According to the Bloomberg article:
More than a foot of snow fell across the northeast yesterday, with some areas in New Jersey getting more than 30 inches (76 centimeters), according to AccuWeather. Central Park had 20 inches of snow by 8 a.m. yesterday, the most for the month since 1948, the National Weather Service said.
and
The snowfall was the fifth-largest on record for the city, Sanitation Commissioner John Doherty said on Dec. 26.
Here are some daily record event reports:
In addition, snow records were set all over the eastern half of the United States:
634 snowfall records were set in the USA this past week.
Here’s the storm system that set so many records, on its way to sea yesterday:
On Monday, December 27 at 1731 UTC (12:31 p.m. EST) the GOES-13 satellite captured this visible image of the powerful low pressure system that brought snows from Georgia to Maine along the U.S. east coast. Some of the snowfall can be seen over South and North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and southeastern New York. The clouds of the low obscure New England in the image.
Credit: NOAA/NASA GOES Project
Here is what Kevin Trenberth has to say:
RobW says:
December 28, 2010 at 9:17 am
Would someone be so kind to point myself to a good rebuttall of the AGW crowd meme that states the melting Artic ice caused it to snow EVERYWHERE. I want to reeducate a few people. Thanks
=======
Lets see if we can make it simple for them.
Given that the IPCC is NOT projecting adverse surface temperature scenarios until about 2060 (unless you wish to discard IPCC findings in favor of MSM muse), all news media articles claiming a current correlation between weather events and AGW impacts should be dismissed as fiction.
Scenarios: 2010-2030. Part I
by Judith Curry
http://judithcurry.com/2010/12/23/scenarios-2010-2030-part-i/
“The IPCC AR4 projected a near term global average temperature increase of 0.2C per decade. Further, the AR4 showed an insensitivity of global average surface temperature to emission scenarios prior to about 2060.”
Global Cooling Consensus is Heating up cooling over the next three decades.
http://notrickszone.com/2010/12/28/global-cooling-consensus-is-heating-up-cooling-over-the-next-1-to-3-decades/
Saw s0me sillyness about Santa Barbera on the web, news that a Pa. outdoor hockey rink is melting and warm weather rumours for GB.
So I checked. Santa Barbera 18C ie. room temperature- nice.Philly 37F. Yup melting. London 7C. Dublin8C.
Get your wooly mamoths ready the ice age cometh.
Baa Humbug says:
December 28, 2010 at 9:00 am
Between the snows of the NH and the rains here in Oz, the volumes involved are mind boggling. It takes huge amounts of energy to transport those volumes up to the atmosphere. Now that energy has been dumped…
______
First, you do realize of course that both of these events are entirely consistent with an acceleration of the hydrological cycle, which is exactly that way the earth has responded for million of years to increased amounts of CO2?
And to your second point…the energy that has been “dumped”. Tis true that the mass of water and snow represent energy by the E=mc2 equation, but I think more to your insinuation that somehow that energy that moved the moisture and snow has been “dumped”? It is of course still somewhere…(in the troposphere mainly) and with more CO2 in the same troposphere, more of that energy will be sure to remain around as opposed to being lost to space through the GH effect of CO2, with the net result that there is more net energy still around to do more dumping in the future, i.e., through the mechanism of the accelerated hydrological cycle as that energy must eventually go back into doing the work of evaporating water.
It can always get worst:
Vancouver Island resort receives 9 ft of snow in three days:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20101225/record-snow-at-vancouver-island-hill-101225/
John McManus:
The hockey rink they are talking about is in Pittsburgh (where the NHL’s Winter Classic is being held at Heinz Field), not Philly. It’s expected to hit 50F that day. However, planners are more concerned with the prediction of rain than the temperature for the event.
Personally, I’ll be happy to see 50F, as I’ll be polar bear plunging that morning. However, we’ve had highs in the 20s and lows in the teens all month, which is more mid-January/February than December temps around these parts. Knew I should have gotten that extra cord of wood for the wood burner when I placed my order ….
I have some better news:
http://tinyurl.com/24ojftq
1.5 m(!) snow cover on Bornholm Island
A powerful winter assault paralyzed the Danish island in the Baltic, Bornholm. Local authorities asked for help because they can not cope with snow, which plied the road. Residents of the island increasingly plagued by lack of medicines and fuel.
Rgates “Tis true that the mass of water and snow represent energy by the E=mc2 equation, ”
Hogwash and stop trying to sound scientific. The e=mc2 equation relates to the amount of energy tied up in matter and has nothing to do with the energy content of clouds unless you intend to spli apart the atoms of water vapor. Also kindly reference where the ipcc predicted colder winters as part of their models? Because we can all supply you with references where they said there would be warmer winters.
RobW says:
December 28, 2010 at 9:17 am
“Would someone be so kind to point myself to a good rebuttall of the AGW crowd meme that states the melting Artic ice caused it to snow EVERYWHERE. I want to reeducate a few people. Thanks”
The arctic ice is sitting exactly where it was sitting ten years ago. Why did this snow not happen ten years ago?
Brc says:
December 28, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Rgates “Tis true that the mass of water and snow represent energy by the E=mc2 equation, ”
Hogwash and stop trying to sound scientific. The e=mc2 equation relates to the amount of energy tied up in matter and has nothing to do with the energy content of clouds unless you intend to spli apart the atoms of water vapor. Also kindly reference where the ipcc predicted colder winters as part of their models? Because we can all supply you with references where they said there would be warmer winters.
_____
I’m fully aware of what e=mc2 stands for, thank you. You may want to go back and read my reply as I was replying with a bit of sarcasm about the “dumping” of energy. In terms of warmer or colder winters, you need to look at the global picture, not just Europe or the USA. 2010 will be one of the warmest years on instrument record. This is entirely consistent with AGW models. Arctic Sea ice today (12/28/10 ) is at its lowest point for this date in the satellite record, also, entirely consistent with AGW’s. I think AGW skeptics are making far too much of the cold weather in Europe, and in the long run, we could eventually learn that the lower sea ice levels are indeed affecting the outbreak of cold and snow for Europe.
Does anyone know if the spread of all this white stuff exceeds ‘normal’ distributions by area? Northern hemisphere seems to have a higher land to ocean ratio than the south (I could be wrong about that), could that suggest a greater sensitivity to albedo changes?
Most places marking above average temperatures (blocking highs, yes?) in this hemisphere seem to be over the northern latitudes where white (freezing temperatures or ice bodies) dominate despite the relative warmth and are also areas recieving the least incoming solar energy due to the curvature of the earth and atmosphere.
The increased snow cover seems to be landing in places with longer days (latitudinally futher south) – where my mind nudges me to think that changes in albedo would matter more (a longer period of reduced net incoming energy).
Could this be a possible negative feedback to these Blocking Highs that we’re observing (observing no doubt with greater understanding than in any incarnation in history)?
I know, a chain of uncertainties (orders of magnitude fewer than CAGW though), but it was scratchin’ so I had to itch me. Anyone?
John F. Hultquist:
That Puget Sound Convergence Zone has given me many a rough ride in my years in aviation. Not so fondly remember many nights flying through one of those
convergence fronts trying to make an approach at Sea Tac..
The polar vortexes are driving the world climate. In the south where Antarctic pressure is low with a strong polar vortex, the AAO is overall very positive, which is driving the strength of the La Nina. The AAO is looking to go further into the positive region which should add extra strength and longevity to the La Nina. The La Nina at nino3-4 continues its negative trend.
In the north the polar vortex has been weak, allowing dominance of arctic high pressure which influences a negative AO and NAO. The vortex has been gaining some strength over the past few days but is looking to break down again soon, which should load another pattern for the NH.
Stratospheric temperatures are about average in the north and below average in the south.
There is little knowledge on what controls the polar vortexes, but they are at opposites at the moment, this is a fertile place to invest scientific research.
lots of good stuff in here:
28 Dec: Boston Herald: Michael Graham: ‘Warming’ up to junk science
According to members of the government/science funding axis pushing the theory of Anthropomorphic Global Warming – aka “Your Pick-Up Is Frying Our Planet” – the mountains of snowfall across North America actually prove the Earth is warming. Believe it or not, they say, warming actually makes the Earth colder…
That very day a Professor Stephan Rahmstorf released a report saying climate change means “we have to anticipate milder winters rather than cold ones,” and that even our “cold” winters have gotten “warmer.”
He says more warmth, not more cold, is proof of global warming. And who is this nut? He’s a scientist at the same Potsdam Institute.
Which is why “climate change” is the perfect mantra of the modern bureaucrat and big-government activist: The evidence always proves you right…
Meanwhile climatologist Piers Corbyn warned London of a white Christmas weeks ago. His models have been far more accurate than the UN-approved “science,” but he’s ignored.
Why? Because Corbyn’s research shows the sun has far more to do with climate patterns than your Prius does. Unfortunately, there’s no money to be made at places like the Potsdam Institute studying things like the sun. No legislature can regulate excessive solar output, and there are no jobs to hand out at the Department of Sunshine Control…
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1305752&srvc=home&position=emailed
R. Gates says:
December 28, 2010 at 4:11 pm
2010 will be one of the warmest years on instrument record. This is entirely consistent with AGW models. Arctic Sea ice today (12/28/10 ) is at its lowest point for this date in the satellite record, also, entirely consistent with AGW’s. I think AGW skeptics are making far too much of the cold weather in Europe, and in the long run, we could eventually learn that the lower sea ice levels are indeed affecting the outbreak of cold and snow for Europe.
You are cherry picking again Gates, even with a strong long lasting El nino the world temps will not rise, the current readings (CH04) are taking a severe nose dive. The current monthly low of ice extent in the north is a product of the extreme high pressure over Greenland, which is part of the global cooling process (weak polar vortex). Strange that you continue not to mention the record ice extent in the south?
Globally there is no problem with ice extent, is that consistent with the AGW models?
The massive cold in the North is just beginning, you will find it harder to push aside as the winter continues.
Thank you Mayor Schmuckberg for your heartfelt request for the taxpayers of NYC to remain patient until their streets can be plowed, a testament to the inefficiency of your office and the DOS (bet they plowed your street within minutes). And a big F.U. to the MTA for total suspension of all transportation. Gee, sure wasn’t a problem several years ago when transit workers went on strike several days before Christmas severely inconveniencing millions of New Yorkers. All this because it snowed, something that NEVER, EVER happens in NYC, right? I’ve lived in the city all 59 years of my life and it’s tragically laughable that whenever it snows city management acts like it’s an 36″ snowfall in the Everglades. Wouldn’t you think the city would be able to deal with snow by now?
Speaking of the high over Greenland with that Nor’Easter heading out to the Atlantic,
I wouldn’t be surprised if that changes things a bit….
Cold and snow times come and go. In late December of 1947, New York City had 26 inches of snow. There was no place to push it, so it had to be gathered into trucks and dumped into the Hudson River. The “Mayor Lindsey” snowstorm in the 1970’s was no slouch either. Cars were stranded on the Thruway bridge over the Hudson for three days. In 1938 I skated on ice a foot thick on a cove in the Hudson River opposite West Point.
Well said as always Geoff.
“Vortexes” should be “vortices”, though. Unless you mates there down under say it differently. 😉
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
savethesharks says:
December 28, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Thanks Chris…It did look wrong when I typed it, but there is some discussion on the right spelling, both can be used perhaps?
Cold misery from Moscow to New York:
The fall of Moscow
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/12/fall-of-moscow.html
RobW says: Would someone be so kind to point myself to a good rebuttall of the AGW crowd meme that states the melting Artic ice caused it to snow EVERYWHERE. I want to reeducate a few people. Thanks
Just to add to what others have said… I find the most effective thing to be to simply look at them in astonishment, get that half laugh trying to hold it back look on; then say: Do you really believe that WARMTH makes it COLD and SNOWY? Reaaallly? Then chuckle in that “I’m so glad I’m not related to you” way and ask, patiently, if they would like it all explained?….
FWIW, the “hot makes cold” argument all hinges on excess fresh water from exceptional melt in Greenland and the Arctic Ice Cap. Just point out that both are still there, so that’s not happened. Yes, the Gulf Stream has slowed down. That’s got nothing to do with Pacifc snows an rains (nor much of anything to do with the rest of North American snows either. Nor the cold winters in the Southern Hemisphere last winter there. So you can try to point out that error, but it’s not as effective as the “Why, you poor dear…” approach in my experience.
I note in passing that R. Gates is still trying to pedal his mistaken hydrological cycle surmise. Hey, R. Gates: “You poor dear, would you like …” 😉
R. Gates says:
First, you do realize of course that both of these events are entirely consistent with an acceleration of the hydrological cycle, which is … blah blah blah…
Since everything is consistent with AGW theory and models then they have not falisification criteria and are non-scientific. It’s all “pig water”. (aka hogwash). Predicting everything then saying “See I was right on that!” is the work of snake oil salesmen, not science.
What’s happening is heat LEAVING, not accumulating. Take a look at the ocean right now, it’s way cold:
http://chiefio.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/sst_anom-29-dec-2010.gif
There’s nothing hot speeding up anything. There is a colder “cold end” to this heat engine of ours (those cold poles that have gone way cold lately) sucking the heat out of the oceans and yes, dumping it to space.
I think more to your insinuation that somehow that energy that moved the moisture and snow has been “dumped”? It is of course still somewhere…(in the troposphere mainly)
Nope. Long gone. Heat moves from the surface to the troposphere and out to space inside one day. You can see the process in the GEOS picture of the clouds over my head right now. Warmer on top as the water condenses and the heat is DUMPED into space for that Sat to see as IR in space. Colder down below where it’s snow in the mountains and very cold rain on my roof and yard. GEOS picture of IR leaving:
http://chiefio.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/ir-28dec2010-na_goes20152010362jp2qbd.jpg
Note that the warm green and blue parts of that GEOS picture are the cloud TOPS.
The process of heat leaving and the daily cycle of it is covered in this paper:
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/31/68/93/PDF/angeo-19-1001-2001.pdf
which I discuss here:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/does-convection-dominate/
but cover a bit better and with better graphics here:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/28/ignore-the-day-at-your-peril/
and with more CO2 in the same troposphere, more of that energy will be sure to remain around as opposed to being lost to space through the GH effect of CO2, with the net result that there is more net energy still around
Drink that kool-aid…
But, back at that paper that actually did field science and looked at tropospheric heating after land warming from sunshine…
Translation: Daily HEATING leaves THE SAME DAY and reaches the tropopause within HOURS.
Your heat storage surmise is junk.
to do more dumping in the future, i.e., through the mechanism of the accelerated hydrological cycle as that energy must eventually go back into doing the work of evaporating water.
No. The energy has left the building … it’s cold water and snow / ice that comes back down from the clouds. Heat left going up.
Stand under a thunder storm and catch the hail, then tell me how that’s heat going back to ‘evaporate water’…
You are being incredibly ‘un physical’ in your descriptions, enough that any kid who’s played in the rain can see it. But just to make it very clear what really happens, from that paper, the conclusions section:
15:00 is 3 in the afternoon. By 3 PM the heating of the land has risen all the way to the tropopause.
Then it contiues out to space as the sun goes down and the whole Troposphere cools off. NOT staying in the air and NOT going back down to the cooling land.
That’s what really happens when you measure and do field work and real science.
So please, take your whole stored heat somehow clawing it’s way down from the tropopause via ice and snow to cause ocean heating thesis and chuck it. It’s worthless as real measurments of the process show the daily heat is all up in the air by 3 pm and gone after sundown. There isn’t any ‘stored heat’. Get over it.
E.M.Smith says:
December 29, 2010 at 3:00 am
OUCH!
I have just been reading “http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/28/ignore-the-day-at-your-peril/”
Very interesting.