Arctic Ice: How Does It Influence Our Weather?

[Gray-Wolf]

Wunderground seem to think there was only one that was nearly comparable and that was in '63 and a lot smaller!

I was merely pointing out that if the 'freak' nature of this storm (I remember plenty of folk arguing about GAC12 as being normal only to then see them say it was the only reason we saw such a low min?) and just how odd to have an 'Ex 'cane/Nor 'easter' combo then have a steering current to take them inland (to the NW) instead of their normal late season curve out to sea?

If circulation is being impacted by low sea ice/snow cover then the 'steering currents' are also being influenced by the warmer Arctic.

The only thing we have no impact on is the full moon tide that'll add to the storm surge! (IMHO)

EDIT: Ginny in 63 was the only other storm to impact this late in the season (two near misses in the 1700's?)

http://www.pivot.net...y/hurricane.PDF

and the scale of the Arctic h.p. and -ve AO must be of note seeing as they are running the show???

Edited October 27, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Methuselah]

They're listed on Watts here

http://wattsupwithth...ocy/#more-73141

Well, I wouldn't trust either Watts or the bloke he's slagging...Aren't they both political mouthpieces?

[Gray-Wolf]

I think, in the light of the 'unusual' synoptics colliding and colluding to bring 'frankenstorm' into being we should not dismiss the part played by the 'unusual' conditions across the Canadian/Alaskan side of the Basin and the H.P. positioned both there and the current Greenland high's positioning and strength (in the light of the research showing such 'faux highs' are a common result of the heat loss from the summer warmed Arctic Ocean) coupled with the two winter storms currently at large across the NE USA?

For those of us who accept the recent studies and data into the impacts of snow/ice loss on the Autumn Arctic/northern hemisphere it is clear that aspects of this storm are not just 'happenstance' but exactly the type of impact we are becoming accustomed to seeing the past few years . The hurricane and Moon phase i have no bones with but the rest?

Current data suggest a larger finacial blow than the 15 billion costs of Irene and a widerv physical impact (64 million people over an 800 mile wide swathe).

[Gray-Wolf]

More info on 'Frankenstorm'. The nearest analogue was the 91' 'perfect storm' off the coast (Grace and a Nor'easter......'Grace' shows that that was a slow season compared with our current 'Sandy') the fact that the 'collision' will occur over land is the difference (not just a few shrimp boats at risk!) and it is the 'odd' jet and positioning of the high pressures that makes it noteworthy.

NHC has upped the storm surge for the NY islands from 6' to 11' this a.m. putting the subways at risk (55 billion damages if they flood) and with trees still in full leaf 'downed trees' are set to be an issue taking down power across a huge swathe of the east coast (1/5th of the U.S. population stands to be impacted)

All I can hope is no/low loss of life and a lot of inteligent conversation as to possible impacts /augmentation from climate change (the low snow cover/low ice link) prior to election night. I feel the 'republican' stance on AGW will not prove helpful (igloos in Florida etc) come the vote if infrastructure impacts/ finacial losses are high.

[Gray-Wolf]

Thinking about it joe P. has been told for years to expect ever stronger storms as a consequence of AGW so I would expect WUWT to be posting how 'Normal/Average' the storm is! (LOL)

[Gray-Wolf]

NHC now noting the "anomalous ridge" that is doing the steering for this storm. I'm sure there will be plenty of folk to show how unique this event is but I'm sure this will be countered with tales of 'before reliable records' and 'just weather' from the usual?

It's odd that even as she deepens further (beyond the earlier 'Worse case scenario') folk are not updating possible impacts?

[BornFromTheVoid]

I have a feeling it will be a long night tonight, webcams, recon and news reports. Could be a truly historic storm, both in terms of power and damage, but also in it's unique track.

We have to hope this isn't the beginning of a more common storm path, given the changes in the Arctic.

[Gray-Wolf]

I have a feeling it will be a long night tonight, webcams, recon and news reports. Could be a truly historic storm, both in terms of power and damage, but also in it's unique track.

We have to hope this isn't the beginning of a more common storm path, given the changes in the Arctic.

Agreed BFTV!

I had mooted a while back the impacts on circulation from other areas opening up over summer but did not expect to be facing such so soon. The origional studies on the impacts of low ice levels, and the Arctic Amplification this drove, centred on the Bearentsz/Kara areas (at that time recently ice free) and the full depth atmospheric readings of temp profiles over refreeze (and any anomalous pressure patterns this was driving).

We now have Baffin and Beaufort acting in similar ways and if they are responsible for the slow ,meandering Jet patern that has that anomalous HP across Canada (driving the storm into land) then we have a potential for some very messy late season 'canes with the ridge forcing the remnants inland instead of out to sea. If the AO state is also being influenced by the low ice then the 'escape' of the polar air will also become a more common/predictable feature.

I'd also mooted at the potential of barely modified Arctic airmasses meeting Tropical airmasses (both for the states and also Europe) and the potential energy such meetings had at their disposal. I guess we are about to find out what happens when hot meets cold?

Edited October 29, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

As per my last post this is how our weather will be impacted with AO driven by low ice and frequent rapid exchanges of cold/warm as the lax polar vortex allows.

If folk want to follow the 'storm' then sure let them use the appropriate thread but if they wish to look at the impacts of low ice allowing these ingredents to be in the same place at the same time then this dedicated thread is surely the place?

Unless you want 'mainstream' threads, populated by folk of little 'climate change' motivation being engulfed in the type of exchanges we get in here I'd say keep the threads separated and shift the AGW based posts into this one.

The low ice this summer has already, IMHO, driven the early snows across Europe (and the difficulties this posed for Poland etc) and this storm in the U.S. We will see further examples as the temps over open water diverge further from what ought to be their 'average' and that 'new energy' finds it's way into our N.Hemisphere weather systems.

Edited October 29, 2012 by pottyprof
Removed my cock up.. lol

[jethro]

IMO this leaping upon any kind of weather event which is notable and instantly connecting it to climate change, or ascribing less ice as the cause, does the AGW argument more harm than good.

I would have thought the wise and scientifically correct approach would be to wait until it's actually happened, the data has been collected and analysed, before making conclusions.

Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Nobody is making any scientific conclusions yet, just thinking out loud. It isn't done with every weather event either.

But when unusual Arctic/Greenland upper atmospheric flows are occurring (which are linked with sea ice changes), and the unique path of this storm is being largely influenced by the unusual Greenland upper flow, making a tentative connection doesn't require any leap of faith.

As far as I know, this path hasn't occurred before for a tropical system, so all possibilities should be considered, with the climate change influence being one.

[jethro]

Info on other Autumn hurricanes to hit the NE coast of America:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Hurricane_of_1938

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Hazel

[Methuselah]

IMO this leaping upon any kind of weather event which is notable and instantly connecting it to climate change, or ascribing less ice as the cause, does the AGW argument more harm than good.

I would have thought the wise and scientifically correct approach would be to wait until it's actually happened, the data has been collected and analysed, before making conclusions.

Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

Yes, J, I agree with that. As far as I can see, there's no connection between this year's record Arctic ice-melt and the behaviour of tropical storms.

But, obviously GW (whether manmade, natural or both) must be involved in the ice-melt itself, as the transition from ice to water requires a heat source...

That said, to connect things that haven't happened yet (we won't be able to properly analyse the storm's path until it's dissipated) to things that have must be jumping the gun. And, anyway, I'm sure that New York has been hit by ex-hurricanes before...

Thanks knocker! http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/62972-in-the-news/page__st__2640#entry2392987

Edited October 29, 2012 by Rybris Ponce

[BornFromTheVoid]

The words of the weather channels senior meteorologist...

A meteorologically mind-boggling combination of ingredients is coming together: one of the largest expanses of tropical storm (gale) force winds on record with a tropical or subtropical cyclone in the Atlantic or for that matter anywhere else in the world; a track of the center making a sharp left turn in direction of movement toward New Jersey in a way that is unprecedented in the historical database, as it gets blocked from moving out to sea by a pattern that includes an exceptionally strong ridge of high pressure aloft near Greenland; a “warm-core†tropical cyclone embedded within a larger, nor’easter-like circulation; and eventually tropical moisture and arctic air combining to produce heavy snow in interior high elevations. This is an extraordinary situation, and I am not prone to hyperbole

http://www.weather.c...enter/tropical/

This is also the most powerful storm on record when measured by wind field size and integrated kinetic energy.

Trying to make out that this storm is not unique is deceptive at best imo.

[knocker]

Thanks knocker! http://forum.netweat...40#entry2392987

? Am I being thick again Pete?

[Gray-Wolf]

It's this 'extreme weather has always happened' line that grates though? Surely to be extreme it has to be out of the ordinary and rare....otherwise it'd just be 'weather' but here we go again . Another 'record breaking event (I too believe it to be the lowest core pressure this far north for any 'cane and also on it's own for both path and size physically.

We all know that the eastern seaboard gets remnants but most canes are in the carolina's on landfall and not NYC!

The other i heard mooted (the 38 storm and ginny in 63) are not in the same league as this event and why folk , esp. in the u.S. are talking down the storm (and costing lives by reasuring folk to stay put as it's all 'overhyped') escapes me??

The Greenland steering and the Arctic plunge are text book 'low ice' result weather forms which folk have talked asround all summer. This time next year we will have the summer/autumns data to show this was the facts of the matter but surely a working knowledge of the changes low ice/snowcover drives make this a 'common sense' call as far as the 'superstorm' ingrediants.

Late season 'canes happen but they obey the normal workings of the atmosphere and swing north and east as they turn ex-tropical (just check out the paths) the 'normal ingredientso f this are late season cane and Full moon the rest has a strong Arctic Amplification impact flavour to it (IMHO).

When we look at 2012 what will it be remembered for? Record ice losses? 97% Greenland melt? American Drought? British Floods and washout summer? Anom SST's of Eastern seaboard America? Low global temps becoming up there with record global temp years? Record early European snows?

The period of max impact from low ice/snow is now with us so lets see what the next 6 to 8 weeks serves up to the N. Hemisphere eh? A few more of these 'common' extreme events???

Edited October 29, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[BornFromTheVoid]

Of the hurricanes ranked Category 2 or greater that have moved within 200 nautical miles of New York City since the 1850s, none are known to have taken a westward hook of the type indicated for Sandy. The hook raises the odds that water will be pushed perpendicular to the coastline, as opposed to more common paths that often parallel the coast. (Image courtesy NOAA Historical Hurricane Tracks.)

https://www2.ucar.ed...e-perfect-storm

[trickydicky]

I don't go for all this 'most powerful storm on record' lark, for how long have we had the capability to record them like we do now? For how long could we not even watch them coming, but they just happened and people said "christ, it was windy yesterday wasn't it? I can't find my hanging baskets". Was there a worse storm that hit British Columbia in September 1156, or Japan in October 1219? Who knows.

This thread seems to want to attribute whatever it can to Arctic ice melt, the first few posts predict a mild winter as a result of it, and then blame it for the recent snowfall in Europe too.

Don't get me wrong the lack of ice up there is likely to have some effect, but we won't know what it was until we have observed it for a while.

[Methuselah]

? Am I being thick again Pete?

No, but I think that maybe I am!

[4wd]

It's equivalent to a Category 1 hurricane the lowest level, in fact technically it is no longer a hurricane at all because that term describes a storm drawing energy from tropical sea water.

This is essentially a very large but not exceptionally deep mid-latitude autumn storm.

There have been numerous storms with deeper centres crossing The British Isles for example.

[keithlucky]

The words of the weather channels senior meteorologist...

http://www.weather.c...enter/tropical/

This is also the most powerful storm on record when measured by wind field size and integrated kinetic energy.

Trying to make out that this storm is not unique is deceptive at best imo.

Said the same Irene was the worse storm then Issac then Sandy yet the powerfull storm that caused the break up of Arctic ice was irrelivant to low levels of remaining Arctic ice.You cherry picking BFV. Edited October 29, 2012 by keithlucky

[BornFromTheVoid]

I don't go for all this 'most powerful storm on record' lark, for how long have we had the capability to record them like we do now? For how long could we not even watch them coming, but they just happened and people said "christ, it was windy yesterday wasn't it? I can't find my hanging baskets". Was there a worse storm that hit British Columbia in September 1156, or Japan in October 1219? Who knows.

This thread seems to want to attribute whatever it can to Arctic ice melt, the first few posts predict a mild winter as a result of it, and then blame it for the recent snowfall in Europe too.

Don't get me wrong the lack of ice up there is likely to have some effect, but we won't know what it was until we have observed it for a while.

In this case, with Hurricane Sandy, there is already a reasonable connection to be made.

There is plenty of evidence now (and lots more papers to come in the next few months) that the sea ice and snow cover loss in the Arctic is causing a slower and more meandering jet stream. It does this by lowering the temperature and atmospheric thickness gradient between the Arctic and more southern latitudes. This effect is strongest in Autumn as the newly warmed waters in the Arctic release their heat into the colder air. Just look at the temperature anomaly map for Autumn so far, and even just October so far

These anomalously high amplitude jet stream waves are what caused a massive record melt of Greenland this year and why SST anomalies are so high around southern Greenland to the US north east coast.

It's this unusually strong Greenland ridge that's steering Sandy on a track straight into New York, rather than brushing up along the coast. This is why people are suggesting it's related to the Arctic.

Not every weather event is being linked to sea ice/climate change, nor should they. But with some there is some justification for it, and this may be one of those.

[BornFromTheVoid]

It's equivalent to a Category 1 hurricane the lowest level, in fact technically it is no longer a hurricane at all because that term describes a storm drawing energy from tropical sea water.

This is essentially a very large but not exceptionally deep mid-latitude autumn storm.

There have been numerous storms with deeper centres crossing The British Isles for example.

You don't seem to know about the structural differences between mid latitude, subtropical and tropical systems.

Sandy is nothing like storm we've been hit by!

[BornFromTheVoid]

Said the same Irene was the worse storm then Issac then Sandy yet the powerfull storm that caused the break up of Arctic ice was irrelivant to low levels of remaining Arctic ice.You cherry picking BFV.

Sorry Keith, I've little clue as to what your trying to say or imply. Would you mind rephrasing your post? Thanks.

[Gray-Wolf]

Still has it's warm core I believe? Anyhoo's Did we have a full moon on the 1st of Oct?

If that's the case we get these once in a Blue moon?

Over time the crew of the lost ship "Tis a common event" will become quite a ridiculous spectacle to most folk surely? How frequently do these rare events need to occur for them to be more than just weather co-incidence?

If we look back over the past ten years and compare it to any other 10 year span I defy anyone to find a period with so many extreme or diverse records being broken to rival it. Couple that with what we are told to expect from the changing climate and you will see why it is ever more credible to see these prediction become realities (and many well ahead of time).

Sorry Keith, I've little clue as to what your trying to say or imply. Would you mind rephrasing your post? Thanks.

I think he's saying these extreme events are becoming both more extreme and more common?