Snow and Ice in the Northern Hemisphere 2013/14

[BornFromTheVoid]

I'm not aware of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics but what I understood Arno Arrak (The commentator) to  be saying was that there was not an observable increase in CO2 at the turn of the 20th century.

 

 

He also points out that

 

 

 

If what he has argued is correct, how has CO2 been proven to be the main driver of global warming?  And was the Cooling period due to less CO2 or just a 'blip' on the long term trend? Bearing in mind, from what I've read, we've been in a similar 'pause' since the early 2000's??

 

I'm not saying I believe the guy, but I'm coming at this from a laymans point of view.

 

The Arctic always warms quicker than elsewhere.

For his first comment about CO2, it's wrong.http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Observing/obs_3.php

 

 

 

There was a large increase in solar activity around the time too, which may have contributed to a large part of the warming.

 

The mid century pause doesn't look like 0.3C/decade to me, and I didn't see any evidence for that claim. The entire cooling for that period was about 0.1C, and was largely due to sulphate aerosol pollution. More here

 

I'll pm you the rest of the stuff this evening, rather than derail this thread any more

[Gavin Hannah]

OK, going on the graph showing the CO2 increase alone, it does render the rest of his argument nonsense lol.

 

I'll have a look through the stuff you posted.

 

Cheers. 

[LincolnSnowstorm]

..and the prettiest september snowy scene award goes  to......Svalbard  

[stewfox]

For those that just want to see the growth in snow , we are up to 345,456 snowmen already

[Summer of 76]

For those that just want to see the growth in snow , we are up to 345,456 snowmen already

There must be a conversion to snowballs somewhere

[Mark Neal.]

Good to see yet more gains in Svalbard and a few flakes fell in Moscow! http://themoscownews.com/local/20130925/191943689/First-snowfall-hits-Moscow.html

Edited September 26, 2013 by Mark N

[stewfox]

Good to see yet more gains in Svalbard and a few flakes fell in Moscow! http://themoscownews.com/local/20130925/191943689/First-snowfall-hits-Moscow.html

 

In 1885 on todays date The Times reported snow in London on the 25th Sept !

 

http://www.ukweatherworld.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/68103-earliest-london-snowfall-september-

 

Turned out to be a fairly cold winter.

 

1885/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat

[be cause]

In 1885 on todays date The Times reported snow in London on the 25th Sept !

 

http://www.ukweatherworld.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/68103-earliest-london-snowfall-september-

 

Turned out to be a fairly cold winter.

 

1885/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat

Am I blind ?  I can see a report of snow showers on Ben Nevis but no mention of any in London ..

[Don]

Don't remember the early 2000s being cold and snowy though..in fact a lot of negative years during the early to mid 80s which had relatively cold winters...maybe lots of snow in Siberia and very little snow elsewhere like N.America is a good thing early doors?

 

After the last above average September snow covers in 2000 and 2002, the following Winters were as follows:

 

Winter 2000/01 had a CET of 4.5C and was snowy at times especially at the end of December and end of February particularly in Scotland.

Winter 2002/03 had a CET of 4.7C and London and the South East had its largest snowfall since 1994 during January.

 

So whilst these Winter's were hardly a patch on those of the mid-80's or 2008-13, they were hardly stinkers either.  However, as others have stated, the snow cover is only one piece of the puzzle.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Don

[LincolnSnowstorm]

For those that just want to see the growth in snow , we are up to 345,456 snowmen already

thats fantastic news! when they all each have less than a square km of ice to stand on then we'll know we are really cooking on gas 

[LincolnSnowstorm]

Recent gains and last year http://gickr.com/results3/anim_bf0685c2-a711-e564-65bf-38f4efca4bc1.gif

 

 

Edited September 26, 2013 by LincolnSnowstorm

[Interitus]

Don't remember the early 2000s being cold and snowy though..in fact a lot of negative years during the early to mid 80s which had relatively cold winters...maybe lots of snow in Siberia and very little snow elsewhere like N.America is a good thing early doors?

 

Well without implied causality, here are a few rudimentary correlations since 1979 of NOAA AO index, Rutgers monthly Eurasian snow extent and September Arctic ice extent from Arctic ROOS. Obviously some of the correlations are very high where the values are intrinsically linked eg winter months with winter totals, but they've been included for completeness.

	Sep sn	Sep ice	Sep AO	Oct sn	Oct inc	Oct AO	AO inc	Nov sn	Nov AO	 								Sep sno	x	0.24	-0.39	0.34	-0.06	0.10	0.29	0.10	-0.16Sep ice	0.24	x	-0.23	-0.43	-0.56	0.14	0.23	-0.36	-0.05Sep AO	-0.39	-0.23	x	-0.07	0.09	-0.11	-0.64	0.01	0.14Oct sno	0.34	-0.43	-0.07	x	0.92	-0.33	-0.22	0.54	-0.13Oct inc	-0.06	-0.56	0.09	0.92	x	-0.39	-0.36	0.53	-0.07Oct AO	0.10	0.14	-0.11	-0.33	-0.39	x	0.84	-0.23	0.04AO inc	0.29	0.23	-0.64	-0.22	-0.36	0.84	x	-0.18	-0.04Nov sno	0.10	-0.36	0.01	0.54	0.53	-0.23	-0.18	x	-0.03Nov AO	-0.16	-0.05	0.14	-0.13	-0.07	0.04	-0.04	-0.03	xDec sno	0.11	-0.49	-0.03	0.54	0.53	-0.09	-0.05	0.58	0.05Dec AO	-0.15	0.16	0.10	-0.37	-0.33	0.16	0.07	-0.26	0.38Jan sno	-0.22	-0.57	0.09	0.20	0.30	-0.03	-0.07	0.16	0.07Jan AO	-0.06	0.15	0.11	-0.26	-0.26	0.29	0.17	-0.22	0.23Feb sno	-0.21	-0.36	0.20	0.32	0.43	-0.24	-0.29	0.28	-0.04Feb AO	0.28	0.13	-0.26	-0.31	-0.44	0.21	0.31	-0.32	0.03DJF sn	-0.14	-0.63	0.11	0.49	0.57	-0.16	-0.19	0.47	0.03DJF AO	0.04	0.19	-0.03	-0.42	-0.46	0.29	0.24	-0.35	0.28																			Dec sn	Dec AO	Jan sn	Jan AO	Feb sn	Feb AO	DJF sn	DJF AO										Sep sno	0.11	-0.15	-0.22	-0.06	-0.21	0.28	-0.14	0.04	Sep ice	-0.49	0.16	-0.57	0.15	-0.36	0.13	-0.63	0.19	Sep AO	-0.03	0.10	0.09	0.11	0.20	-0.26	0.11	-0.03	Oct sno	0.54	-0.37	0.20	-0.26	0.32	-0.31	0.49	-0.42	Oct inc	0.53	-0.33	0.30	-0.26	0.43	-0.44	0.57	-0.46	Oct AO	-0.09	0.16	-0.03	0.29	-0.24	0.21	-0.16	0.29	AO inc	-0.05	0.07	-0.07	0.17	-0.29	0.31	-0.19	0.24	Nov sno	0.58	-0.26	0.16	-0.22	0.28	-0.32	0.47	-0.35	Nov AO	0.05	0.38	0.07	0.23	-0.04	0.03	0.03	0.28	Dec sno	x	-0.37	0.44	0.04	0.15	-0.02	0.73	-0.15	Dec AO	-0.37	x	-0.29	0.51	-0.10	0.15	-0.34	0.73	Jan sno	0.44	-0.29	x	-0.24	0.40	-0.01	0.81	-0.24	Jan AO	0.04	0.51	-0.24	x	-0.43	0.41	-0.27	0.84	Feb sno	0.15	-0.10	0.40	-0.43	x	-0.50	0.69	-0.45	Feb AO	-0.02	0.15	-0.01	0.41	-0.50	x	-0.24	0.70	DJF sn	0.73	-0.34	0.81	-0.27	0.69	-0.24	x	-0.38	DJF AO	-0.15	0.73	-0.24	0.84	-0.45	0.70	-0.38	x

This shows that increased September snowfall over Eurasia is typical with increased September ice extent, but is associated with less snowfall in the following winter overall, particularly in January and February.

More interesting are the links to the 'warm Arctic, cold continents' theory and the works by Cohen et al.

It would be expected that the snow extent would be closely linked to the previous month value, and this is the case, though the September value doesn't show any correlation with October extent increase. Weak intermonthly correlations exist with AO, but the September AO doesn't show any link to October snow extent or increase. The change from September AO to October is correlated to Oct snow values and October AO is better as would be expected, but these of course are not known in advance.

But guess what? The October snow extent and increase is even more highly correlated to the September ice extent,

From here, the October snow extent, increase and most of all September ice extent are all highly correlated with winter snowfall - all of them more so than November data. In fact at -0.63 the September ice extent has the biggest correlation from any of the total winter data outside of the 3 winter months themselves.

Also they all correlate well with winter AO, in this case the October snow increase the most with once again both October snow extent and increase better than November values.

So ice extent would appear to be of some prognostic value, linked closely to snow extent in the following months, and through its influence on October snow, to influence the winter AO.

Would be surprised if any of the traditional global indices could match these correlations, at timescales of 3-5 months.

[cyclonic happiness]

Then there's the snow distribution to consider?

 

Where it falls, greatly affects our chance of a cold winter even a months before.

 

Everything is linked.......everything!

[Gavin Hannah]

The latest value: 5,183,869 km²â€‚(September 26, 2013)  

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

 

The snow is gathering pace.

 

Scandi starting to accumulate, although, would love to see more there.

[bluearmy]

 

Scandi starting to accumulate, although, would love to see more there.

 

 

Any particular reason IBTH ?

[LincolnSnowstorm]

My thinking on the above issue of Scandinavian snow cover is that it would show a nice closer to home progression but its too extreme a wish for september at least in any significant amounts.

But give it a couple of weeks or so and  maybe it could change to look more like 2003 in that area 

 

Things looking very steady for the last two days on the snow and ice  chart http://gickr.com/results3/anim_870ad8b6-80bd-5714-1559-51832e964de7.gif

 

Edited September 27, 2013 by LincolnSnowstorm

[syed2878]

funny how any1 who goes against globle warming r quickly get discredited on weather forums like this1. Anyway guys i beleave snow cover is above normal this year? Surely its good for the nh winter?

[Weather-history]

Am I blind ?  I can see a report of snow showers on Ben Nevis but no mention of any in London ..

Bonacina reported in his famous snow analyses.

[Gavin Hannah]

 The latest value: 5,269,020 km²â€‚(September 27, 2013) 

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

 

 

We are looking like we could easily catch the 2000's average. Seeing as the ice levels tracked it closely in the early part of the year, it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that it catches it back up during the refreeze.

[beng]

 The latest value: 5,269,020 km²â€‚(September 27, 2013) 

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

 

We are looking like we could easily catch the 2000's average. Seeing as the ice levels tracked it closely in the early part of the year, it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that it catches it back up during the refreeze.

 

The thing is though that the AMO is still in the long term positive cycle at the moment - which acts against ice formation to some extent in the Barents Sea - so I'd still bet we'll top out below the average. In 5-10 years the cycle will switch - then we're going to get a big surprise with a big jump in arctic ice; it will make the climate change discussion interesting. Worth saying that I think the winter of 63 happened around the time of the last long term switch in the AMO - although as to whether there's a connection - impossible to say.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Amo_timeseries_1856-present.svg

Edited September 28, 2013 by beng

[bobbydog]

comparison of today in previous years

 

latest-

 

2012

 

2011

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

potential for further significant snowfall through the start of october-

 

http://www.weather-forecast.com/maps/Russia?hr=6&over=pressure&symbols=none&type=prec

[Gavin Hannah]

Interesting to see the snow cover increase year on year. (Minus the 2012 blip).  

 

A huge gain in sea ice today too.

 

 The latest value: 5,340,043 km²â€‚(September 28, 2013) 

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

Up 70K in one day.  Not long till we get the 100K+ daily gains.

[cooling climate]

funny how any1 who goes against globle warming r quickly get discredited on weather forums like this1. Anyway guys i beleave snow cover is above normal this year? Surely its good for the nh winter?

 

Pay them no heed. They will melt into obscurity in the coming years.

The main contributers to the climate and environment thread especially the Arctic

ice thread could not even see the possible importance or significance of the very cool

Arctic summer that has just passed. 

The IPCC do not even acknowledge the continuing 15 years pause in global warming

which many other climotologists admit to.

[coram]

Pay them no heed. They will melt into obscurity in the coming years.The main contributers to the climate and environment thread especially the Arcticice thread could not even see the possible importance or significance of the very coolArctic summer that has just passed. The IPCC do not even acknowledge the continuing 15 years pause in global warmingwhich many other climotologists admit to.

It may be fair enough that the IPCC dismiss the 15 year pause in rising temperature as a blip. Perhaps this question should be asked - if the pause continues, after how many years would the blip be no longer considered temporary and therefore the current theories of further anthropogenic global warming have to be questioned?

[Relativistic]

The blip sticks out because the theories suggested runaway GW, which has failed to come to fruition thus far. It's fallen completely flat.

Edited September 29, 2013 by 22nov10blast