Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday October 11 2019, @02:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the Brrrr! dept.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/09/winter-storm-aubrey-historic-snow-cold-forecast-central-us/3918343002/

A "potentially historic" winter storm will slam the north-central USA over the next few days with up to 2 feet of snow possible in some areas.

Snow will accumulate from eastern Washington and Montana to Colorado, the Dakotas, Minnesota and northern Wisconsin, the Weather Channel said. Record low temperatures are also possible Thursday and Friday across the western USA.

The system will produce severe storms and heavy rain Thursday in the southern Plains and critical-to-extreme fire weather threats from the central and southern Rockies to California, the National Weather Service said.

The size and intensity of this snowstorm are unheard of for October, according to AccuWeather.

[...] A slew of winter storm warnings, watches and freeze warnings were in effect across parts of seven states as the storm ramped up Wednesday, AccuWeather said.

[...] The storm will have two parts, the first of which is targeting the northern and central Rockies and High Plains on Wednesday into Thursday. The second part will bring snow to the eastern and central portions of the Dakotas and western Minnesota by week's end.

"Near-blizzard to full-fledged blizzard conditions are possible across portions of central North Dakota Friday afternoon into Saturday morning," the weather service in Bismarck said. "Expect high impacts and dangerous to impossible travel conditions."

The weather service called it a "potentially historic October winter storm."

Meanwhile, locations in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, India, and Australia (among others) reported temperatures well over 100°F (38 C)!


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @10:04PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @10:04PM (#906071)

    That "isotropic source" is supposedly well-mixed CO2 acting uniformly over the entire globe.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @10:53PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @10:53PM (#906086)

    If it is acting as a reflector to send 100 watts back down then the radiative temperature of the ground needs to be taken into account. The polar areas are more than 20 degrees cooler than the equatorial areas. Your 100 watts average should be higher near the quator and lower near the poles.

    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @11:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 11 2019, @11:05PM (#906091)

      Well that makes sense to me. But afaict you are now a climate heretic, because all they do is add an equal magnitude CO2 effect to the entire surface with no regard for that:

      Using the new expressions, the radiative forcing due to the increases in the well-mixed greenhouse gases from the pre-industrial (1750) to present time (1998) is now estimated to be +2.43 Wm −2 (comprising CO 2 (1.46 Wm −2 ), CH 4 (0.48 Wm −2 ), N 2 O (0.15 Wm −2 ) and halocar- bons (halogen-containing compounds) (0.34 Wm −2 )), with an uncertainty 1 of 10% and a high level of scientific understanding (LOSU).

      https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/TAR-06.pdf [www.ipcc.ch]

      Can you find an example of someone doing otherwise?