Modern Era

[acbrixton]

Excellent analysis AC, though reading numbers and trying to make sense of them reminds me how visual I am in communication preference.

My only quibbles are twofold: first up I agree that cold doesn't distinguish source - I was looking at my uni thesis recently and was reminded of a technique I used that I will eventually get around to reproducing on here that helps to overcome that issue, howver it would be a long build and might require a team of us to compile (volunteers most welcome by the way).

Secondly, I wouldn't use mean temp but would have used max - the results probably won't be markedly different but I did point out several times during one of the recent anticyclonic spells how large (unusually so for the time of year) sone of the diurnal ranges were. Also, an assessment of minima would give an intersting, though probably rather different, picture.

Your observation re context is very well made, though I would suggest that 1978-87 is actually a throwback to a previous time, and as much an anachronism (though far from absolutely exceptional) as 1998-2007 currently seems towards a future we are yet to reach. The decline since late in Queen Victoria's reign is plain to see.

SF thanks. I must try to master excel etc.

1. The reproduction sounds useful...what would it involve?

2. Agreed it would be interesting: being idle I simply made use of the data posted here!

I agree with your characterisation of 1978-1997 and the decline in winter cold since the end of the 19th c blips notwithstanding.

regards

ACB

[Stratos Ferric]

Many thanks for this very interesting post acbrixton, particularly the part highlighted below.

I certainly remember the disappointing winters of the early-mid 70s, and the two week long cold of Feb 1978 came as a genuine surprise back then. The six winters from 1971-76 are matched only by 1911-16 in not returning a single month at more than 1C below the rolling thirty year mean, unless and until this winter clears with the same, in which case it's eyes forward to next winter for another potential 'uncold' record.

Little did we know that the exceptional events that followed over the next few winters after 1978 would not return.

However, and this IS where Andrew's analysis enters something of a void by looking at only one end of the distribution, the unanswered question is whether the days that weren't cold were merely cool, warm, or even very warm instead. Historically, January hasa been our coldest month. In the even larger teapot this month alone is around 3C warmer than it was in the halycon days of the C18th, and as much as 2C warmer than was the case (10 year rolling mean) just a couple of decade ago. It mightn't sound much, but one has to remember that that will not be relaised as 2C per day. There have ALWAYS been mild days in nearly every winter month. To gain sixty cumulative degrees probably means something like 4C for half of the month - that is more than enough to take a cast iron wintry day well the cold side of marginal, right across the dividing line into a non-marginal wrong side of the line for wintry weather day.

So, for me, it's not just the lack of cold, but also how far away from cold we tend to be now. In the 70s, even in some of those mild winters, I recall seeing distant sno on the tops of the Pennines. Nowadays we don't even get snow on that very high ground: again, that's about 2C difference.

SF thanks. I must try to master excel etc.

1. The reproduction sounds useful...what would it involve?

2. Agreed it would be interesting: being idle I simply made use of the data posted here!

I agree with your characterisation of 1978-1997 and the decline in winter cold since the end of the 19th c blips notwithstanding.

regards

ACB

We'd need to do a grid assessment of every day in winter (I use Dec 1 - Mar 31) determining the air mass type (loosely using Lamb's types), but it really requires several stations to be used (mine were Braemar, Buxton, Woburn and Lizard I think - running N-S across the UK to capture occasions when the PF was lateral, or breakdowns / incursions were slow moving E-W). Once the data has been collated it nan be dropped into Excel and a visual representation produced. The additional facility of Excel would be to allow actual temperatures to be overlayed. That would then allow assessment not only of extent of cold, but also of the frequency of drivers of cold. I do think a group of us should do it because it would produce a rich database. Also, working backwards, we'd could reveal it a bit at a time instead of having to wait for ever to produce a final output.

Now that the archive charts are available it's not hard to do. It just requires diligence and consistency in the capture to make processing of the final outputs straightforward.

[osmposm]

almost identical to the phrases and make up of the article from the 1920s printed earlier but using todays dates!

True-ish, but please note than in the article the writer talks of "frozen locks at Windsor" and "our bursting water pipes" in their "cold snap", and compares the short-lived freezes they were experiencing in the 1920s with the serious and prolonged winter cold of a generation before. The writer was, indeed, correctly suggesting that the 1920s winter climate was less severe than that of previous times. However, it's clear from what he wrote (and from the statistics) that his idea of 'less severe' and 'short-lived' was significantly harsher than anything we've experienced, in the south at least, since the 1980s : Feb 1991 was certainly severe, but did not last long (just four or five consecutive sub-zero max "ice days" for most, and no return of the cold after a brief respite).....and besides, it was over 15 years ago. The burst water pipes he's talking about are indoor pipes, often in a loft, in which the water has frozen solid: when do you think they were last widespread?

The "even larger teapot" of the 1920s was milder than the 1890s. The "even larger teapot" of the 2000s is not only milder than the 1940s-80s, but also milder than the previous "mild" period. In both cases I find it a perfectly acceptable descriptive phrase for what was/is being experienced: but as others have said, it doesn't preclude the possibility of a change in the future.

Edited January 4, 2008 by osmposm

[Roger J Smith]

The heavy snow in some northern parts of the U.K. on Thursday reminds us that "even larger teapot" is no protective shield that can negate processes for snowfall, and the 1062 mb high indicates that nature is still capable of matching long-term extremes for Europe, so to my mind, it is only a matter of time until the right synoptic pattern develops to bring a strong blast of wintry weather to much of south-central England as well.

However, there is clearly merit in the argument that the synoptics have changed in frequency, and if there is a debate about whether certain synoptics can even happen any more (there seems to be, not sure who wants to speak for the affirmative), then this debate has an uncertain answer because so far, these synoptics have been conspicuous by their absence.

I've read any number of posts in the past day or two, giving the opinion that in days of yore, a high this strong would have forced the jet south and won the day, with which I do not agree. I think the truth of the matter is, each pattern sets up in some unique way, and the pattern itself determines the fate of the high, not vice versa. This high was never going to push the Atlantic storm track away because from the outset, it was clearly heading SE then SSE into Russia, and the only real question about its long-term effects are whether it will help establish a form of Bartlett spoiler, or hang around far enough north to be in position to retrograde its way back into contention as a cold-maker. The jury is out on that as models struggle to resolve events over their event horizon, naturally, they lose the plot.

My research suggests (with not the highest confidence) that it's more likely to be a case of semi-Bartlett for a time, then to look north for a reload later in January rather than hoping this Russian fighter has more rounds left in him.

A final thought here -- suppose we were in the grip of a phenomenon rightly called "even larger teapot" -- I've said this before, North America was also for a time, and seemingly escaped in the period 1993-94. But it could be a considerable lag for your side of the Atlantic, processes like this can take 20-30 years if they are largely or only natural. Add in whatever A there is in AGW, and that lag time could be greater. On the other hand, if it's true that the climate balance has shifted, we must keep in mind that past climate shifts have been sudden, and so could be the next one.

[Stratos Ferric]

...The burst water pipes he's talking about are indoor pipes, often in a loft, in which the water has frozen solid: when do you think they were last widespread?

The "even larger teapot" of the 1920s was milder than the 1890s. The "even larger teapot" of the 2000s is not only milder than the 1940s-80s, but also milder than the previous "mild" period. In both cases I find it a perfectly acceptable descriptive phrase for what was/is being experienced: but as others have said, it doesn't preclude the possibility of a change in the future.

I agree with all of that Osm, but we should remember that in 1991 most houses had central heating; in the 20s they wouldn't have had. The stats do clearly show that the 20s, though anomalous, were not as absolutely anomalous as what we have today.

...

In the same way that our parents and grandparents talk about 47 or 63, then people are of my generation will at least be able to talk about 79, Dec 81, various events in 83/84,84/85, the last sub zero month of Feb 86 and of course Jan 87.

It's a great question actually, for anyone younger than 25, what their yardstick for a real winter experience (in this country!) is. Anyone under 16 really doesn't have a chance.

[Optimus Prime]

SF I'm pretty sure many people aware of the winter 2000/2001 in Scotland will tell you the snow was at times some of the most significant in living memory. Even to people born in the 60s.

For England though signficant snow seems to be about as common as there are English people in Harrow and Scottish people in Wales.

Very rare.

[Lightning Hunter]

I think people who use the term 'even larger teapot' should be called 'modern weather nerds'*

*I would never use such a vague, short-sighted term (IMO)

[Zerouali lives]

SF I'm pretty sure many people aware of the winter 2000/2001 in Scotland will tell you the snow was at times some of the most significant in living memory. Even to people born in the 60s.

For England though signficant snow seems to be about as common as there are English people in Harrow and Scottish people in Wales.

Very rare.

Not just 2000/01 ,OP but the first week of March 2006 was the most severe snowfall I've ever witnessed (I was only a few months during December 1981 so that doesn't really count!) 13" fell in Aberdeen city centre!

[West is Best]

christmas pudding is an utterly crass term.

'Modern' is a complete misnoma, for unless those using it are referring back to the industrial revolution the word Modern comes from the C19th and not from the last few years. It is therefore being used inappropriately and inaccurately.

Anyway, what does it matter? The weather is kicking the 'even larger teapot' nonsense thoroughly into touch. Hooray that for the first 6 weeks of this winter we're below the 1971-2000 mean.

[LadyPakal]

Yes, March 2006 was the 'worst' snow fall here in 40 years apparently (according to the met office). From a northerly I seem to remember... I moved up here in the autumn of 1998 and don't remember the 2000/01 winter being that bad to be honest.

Edited January 4, 2008 by LadyPakal

[West is Best]

Do they still have the Pools Panel ... It really was a different time.

Yes it was. It's called a time of unheated, uncovered, pitches. Really you don't help yourself sometimes ...

we can't even register a sub four month nowadays

January 2001 3.2C

December 2001 3.6C

February 2003 3.9C

February 2006 3.7C

It's really quite astonishing how unfactual you are becoming SF. Seriously offer that as a suggestion that you post less hyperbole and get back to what you were once so good at: unbiased dealing with fact.

[Nick H]

Anyway, what does it matter? The weather is kicking the 'even larger teapot' nonsense thoroughly into touch. Hooray that for the first 6 weeks of this winter we're below the 1971-2000 mean.

The first five (sic) weeks of this winter have not been below average. Manley was 5.1C for December, rounded from 5.06C: bang on average.

The first three days of January have been half a degree above average, despite this "Big Freeze" which lasted all of one day and produced unheard-of-in-English-winters maxima of 2-3C!. God help us....

It's really quite astonishing how unfactual you are becoming SF. Seriously offer that as a suggestion that you post less hyperbole and get back to what you were once so good at: unbiased dealing with fact.

To be fair SF has apologised for that, and unfortunately WiB I suspect you saw it as well.

Edited January 4, 2008 by Nick H

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Just a thought....Arent we always in a even larger teapot?

[I remember Atlantic 252]

id say the even larger teapot began on the 1st january 2000, stronger jetstreams more atlantic air, and way less snow, what a pathetic cold spell that was if you can call it that, im now mild at 6.6oC max, after my 1 coldish day with no frost, snow or fog or ice

[PersianPaladin]

If I just look back in the last ten to twelve years up here in the north-east; statistically we get a lot less from northerlies and easterlies than we used to before then...perhaps 1991 was a big outlier post the 1987 marker; but it was a good example of our leadership in snow amounts from easterlies thanks to us being positioned near a long sea-track for convection. Easterlies these days just don't last as long and are very fleeting; mainly down to tanked arctic air, +AO, more intense and prolonged ENSO events and a northward migration of the pfj as well as higher SST's in the sub-polar regions encouraging shortwave proliferation.

[Stratos Ferric]

Yes it was. It's called a time of unheated, uncovered, pitches. Really you don't help yourself sometimes ...

..

Silly me, there was me thinking the problem was as often as not with snow covered terraces deemed unsafe. WiB, let's get this clear, are you honestly suggesting that winters now are remotely as snowy as they were back in the 60s, 70s and 80s?

[Snowly does it]

So that is 4 sub 4C winter months out of 22 since December 2000 ? Can anyone replicate another seven year period when that has been 'beaten' ?

1970-1977 comes close with 5, 1988-1995 has 6, 1920-1927 has 6 (saved by some cooler Decembers)

Most of these of course had some rather colder sub 4s than the recent example.

[noggin]

"Current" might be a better word than "modern", given that these things go in cycles.

I remember saying to my Mum, sometime during the late 60s ( that's the 1960s, btw, not the 1860s) that the weather seemed to be evening out, that the Summers weren't so hot, nor the Winters so cold as they had been when I was a much younger noggin. Just thought I'd mention it.........

[Stratos Ferric]

The first five (sic) weeks of this winter have not been below average. Manley was 5.1C for December, rounded from 5.06C: bang on average.

The first three days of January have been half a degree above average, despite this "Big Freeze" which lasted all of one day and produced unheard-of-in-English-winters maxima of 2-3C!. God help us....

To be fair SF has apologised for that, and unfortunately WiB I suspect you saw it as well.

Yes, he doesn't help himself sometimes does he? lol

With the exception of a cool August and July, this cool run is really little more than average. As I keep suggesting, it's not the coolness that's remarkable by recent standards, so much as the lack of warmth that we had been becoming increasingly accustomed to. Against rolling thirty year the last three months are now above mean, and January isn't looking cold as things sit.

[Nick H]

I should have added in my original post in response to WiB that I deliberately use Manley, not Hadley, in declaring that this winter has so far not been below average. Remember that Hadley is to be compared against the 1961-90 mean, regardless of the relative merits of using 1971-00. Accordingly, December was half a degree above the 1961-90 mean. You can't appeal to Hadley on the grounds of alleged Met Office officialdom and then simultaneously use a 30 year mean which the MO does not recognise as yet, which you did in your original post.

With the exception of a cool August and July, this cool run is really little more than average

Indeed. In fact the last 4 months of the year were 0.3C above average cf 1971-00. Signs of runaway global warming if you ask me......lol

Edited January 4, 2008 by Nick H

[Don]

id say the even larger teapot began on the 1st january 2000, stronger jetstreams more atlantic air, and way less snow, what a pathetic cold spell that was if you can call it that, im now mild at 6.6oC max, after my 1 coldish day with no frost, snow or fog or ice

I would say the 'real' even larger teapot began in February 1997. From 1987 to this point, cold seasons although few and far between did occur, but we've had nothing of the sort since then.

[noggin]

The first five (sic) weeks of this winter have not been below average. Manley was 5.1C for December, rounded from 5.06C: bang on average.

I was under the impression that the December CET was 4.9, making it just below average.

[PersianPaladin]

I would say the 'real' even larger teapot began in February 1997. From 1987 to this point, cold seasons although few and far between did occur, but we've had nothing of the sort since then.

Well I'm not sure, its just a case of the various factors impinging sustained cold synoptics getting worse.

I think 1987 is more a realistic start-point, obviously with any change in trends you are going to have occasional outliers but they get less intense as time goes on....with the winter of 1995/6 more realistic as a benchmark comparison for today's potential; although I worry that we may even be beyond that.

This current 'average' trend is just natures way of balancing out the previous run-away record + anamolies of last summer\autumn\winter...but I feel that this trough will be outweighed by an even higher peak next summer and into the season beyond.

Edited January 4, 2008 by PersianPaladin

[Snowly does it]

Yes, he doesn't help himself sometimes does he? lol

With the exception of a cool August and July, this cool run is really little more than average. As I keep suggesting, it's not the coolness that's remarkable by recent standards, so much as the lack of warmth that we had been becoming increasingly accustomed to. Against rolling thirty year the last three months are now above mean, and January isn't looking cold as things sit.

Nor is January looking particularly mild, as things sit.

I am not sure how the debate around the current run moves forward - the fact that it is 'average' is of course an acknowledgement that it is not 'modern' - as 'modern' is running very much above 'average' - the terms are rather confusing as we relate the current warmed conditions to an historic cooler mean - thus when things are 'average' in a warming period, they are actually 'ccol' - as evidenced by the 10 year mean only being breached once since May, thats when referenced against the reality on the ground.

If this continued for 10 years we could say temps are only really around average, but we would also conclude GW in the UK was dead in the water for the time being and we were as we had always been. Hence the run is significant the longer it goes on (yes, that IS tempered somewhat by the lack of cold - a March 2006 and another very cold month in this run and it would be interesting anyway)

[Nick H]

I was under the impression that the December CET was 4.9, making it just below average.

Philip Eden revised it upwards this morning. See other threads for discussion re this matter.