NOAA's CSI explains record snows: global warming not involved

This analysis from NOAA’s Climate Scene Investigators (CSI) shows that there’s no historical signature which would implicate a human fingerprint, or as they say:

Specifically, they wanted to know if human-induced global warming could have caused the snowstorms due to the fact that a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor. The CSI Team’s analysis indicates that’s not likely. They found no evidence — no human “fingerprints” — to implicate our involvement in the snowstorms. If global warming was the culprit, the team would have expected to find a gradual increase in heavy snowstorms in the mid-Atlantic region as temperatures rose during the past century. But historical analysis revealed no such increase in snowfall.

We’ve seen the ridiculous pronouncements of global warming = record snow from the Goreacle and his disciples a lot lately. It’s their last gasp since not much else is working out for them. Will Joe Romm offer a mea culpa for his chicken little squawking about deniers, snow, and global warming? Doubtful. (Though, Jeff Masters might). Romm and others, like Gore, will keep on squawking, because they know they can get away with such things on the short term, because it takes science awhile to catch up, producing an analysis, and the public has a short memory. Gore and Romm pay no attention to the science produced afterward, like this, or the article below.

From NOAA: Forensic Meteorology Solves the Mystery of Record Snows

By Martin Hoerling & Katy Human & Barb Deluisi – NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory

Introduction

This is the second in a two-part retrospective on the mid-Atlantic’s record-setting snowstorms of 2009-10. For Part 1, please see Can Record Snowstorms and Global Warming Coexist?

Reagan_Airport_Annual_Snowfall
Annual snowfall at Reagan National Airport site for 1888-89 through 2009-2010. The red bar shows the 55.9 inches accumulated through February 11, 2010 that broke the former record from 1898-99. Note that only 3 years of the last 20 have more than the long-term average of 15.2 inches of snow. Data courtesy of NOAA National Weather Service.

Shortly after the third of three major snowstorms brought record-setting snowfall to the U.S. mid-Atlantic region, NOAA’s Climate Scene Investigators (CSI) assembled to analyze why the snowstorms happened. The CSI is a team of “attribution” experts in NOAA whose job is to determine the causes for climate conditions. By distinguishing natural variability from human-induced climate change, they aim to improve decision-making and inform adaptation strategies.

The CSI team was formed in 2007, following chaotic media coverage of the record U.S. warmth in 2006 (see CSI: NOAA Climate Scene Investigators). Here they have been called to the scene again, but now to explain cold, snowy conditions, and to reconcile those with a warming planet. After a series of record-setting snowstorms hit the mid-Atlantic region this winter, some people asked NOAA if humans could somehow be to blame. Specifically, they wanted to know if human-induced global warming could have caused the snowstorms due to the fact that a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor.

SnowDepth_20100211
In early February, two weather systems brought record snowfalls to Washington, D.C., and other parts of the U.S. mid-Atlantic region. This image shows the depth of snow that had accumulated at locations across the contiguous United States as of February 11, 2010. (Image by NOAA Environmental Visualization Laboratory using data courtesy of NOAA’s National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center.)

The CSI Team’s analysis indicates that’s not likely. They found no evidence — no human “fingerprints” — to implicate our involvement in the snowstorms. If global warming was the culprit, the team would have expected to find a gradual increase in heavy snowstorms in the mid-Atlantic region as temperatures rose during the past century. But historical analysis revealed no such increase in snowfall. Nor did the CSI team find any indication of an upward trend in winter precipitation along the eastern seaboard.

The CSI team turned its attention to natural factors that control the ordinary ups and downs of weather. Many extreme weather events are due to cyclical, large-scale anomalies in air pressure and sea surface temperature across large tracts of ocean. Such fluctuations spawn weather systems that can cause droughts, floods, and massive snowstorms. While El Niño is the most famous, scientists have identified other climate anomalies throughout Earth’s climate system as well. Their names may seem unimpressive — the Arctic Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, to name a few — but they can pack quite a punch!

The Suspects

pacific_ssha_jsn_15Feb2010_465
False-color map showing El Niño pattern of sea-surface height anomalies in the equatorial Pacific Ocean on February 15, 2010. Higher areas, shown in red, are warmer than average, and lower areas, shown in blue, are cooler than average. White areas show average heights and temperatures. Image courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory.

The CSI team focused on two suspects known to be at large this winter — the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and El Niño. El Niño, with its warming of tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures, may be best known for delivering heavy rains across the southern United States. El Niño events can trigger mudslides in California, floods along the Gulf Coast, and unusual warmth and drought in the Pacific Northwest. The latter should sound familiar: an unusually warm winter from Portland to Seattle was part of the same climate pattern affecting the venue of the Winter Olympics. The CSI Team suspected that El Niño was a conspirator in the United States’ unusual winter weather, and that it had an accomplice.

The North Atlantic Oscillation is a fluctuating air-pressure pattern that alternatively enhances or blocks the storm-steering jet stream over North America. So the NAO is particularly relevant in understanding eastern U.S. wintertime climate variations. The NAO describes the contrast in surface air pressure between Iceland and the Azores as well as the vigor of the jet stream that normally flows between them.

NAO histogram
The winter of 2009-10 witnessed the most extreme negative (blocked) NAO phase since at least 1950. (Graph courtesy of Marty Hoerling, NOAA Earth System Research Lab.)

This winter the NAO was in its negative phase and the jet stream flowed further south than usual, pushed toward the Azores by a massive “block” of high surface pressure over Greenland. It’s an unusual atmospheric circulation pattern, but one that has been implicated before. For example, remarkably cold winters persisted over Europe and Russia in the early 1940s, helping to turn the tide of World War II. The NAO, in a blocked phase, was one conspirator in those cold events. Likewise, the CSI Team suspected the pattern was a co-conspirator in the extreme winter weather conditions this year in the mid-Atlantic region. But could they find the evidence they would need to finger El Niño and NAO?

[Editor’s note: There is ongoing discussion among scientists as to which of the climate patterns is a more meaningful description of real-world conditions — the Arctic Oscillation or the North Atlantic Oscillation? While these phenomena are measured using different indexes, their values are so highly correlated that some scientists use the terms interchangeably, referring to them together simply as “AO/NAO.” Both AO and NAO were at record lows this winter. (For more information about the Arctic Oscillation this winter, see Can Record Snowstorms and Global Warming Coexist?)]

–~~~~~~~~~~~~–

The Evidence

archetypical patterns for positive and negative phases of the NAO
This rendering shows climate conditions and weather events associated with extreme phases of the North Atlantic Oscillation. Based on scientific reanalysis, the NAO index is the difference of normalized surface pressure values between grid points closest to the stations Ponta Delgada, in the Azores, and Stykkisholmur/Reykjavik, Iceland. During a positive phase (left), surface pressure in the Azores is much greater than in Iceland (data from May 1992 shown). During a negative phase, that difference is much weaker (data from July 1993 shown), resulting in different circulation patterns (Schematic adapted from AIRMAP by Ned Gardiner and David Herring, NOAA.).

Evidence: Negative Phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation

By January, scientists worldwide were already abuzz about the extremely low values for the NAO index. The NAO, first discovered by British atmospheric scientist Sir Gilbert Walker in the 1920s, has been extensively studied, and its affect on U.S. snowfall is clear: When the NAO index is negative, or “blocked,” snow can pile up along the East Coast. At the atmospheric steering level for storms, high-pressure systems develop over Iceland and Greenland while low pressure builds over the central North Atlantic. This situation redirects the tracks of surface weather systems that are conducive for cold and snow toward the mid-Atlantic coast. Winter precipitation along the eastern seaboard is often in the form of rain, but in a blocked NAO pattern, temperatures can drop low enough to create snow instead.

Historical snowstorms affirm the link. In Baltimore and Washington, D.C., thirteen of the fifteen heaviest snowstorms since 1891 occurred when the NAO index was negative. And case studies of infamous Northeast U.S. storms over the last century, summarized in a Monograph of the American Meteorological Society, have discovered a link to blocked NAO conditions.

The CSI team took its analysis a step further, mapping out historical climate conditions associated with the ten snowiest Decembers, Januaries, and Februaries since 1891. The 30-month composite map of jet stream level and surface conditions revealed a textbook picture of a blocked NAO pattern over the Atlantic Ocean.

Evidence: El Niño

But the negative NAO didn’t act alone. By fall of 2009, a NOAA network of ocean buoys in the tropical Pacific Ocean picked up a moderate El Niño, which strengthened a bit by winter. El Niños typically influence North American climate by displacing the track of wintertime storms across the Pacific Ocean southward, often delivering heavy precipitation into a belt from Southern California through Texas and into the Southeast. The weather pattern also generally cools the eastern seaboard, though not as significantly as a blocked NAO pattern can.

The top 10 heaviest snowstorms for Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. Snowstorms occurring in years when there was a negative NAO and/or an El Niño are indicated. The shaded boxes highlight the storms from this past winter. (Table produced using data courtesy of Jeff Master, Weather Underground, and Klaus Wolter, NOAA ESRL.)

Historically, El Niños are associated with more winter snowfall along the East Coast. And many of the biggest snowstorms in mid-Atlantic cities occurred during El Niño years. Of the top ten storms in Washington, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, more than half have coincided with El Niño events. Yet not all El Niños yield heavy mid-Atlantic snowstorms. Notably, there was no statistically significant increase in snowfall during 1997-98, when one of the strongest El Niños of the century occurred.

–~~~~~~~~~~~~–

Co-conspirators

ElNino_NAO
These maps are centered on the North Pole to show near-surface temperature anomalies in the Northern Hemisphere. Asia is at the top of the map and North America is at the bottom. The top pair of maps are long-term composites (from 1951-2010) illustrating typical winter-time influence of El Niño (top left) and the NAO (top right). The bottom pair of maps shows a composite of the combined influence of El Niño and the NAO (bottom left) compared to the real-world observation from December 2009-February 2010 (bottom right). (Maps courtesy NOAA Climate Prediction Center.)

Combing through historical records dating back to the late 1800s, the CSI team identified the separate “fingerprints” of wintertime climate conditions related to El Niño and the NAO. They deduced that NAO conditions alone could explain Europe’s extreme winter and the large-scale cold temperatures in the United States, but not the remarkable occurrence of record-setting snowstorms in the mid-Atlantic region. They also found that while El Niño conferred additional risk of storms for the mid-Atlantic, these conditions alone didn’t always result in snow. The team then compared the combination of these fingerprints with the 2009-10 conditions. Using a mathematical model to combine the characteristic climate patterns related to El Niño with those of a negative NAO, their reconstructed winter conditions agreed with real-world observations.

Wintry Weather in a Climate Context

The CSI Team found abundant historical evidence of heavy mid-Atlantic snowstorms whenever an El Niño and a negative NAO acted in concert, further supporting their conclusion that the record-setting snowstorms were the result of natural causes. But could global warming have elevated the potency of this dynamic duo? Again, the CSI Team didn’t find a connection.

While the U.S. shivered this winter, ranking 18th coldest since 1895, the planet’s average winter temperature ranked as the fifth warmest on record. Sea surface temperatures ranked second warmest this winter when averaged over the world oceans, according to preliminary data from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center.

The observed variations of winter precipitation in the Washington, D.C., area (left) have been very different from what models predict would occur if only human-induced emissions of greenhouse gas and aerosols (right) were taken into consideration. This evidence suggests the mid-Atlantic’s trends in precipitation are mainly due to natural variability, not human influence. (Graph courtesy of Marty Hoerling, NOAA ESRL.)

But the extreme blocked-NAO of this past winter was opposite to the trend toward more positive phases of the NAO since 1950, and also opposite to projections for a positive trend in the NAO during the 21st Century due to greenhouse gas increases.

Attribution is often in high demand when climate behaves in unusual or extreme ways as it did this past winter. NOAA’s ability to respond with the best possible science is critical so that society can anticipate and respond to climate and its impact. For a more detailed science assessment of the causes for this winter’s snows, please see Understanding the Mid-Atlantic Snowstorms During the Winter of 2009-2010.

End_Symbol_465

Do you have feedback to offer on this or another ClimateWatch article?

Let us know what you think.

Martin Hoerling is a senior climate scientist at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL), where he leads the Climate Scene Investigators team. Katy Human and Barb Deluisi are science writers at NOAA ESRL.

=============================================================

h/t to Joe D’Aleo at ICECAP

Note, this analysis if for winter 2009/2010. The 2011 report can’t be completed yet because snow season is not over. I expect when it is complete, a similar analysis will be produced.

=============================================================

UPDATE: Steve Goddard points out inconsistency in some NOAA employees who claim that there is a human signature, he posts these two duel opinions from James Overland:

NOAA announced last year that the snow had no human fingerprint, two weeks ago James Overland at NOAA said just the opposite.

Is severe winter weather related to global warming?

Monday, February 7, 2011; 2:56 PM

Over the past two years, the polar vortex has been strikingly unstable, according to meteorological data. James Overland of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration cites a couple of measures in particular: One, called the Arctic oscillation, tracks air pressure and related atmospheric variables over the North Pole. The other, the North Atlantic oscillation, takes into account similar variables in the neighborhood of Iceland. Both indexes are reliable indicators of the strength of the polar vortex.

Last winter, both indexes reflected higher air pressures and therefore less vortex stability than scientists have ever recorded. This year, both were again seriously off-kilter.

Any number of meteorological factors contributed to those anomalies. Some were undoubtedly random, Overland says. But he and other experts suspect climate change is contributing to the unusual pattern, and if they’re right, things could get a whole lot worse in the years ahead.

The root of the problem, Overland says, is melting sea ice. Sea ice forms in the Arctic Ocean during the cold, dark days of fall and winter and hangs around, melting slowly but not completely vanishing, throughout the summer. In recent years, more sea ice has melted during the warm months than can be replenished during the chillier ones.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/

In 2004, Overland blamed the lack of snow on global warming:

When scientists trained their analytical tools on the North Pole and its environs, they quantified the local knowledge: The polar ice cap is 40 percent thinner and millions of acres smaller than it was in the 1970s.

What happens at the North Pole can affect the rest of the planet, potentially altering the course of the Gulf Stream, which moderates climate from the East Coast of the United States to the British Isles. Closer to home, the jet stream that dictates much of Seattle’s weather can be diverted when the polar vortex speeds up.

“It’s probably contributing to the fact that it’s warmer and we’ve been getting less snow,” Overland said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001910590_northpole23m.html

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

88 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 21, 2011 10:09 pm

For any NOAA peeps tracking this story, the drivers you are paying attention to are themselves being driven by interacting cyclic factors beyond human control or influence.
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/richard-holle-the-big-picture/
will give you someplace meaningful to start looking for the real culprits and their motivations, plans and intended actions.
*the Moon rats out the other planets, saying the Sun made me do it.*

February 21, 2011 10:26 pm

I see Pamela is caught up in the same old TSI only argument that Leif projects.
A combination of low EUV that influences the Northern Vortex along with ocean cycles could be the key. Some research into planetary waves could also help.
Can I suggest a good hard read of this paper by distinguished authors that may enlighten those that can’t get beyond the TSI flaptrap.

wayne Job
February 22, 2011 3:09 am

Some one once said.” Be careful what you wish for, for it may come true” The warmanistas have been wishing for the Arctic to become ice free to prove their point. Perhaps some one more educated than I can research the fact, that when the five mile deep ice sheets advance on the Northern hemisphere continents, the poles become some what ice free. It is a warm arctic ocean that causes the huge snow falls that create the ice ages. Investment in coal futures is possibly a prudent choice.

Don K
February 22, 2011 5:03 am

“On other posts on record floods over time, I suggested the idea that if the record highs are random, then the number of records to be expected over time is equal to Ln”n”, where “n” equals the number of years and the first year in the series is treated as a record (sometimes other time units – eg seasons). ” Gary Pease
Nice post. I learned something I’m too slow to work out for myself.
However, I think the last line is incorrect. I believe that there is no due date for the next record, just a probability of any given year setting a new record. The probability of a new record should be the same for 2012 as it is for 2160 — for all practical purposes 1/150 =0.00667

Beth Cooper
February 22, 2011 5:13 am

Of course you’re unlikely to find a human fingerprint! In snow you’re more likely to find footprints. Any fool knows that 🙂

John Marshall
February 22, 2011 5:14 am

A post last week stated that it is cold air that can draw more water due to saturation levels. So warm air has nothing to do with it.

Michael H Anderson
February 22, 2011 8:57 am

@Pamela Gray: yes, the experts are that bad. They use computers to predict that which provably cannot be predicted at all, never mind by biased mathematics grads who run simulations based on biased data.

John from CA
February 22, 2011 9:05 am

Mister Ed says:
February 21, 2011 at 6:56 pm
John from CA says:
February 21, 2011 at 9:59 am
El Niño conditions abruptly abated in the NH winter and spring of 2010. By July, we were headed into La Niña conditions which continued to form rapidly for the rest of the year…. [W]hy isn’t La Niña mentioned in the article?
– – – – – – – – – –
This article and its part-one predecessor were published March 25 – 26, 2010 – too early to mention La Niña.
Can Record Snowstorms & Global Warming Coexist?
Forensic Meteorology Solves the Mystery of Record Snows>
I mention the first article only so I can say that the collective authors were Herring, Higgins, Halpert, Hoerling, Human, … and Deluisi.
To get La Niña mixed in, you want An Assessment of 2010 North American Temperatures (pdf) by Hoerling, Easterling, Perlwitz, Eischeid, and Pegion.
============
Thanks Mister Ed,
I should have reviewed the NOAA article before posting and thanks for the link.

eadler
February 22, 2011 11:59 am

This analysis on the NOAA web page is old. It is about the winter of 2009-2010. The science was not settled when that was written. There is a new theory to explain what is going on. It is well worth a read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html
The article says, because of added moisture in the air over the Arctic Ocean as fall temperatures have risen, and the freezing of the Arctic starts later, there is added snow cover in Siberia. This creates a pocket of cold air in Siberia which affects the global air circulation pattern, and sends the Arctic Oscillation into negative territory. The result is cold in the upper midwest US and the huge snow storms in the mid Atlantic.
The author has supported his theory with simulations which successfully predicted this winter’s weather.
REPLY: Sorry, not even wrong. There’s no new 2011 analysis because the 2010-2011 snow season is not over yet. And FYI, the science is never settled. – Anthony

eadler
February 22, 2011 4:07 pm

REPLY: Sorry, not even wrong. There’s no new 2011 analysis because the 2010-2011 snow season is not over yet. And FYI, the science is never settled. – Anthony
Judah Cohen claims that he has used this phenomen as part of his winter forecasts very successfully.
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/27/wintry-weather-and-global-warming/?permid=36#comment36
He writes:
I make real-time forecasts based on these ideas. The best way to validate a scientific hypothesis is to make a successful prediction. The forecast model uses Siberian snow cover as one of its main predictors and I have been posting those forecasts to the National Science Foundation website:
http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/autumnwinter/model.jsp
http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/autumnwinter/predicts.jsp
You can see this winter’s forecast and examples of previous forecasts on the site. Those forecasts have consistently outperformed other publicly available forecasts. Finally, I was invited to a prediction workshop in October where I presented a forecast for December-February 2010/11. The forecast was for a cold winter in Northern Europe and the Eastern US (a similar forecast was provided to my clients but that is not public and therefore not verifiable). I will not declare success one month into a three month forecast, but I think that your readers will agree that since the severe weather so far this winter is consistent with my forecast, makes the ideas that I expressed more compelling than if I had not made a forecast.
REPLY: And again, you miss the point, this is NOAA, not Judah Cohen or Punxatawney Phil. Clearly, you are simply citing what you believe in, rather than waiting for all the data to come in. It is a common MO of AGW proponents to make early pronouncements in the slimmest of correlations, and then later we see that when analysis comes in from others, the arguments gets shifted.
However, that said, and since you raised the issue, I’m willing to have a look at your forecast you presented. Please post it. – Anthony

February 22, 2011 10:47 pm

eadler says:
February 22, 2011 at 11:59 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html
The article says, because of added moisture in the air over the Arctic Ocean as fall temperatures have risen, and the freezing of the Arctic starts later, there is added snow cover in Siberia. This creates a pocket of cold air in Siberia which affects the global air circulation pattern, and sends the Arctic Oscillation into negative territory. The result is cold in the upper midwest US and the huge snow storms in the mid Atlantic.
The author has supported his theory with simulations which successfully predicted this winter’s weather.

I think we should look at the detail of this claim and evaluate its worthiness to science.
To begin with the article makes no mention of the Eurasian snowfall having any effect on the AO/NAO. It only states the “cold dome” over Siberia bends the jetsream which is hardly credible. The AO/NAO is the major driver of the jetstream changes. The negative phase of these oscillations is controlled by the power of the planetary wave and the phase of the QBO. The “cold dome” is at its strongest from now until April but we have witnessed the AO/NAO turning strongly positive in recent weeks. This is a major flaw with Cohen’s theory as the jetstreams have moved away from their cold position over the U.S. in recent weeks bringing slightly warmer weather.
Perhaps you could provide the Eurasian snow data for the last 40 years so we can dig a little deeper?
I also predicted the massive winter for the NH back in July. My Logic was based on the neg PDO, the strong La Nina that would result from the very positive AAO at the time and the expectation of the AO/NAO going strongly negative because of reduced EUV. The AO is generally not affected by planetary waves after Feb.

drewski
February 23, 2011 2:59 am

This was an interesting bit from the article:
“While the U.S. shivered this winter, ranking 18th coldest since 1895, the planet’s average winter temperature ranked as the FIFTH WARMEST on record. Sea surface temperatures ranked SECOND WARMEST this winter when averaged over the world oceans, according to preliminary data from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center.
Granted, this was a quote referring to the entire globe and didn’t mention the small part of the US that was so snowy so sCeptics can feel free to disregard it as unimportant.

Scott Covert
February 23, 2011 9:17 am

From the third illustration:
“False-color map showing El Niño pattern of sea-surface height anomalies in the equatorial Pacific Ocean on February 15, 2010. Higher areas, shown in red, are warmer than average, and lower areas, shown in blue, are cooler than average. White areas show average heights and temperatures. Image courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory”
The image states “Sea Surface Height Anomaly (mm)” But the caption refers to the colors as temperature. Is someone’s bias showing? The height correlates with temperature so they are the same? Temperature causes the elevated sea levels alone so they are height/heat? Why didn’t any one catch that? Are we so programmed that mixing units in an illustration misses that many eyes or am I missing something very obvious?