New 2 day record December snowfall amount to the Minneapolis/St Paul area
While there have been a few high temperature records in the desert southwest and western Oregon, the majority of weather records in the USA this week have been for cold, snowfall, or rainfall. The biggest number of records have to do with the lowest maximum temperature.
Here’s a summary of the weather records:
| Record Events for Mon Dec 6, 2010 through Sun Dec 12, 2010 | |
| Total Records: | 2002 |
| Rainfall: | 319 |
| Snowfall: | 320 |
| High Temperatures: | 71 |
| Low Temperatures: | 426 |
| Lowest Max Temperatures: | 767 |
| Highest Min Temperatures: | 99 |
Uncharacteristically for the Associated Press, they give this latest snowstorm the title of “monster”:
Rutgers snow lab has the current snow cover for 2010:
Last year, we seemed to have a bit more snow cover in the USA (and globally) at this time:
I think Rutgers is having a little joke by making snow cover “yellowish”.
Here’s a Public Information Statement (PIS) from the NWS in Minneapolis
Dec 10-11 Snowfall…New December Record
The December 10-11 snowstorm brought a new 2 day record December snowfall amount to the Minneapolis/St Paul area, and perhaps to other areas as well. The new record is 17.1 inches. This storm was bit unusual in that it was a Pacific type storm system. The snowfall amounts were in the category of what would be more typical of a storm moving out of the southwest U.S. toward the Mississippi valley.
This storm also ranks in the top 5 of the largest snowfalls in the Twin Cities. See the Minnesota State Climatology site for further details.
Here is the broad picture of the storm total snow.
PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TWIN CITIES/CHANHASSEN MN
800 PM CST SUN DEC 12 2010
...SNOWFALL TOTALS FROM THE WINTER STORM EVENT DEC 10-11...
THE TOTALS BELOW ARE SEPARATED INTO SNOW...AND ICE AND SLEET
CATEGORIES...THEN BY AMOUNT...AND ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE
FINAL AMOUNT FOR EACH LOCATION.
SNOW REPORTS LISTED BY AMOUNT
INCHES LOCATION ST COUNTY TIME
------ ----------------------- -- -------------- -------
23.00 5 SE OSCEOLA WI POLK 0900 AM
22.00 EAU CLAIRE WI EAU CLAIRE 0500 PM
TELEVISION STATION WQOW.
21.50 NEW MARKET MN SCOTT 0930 PM
21.50 SHAKOPEE MN SCOTT 0700 PM
21.00 OAKDALE MN WASHINGTON 0330 AM
20.00 RED WING MN GOODHUE 0800 AM
20.00 MAPLEWOOD MN RAMSEY 0330 AM
19.20 EAU CLAIRE WI EAU CLAIRE 0100 PM
18.50 4 NNE MENOMONIE WI DUNN 0945 PM
18.00 MENOMONIE WI DUNN 0800 AM
18.00 EAST FARMINGTON WI POLK 0630 PM
18.00 3 SSW BURNSVILLE MN DAKOTA 0615 PM
18.00 2 W PRIOR LAKE MN SCOTT 0900 PM
17.50 3 NW MINNEAPOLIS MN HENNEPIN 0100 PM
17.40 LAKEVILLE MN DAKOTA 0900 PM
17.20 WOODBURY MN WASHINGTON 0900 AM
17.20 1 W CARVER MN CARVER 1000 PM
17.10 MINNEAPOLIS MN HENNEPIN 0130 AM
MEASURED AT THE MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL AIRPORT
17.00 EAU CLAIRE WI EAU CLAIRE 1100 AM
17.00 2 N MENOMONIE WI DUNN 0630 PM
16.50 SAVAGE MN SCOTT 1130 PM
16.30 HASTINGS MN DAKOTA 0830 PM
16.10 BLOOMINGTON MN HENNEPIN 0600 PM
16.00 RIDGELAND WI DUNN 0100 PM
16.00 DURAND WI PEPIN 1030 PM
15.50 CHANHASSEN MN CARVER 0130 AM
MEASURED AT THE NWS OFFICE
15.20 ST LOUIS PARK MN HENNEPIN 1030 PM
15.00 1 SSW DELANO MN WRIGHT 0630 PM
14.70 WACONIA MN CARVER 0745 AM
14.50 3 SSW WHITE BEAR LAKE MN RAMSEY 1030 PM
14.20 STANLEY WI CHIPPEWA 0930 AM
13.70 LESTER PRAIRIE MN MCLEOD 0930 AM
13.50 1 ESE CHASKA MN CARVER 0700 PM
13.50 ELK MOUND WI DUNN 0700 PM
13.00 STILLWATER MN WASHINGTON 1200 PM
13.00 JIM FALLS WI CHIPPEWA 0930 AM
12.50 NORTH BRANCH MN CHISAGO 1100 AM
12.50 1 ENE CAMBRIDGE MN ISANTI 0630 PM
12.00 FARIBAULT MN RICE 0900 PM
11.50 ANDOVER MN ANOKA 0145 AM
11.00 HAUGEN WI BARRON 1130 AM
10.00 ST JAMES MN WATONWAN 1230 PM
10.00 CUMBERLAND WI BARRON 0730 AM
9.50 NORTH BRANCH MN CHISAGO 0430 PM
9.00 VESTA MN REDWOOD 1230 PM
8.00 MANKATO MN BLUE EARTH 0715 PM
7.00 4S ST CLOUD MN STEARNS 0630 PM
6.00 WINTHROP MN SIBLEY 0830 PM
Here is a Radar Replay during the time of some of the heavier snow (9 am to 3pm).
Snow Depth as of December 12
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
oldgifford says:
December 13, 2010 at 9:21 am
R. Gates says:
“The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…”
What drier than the Sahara?
________
Actually, both of them are classified as deserts, and the interior of Antarctica is even more dry than than Sahara…
A Desert is defined as a region that has less than 254 mm (10 in) of annual rainfall or precipitation. Antarctica can be classified as a desert by this definition. In the interior of the continent the average annual precipitation (in *equivalent of water) is only about 50 mm (about 2 in), less than the Sahara.
Here a useful link to learn more about the amazing Desert that is Antarctica:
http://tiny.cc/9n0x3
In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.
R. Gates says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:02 am
Sam Parsons says:
December 13, 2010 at 9:45 am
R. Gates says:
December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!
Sir/M’am, put down the dope pipe. Get a nap.
Sam Parsons says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:10 am
To R. Gates:
By the way, is there some reason to believe that there is a global hydrological cycle? To me, that sounds like a global cloud cycle or global humidity cycle, and I know that neither of those exist. I am asking for an answer in your very own words. Do not refer me to an article. I am not your student.
___
I’m not sure what you mean by global cloud cycle or global humidity cycle, but abolutely there are ocean and atmospheric cycles that affect the entire global (ENSO, PDO, etc) If the hydrological cycle is accelerating on a global basis, as appears to be the case by the latest research, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/10/global-warming-river-flows-oceans-climate-disruption.html
Then yes, you could say there is a global hydrological cycle in the sense that more precipitation will be evaporated from oceans worldwide and falling on land worldwide. This is the exact method of negative feedback the planet has used to balance CO2 levels off for millions of years and there is no reason to think this time would be dfferent. The only difference now is the fact that CO2 levels have risen far more quickly (virtually instantly from a geological perpective) and it is not clear how the normal acceleration of the hydrological cycle will respond. (i.e., it looks like it is accelerating, but what other things will result from this large and rapid spike in CO2?)
Since “eadler” usually doesn’t notice or chooses not to notice corrections, I’m point it out that I’ve made a significant correction to his false comment above. He claims GISS has November Land Ocean Index at .96 which is totally bogus.
Sam Parsons says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:27 am
R. Gates says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:02 am
Sam Parsons says:
December 13, 2010 at 9:45 am
R. Gates says:
December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!
Sir/M’am, put down the dope pipe. Get a nap
______
Thanks for that Sam. My description is accurate, but you’ve reminded me that I need to go out a do a bit of Christmas shopping as I enjoy this unusually warm December day in Denver.
I’m not sure of the weather station density from http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/ , but I suspect it’s a lot lower in the southwest than in the southeast. Still, it’s a decent outbreak for the southeast. Rather annoying actually, it was 50°F when I got up this morning in New Hampshire. Oh well, at least the ground thawed so I could plant my snowstake.
Snowfall to date for me this season – 0.8″. Our turn will come.
R. Gates:
“What does all this have to do with AGW? Thats the million dollar question, but there are those who are looking at it.”
Actually, it’s the billion dollar question, and I would rather that my tax money NOT look at it. There are many, more urgent matters that require our attention (e.g. national debt, hunger, disease, to name a few).
PS
I am totally OK with funding climate research with private money…you know, George Soros, Greenpeace, WWF, UAW, Teamsters, BP, R. Gate’s money, etc. …
RE: R Gates
“…It takes tremendous energy to move the mass of moisture in snow from the ocean to cover your driveway…”
It took even more energy to move ice a mile thick, down to the latitude of NYC. Does this make the past ice age a proof of global warming?
However I do think you make some good points, regarding how poorly understood the energy budget of the earth is. Vast amounts of energy is shifted from place to place to place, and a single big storm captures and releases gigantic amounts of latent energy as water shifts from gas to fluid to ice, and then back again, raising the water three times as high as Mount Everest and then dropping it down again. Simply attempting back-of-the-envelope calculations of energy gains and losses on earth can make your head spin. Likely the best route is to skip all the amazing things energy does here on earth, and instead to simply position a satellite or ten up in space, and measure incoming energy as opposed to energy going out.
The current AO is pretty amazing. It is interesting no matter what it is caused by. It is like a rubber band stretched as far as it can be stretched, and when the pattern “breaks” the new pattern will catch many by surprise, I think. And what will the new pattern be? Ah, that is the question, isn’t it!?
This just in: It snows in the midwest in the winter.
Amazing science being done!
REPLY: This also just in, WUWT reports on weather as well as climate, as does the Associated Press and thousands of other new outlets. Read the masthead.
At least TRY to have some convincing snark without parroting Romm, otherwise please visit the FAIL blog where your level of commentary might be more appropriate. – Anthony
Pops says:
December 13, 2010 at 6:36 am
Rocky Balboa, here’s the very link for you:
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.
———————————————-
Thanks for that. Seen it before but that’s exactly what I need to print off and pin up in the coffee area at work. Anything to try and wake people up to the fact that we’re all getting scammed, or at least that the so-called ‘experts’ we have rammed down our throats by the BBC all the time know sh*t. That’s getting printed off tonight and pinned up tomorrow.
Failed predictions are great. Al Gore’s got it coming good, over the ‘five years’ arctic ice claim he made two or three years ago.
Proof of Global Warming: How to get it…
Get yourself a fifth of 100 Proof Kentucky Bourbon or other similar distill, drink up, and you shall feel globally warmed all over.
Neither rain, nor sleet, nor snow, flood, hurricane, tornado, Arctic blast, drought or Barbecue Summer shall deter you.
Just remember to contract a designated driver before you fall off the wagon.
Ric Werme says:
“Snowfall to date for me this season – 0.8″. Our turn will come.”
I think the West’s turn is coming soon. and New England is downwind…
Heard on the radio the other day…
The Temperature in Anchorage is now 17(f) while it is 4(f) here at our studios. I had to laugh, the studios are about 3 miles from the airport. I was about half a mile from the airport at the time and my truck thermometer read 2f.
no se puede cantar victoria
hay que esperar los proximos años haber si no se sigue calentando el planeta
para estar seguro de que nos encaminamos a una edad de hielo
R. Gates says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:24 am
In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.
That only works if there are 2 states to climate.
There are 4.
R. Gates, go0d comment about not needing goverment. BTW, if you speed up the hydrologic cycle, and produce more snow, more rain, then you are getting more clouds. Clouds always reduce the SWR entering the oceans. The oceans are primarily warmed by SWR. The feedback from the oceans can takes time to manifest in an atmosphere warmed by GHG,
R. Gates is always good for a laugh or two and he always reminds me of the knight in the “Holy Grail” that has all of his limbs cut off, “Merely a flesh wound.”
“Those record cold temperatures are really predicted by global warming theory.” NOT.
“CO2=more heat=greater evaporation=great rainfall & snowfall in winter=greater weathering of rock to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.”
R. Gates please demonstrate your proof of this statement. Please no links just your proof. Some math. Some physics. Some chemistry. Not just words. Especially the more heat part.
Sam Parsons says:
December 13, 2010 at 10:01 am
Talk about someone who misses a point or two! The amount of snowfall is not the big deal. The big deal is the timing, extent, coldness of the air mass.
So it’s cold where you are. And the British Isles, and Scandinavia. But did you notice the red and yellow dots on the map scattered across the entire Western US vs purple and blue in the Southeast?
R Gates,
Your argument that warmer temperatures lead to increased snowfall is valid in very few places on earth. Your central Antarctic desert for example. Warmer air would lead to increased snowfall there simply because the air could hold more moisture.
However, you have implied that increased SNOWFALL in other areas of the world are a result of the same effect. You could not be more wrong. Warming and an increased hydrological cycle will not cause more SNOWFALL in areas that are ordinarily ABOVE freezing. Increased rainfall, yes, you might be able to make that argument. But please, there is no argument that allows for snowfall in areas that are ordinarily too warm for snow due to WARMING.
[Snip] Fine argument, no need for the ad hom. ~tallmod
@frank K, December 13, 2010 at 7:42 am.
I visited the link you provided and found this directly under the headline:
“A climate scientist has predicted the recent snowfall could be the last we see for a long time. Dr Nick Pepin, from the University of Portsmouth, believes such long-lasting snow will become a rare event in the future.
Dr Pepin, who’s been running a weather station on the roof of the geography department since 1995, said: ‘What we had over the past week was unusual because the snow stayed.”
Does anything sort of catch your eye in this?
Google Maps “Lion Terrace, Portsmouth, England” to see what the surrounding environment looks like.
During the 2010 magma intrusions at Eyjafjallajökull, 100 million cubic meters of ice melted during the eruption. Much of that was converted to steam. Here is an attempt to picture the size of a cubic meter: Eruption rates at volcanoes
http://blogs.agu.org/magmacumlaude/2010/11/20/average-lava-fluxes-at-volcanoes/
Sharp temperature gradients + particulate = what goes up eventually comes back down.
Merapi wasn’t big enough to significantly cool the area around the equator like a VEI-6 Pinatubo perturbed globally. 1916 was La Nina followed by an even stronger one in 1917. Big volcano year, Cerro Azul (VEI 5+). Hope that doesn’t happen again. The VEI index is logarithmic scale,
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale?wasRedirected=true
as an example, it takes 100 VEI-4 to equal one massive VEI-6. That can sometimes even penetrate all the way through the stratosphere, especially near the poles.
The stratosphere is situated between about 10 km (6 miles) 31,680 ft and 50 km (31 miles) altitude above the surface at moderate latitudes, while at the poles it starts at about 8 km (5 miles) 26,400 ft altitude.
Hmmmmmm, I understand that there might (should) be a hydrological cycle. And I agree that it should lead to an increase in precipitation. The point I think is that the precipitation will be water in the liquid form when the temperature is within the “normal” range for the date in the SE. The problem is that the temp isn’t in the “normal” range.
R. Gates there is not argument about the hydrological cycle there is one, whether it is increasing has not been determined as yet. Perhaps we should wait a few years and complete one of the full cycles and make that determination. As for me here in NE Alabama it is very cold with today’s high about 30 degrees below the climatic norm for the date leading to the precipitation being in the solid state rather than the liquid.
Nor argument from me it did precipitate and it is cold. Tonight it is going to be very cold also probably if the forecast is correct record setting 9f for my particular location. Glad the hydrological cycle will be dry tonight.
Bill Derryberry
During the 2010 magma intrusions of Eyjafjallajökull, 100 million cubic meters of ice melted, way more than the same intrusion in 1999-2000. Thus more snow, also 2000 was a La Nina year.
Got a question: If the Hydrological cycle is speeding up why is the sea level rise slowing
down?