Tuesday, March 8, 2016

The 2015-2016 season was the warmest on record

America’s year without a winter: The 2015-2016 season

was the warmest on record

   
The Lower 48 states had its warmest winter in 121 years of record-keeping, NOAA announced this morning.
Temperatures averaged over the country between December and February were nearly five degrees above the 20th-century average. Every state but two were warmer than normal and all six New England states set winter records.
The warmth of this winter marked a stunning reversal from the previous year in New England, when it witnessed one of its harshest winters on record.
Rather than punishing cold and paralyzing winter storms, temperatures regularly shot up into the 40s and 50s. Burlington, Vt., and Concord, N.H., tallied just half of their normal snowfall. Bare spots were common at ski resorts normally up to their shoulders in snow.
“If we didn’t have snowmaking, it would have been a disaster,” Win Smith, owner and president of Vermont’s Sugarbush Resort, told Freshies, an online ski magazine.
The lack of winter extended into the Last Frontier. Alaska logged its second warmest winter on record, almost 11 degrees above average. At the end of February, Anchorage had no snow on the ground for the first time on record during the month.
An index that rates the severity of winter at 52 locations across the Lower 48 found only three where winter conditions were classified harsher than “average.” Most places earned a mild-moderate winter rating. Several were record mild.
The benign winter could be blamed in part on the record-challenging El Niño event, characterized by much-warmer-than-normal ocean temperatures in the eastern and central tropical Pacific Ocean. Some of the excess ocean heat was drawn into weather systems entering the United States.
While El Niño is behind some of the warmth, long-term climate warming is also nudging U.S. temperatures ever higher. Of all the seasons, winters are warming the fastest in the United States.
The rising winter temperatures in the U.S. fit right into the global warming trend. Satellite-estimated temperatures show the planet had its warmest February on record by a large margin.
Jason is the Washington Post’s weather editor and Capital Weather Gang's chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association.

Sunday, March 6, 2016

Which City Has The Most Unpredictable Weather?

Most every American has some basis to complain about unpredictable weather. As a mid-latitude country with shining seas and majestic mountain ranges and fruited, wind-swept plains, we’re subject to pretty much every type of weather meteorologists have thought to identify. So perhaps you’ve heard the line: “If you don’t like the weather in Chicago, wait five minutes.” Or you’ve heard it applied to a city nearer to you: Denver or San Francisco orAtlanta or Boston.
But where in the country is the weather truly the most unpredictable?
We’re going to answer this question in a specific way, by comparing daily weather patterns against long-term averages.1 We’ll define the weather as being more unpredictable when it deviates more from these long-term trends.
Meteorologists call these long-term averages climatology. Weather forecasting has moved beyond climatology to embrace more sophisticated techniques, but in some cities climatology does extremely well on its own. Take the case of Phoenix, for example. The chart below compares high temperatures in Phoenix on each day from 2011 through 20132 against the 20-year average for the week3 in question. On a typical day in Phoenix, the high temperature deviated from the long-term average by only 5 to 6 degrees. You could plan a wedding or golf tournament in Phoenix years in advance and be reasonably confident of what the temperature would be.
silver-feature-unpredictable-2
This wouldn’t be true for Denver. Over the past three years, climatology has missed the high temperature there by 9 to 10 degrees on average. And misses of 20 degrees or more, which almost never happen in Phoenix, have occurred, on average, once every other week in Denver.
silver-feature-unpredictable-1
Get the drift? We’ll do this for 120 American cities, one representative from each of the 120 National Weather Service forecast offices across the 50 states.4 (Generally, we used data from the largest airport-based weather station in the area.)5 And we’ll be doing it for 10 weather statistics rather than just high temperatures. We can then combine the statistics into an overall measure of weather unpredictability for each city.
As a reminder, our goal is to evaluate how unpredictable the weather is — rather than whether the weather is good or bad. In San Diego, to a first approximation, it’s always 72 degrees and sunny.6 In Seattle, to a first approximation, it’s always 59 degrees and drizzly. Most people like San Diego’s weather better, but both cities have fairly predictable weather patterns.
Nor are we concerned about how much the weather varies throughout the year — provided it does so predictably. As a matter of practice, cities with high seasonal volatility usually also have high day-to-day unpredictability, but there are exceptions. Phoenix, for instance, has pronounced seasonal variation in its temperatures (the average high temperature there is 67 degrees in January and 106 degrees in August) but the daily values don’t deviate much around those seasonal averages. So its temperatures rate as predictable. Similarly, a city that routinely has thunderstorms in the spring but rarely throughout the rest of the year will rate as having more predictable weather than one where storms can occur at any time.
The statistics we’ll be evaluating fall into three major categories.
First, temperature:
  • High temperatures;
  • Low temperatures;
  • Daily mean temperatures.
Second, precipitation:
  • Rainfall, in inches;
  • Snowfall, in inches of snow (rather than the liquid equivalent7);
  • A binary variable indicating the presence or absence of precipitation (without regard to the type or amount of it). If there’s any precipitation at all over the 24-hour day, we score this variable as one. Otherwise, it’s zero.
Finally, severe weather and the conditions that contribute to it:
  • Wind speed;
  • Humidity8;
  • Cloud cover9;
  • A binary variable indicating whether there was a severe weather event (a thunderstorm, tornado or hail) in the city that day.
We scrubbed the data to identify extreme outliers and obvious data-entry errors and removed them before calculating the weekly averages.10 Then we calculated the root-mean-square deviation for each variable. Because all the statistics are on different scales — degrees Fahrenheit for temperature, mph for wind speed — we standardized them onto a common scale before averaging them together.
That was a bit of work, but it allowed us to generate this fun map:
silver-feature-weatherpredict-1
Among the cities we tested, the one with the most unpredictable weather is … Rapid City, South Dakota. Congratulations, Rapid City!
The ICAO code for Rapid City Regional Airport is KRAP. That’s also a good description of Rapid City’s weather. Its temperature might be 30 degrees in January — or just as easily -12. It’s snowy and windy and prone to big, unexpected winter storms. And it has a thunderstorm on almost 25 percent of days from July through September, more than the national average.
But Rapid City isn’t alone; other cities in the Great Plains and Upper Midwest dominate the most-unpredictable list. After Rapid City, those with the most unpredictable weather are Great Falls, Montana; Houghton, Michigan; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Fargo, North Dakota; Duluth, Minnesota; Bismarck, North Dakota; Aberdeen, South Dakota; Grand Island, Nebraska; and Glasgow, Montana.
For the most part, these cities are landlocked. The presence of lakes or oceans can contribute to weather problems — for instance, the huge amounts of lake-effect snow in Houghton, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula (about twice as much as in notoriously snowy Buffalo, New York). But water usually does more to regulate temperatures and severe weather.
The other common thread between these cities is that not very many people live in them. Indeed, among the top 23 cities on our list, none are within the50 most populous metro areas in the United States. Among cities that do fall within the most populous metro areas, those with the most unpredictable weather are as follows:
  1. Kansas City, Missouri;
  2. Oklahoma City;
  3. Minneapolis;
  4. Cincinnati;
  5. Indianapolis;
  6. St. Louis;
  7. Birmingham, Alabama;
  8. Boston;
  9. Milwaukee;
  10. Dallas.
This list, too, is dominated by landlocked cities in the Midwest (depending on how you define the region). There are a smattering of northeastern cities and a few landlocked cities in the South.
To get more insight into the source of these differences, we can break the ratings down into their three major subcomponents: temperature, precipitation and severe weather. Here’s the map for temperature unpredictability:
silver-feature-weatherpredict-4
You can easily make out the path of the Rocky Mountains in this map. Cities just to the east of them — like Denver and Great Falls, Montana — have much more unpredictable temperatures than almost any place to the west of them.
Cities just to the east of the Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico have the most predictable temperatures. San Diego’s temperatures are the most predictable of anywhere in the continental United States (Honolulu’s are the most predictable overall). Seattle and San Francisco have highly predictable temperatures, as does the Florida peninsula.
The map of unpredictable precipitation patterns is dominated by cities in the eastern half of the country:
silver-feature-weatherpredict-3
Nothing tops Houghton, which gets about twice as much snow as any other city we evaluated and can also be reasonably rainy in the summer.
But why don’t notoriously wet cities like Seattle and Portland, Oregon, rank higher? Both have precipitation fairly often; Seattle ranks eighth in the country (out of the 120 cities we tracked) by the number of days with precipitation, and Portland ranks ninth. But they usually have light precipitation. Between 1994 and 2013, Portland got at least an inch of rain only 1.2 percent of the time, for example, as compared with 2.1 percent of the time for the average U.S. city. Their precipitation patterns are also quite seasonal, making them more predictable. Seattle has historically received precipitation on 71 percent of days in January but just 19 percent of days in July.
If you want to have an easy life as a weather forecaster, you should get a job in Las Vegas, Phoenix or Los Angeles. Predict that it won’t rain in one of those cities, and you’ll be right about 90 percent of the time.
The frequency of severe weather conditions is more idiosyncratic than the presence of precipitation in general. But the map of areas most prone to unpredictable, severe weather generally follows Tornado Alley, with cities in the line of states from South Dakota through Oklahoma and northern Texas ranking toward the top of the list.
silver-feature-weatherpredict-2
Oceans and lakes tend to reduce severe weather frequency and make its occurrence more predictable. There are some exceptions, however — especially the Atlantic Seaboard from North Carolina through Maine. Cities like Boston and New York don’t have many thunderstorms, but they have fairly unpredictable wind patterns and humidity levels. Those can scale up the severity of a storm in a hurry, especially in the winter months.
Want a more precise estimate of where your city ranks? As we mentioned before, we translated the 10 weather conditions onto a common scale; specifically, it’s a common scale where 66 represents average. Why 66? Because it should be an intuitive value when we’re looking at weather data. The high temperature for the 120 weather stations we tracked was about 66 degrees, on average, throughout the year.11
Higher values indicate more unpredictability:
  • Scores in the 80s or above indicate very high unpredictability.
  • Scores in the 70s indicate above-average unpredictability.
  • Scores in the 60s indicate average unpredictability.
  • Scores in the 50s indicate comparatively predictable weather patterns.
  • Scores in the 40s or below indicate highly predictable weather.
There are some limitations to our method. It reflects day-to-day rather than hour-to-hour unpredictability, for instance. And perhaps the weather is more unpredictable within particular microclimates than at the airport-based weather stations we’ve tracked. Still, a few cities with a reputation for unpredictable weather rank lower than you might expect:
  • San Francisco’s weather patterns are unusual as compared to the rest of the country (September has historically been San Francisco’s warmest month, for instance). But they’re predictably unusual, at least on a day-to-day (if not necessarily hour-to-hour) basis. And San Francisco, like the rest of the West Coast, rarely gets severe weather.
  • Chicago’s weather is slightly more unpredictable than average but not more than that. It has distinct seasons, and considerable temperature fluctuations, especially in the spring. But it doesn’t have especially unpredictable severe weather or precipitation patterns. It isn’t all that windy, despite its nickname, and it very rarely gets lake-effect snow since the wind usually blows west to east across Lake Michigan rather than into Chicago.
  • Buffalo does get plenty of lake-effect snow and has unpredictable wind patterns. But its humidity levels and cloud cover patterns are fairly predictable, which cuts down on severe weather outside the winter and early spring.
  • Denver, although it has among the most unpredictable high temperatures in the country and can have bouts of severe weather, has fairly predictable rainfall patterns (there usually isn’t much) and cloud cover (it’s usually sunny). And its problems tend to be concentrated in spring; summer days in Denver are often predictably mild.
These cities still have plenty of unpredictable weather. But if you don’t like the weather in Chicago or Denver, be thankful you don’t have to deal with the KRAP they have in Rapid City.
silver-feature-weatherpredict-table

Wednesday, March 2, 2016

About El Nino

El Niño: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

March 02, 2016 / General / Daphne Thompson
There has been a lot of talk this year about El Niño, but what is it and is it really to blame for everything going on in the weather? Some people say it brings heavy rain, some drought and others blame it for tornadoes. Is it really to blame for any of these events? Is there anything else besides weather associated with El Niño?

So what exactly is El Niño? It is a warm band of water in the Pacific Ocean found just north of the equator, between South America and Australia. Occurring when trade winds weaken causing warm water to move east, this happens about every two to seven years and can last nine months or longer. Fishermen in South America tended to notice it around December and named it after the Christ Child. The warm water is actually bad for this trade as the anchovies caught there prefer cold water. 

El Niño Diagram

Not all El Niños are the same. Some are much stronger than others. The one occuring now, is considered very strong. Ocean temperatures are higher than most El Niño years. In the graphic below, you can see the very warm water to the west of South America.

Sea surface temperature anomalies on Nov. 12, 2015. Image: NOAASea surface temperature anomalies on Nov. 12, 2015. Image: NOAA

El Niño can enhance certain conditions. Let's talk about the good, the bad and the ugly occurring right now.

The Good


Have you heard of the "super bloom" happening in Death Valley? Mostly known for the extreme temperatures, every year the desert blooms. Wildflower seeds rest in the sand waiting for just the right amount of moisture to wake them up. This year, the situation has been enhanced by El Niño and there has been more rain than normal. Strong storms and flash floods occurred last fall and in a place that normally gets 2 inches annually, some storms dropped up to 3 inches in a few hours. The desert is now a valley of flowers.

Death Valley Super Bloom

The Bad

Coral Reefs are amazing underwater structures alive with tiny animals. These are sometimes called "rain forests of the sea" and contain some of the most diverse ecosystems on Earth. They are very fragile and excessive warm water can stress them. El Niño and Climate Change have caused the ocean to be much warmer than normal. Known as Coral Bleaching, the reefs are basically dying off. Slow growing coral does not usually recover from this. 

Coral Bleaching

 

The Ugly

Thousands of dead birds have been washing up on the Alaskan shorelines. Known as common murres, an estimated 100,000 birds have starved and the number continues to grow. They are losing their food supply due to the warm ocean temperatures. The fish they eat will vacate the area if it becomes too hot or too cold. When you weigh 2 pounds and must eat 30% of your weight a day, the loss of fish can be devastating. Luckily, this is a small percentage of the approximately 2.8 million murres living in Alaska. Unfortunately, it's not only happening to birds. Reports are coming in showing that newborn sea lions are washing up on the South American coastline. Whales are also dying. They are all starving, as their food chain has been disrupted. 

Dead Sea Birds (Credit: Tamara Zeller/USFWS)

You may hear of floods or drought or tornadoes associated with El Niño. However, it is not possible to link specific weather or other events to this. Climate Change is also at work and it is hard to know which of these is affecting the weather. Maybe it is a combination, maybe not? Not all bad things occurring can be attributed to El Niño, but some conditions can definitely be enhanced. 

Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Snow Packs Decrease in February

Jim Steenburgh of the UofU provides a pessimistic review of the poor snowfall across much of the west in the month of February. While still below normal much of Wyoming  changed little during February.


The February Southwest Snowpack Disaster

As far as snowfall and snowpack in the southwest are concerned, February was a disaster.

Below is the percent of average snowpack analysis from February 2nd (when I grabbed it for a blog post) showing very healthy conditions relative to average for that time of year across much of the southwest.
Source: NRCS
Fast forward to today and you can see that we have failed to keep pace with the climatological buildup of the snowpack in nearly every drainage basin in California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico.  The situation in Arizona and New Mexico (as well as the south Sierra not shown here) was especially disastrous.  

Source: NRCS
Let's take a look at a few select stations.  At Snowslide Canyon in Arizona (9730 ft), the peak snowpack was achieved in mid January, after which the snowpack has not only lost some ground to climatology, but also in absolute terms, with a slight decrease in total water equivalent.  

Source: NRCS
If we go to lower (and warmer) elevations, the situation is even worse.  At Baker Butte (7300 ft), the snowpack is gone as of today.  

Source: NRCS
How about a snowier location like Squaw Valley near Lake Tahoe?  It hit the wall at 30 inches of water equivalent at the end of January and has been flatlined ever since.  

Source: NRCS
Areas that didn't do too badly are in the northern tier of the western U.S.  Paradise Ranger Station on Mt. Rainier, for example, is still tracking close to median (lower elevation sites in the Cascades lost some ground).

Source: NRCS
Similarly, one can find sites in the northern interior that were able to preserve or in some cases close the gap relative to the lack of snow earlier this winter.  Good for them.  

We'll have to see if the advertised pattern shift in a few days comes through and if the southwest snowpack can get back on track.