What Will Northwest Weather and Climate Be Like in 2050?

Reposted from The Cliff Mass Weather Blog

Sunday, October 18, 2020

What Will Northwest Weather and Climate Be Like in 2050?

The future of Northwest climate is frequently discussed and debated these days.

Knowing the future climate is very important, because we can take steps to adapt to climate change, saving lives and property. And the threat of unpleasant consequences can motivate society to take steps to reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere and increase carbon storage in the ground.

A number of politicians have made climate change a centerpiece of their political platforms, and a range of natural disasters (such as wildfires, drought, and storms) have been blamed on increasing CO2 and other greenhouse gases. A free-for-all of name calling has followed this topic with terms such as “denier”, “alarmist”, and “warmest” representing just a few.

A Time Machine

Climate change has become such an issue of contention, that activist groups have pushed to remove radio commentators that don’t follow their line (e.g., Seattle350 pushing KNKX to remove a certain meteorologist).  It has become an issue of almost religious intensity to some with “right thinking” on the topic becoming an important way to demonstrate that one is a true “progressive.”

So let’s  clear the air a bit now.  I will show you the gold standard of projections of what will occur here in the Northwest over the next three decades due to increasing greenhouse gases.   

It is a time scale that is short enough that I believe we can have great insights into what weather/climate conditions in the Northwest will be like if CO2 continues to rise.

Each of you can consider the projections and make your own judgement whether it is an “existential” threat, a serious threat, an inconvenience, or an improvement over our current climate.  You decide.

The Gold Standard of Regional Climate Projections

My group (particularly Richard Steed and Jeff Baars) in concert with Professor Eric Salathe of UW Bothell has been working on the most advanced regional climate projection capability of the region.

Specifically, we have run an ensemble of TWELVE high-resolution regional climate simulations (12-km grid spacing) for 130 years (1970-2100).  

Each of these simulations was driven by a different global climate model.  Such global models have such coarse resolution that they make profound errors with our local terrain.  Thus, we applied a proven high-resolution weather forecasting model (WRF) to properly simulation regional weather effects, running it for 130 years. 

Global climate model (left) versus our high-resolution regional model (right).

In our simulations, we have assumed the worst case scenario for increasing greenhouse gases (known as RCP 8.5), which assumes increasing use of coal and fossil fuels.  CO2 rising rapidly. 

Reality will probably be more benign, as increased renewables come online, the use of coal declines, and hopefully there will be a revolution in the use of nuclear energy (both safe fission and fusion).  And with increased energy sources, sequestration of CO2 (removing it from the atmosphere) become more viable.

Our work demanded enormous computer resources, with much of it supplied by a grant from the Amazon Catalyst Program.  The Amazon folks also helped support some of the researchers that completed and analyzed the output, and guided us in our use of cloud computing.  So a big thanks to Amazon.

What I am about to show you is unique:  no other regional climate prediction effort provides such a high resolution view of the future climate of the Northwest or offers information about the uncertainties in the projections.

Precipitation

There is a lot of talk about climate change bringing drought to the region, so let’s see what state-of-science models suggest. 

I will start by show you the change in annual precipitation over the region between 1970-2000 (think 1985) and 2030-2060 (think 2045).  This graphics shows changes in the averages of all twelve forecasts.  The average of an ensemble of many forecasts is generally more skillful than the individual predictions.

For most of the region, annual precipitation will increase by1-4 inches, with some decreases on the lee (downwind) side of some major terrain barriers.  In general, MORE water for our region each year.  Good news.

What about during the summer? 

For about 2/3rds of the region, amounts will decline, but most of the declines will be small (0 to .5 inches).  The biggest declines (up to roughly 1 inch) will be on the western side of the Cascades and the western slopes of Vancouver Is.   Interestingly some of the region, particularly east of the Cascade crest, will see small increases, with largest increases over the northern Rockies.

 Bottom line:  no major precipitation declines over the arid eastern side of Oregon and Washington.

What about Seattle? What can you expect for precipitation and how good are our simulations?  Good question.
The key precipitation period is midwinter…and below is a plot of all ensemble members, the average of all of them (green line) and observed values (black dot) for 1970-2100.
A very small upward trend in winter precipitation through 2050.  You won’t notice it.  Also note that there has not been much trend in the observations either.

What about summer (June to August) in Seattle?   The forecast is below.  
A very slight downward trend.   Summer has always been dry around Puget Sound (typically 2-3 inches in total) and perhaps we will lose as much as .5 inches from global warming by 2050.  

How about Omak in the fire-prone mountainous area of northeast Washington? As shown in the projections below, it is a dry place with little trend.

The bottom line of these forecasts is that the precipitation changes through 2050 over our region will be modest, even if greenhouse gases increase rapidly over the next several decades.  
Temperature
Increasing greenhouse gases WILL have a significant impact on our regional temperatures, but how much?  Let’s check out maximum temperatures.
Annual average maximum temperatures by 2030-2060 (think 2045) will increase by 1-2 C (2-4F) west of the Cascade crest and 2-3 C (4-5F)  to the east.

What about the summer, where we worry about heat waves and wildfires?  Clearly larger increases in temperature (see below).  Along the coast, pretty much the same as for winter– 2C or less increase in temperate.  The ocean temperatures do not warm up as rapidly as the land, so relief from heat will remain available from Forks to Astoria to Lincoln City along the coast.
Summer temperatures in Puget Sound will notch up by about 2.5- 3 C (4-5F).   So a typical summer high in Seattle would increase from approximately 76F to around 80F.

East of the Cascade crest, summer high temperatures will increase 3-3.5C (5-6F), so the typical summer high in say Richland, WA will rise from 88F to 93.5F.  Enough to be noticeable.
Below is a plot of how the daily average winter (Dec-Feb)  temperature (C) will change at SeaTac through 2050. Again, the green line is the average of the ensemble of regional climate forecasts.  A slow increase over time by about 2 C.

The summer temperatures also increase steadily, by about 3 C.   Note in 2020 we have already experienced about half of the greenhouse warming that is expected by 2050.

By the way, do you notice that the high-resolution model is too cold in winter and too warm in summer at SeaTac?  This error is probably due to the lack of resolution even of the regional climate simulations, with an inability to define the relatively narrow Puget Sound west of SeaTac.

Omak mean temperatures in winter and summer?  A gradual increase, with summer temperatures going up 2-4C over the period (and we are again about halfway there at this point).

Omak Winter

Omak Summer
Bottom Line:  Assuming a worst-case scenario of increased greenhouse gases, the region will warm, with greatest increases east of the Cascade crest.    Winter warming (from approximately 1985 to 2045) will be approximately 3F in the west and 5 F in the east.  Summer warming will be roughly 4F in the west and 4-5F in the cast.  Warming will be gradual and progressive.
Snowpack
With only a modest rise in precipitation but warming temperatures, one should expect a decline in snowpack–and that is exactly what the regional simulations are showing.
Here is the change in April 1 snowpack (snow water equivalent in mm), a critical measure of melt water availability for the summer, between roughly 1985 and 2045.  Notable declines  (darker brown colors) over the western slopes of the Cascades and the Olympics.  Some increases in eastern WA (from the increases in precipitation).

To get a more intuitive idea of the April 1 snowpack change below are the ensemble forecasts and ensemble mean (green line) at Stevens Pass.  You will note a lot of variability in the forecasts and observations–snow amounts vary a lot from year to year for a variety of reasons (including natural variability such as El Nino/La Nina).  Over the entire period through 2050, the snowpack declines from roughly 1000 mm (1 meter) to around 750 mm:  a 25% decline.
It is not clear whether there has much decline so far in the observed snowpack (black dots).

Declines in projected snowpack are less at higher locations, and greater at lower ones, such as Snoqualmie Pass.     Skiing at Snoqualmie is often marginal today and I would not buy a season pass there after 2030.   I suspect skiing will be history at Snoqualmie by 2050.
Wind Speed        The regional climate simulations do NOT suggest much change in average daily maximum wind speed (see below) between 1985 and 2045.  The same is true of annual maximum gusts or the strength of approaching Pacific windstorms.

I can provide a thousand more graphics, but you get the general idea.  
If the emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases continue on their present pace, there will be changes in our regional climate.  In fact, some of the changes have already started.  So by 2050:

  • Annual precipitation will increase slightly for most of the region.
  • Temperatures will warm by roughly 3-5F.
  • Winds and windstorms will experience little change.
  • Snowpack will decline dramatically (roughly 25%) by 2050.

Importantly, the model projections do not suggest  any “tipping points” nor abrupt changes in our weather/climate as a result of increasing greenhouse gases.
To say something that will get me in trouble with the climate activists folks, there is no existential threat to our region through the middle of the century.  We will be able to adapt to the modest changes that are expected, although some will be worrisome (loss of skiing at Snoqualmie Pass).

Not optimal snow conditions
I believe the above is the best available estimate for what unrestrained global warming will bring to our region through mid-century, and I ask that the activist folks and over-the-top “journalists” in some local media outlets restrain their name calling and twitter rage when such information is communicated.   My erstwhile radio station, KNKX, surrendered to the climate activists–hopefully, as the political rancor of this season ends, rational discussion and good science will again be appreciated.

HT/Cam_S

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

89 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 20, 2020 12:37 pm

The love of far into the future unverifiable weather/climate modeling scenarios continues…..

Splitdog Homee
October 20, 2020 12:38 pm

The best models are Hot Wheels.

RockyRoad
October 20, 2020 12:41 pm

Sequester CO2 in the ground or anywhere and you limit the earth”s foodstuff production by that amount. If food was universally abundant, that would be no problem, but we all know the situation is otherwise. So are people who want carbon sequestration stupid, evil, or both?

RockyRoad
October 20, 2020 12:45 pm

Did the models come with any estimation variances?

Vuk
October 20, 2020 12:53 pm

My prediction for the 2050 case of global warming:
there will be six months warmer than any of the other six months.
There is also chance of global cooling in 2050, there I predict:
there will be six months colder than any of the other six months.
There you have it, a prediction that can be easily verified.

Eliza
October 20, 2020 12:56 pm

I HOPE BIben wins soo you undertand what pain is all about

Ron Long
October 20, 2020 12:58 pm

2050? It will be hot, fool, were you born on the sun? It’ll be damn hot, it…wait a minute, it will be hot where I’ll be in 2050, that’s for sure, because I’ve already signed a deal with the devil for 2040. 74 and counting.

Mr.
Reply to  Ron Long
October 20, 2020 2:13 pm

See you there Ron.
😈

fred250
Reply to  Mr.
October 20, 2020 3:58 pm

I’ll be guy on the big chair ! 😉

October 20, 2020 12:59 pm

I just downloaded Tony Heller’s free software that allows one to download and graph the unadjusted temperature data from NOAA’s website. I have checked the data records for many sites in WA. I have yet to find one where there is significant warming. I have always liked Cliff’s work, but I have to say this article is an outlier. To be clear, the predictions by Cliff’s work can not be reconciled with the unadjusted data that NOAA provides.

I believe a more accurate interpretation is that the temperature rise Cliff predicts is the amount of adjustment to actual measured temperatures that NOAA will have to make in order for the temperatures they report to be consistent with the hypothesis of Catastrophic Global Warming.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Nelson Woodard
October 21, 2020 6:22 am

Yeah, those temperature chart manipulations and bastardizations are the only place where we can find Human-caused Global Warming.

If the Alarmists didn’t have temperature chart manipulation, they wouldn’t have anything.

The good news is the Temperature Chart Manipulators didn’t have time to manipulate all the charts on the planet, so we can go look at the unmodified data and see that we are not experiencing unprecedented warming today, which means the Human-caused Climate Change narrative is just scaremongering and CO2 is not the control knob of the Earth’s temperature.

Tony Heller does good work. Right, Steven? 🙂

John Shotsky
October 20, 2020 1:16 pm

The climate cycles on an approximate 70 year cycle. 30 years from now it should be approxmately where it was 40 years ago – when it was all the rage to warn of the coming ice age. This is easily testable. I believe we are on the down cycle now, and it will soon become abundantly obvious.

DMA
October 20, 2020 1:39 pm

The title asks
“What Will Northwest Weather and Climate Be Like in 2050?”
My answer,even after reading the article, is about the same as it has been for the last 30 years. You will probably have to have very good records to see any changes in the average precipitation , temperature, or weather patterns. Climate change is slow and mostly imperceptible leaving only a vague feeling on the old timers that things used to be different. It is also cyclical and will likely veer back toward the currant climate in 50 or 60 years. But most importantly for this discussion it is hardly influenced by changes in CO2 and certainly not measurably effected by human emissions of CO2. If the programs they ran to produce this scenario are controlled by the evolution CO2 in the atmosphere and that evolution is predicated on emissions, the only way it will be right is by accident.

Peter W
October 20, 2020 2:00 pm

Here it is, mid-October, still early fall. I have been checking the daily temperature and weather maps for some time now. Since the start of the week, for three days now, I have consistently seen in Montana, the Dakotas, and even into northern Minnesota, snow and sub-freezing temperatures. I would guess that the inhabitants of those areas, especially the farmers and ranchers, would be more than happy to be seeing some of that global warming they are being promised.

https://weather.com/maps/currentusweather

Richard M
Reply to  Peter W
October 21, 2020 5:48 am

You got that right. My MN location set a new snowfall record yesterday with about 3″. Some places got up to 10″. More on the way this weekend. Temperatures have been 15-20° F below average and are predicted to remain there for the next week at least.

October 20, 2020 2:04 pm

Using historical data until 1980, what would these models predict for 2019 – 2020 ?

Mark Hansford
October 20, 2020 2:07 pm

miss just one parameter and the whole ensemble is meaningless more than a few months out. And lets assume the worst possible scenario to run our model. You know the scenario that by your own admission is not going to happen. All ready garbage in, so why expect better out.
Interesting fiction at best. More unfounded conjecture at worst

Peter Shinn
October 20, 2020 2:29 pm

“Greenhouse warming,” what a load of, to be nice, ….garbage. I can’t believe you people think you are using scientific methods.

I don’t deny the possibility of things warming up on the West Coast, but global warming because of humans, NONSENSE!

James Clarke
October 20, 2020 2:52 pm

Here is my prediction. Cliffs attempt to placate the mob by using our RCP 8.5, and the best computer technology in the world, will fail. That is because the mob doesn’t care about science or even climate change for that matter. These things are just tools they use to effect the social change they desire, which will be based on a post-modern philosophy. In that society, there will be no place for classical science or classical scientists.

Geoff Sherrington
October 20, 2020 3:07 pm

Noise.
Not random noise, but noise constrained by beliefs of the operators.
Where are the estimates of uncertainty?
Why use RCP 8.5 when several papers claim it is not possible for this scenario to happen?
Noise. Meaningless noise, a disgrace to Science.
Geoff S

Gord
October 20, 2020 5:11 pm

if you want to see what “experts” are doing, check the Prairie Climate Centre and their Climate Atlas at:
https://climateatlas.ca/prairie-climate-centre
They have also assumed the worst case scenario of RCP of 8.5. Then they also got the worst case scenario temperatures from somewhere and plot all this on a “high resolution” map for the future. They claim Manitoba will have Texas temperatures by 2080. Dream on.

Reply to  Gord
October 20, 2020 8:05 pm

Wow
Never seen that site before

“ Our team has high-level expertise and many years of experience in climate change science and storytelling”.

Doesn’t that mean they are like the rest of the climatologists?

Gord
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
October 21, 2020 9:36 am

Their strength is in “storytelling”. Their experience is in accepting the misinformation of IPCC and rebroadcasting it. Then they have movie makers on the payroll. They thoight that RCP was a MEASURED number. And the gov gives them money.

Toto
October 20, 2020 5:39 pm

He says he will show us the gold standard of projections and then he pulls out the worst case scenario of RCP 8.5 — which shows the worst case and beyond. But the title of his article was “What Will Northwest Weather and Climate Be Like in 2050?” . What will it be like, or what will it not be like?

I can do better than that. It will be just like it has been for the past 30 years.

Garland Lowe
October 20, 2020 7:39 pm

Knowing the future climate is very important, because we can take steps to adapt to climate change, saving lives and property.
These idiots can’t predict the high and low temps a week out, but they’re able to predict the temps 80 years from now. What a bunch of Horse Shi.. manure.
Do any of the well educated people have any intelligence?

MarkW
October 20, 2020 9:02 pm

“What Will Northwest Weather and Climate Be Like in 2050?”

What do you want it to be?

October 20, 2020 11:25 pm

Carbon dioxide makes up only ~0.04% of the atmosphere and constitutes only 3.6% of the greenhouse effect and has increased only 0.008% since emissions began to soar after 1945. Such a tiny, tiny increment of CO2 can’t cause the catastrophic warming predicted by CO2 alarmists.

Also overlooked by models is that the sun has just entered a Grand Solar Minimum. The last time a similar event occurred was the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1820 during which global temperatures dropped into one of the several Little Age cold periods.

Glacier fluctuations on Mt. Baker and Mt. Rainier show many warm and cold periods well before CO2 began to rise after 1945. None of these had anything at all to do with CO2.

Loydo
Reply to  Don Easterbrook
October 20, 2020 11:49 pm

“Carbon dioxide makes up only ~0.04% of the atmosphere and constitutes only 3.6% of the greenhouse effect and has increased only 0.008% since emissions began to soar after 1945. ”

but somehow it can green up the world’s forests. Astonishing.

Disputin
Reply to  Loydo
October 21, 2020 2:11 am

Fair comment.

Richard M
Reply to  Loydo
October 21, 2020 5:56 am

Loydo, IR absorption vs. photosynthesis. Two entirely different processes. You really should learn a little science.

CO2 IR absorption has already pretty much saturated. The ability of plants to utilize CO2 for photosynthesis saturates at around 1000 ppm.

John Shotsky
Reply to  Don Easterbrook
October 21, 2020 4:03 am

The human contribution to CO2 is just 20 ppm per year. That is 5% of the total. Warmunists would have you believe that the 20 ppm is responsible for ‘global warming’, and that somehow, the earth ignores that particular Co2 in it’s annual cycle of emission and absorption.
They would also have you believe that somehow, Co2 could ‘double’ due to human emissions.
I have news for them…if ALL human emissions were stopped, including our own breath, the climate would not take notice.

Reply to  Don Easterbrook
October 21, 2020 7:07 am

The Sun is just over halfway through a very short and so far unusually mild centennial solar minimum. While the next two centennial solar minima from 2095 and 2200 will be the longest pair for 3500 years.
But curiously in the previous and in the current centennial solar minimum, we see the globe warming, because increased negative NAO/AO drives a warm AMO and increases El Nino conditions.

October 21, 2020 6:58 am

The trends in the study period are dominated by weaker solar wind states since 1995 driving warmer ocean phases. By 2045 very strong solar wind states like in the early-mid 1970’s will be driving multi-year La Nina and a cooler North Pacific and North Atlantic. That will take the rainfall, snowpack, and temperatures back toward 1970’s conditions.

Jeff Alberts
October 21, 2020 7:35 am

“Knowing the future climate is very important”

Humanity has done just fine not knowing what the weather will be like tomorrow. Changes in climate are so slow that adaptation is easily accomplished, if needed.

Dudley Horscroft
October 21, 2020 11:34 pm

I thought that this was a good piece of satire at the convolutions Climate Alarmists go into in order to predict something so totally unpredictable as weather. Amazing so many people have taken it as factual!

Nevertheless, probably the best prediction of British weather can be found here:

October 23, 2020 8:44 pm

The article reaches its conclusions from model “projections.” Projections differ from predictions in the respect that projections lack falsifiability but predictions do not. Falsifiability is the mark of the scientific method of investigation. Thus, these conclusions are scientific nonsense.