of central Canada. In the United States, all-time record low temperatures were set in four states (Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Rhode Island), and nearly 400 daily record lows were either tied or broken. Additionally, the cold temperatures were accompanied by strong winds that produced extreme wind chill temperatures below -50oC over much of Canada and large portions of the northern United States. The upper-level height and anomaly fields (Fig. 48a) reveal that the Arctic outbreak was associated with a highly amplified flow, featuring above-normal heights across the high latitudes of the central North Pacific and well below normal heights throughout central North America. Within this flow pattern, height contours originating in Alaska, eastern Siberia, and the Arctic Circle covered central and southern Canada and extended southeastward across the upper one-third of the United States east of the Rocky Mountains. This pattern resulted in a sustained flow of pure Arctic air into central and eastern North America.

This Arctic outbreak was immediately followed during 6-10 February by much milder air across central North America. During this 5-day period, temperatures reached 21oC in the plains states, more than a 50oC increase from the record-low readings observed the prior week. At Tulsa, Oklahoma, new February extreme minimum (-24oC) and maximum (32.2oC) records were set within 18 days of each other in association with the Arctic outbreak and subsequent warm-up. This warm-up was associated with a large-scale transition in the upper-level flow to below-normal heights and a deep trough over western Alaska and an amplified ridge over the intermountain region of North America (Fig. 48b). This pattern resulted in a strong and extensive flow of marine air from the central North Pacific into virtually all of North America.

Overall, snowfall totals by the end of February averaged more than 150% of normal over the Dakotas and the upper Midwest and over the central and eastern United States from Indiana northeastward to southeastern Maine and southeastward to the Virginia coast (Fig. 49). Totals exceeded 200% of normal from southern Virginia northward to northern Massachusetts, and more than 300% of normal snowfall was recorded from central Maryland northward to southern New York and throughout the southern Appalachian Mountains region. Totals also averaged 200%-300% of normal over eastern North Dakota, northwestern Minnesota, and western South Dakota.

Many locations established new all-time record seasonal snowfall totals during the 1995/96 cold season (Table 2). The largest total snowfall (573 cm) was observed at Sault Saint Marie, Michigan, which broke its previous highest total snowfall accumulation record of 454 cm. Most of the other records were established in the East, extending from Virginia in the south to Massachusetts in the Northeast. For many of these cities, the previous snowfall records were broken by mid-February. In some locations the previous record snowfall totals were exceeded by more than 60 cm during the winter of 1995/96.

Perhaps the most notable snow event during the winter was the blizzard of 6-9 January 1996, which af
fected the entire eastern United States. During this event, 50-120 cm of snow covered the eastern seaboard from the mid-Ohio valley eastward to eastern Virginia and northward to southern Massachusetts (Fig. 50). Totals exceeded 76 cm at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, establishing a new single-storm record, and reached 87.5 cm in west-central New Jersey and 120 cm in Pocahantas County, West Virginia. Additionally, most areas from Washington, D.C., northeastward to Providence, Rhode Island, reported one of the five biggest single-storm snowfall totals on record during the storm, which resulted in a shutdown of most airports on the East Coast from Virginia northward and made other modes of transportation virtually impossible.

In contrast, during the following week the eastern United States experienced a dramatic warm-up and heavy rains (50-150 mm), resulting in a rapid snow melt and extensive runoff. These conditions produced flooding throughout the mid-Atlantic States and the Northeast during 19-24 January. During this period, all major rivers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, New York, and Vermont crested 1.2 m-3.6 m above flood stage. In many areas, this was the highest recorded crest since the flooding associated with Hurricane Agnes in June 1972.

 

 

Back to Table of Contents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we are headed into a cycle with the IOD?I omitted the IOD into 1997 because this was such a viscous cycle based on the ONI but still has some merit,but seemingly after a strong IOD year we see a strong ElNino sign roughly three years after,probably means nothing,just pointing out a possibility

 

1993 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1
1994 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.1
1995 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 -0.2 -0.5 -0.8 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0
1996 -0.9 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -0.5
1997 -0.5 -0.4 -0.1 0.3 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.4
1998 2.2 1.9 1.4 1.0 0.5 -0.1 -0.8 -1.1 -1.3 -1.4 -1.5 -1.6
1999 -1.5 -1.3 -1.1 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.1 -1.1 -1.2 -1.3 -1.5 -1.7

Year

DJF

JFM

FMA

MAM

AMJ

MJJ

JJA

JAS

ASO

SON

OND

NDJ

2000 -1.7 -1.4 -1.1 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.6 -0.5 -0.5 -0.6 -0.7 -0.7
2001 -0.7 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3
2002 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1
2003 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.0 -0.3 -0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4
2004 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
2005 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.3 -0.6 -0.8
2006 -0.8 -0.7 -0.5 -0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.9
2007 0.7 0.3 0.0 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5 -0.8 -1.1 -1.4 -1.5 -1.6
2008 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -0.9 -0.8 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -0.6 -0.7
2009 -0.8 -0.7 -0.5 -0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.6

Year

DJF

JFM

FMA

MAM

AMJ

MJJ

JJA

JAS

ASO

SON

OND

NDJ

2010 1.5 1.3 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.0 -1.4 -1.6 -1.7 -1.7 -1.6
2011 -1.4 -1.1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.5 -0.7 -0.9 -1.1 -1.1 -1.0
2012 -0.8 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.0 -0.2
2013 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 -0.3
2014 -0.4 -0.4 -0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7
2015 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.6
2016 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.3 -0.6 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -0.6
2017 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 -0.1 -0.4 -0.7 -0.9 -1.0
2018 -0.9 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.9 0.8
2019 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMS paper from U. Maryland has a contrarian view we may be heading into a major / active solar cycle. Hypothesis is solar storms dragged out cycle 23. This cycle 24 has been a little short in time duration and solar storms. Getting ready for 25 to roar out of the gates strong. Endless warm winters!

Solar.PNG.428f368620bf2032735c948e6c354a53.PNG

Again it's just a contrarian hypothesis. But it would mesh with 2012 going into a warm 2012-13 winter. If anything can go wrong...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just threw in some numbers for 2019-20, but you can see, after the lowest annualized solar year (monthly sunspots July-June/12), the NAO goes negative in winter, at least in recent history it has.

LJEbpnE.png

I don't think it's a coincidence that the annualized solar cycle effects have been showing up - very wet Northern Plains / cold West, relatively uninterrupted since 2016-17, which is when we fell below the magical 55 sunspot/year threshold I use for low-solar.

05lokhv.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Above agrees with consensus on the Solar Forecast too. If the Contrarian verifies, we already had out minimum. Head over to the Climate Change threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Holston_River_Rambler said:

Anyone want to take a stab at deciphering this guy?

 

 

He is implying that we are headed into a cooler climate based on previous solar mins and the previous tilts of the Earth; could very well be but there are multiple drivers of climate and the weather in general, not just as in this case, solar mins and tilt of the Earth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's wrong. Looking for attention. I don't see anyone by that name with credentials on Linked In.

Currently the Milankovitch Cycles approximately cancel out each other. That's why Climate Science can more reliably zero in on the solar cycle and Carbon.

The divergence is startling. Sun is sleeping; temps and CO2 continue up; and previously, they had always all 3 been in lock step.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's wrong. Looking for attention. I don't see anyone by that name with credentials on Linked In. Currently the Milankovitch Cycles approximately cancel out each other. That's why Climate Science can more reliably zero in on the solar cycle and Carbon. The divergence is startling. Sun is sleeping; temps and CO2 continue up; and previously, they had always all 3 been in lock step.  

 

 

I agree. Not to slander the individual or say they are uneducated, anyone can be wrong in the process of research. I would just be cautious and certainly not trusting. Established science would suggest we are lucky to not be in a Solar maximum, that atmospheric influences might be even more extreme. Though again, divergence in climate is not simply explained by it's hotter, colder, wetter or drier at any specific location. There are, of course, other regional variables; but the idea here is increasing periods of measurable short and long term extreme deviations per climatological norm at any specific geographic location. If anything, that we are not within increased Solar output could be taken as alarming.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @weathertree4u @nrgjeff and @Windspeed for the thoughts on that guy. I saw that Masiello followed him when he created his account, so thought at that time that maybe he had some good info. I suspected he was trying to sell the low solar = better winters or hurricane seasons, but he was pretty obfuscate about how he did it and I just couldn't make heads or tails of it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.