According to The Winter of 95-96: A Season of Extremes, National Climatic Data Center, Hartford typically receives about 45 inches (114 cm) of snow in an average winter. The record seasonal snowfall was 115.2 inches (293 cm) during the winter of 1995–1996. Compare that to January 2011 which has so much snow that roof collapses are becoming a concern.
Seen above: New Haven, CT has declared a snow emergency.
WGN-TV’s Tom Skilling writes:
Hartford, Connecticut’s monthly snow approaching six feet!
The prolific snows which have hit the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast this winter–during January in particular–are without precedent. January tallies haven’t just surpassed previous snow records–they’ve obliterated them. In the New York City area, where an 8.1 inch total is considered normal to date, snow totals have reached 3 feet–at some locations, even more! Central Park’s 36.0 inch month to date tally has eclipsed the 86 year old previous record of 27.4 inches set in 1925. Records have also fallen at Newark (37.3 inches), La Guardia (32.4 inches), Bridgeport, Connecticut (41.8 inches) and Islip on Long Island (34.2 inches).
Among the most stunning of all the January snow totals close to the New York City area is the 56.9 inches which have hit Hartford, Connecticut. That’s four and a half times the city’s typical full-January total of 12.6 inches.
Word of the huge monthly snow amounts there comes just days after that area was hit by yet another snowstorm–a system which rode into New York on gusts as high as 49 mph. Snowfall at New York’s Central Park hit 19.0 inches as did tallies out of Clifton and Roselle, New Jersey.
The same lightning-laced snow system put down 15.1 inches in Philadelphia, 16 inches Jersey City, New Jersey and 11.5 inches at South Boston, Massachusetts. The Nation’s Capital measured 5 inches at Reagan National Airport.
How bout NE Ohio. Over 55 inches of snow at the youngstown airport in december and 25 inches so far this month. What’s more depressing is that from December 1, 2010 to January 28, 2011, there has been a trace or more of snow 88% of the days and the temps have been below normal 82% of the days. Sun, what sun?
just amazing what GAGW will do…./sarc off
It’s global warming – Kaku knows.
I moved from Connecticut to Maryland in ’79.
Just in time……..
pRadio
And, as usual, the Alarmists will claim Man’s rampant use of fossil fuels caused it.
So how will the people hit by this “unprecedented” cold weather keep warm?
By burning more fossil fuels. Well, for those that can AFFORD to burn fossil fuels, that is.
And, when people die from exposure, they can claim those deaths as a result of AGW.
And the current GFS model has a repeat performance on tap for us Wednesday-Thursday again. Can you say: “another 17”?
In our record year of 1996, here on Long Island, we had over 90″ for the season – 3x the normal average. We had at least four storms over 14″ that year. But I don’t remember there ever being as much snow on the ground at one time as we have right now. We typically have substantial melting between major storms. Not this year.
If this keep up, I’m moving to Syracuse.
RE: “another 17”
Not if I have to shovel it. I’ve shoveled so much snow in the last month that I’m seriously considering moving south. But hey, I thought snow would soon be a thing of the past…
With La Nina continuing strong in the Pacific next winter has a chance of being worse.
Mike Monce says:
January 29, 2011 at 1:30 pm
And the current GFS model has a repeat performance on tap for us Wednesday-Thursday again. Can you say: “another 17″?
Joe Bastardi is forecasting a big one next week. In his tweets:
Media hype surprisingly non existent. For nation as whole, next week is the worst of the winter.. between this storm and extreme cold
http://twitter.com/BigJoeBastardi
Joe Bastardi tweet,
Major disruptive winter storm much of nation next week. Arguably it will be the worst week of winter for nation as whole. Get the Groundhog!
http://twitter.com/BigJoeBastardi
I shook my magic 8-ball after asking what could cause such a thing, but it keeps coming up ‘Global warming’. Maybe I should market this?
So we know snowfall depth is up, how about area? That’s the more important number, I think.
You have a non-existent link for “The Winter of 95-96: A Season of Extremes, National Climatic Data Center”, in the first sentence of this blog item.
[fixed ~mod]
Considering difference in latent heat content between rainwater and snow at 0°C, when so much snow is produced a lot of heat should be released to the atmosphere. It is equivalent to the amount of heat needed to warm up the same amount of water by 80°C. Still, this heat is nowhere to be seen (if not in South-West Greenland), global average temperature is falling like rock.
I guess as the heat is released at cloud tops, it is readily radiated out to space, as freeze-dried air above is pretty transparent to thermal IR, because the so called Arctic window on the other side of CO2 absorption band (at wavelengths longer than 16 μm) is also open.
In other words if the extra snow is caused by global warming indeed, we have the luck to identify just another strong negative feedback loop.
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
“The prolific snows which have hit the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast this winter–during January in particular–are without precedent.“
Can anyone be sure of that? Maybe within the writer’s lifetime but before that…???
Quoting scripture (Soloman, The Wise, IIRC): “There is nothing new under the sun.”
Extreme weather events? In perspective, let’s keep things like this in mind….
Great floods of California, extreme weather events that pale today’s, back in 1862.
http://www.redlandsfortnightly.org/papers/Taylor06.htm
Do any of these NE cities keep records of how long the snow stays on the ground? If it sticks around longer, lasting into late winter and early spring a tad more each year, then we may be witnessing the beginning of a trend- a New Ice Age?
Mike says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
The real question is why the excess water vapor comes down as snow rather than rain. What could cause that?
Mike says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
==================================================
Exactly!
And why is it snowing and not raining?
I remember all those rainy, damp, gloomy, overcast winter days, what happened?
The reason global warming is so prevalent is similar to the Emperor’s New Clothes – nobody wants to admit they don’t understand it. They say they understand it and try to repeat mangled and illogical excuses they hear from media personalities, because it strokes their ego – they think it makes them look intelligent.
This is why the “global warming causes snow” excuse will work on the masses because if it doesn’t make sense then you have to be really smart to understand it – like me!
On another note:
David Falkner says:
January 29, 2011 at 2:11 pm
“I shook my magic 8-ball after asking what could cause such a thing, but it keeps coming up ‘Global warming’. Maybe I should market this?”
This sounds like the perfect basis for a new global warming cartoon with Mann stacking the magic eight ball with “global warming’ pyramids. Perhaps show him crossing things out like “solar variation” and “oceanic cycles.”
To rain rather than snow, you might recall large floods in Queensland Australia in recent weeks. Warwick Hughes has some comments on these on his blog:
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/
For perspective, it’s worth reading this URL from commenter Peter West:
http://reg.bom.gov.au/hydro/flood/qld/fld_history/brisbane_history
There have been larger floods in Brisbane, but this knowledge is being made fuzzy in order to hype “Global Warming = more severe events”.
Rain inputs to the Brisbane River come from a relatively small, enclosed basin that seems too small to model with GCMs or derivatives. There is resistance here to a multi billion $ levy, in part because people are realising that high transaction costs and low economic efficiency are typical of government programs. Also, in part, because of the speding to repair thousands of homes that history shows will flood again.
Mike
Jan 29, 3:01 pm
Why is there so much water vapour in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
Cooling oceans.
Mike says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
The salt in the oceans changed on the surface which moved the ocean heat into the Arctic.
This is pumping tremendous amounts of water vapor in the northern hemisphere.
Meanwhile:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/29/3124776.htm
I have the same experience as Skeptic Tank. There has been minimal melting between storms. Here in Princeton, NJ, we have four separate layers of snow on the ground, with the piles at street intersections so high that you can’t see the intersecting traffic.
Is everybody sure Al Gore isn’t visiting NY at the moment.
David Falkner says:
January 29, 2011 at 2:11 pm
“I shook my magic 8-ball after asking what could cause such a thing, but it keeps coming up ‘Global warming’. Maybe I should market this?”
This sounds like the perfect basis for a new global warming cartoon with Mann stacking the magic eight ball with “global warming’ pyramids. Perhaps show him crossing things out like “solar variation” and “oceanic cycles.”
Sounds like the newest Alarmist toy. Do the globe with 8-ball guts. That way kids can ask any question about the state of the climate, and the answer will be the same.
Of course, we have to ensure that it’s made in China…
Because of certain changes in my Mother’s mobile home park regs, a storage shed had to be eliminated. It had 40 volumes of photo Albums covering the ’30’s, 40’s, 50’s,60’s,70’s,80’s,90’s and to current.
All centered around Minneapolis, Duluth, southern MN.
Many wintertime photos. Many dated…Dec/Jan/Feb/March.
None of them COMPARE to the current photos and amounts in Mpls, St. Paul.
Looks like this will be a record book year in MN.
Max
Mike says: “Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?”
Little rain fairies come down from the moon. They lift the water up in their dew buckets.
If you believe in AGW, you should believe in rain fairies, too.
Mike (Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?)
Perhaps all the aquifers pumped to the surface to evaporate?
Here is a letter I wrote about the Brisbanr floods. It was published in “The Australian
“Dear Sir,
I see that Bob Brown is blaming global warming and CO2 increases for the current Australian floods.
Now I am merely a doctor and not a climate scientist but I do know about floods in Brisbane. I survived the 1974 flood. I have 6 adult children all of whom have bought real estate in the Brisbane area. So we know the flood record.
Between 1840 (when the first records were taken) and 1901 there was on average one flood as big as 1974 every fifteen years
In the 20th century the climate changed (as it always does) and we have had two big floods in 110 years.
There were lots of floods in the 19th century.
I don’t think the had much in the way of global warming or rising CO2 levels back then!
It is sad to think that our current government is in coalition with the Greens and that every decision Julia Gillard makes has to be approved by Bob Brown.
Yours sincerely,
Jim Petrie
Bob Brown is the leader of the greens in Australia. He is a bit like Al Gore, but rather more extreme
2-feet of snow are forecast for a long band throughout the Ohio Valley over the next few days.
More Boston way on wed. Boy aren’t La Ninas fun?
henrythethird says:
January 29, 2011 at 5:33 pm
“Sounds like the newest Alarmist toy. Do the globe with 8-ball guts. That way kids can ask any question about the state of the climate, and the answer will be the same.
Of course, we have to ensure that it’s made in China…”
Alarmist toy? It could be a great novelty toy for mockery. A tiny globe, the pyramids float up to the arctic and the antarctic/lower third of the globe has big flames all around it.
I wish I knew some reputable Chinese manufacturers with an aversion to lead.
Actually I think we should market them with a few carbon credit offsets too.
The storms we have had in the Northeast this winter are Northeasters. The circulation is counter clockwise. This brings air from the North Atlantic to the coastal land areas of the North East. A look at the weather map of this type of storm will show that clearly.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Christmas_nor%27easter_2010Dec27.jpg
A look at the temperature anomaly for Dec 2010 – Jan 2011 shows that the North Atlantic is off the coast of North America has areas of ocean which are 3degC warmer than normal.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Christmas_nor%27easter_2010Dec27.jpg
That situation coupled with colder temperatures over land due to the position of the Arctic Oscillation have resulted in a series of heavy snow storms.
The warmer North Atlantic SST’s are a result of delayed ice formation in the Arctic Ocean and the storms were forecast in advance by Judah Cohen. His forecast turned out to be accurate.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/putting-a-siberian-snow-connection-to-the-test/
Duke C. says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:11 pm
The NWS Coop observer forms have a box for snow depth, and the CoCoRaHS observers track snow fall, snow depth, and water content.
During the 1974 concern about the coming Ice Age, one suggestion was that all it would take is for snow to not melt some summer. That winter I flew across the US and concluded that we wouldn’t have a problem unless the conifers were completely covered.
Also, by April, the sun is so high that it will do a number on the remaining snowpack. I remember one April day in Plymouth New Hampshire, possibly in 1996, sunny, warm (about 80F – so much for the snowpack south of us keeping the air cool), and not much wind. We lost 8 inches that day. (27C, 20 cm.) I don’t know what the dew point was – dew points above freezing means air can dump a huge amount of heat on the snowpack by water vapor condensing on the snow pack.
Snowfall is an awful parameter for tracking climate, possibly even worse than Atlantic hurricanes. I track snow fall and “snow depth days” and there’s an amazing variability over the region. Depending on where the rain/snow line is for a few storms, one year can have a big difference over 40 miles, the next the data may be nearly identical. See http://wermenh.com/sdd/index.html but be kind – I didn’t log December data yet because there was so little snow until a couple days after Christmas. Also, I made a major change to switch to a frames based layout and navigation bar. I’m not sure how much is broken.
Only 8.6″ in December for me, but 36.6″ so far in January, so things are looking a lot better now. I still have space to put snow, so I’m hoping for a good (i.e. big) storm next week.
H. R. prophesises
——-
Quoting scripture (Soloman, The Wise, IIRC): “There is nothing new under the sun.”
——-
Solomon tweeting on his iPad.
Berényi Péter says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Mike says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
The real question is why the excess water vapor comes down as snow rather than rain. What could cause that?
————
No, the really real question is:
1. Why is there are lot of cold dry air coming down from the Arctic?
AND
2. A lot of moist air coming from the oceans. Moist air typically meaning relatively warmer oceans combined with wind.
The recipe for making snow includes both. I am surprised I have to explain this on a weather climate blog.
Graph from Rutgers that shows Northern Hemisphere area covered by snow.
http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_seasonal.php?ui_set=nhland&ui_season=1
2009/10 was the second highest on record, since 1967. This is counter to the global warming hypothesis that says snow cover will be in a smaller area. It will be interesting to see if 2010/11 passes 2009/10 for second, or even the famous 1977/78 winter for first.
Over the last 20 years, I recall in Sydney, a number of unprecedented destructive, alarming, catastrophic climate (no weather, no climate, oh damn what is it!) events:
January 1991 – a catastrophic wind storm swept through the whole leafy North Shore. My brother-in-law’s house had three large (huge) blue gums land on his roof. His street was so badly damaged, he couldn’t get his car back home for over a week afterwards. Our swimming pool had a foot or more of chopped leaf matter in it. It looked exactly like a well kept lawn, the raised coping appeared to be completely merged horizontal with the top of the water. (Luckily, the emergency team cleaned it out eventually). We had a pile of logs, broken from overhanging trees, lining our back drive, as high or higher than our station wagon.
Some years later (can’t remember when) we were living on the north shore of Sydney Harbour with a sweeping view across to the city and the south eastern suburbs. A hail storm so big, that the green lawns turned white like snow, which lasted many hours afterwards. For up to a year afterwards, the south east was just a sea of blue tarpaulins over broken roofs, for the ferocity of the record storm.
Later still, the view across the harbour was completely blanked out, not by the usual harbour fog, but from smoke from bush fires that surrounded us almost completely. Sydney is the harbour city, for sure. It is also the forest city. We love it that way.
But the climate here is always going to extremes, has been that way for all of my many years. There is always new records made – new highs, new lows, new wets, new drys. That’s what chaotic means – long right hand tails – maths lesson anybody?
I belong to new south wales rural fire service and I agree with Ausie Dan australia have been subjected to climate changes over millions of years how do you get through to the boofheads I haven,t the answer god help us
Look at the bright side.
Fire Ants are held at bay and tend to stay more south.
Kudzu gets culled back much like it does in it’s native environment.
Africanized honey bees have to do more work to survive the cold.
Reading the above stories makes me wonder whether people are much less able to cope with weather than they used to or if the majority of the population has been so brainwashed by the CAGW meme that they are incapable of comprehending normal climate variations.
When I lived in Ottawa in the 1970’s, once the snow came down in November it stayed on the ground until April or so. There was a lot of snow and one of my jobs was to shovel the driveway, the hardest part being dealing with the 3′ high ridge of compressed snow at the base of the driveway thrown up by the overnight snowplow. Once the snow got to be over about 5′ in height next to the driveway I’d have to go up the bank and shovel the snow onto the lawn so I could deal with the next snowfall. Then I’d put on my cross country skis and ski to the university of Ottawa, quite a nice 4 mile trip on the bike paths next to the Rideau river. After a big dump of fresh snow, snowshoes were easier.
What the city of Ottawa did was to have nightly convoys of dump trucks which would be loaded with snow which was taken to one of several snow dumps which would reach impressive proportions by the end of the winter. In Calgary, IIRC, the city would melt the snow in the snow dumps by heating it and disposing of the water in the river. Ottawa had less snow than places like Quebec City where the snowbanks besides some of the highways would be 12′ or higher. I had quite an interesting experience north of Quebec City when I fell off my cross country skis into 6′ of powder snow and it was far harder than I expected to get back on my skis.
Presumably all of the same options that worked back then are available to cities today and the technology to take snow and heat it to produce water is quite straightforward. The water takes up far less room than the snow although the phase change does produce large quantities of plant fertilizer as a byproduct.
When I finally got persuaded to get my drivers license at age 25 I wondered why anyone would want to drive in the snow; it took me far longer to dig a car out of the snow and then try to find a parking spot at the university than it did to ski the equivalent distance. My cross country skis are easily at hand if I need them as are my snowshoes.
The average high temperature in January for Boston is 36F. Drive a couple hours north to Concord, NH and the average January high temperature is 30F. Many winters there is bare ground in Boston, and people hop in cars and head north to ski.
I can remember many years when we had two feet of snow on the ground in southern New Hampshire, while Boston, whose sky scrapers can be seen from our highest hills, is snow free.
It really doesn’t take much of a shift in the storm tracks to put Boston on the colder and snowier side of passing storms. The local forecasts often use the large highways that circle the city (128 and 495) as convenient demarcations for the rain-snow line.
What is unusual is to miss the “January Thaw,” which often shrinks the December and January snowpack before the February storms.
Here in southern NH it is starting to look like I’ll have to shovel snow from the roofs of my barns and sheds, which is a real bother. Who needs the extra work? All the local talk is about running out of places to put the snow.
The local road crews have enough experience of snowy winters to take steps that make room for the possibility of more snow. Front-end-loaders are even moving the larger piles away from intersections, where they block the view of oncoming traffic. However I imagine the road crews further south lack such experience. Another storm will make a real mess down there.
@LazyTeenager says:
January 29, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Berényi Péter says: January 29, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Mike says: January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
The real question is why the excess water vapor comes down as snow rather than rain. What could cause that?
————
“No, the really real question is:” (blah blah blah).
No, the really really real question is why the warmist trolls want to ban CO2 instead of the much more powerful and prevelant “water vapour”?
Should be easy enough and just think of the taxpayer funded grants that will come with that one!
Where do you put it? In 95/96 Boston had piles in the streets about 20ft high but could cope, presumably because they have snow every year. New York was at a standstill and had to push their snow into the harbour. This annoyed the environmentalists.
I expect that we will get some of your snow shortly here in the UK.
The ocean temps off the US east-coast are & have been below average.
So much for the “warm ocean water causes more snow” theme — just the opposite.
I live in Kansas. I think we have set records too, and another one is coming in the next few days. See Ryan’s graphic above. I want a snowblower for Valentine’s Day.
LazyTeenager says:
January 29, 2011 at 8:38 pm
No, the really real question is:
1. Why is there are lot of cold dry air coming down from the Arctic?
AND
2. A lot of moist air coming from the oceans. Moist air typically meaning relatively warmer oceans combined with wind.
The recipe for making snow includes both. I am surprised I have to explain this on a weather climate blog.
Well, try to think of it in terms of heat, not just temperature. You need a whole lot more cold dry air mixed into moist one coming from the oceans to produce snow instead of rain. If water had no phase transition at 0°C, this mixing would have to produce water droplets at -80°C in order to extract the same amount of heat that is released to the atmosphere as latent heat at 0°C during freezing.
As that much cold dry air is coming out of the Arctic, it is obviously replaced by air masses coming from elsewhere (otherwise it would leave vacuum behind, which is not the case). These air masses being warmer than standard Arctic air hold more moisture as well. But getting into Arctic winter with no incoming solar radiation whatsoever, they’re cooling soon well below freezing, therefore even more snow (along with cold dry air) is produced, this time at higher latitudes.
Ice crystals floating in air are pretty close to perfect black body radiators in thermal IR. As effective temperature of Earth as it is seen from space is -18°C and black body radiation flux is proportional to the fourth power of absolute temperature, radiation losses go up steeply with increasing temperature. At 0°C it is about 315 W/m^2 instead of the 240 W/m^2 planetary average (that’s a 75 W/m^2 surplus, which is much, at least compared to the alleged 3.7 W/m^2 difference from CO2 doubling). This radiation escapes to space almost unimpeded from cloud tops as air above is already freeze-dried (the narrow CO2 absorption band between 14 μm and 16 μm does not have much effect there).
Cloud temperature can’t drop significantly below freezing until all the water droplets in it are turned to ice. Therefore high level of OLR (Outgoing Longwave Radiation) is maintained for some time while ASR (Absorbed Shortwave Radiation) is low due to both low incidence angle of NH winter insolation and high albedo provided by clouds and snow covered surfaces.
Therefore this high level of mixing between Arctic and mid-latitude air masses that’s observed in the last couple of years provides a strong negative feedback on net heat content of the climate system which shows up as a sharp decrease in rates of both sea level and OHC (Ocean Heat Content) rise.
As this large scale heat loss is going on, global average temperature may not drop immediately, because the Arctic is getting “hot” (while it is cooling everywhere else), provided of course -20°C (instead of the standard -40°C) can be called hot. But it only shows average temperature (as opposed to heat content) is a rather ill-formed metric. Averaging intensive quantities is never a wise move.
If one wanted to make science (instead of propaganda), it would be much better to stick to extensive quantities like heat and entropy. I am surprised I have to explain this on a weather climate blog.
LazyTeenager says:
January 29, 2011 at 8:38 pm
I am surprised I have to explain this on a weather climate blog.
=====================================================
Please continue….
…explaining and re-explaining just draws more attention to the fact that no one can predict the future….
…and the climate scientists got it wrong again
Caleb says:
January 30, 2011 at 1:51 am
In addition to the rain/snow line, the northern extent of a coastal storm can be surprisingly sharp. I work in Nashua NH on the southern end of the city and right next to Massachusetts, but live well north. During one major storm (I forget which one, but it’s likely on that Kocin/Uncinelli list), the radar loop showed Nashua was right on the edge and the edge wasn’t making northerly progress.
So I went into work. No snow until I got to the northernmost exit in Nashua, #8. Each exit I passed seemed to have an extra inch of snow, and getting into the parking lot at work was satisfying challenge.
I would be rather leery of any “based on observational data” statistic that purports to show an AGW water vapor increase. Water vapor is rather hard to quantify within a needed, small, standard error, let alone measure and quantify AGW trends outside of the error bars unrelated to weather pattern variations and oscillations.
http://www.cmsaf.eu/bvbw/generator/CMSAF/Content/Publication/vs__pdf/ANVADA,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/ANVADA.pdf
This leads me to suggest that statements related to AGW water vapor increases are based on models, not real-time data.
I live just outside of Danbury CT on the NY side, currently I have approx. 30-40 inches on the ground. During the 95-96 season Danbury recorded 120 inches for the season but although it snowed constantly it melted between storms. I have lived here since 1980 and have never seen this much snow on the ground at one time.
I continue to hope for the epicenter of snow storms and lack of thawing to be in Edward Markey’s district in MA. Dump on them.
Yep, it’s been a very wet couple of winters, and as the long term ice core data tell us:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/alley2000/alley2000.gif
The colder periods when the glaciers advanced saw LOWER snowfall rates, not higher. Colder periods are marked by summers when the snow doesn’t melt and that’s why the glaciers advance, not because of higher snowfall rates. The coldest period in the ice core data above (the Younger Dryas) when the glaciers started advancing was also the period with the lowest snowfall rates. Cold=Dry, at least that what hundreds of thousands of years of ice-core data tell us, and of couse, basic physics.
Berényi Péter says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:42 pm
>>
Mike says:
January 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Why this there so much water vapor in the atmosphere? What could cause that?
The real question is why the excess water vapor comes down as snow rather than rain. What could cause that?
>>
Well I guess it’s the cold weather , but it’s winter , there’s nothing “unprecedented” about it being cold enough to snow in winter. What is unusual is the quantity of snow , not the fact that it is snowing. So Mike’s comment makes sense.
Lots of snow does not mean it’s exceptionally cold, it means there’s lots of water vapour in the air. If anyone feels the need to guffaw about extreme cold let’s post temperatures not precipitation data.
Berényi Péter says:
>>
I guess as the heat is released at cloud tops, it is readily radiated out to space, as freeze-dried air above is pretty transparent to thermal IR, because the so called Arctic window on the other side of CO2 absorption band (at wavelengths longer than 16 μm) is also open.
In other words if the extra snow is caused by global warming indeed, we have the luck to identify just another strong negative feedback loop.
>>
There you’re making more sense. Both evaporation and precipitation add a significant amount of heat transfer away from the surface in addition the the T^4 Stephan-Boltzmann radiation at the surface.
This is a clear negative feedback and is one example of how it is H2O not CO2 that regulates climate on Earth.
P. Solar says:
January 30, 2011 at 12:51 pm
“This is a clear negative feedback and is one example of how it is H2O not CO2 that regulates climate on Earth.”
_______
You may want to read: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010_Lacis_etal.pdf
(scroll down to start of article)
P. Solar says:
January 30, 2011 at 12:51 pm
“Lots of snow does not mean it’s exceptionally cold, it means there’s lots of water vapour in the air. If anyone feels the need to guffaw about extreme cold let’s post temperatures not precipitation data.”
____
Ice core data covering hundreds of thousands of years would agree with you. Colder periods saw LOWER, not great snowfall accumulations as in general colder=more dry.
See: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/alley2000/alley2000.gif
To see how snowfall accumulation varied with temperatures in Greenland over the past 20,000 years. Colder=lower snowfall accumulations.
R. Gates says:
January 30, 2011 at 1:10 pm
P. Solar says:
January 30, 2011 at 12:51 pm
“This is a clear negative feedback and is one example of how it is H2O not CO2 that regulates climate on Earth.”
_______
You may want to read: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010_Lacis_etal.pdf
(scroll down to start of article)
LOL, Schmidt and Reudy are a joke. Lackies in Hansen’s nuclear proliferation team.
How these jokers don’t get sued for misrepresentation (of themselves as scientists) beats me.
These guys could watch a dog shake itself dry and conclude that there was a pre-emptive feedback mechanism by which the water flying off caused the dog to start shaking.
Hey, I’m in Rep. Malarky’s district! I don’t know as we’re in the ‘epicenter’ of the recent storms, but the snow piles and icicles are impressive. However, the good solon has a reputation for avoiding his district (except at election time). But with any luck, he will have gotten stuck in the amazing gridlock that paralyzed Washington, D.C. Thursday. That was the traffic kind, but long may he suffer from the Congressional kind, as well.
/Mr Lynn
latitude says on January 30, 2011 at 6:12 am
You attributed the comments to the wrong person. It was actually Berényi Péter.
R Gates:
>>
Ice core data covering hundreds of thousands of years would agree with you. Colder periods saw LOWER, not great snowfall accumulations as in general colder=more dry.
See: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/alley2000/alley2000.gif
To see how snowfall accumulation varied with temperatures in Greenland over the past 20,000 years. Colder=lower snowfall accumulations.
>>
Thanks for the link, interesting graph. I always wondered by that cold period was called “Younger Dryass”, all becomes clear.
I guess they call the last ice age the Older-Dryass period. 😉
“Ice Coverage
9 to 10 tenths of medium lake ice west of Long Point and near
Buffalo. Elsewhere 9 tenths of thin lake except 9 tenths of new lake
ice in Long Point Bay.”
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/marine/iceConditions_e.html?mapID=11&siteID=07503
I’m up by Lake Ontario so don’t know snow conditions on Erie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_Blizzard_of_1977#Winter_of_1976-1977_Prior_to_the_Storm
Skeptic Tank says:
January 29, 2011 at 1:40 pm
“In our record year of 1996, here on Long Island, we had over 90″ for the season – 3x the normal average. We had at least four storms over 14″ that year. But I don’t remember there ever being as much snow on the ground at one time as we have right now. We typically have substantial melting between major storms. Not this year.
If this keep up, I’m moving to Syracuse.”
I live in Texas but I’m temporarily in western NY about 180 miles southwest of Syracuse. I don’t think you’re going to get a break there except perhaps they’re far better prepared for harsh winters.
Wait until the damage is tallied up from all the ice dams. I grew up in this area and I’ve never seen them this bad. Chunks of ice as big as garbage cans are building up along eaves backing up water underneath shingles resulting in lots of yellow icicles (something rarely seen in the last 50 years) as the water penetrates attics and walls and picks up yellow coloring from the underlying wood. When these huge ice dams break off they rip off gutter pipes, roofing shingles, siding, furnace vent pipes, and anything else breakable in the vicinity. I expect there’ll be a fair amount of people getting hurt by falling ice too or falling off ladders while attempting to get rid of the dams.