Winter Storms Are Breaking Snow and Temperature Records (npr.org) 97
Winter storms sweeping parts of the Western U.S. and the Pacific Northwest have brought heavy snow and record low temperatures in some areas -- and there's more to come. From a report: A winter storm warning continues into Wednesday for parts of the border area of Northern California and Nevada. "We've had quite a series of storms that have impacted the area, especially impacted the Sierra, where we've had some very heavy snow amounts. That's impacted travel to an incredible degree," National Weather Service meteorologist Eric Kurth told The Associated Press. Snow showers blew in from the Gulf of Alaska and blanketed parts of Washington and Oregon, where state officials have declared an emergency. The Seattle area got up to 6 inches of snow. Weather shelters were opened in both Seattle and Portland. The NWS said Seattle's low of 20 degrees on Sunday broke the previous low for the day set in 1948. Bellingham, Wash., hit a low of 9 -- three degrees below the 1971 record for the day. Utilities in western Washington and Oregon reported about 5,000 customers without power Monday. Pacific Power reported early Tuesday that more than 2,000 customers in Oregon still had no electricity.
Great, now before it melts (Score:1)
find a place to store all the runoff this spring
Re: Great, now before it melts (Score:2)
Re:Great, now before it melts (Score:5, Funny)
A salmon eyes your post nervously.
Re: Great, now before it melts (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
California is ready.
Re: (Score:1)
find a place to store all the runoff this spring
California will simply send it all to the ocean like they keep doing for no good reason. Supposedly to help with the salt levels it was quickly dis-proven. However, they want a crisis so they keep wasting water.
Re: Great, now before it melts (Score:1)
AC (Score:3)
Meanwhile here in WV I had to turn the AC on yesterday.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile here in WV I had to turn the AC on yesterday.
And though Arizona was supposed to be in a dry La Niña phase this year, it's been raining like hell.
Re: (Score:3)
we've been warming the world and now this is a sign of cooling.
Wild swings between droughts and deluges are probably more of a sign of a destabilized jet stream than of "cooling".
Re:and how is this bad? (Score:4, Informative)
Wild swings between droughts and deluges are not a sign of anything. That is how things are normally. see for example [wikipedia.org].
Re:and how is this bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah yes, the good old days, when once-in-a-century events only happened once per century on average, not every few years.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying that wild swings between droughts and deluges are not the normal way of things in the western United States? That's how it's always been.
If you have 100 independent "once in a century" events, then you should have one every year.
Re: and how is this bad? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The science clearly escapes you... (Score:5, Informative)
Weather isn't climate.
This event isn't a "sign of cooling" in terms of climate, but in terms of weather.
If anything, events like this are a certain warning sign that the climate is changing at a rapid pace, rather than changing over longer periods.
At the same time as this weather event is impacting the Western U.S. and the Pacific Northwest, more or less, there have been record high December temperatures in states such as Texas.
Where I live in the UK, it's possible we will break the temperature record for the warmest New Years.
This is climate change in action - whilst there's a warming trend in the climate, our weather doesn't react in the same way. The complex nature of weather systems - of climate - are incredibly unpredictable.
Weather systems, such as the polar vortex, get thrown totally out of whack.
Whilst the artic can heat to levels never seen before, we can see regions of the globe see cold weather never seen before, as artic air plunges down lower than it usually does, at the same time as warmer conditions penetrate artic regions.
This is the difference between climate and weather.
Re: (Score:2)
Got it - climate warming = colder weather.
Sometimes, in some places. Warmer weather most of the time in most places. Is this somehow too hard for you to wrap your mind around?
Sounds like a bunch of gaslighting being spun by the climate change douchebags to me, trying to tell me black is white and blow smoke up my ass. How stupid do you think people are?
In your case, pretty damned stupid. I'd bet you'd also be gaslighted by a strategy guide to playing tic-tac-toe.
Re: (Score:2)
Got it - climate warming = colder weather.
Sounds like a bunch of gaslighting being spun by the climate change douchebags to me, trying to tell me black is white and blow smoke up my ass. How stupid do you think people are?
You are either a troll or incapable of rational thought.
When a single person is telling you about the concern of global warming, of climate change, you can absolutely apply some scepticism.
When a small group are doing the same, ditto.
When 99% of scientists, numbering the hundreds of thousands, spread across the entire planet, with absolutely no means nor reason to spread rumours or lie, it's probably wise to pay attention.
You therefore have, as is your right, several options of belief open to you:
1. You don
I really wish people would study... (Score:5, Insightful)
... and actually GET what is happening.
It doesn't take much - hell, a few hours a day for a week will do.
In very simplistic terms, the climate of earth is constantly changing.
Without human intervention, we go into and out of phases such as a "cool earth" and a "warm earth", but this occurs over time scales that are usually long enough for life on earth to adapt.
Human civilisation has arisen during a period of warming - of, I guess, "goldilocks" weather conditions.
The retreat of the last ice age saw our civilisation rise over the course of some thousands of years.
We adapted.
Earth and climate change can be a cruel beast - the earth has seen temperatures far higher than we are seeing now. But these events, barring cataclysmic ones, have happened over a long duration of time.
What we are seeing now, is anthropogenic climate change over an extremely short period of time.
It all adds up to a cataclysmic event, due to that short time frame.
We have sped up the natural global climate system an order of magnitude that is normally associated with a cataclysmic event - all through our own doing.
We are in unknown territory. We have a good idea how earth with higher temperatures in the past worked, but we have no idea, really, what the impact of rapid warming will do.
Let's just say, a period of increasing and profound weather events that will make civilisation untenable by or before the end of the century... and leave it there.
Over to you, to do about 10 hours of research online all told, till you get it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, I wish people would study more thoroughly.
Look up the effects of weak solar output. Hint: our planet is currently experiencing a Grand Solar Minimum, with one result being a less stable, meridional jetstream.
I'll take the bait. As you have provided no sources, I won't either.
From what I've read, even if the current Grand Solar Minimum lasts a century, it will do little to prevent the current trajectory of global warming.
We can leave it there, as the research papers are available if you want to look them up.
Re:I really wish people would study... (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as time frames for climate change go, you might want to lookup the Younger Dryas. The climate changes going in and out of that were pretty dramatic.
The 8200 year event also was rapid, but smaller in amplitude.
What perplexes me is the conceit that humanity is going to choose the ideal global temperature and hold it there forever. It will not be allowed to warm, and we will stop the next ice age as an encore. Sure we will.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as time frames for climate change go, you might want to lookup the Younger Dryas. The climate changes going in and out of that were pretty dramatic.
The 8200 year event also was rapid, but smaller in amplitude.
What perplexes me is the conceit that humanity is going to choose the ideal global temperature and hold it there forever. It will not be allowed to warm, and we will stop the next ice age as an encore. Sure we will.
Good points. I guess the Younger dryas could be regarded as a cataclysmic event.
In a way, this makes the rise (and many falls) of human civilisation all the more incredible.
Humanity does indeed have so much conceit - and I guess a lot of this is to do with the fact that it is only relatively recently we have begun to understand how our climate operates.
It amazes me all the more, that given our knowledge and knowing the delicate balances at work, we continue to push this delicate process willingly.
It's like
Civilization will remain Tenable (Score:2)
Let's just say, a period of increasing and profound weather events that will make civilisation untenable by or before the end of the century...
I agree with your post up to this point. What about rapid climate change is going to make civilization untenable? It is definitely going to cause huge disruption and a reduction in the standard of living to cope with the change but I do not see anything that will make civilization untenable.
What you are forgetting is that as some areas become less able to support life other areas of the planet are becoming more able to support it. Of course, if we do not stop or at least hugely slow global warming makin
Re: (Score:2)
Food.
Due to the rapid onset of warming, there's a very real possibility that global harvests will fail on a regular enough basis in enough areas, globally, to result in a civilisation collapse.
Our food production can cope with extreme weather in different regions, a few times a decade.
When the cadence of this steps up to being every year, producing grain at scale becomes impossible.
Grain is the worlds most consumed staple. It is also an
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like you can move the worlds bread baskets in a few decades - and where would you move them?
Actually, you can and one place you would move them is northern Canada. There were some studies briefly mentioned in the press a few years ago here about global warming leading to increased grain yields in central Alberta and making farming more viable in central and northern regions.
The stories got a lot of negative/angry attention with complaints that they were making global warming look acceptable or even beneficial. Sadly, we already know from the Amazon that it's depressingly easy to rapidly conver
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have not seen any science that indicates that the new areas opened up for agriculture will be much smaller (or larger) than areas lost mainly because they would need to accurately predict the boundaries of temperature rises and increased rainfall and I don't think they can do that.
I'd look at the latest science, because I might be illuminating. The level of accuracy is increasing, and the suggestion is a net loss of production of some crops as although Canada is big, the soils and infrastructure is not developed so it will be decades before it is particularly productive.
Indeed, it is hard to find any articles about this since anytime someone writes an article indicating that global warming is bad but might not be the end-of-the-world there is a huge outcry.
You'll probably need to go to the original journal publications, survey papers, or other near-academic sources for the detailed breakdown.
Re: (Score:2)
But at the same time, a warning Canada and Russia can now use more of their vast landmass to increase grain production. And the proper response to overfishing of the oceans is to switch to fish farming. The hunting and gathering lifestyle is sustainable only in small human populations.
I know: "Waaaah! Dr. Mercola says I shouldn't eat farmed fish!" Then please move somewhere off the grid so the rest of us can fix the underlying problem by replacing our fossil fuel baseload with nuclear.
Re: (Score:2)
But at the same time, a warning Canada and Russia can now use more of their vast landmass to increase grain production.
It will take a significant period of time to do so, and doesn't really help places in Africa which will experience famine unless you are suggesting that there be global redistribution of food beyond ability to pay. The use of areas under permafrost will not be suitable, and it will also depend on irrigation in Siberia.
Re: (Score:2)
... and actually GET what is happening.
It doesn't take much - hell, a few hours a day for a week will do.
In very simplistic terms, the climate of earth is constantly changing.
Without human intervention, we go into and out of phases such as a "cool earth" and a "warm earth", but this occurs over time scales that are usually long enough for life on earth to adapt.
Human civilisation has arisen during a period of warming - of, I guess, "goldilocks" weather conditions.
The retreat of the last ice age saw our civilisation rise over the course of some thousands of years.
We adapted.
Earth and climate change can be a cruel beast - the earth has seen temperatures far higher than we are seeing now. But these events, barring cataclysmic ones, have happened over a long duration of time.
What we are seeing now, is anthropogenic climate change over an extremely short period of time.
It all adds up to a cataclysmic event, due to that short time frame.
We have sped up the natural global climate system an order of magnitude that is normally associated with a cataclysmic event - all through our own doing.
We are in unknown territory. We have a good idea how earth with higher temperatures in the past worked, but we have no idea, really, what the impact of rapid warming will do.
Let's just say, a period of increasing and profound weather events that will make civilisation untenable by or before the end of the century... and leave it there.
Over to you, to do about 10 hours of research online all told, till you get it.
The comet that wiped out the dinosaurs happened instantaneously. Those species that weren't instantly incinerated or drowned by tsunami were instead able to enjoy Earth-spanning wildfires as the atmosphere heated to hundreds or thousands of degrees C (depending who you ask). Years of darkness afterwards as the sun was blotted out by dust in the atmosphere. And even with a catastrophe of this magnitude, life survived and thrived.
Humans are deluding themselves by believing they could cause anything remotely c
Re: (Score:2)
Fair play, wrong choice of comparison - wrong word.
Re: (Score:2)
The comet that wiped out the dinosaurs happened instantaneously.
The comet did, but there is debate as to whether the dinosaurs went quickly or over a period of several thousand years. Apart from the little flying, feathery ones.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really a negative impact either, it's much needed snow, necessary for water, and after a drought this is a good thing. The fact that some roads are closed is not a big deal at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I've got land to sell you in Kentucky.
Re: (Score:2)
What's been happening here in BC is large snow packs that melt much quicker in the spring. This causes a lot of undergrowth to happen in the spring, then it gets hot, dries out, and burns. The burnt land no longer holds water, so come autumn, we get flooding.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_... [nsidc.org]
and: https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_... [nsidc.org]
From starting UNDER the long term average curve (albeit not as low as the previous "global warming panic years") it is resolutely marching INTO THE LONG TERM AVERAGES territory. It is already in the 90% and it on its way to get near into the 60% at this rate.
Re: (Score:2)
And we're supposed to disregard the fact that the region is getting closer and closer to complete meltdown during summer? Or that parts of Alaska and Siberia that have been frozen solid for millennia are now melting and releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide from the decay of previously frozen organics? Or the fact th
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if we look at the global picture for this winter ain't warm either. To illustrate my point - actual ice in the arctic:
https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_... [nsidc.org]
and: https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_... [nsidc.org]
From starting UNDER the long term average curve (albeit not as low as the previous "global warming panic years") it is resolutely marching INTO THE LONG TERM AVERAGES territory. It is already in the 90% and it on its way to get near into the 60% at this rate.
You really need several graphs, not just one.
From *exactly* the same source as your links:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicen... [nsidc.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Weather isn't climate.
Thank you.
The sad fact is that most people can't tell the difference and use the terms interchangeably.
Like douche bag Sen. James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, who denies that climate change exists, and who brought a snowball to the Senate floor to 'prove' that "global warming is a 'hoax'.
FFS, with people like him in power, we're doomed.
Re: (Score:2)
Weather isn't climate.
This event isn't a "sign of cooling" in terms of climate, but in terms of weather.
If anything, events like this are a certain warning sign that the climate is changing at a rapid pace, rather than changing over longer periods.
At the same time as this weather event is impacting the Western U.S. and the Pacific Northwest, more or less, there have been record high December temperatures in states such as Texas.
Where I live in the UK, it's possible we will break the temperature record for the warmest New Years.
This is climate change in action - whilst there's a warming trend in the climate, our weather doesn't react in the same way. The complex nature of weather systems - of climate - are incredibly unpredictable.
Weather systems, such as the polar vortex, get thrown totally out of whack. Whilst the artic can heat to levels never seen before, we can see regions of the globe see cold weather never seen before, as artic air plunges down lower than it usually does, at the same time as warmer conditions penetrate artic regions.
This is the difference between climate and weather.
For certain. But people claiming "So much for Global warming!" have this weird habit of spouting toldyaso's about that weather out west, while ignoring the Thunderstorms we had in PA last night, and the seriously warm Winter weather we've had. Today I was on the Allegheny front, which is usually pretty cold by now. Mid 40's when it typically is in single digit mode, and the local lakes there are 100 percent ice free.
And the Jet Stream is way out of whack, with the earth trying to re-balance and shed ene
Re: The science clearly escapes you... (Score:2)
Nobody wants to hear that there's something to worry about. That would make those alive currently RESPONSIBLE for the state of the world! I mean, the generation before us didn't care, nor the generation before them. Why should we have to be the adults?
Shit, we can't even try to stop a plague because it would have required people to not get haircuts or a hamburger when they wanted to. That's a clear and present danger right in front of us and you can see how that's worked out. Just drink some bleach and take
Re: (Score:2)
In Switzerland we just had the warmest new year, 17 degrees Celcius yesterday. The 0-degree height was 3700 meters at midnight, never happend.
Climat change puts more energy in the athmosphere, the extremes get bigger, and the average keeps climbing bit by bit.
Re: (Score:2)
This is bad because its still a sign of climate change - as the atmosphere, oceans, and land masses heat up, more energy moves into the atmosphere, creating more and more violent wind flows. Some of these winds will tend to flow north to south in winter, making winter storms harsher than they used to be. Others will move from south to north, making expected winter snows less harsh than usual, but also removing another source of water from already parched land. Other places will have a combination of the two
Re: (Score:2)
Obvious side effect: Depending on whether the standard deviation or the mean changes faster, we may see more extreme cold events at the same time we see many more and more extreme heat events.
Re:and how is this bad? (Score:5, Informative)
we've been warming the world and now this is a sign of cooling. along with more snow to refill underground water sources, human water reservoirs and provide water for healthy soil
Extreme summer heatwaves are a (weak) sign of a warming climate since it's usually local warm weather systems growing more extreme.
And weirdly enough, this cold snap is ALSO a sign of a warming climate.
That's because these cold snaps aren't from local conditions, they're from the polar vortex. And the polar vortex is usually held up in the poles by the jet stream, but the warming climate weakens the jet stream and allows the polar vortex to expand and reach lower latitudes [ucdavis.edu].
So climate change probably means milder winters in general, but with a higher frequency of major cold snaps.
(any actual climate scientists feel free to correct me)
Re: (Score:3)
mopower said it best:
https://news.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org]
I've been told the inability to track a straight line is a sign of poor alignment in a car. I've also been told that difficulty in turning is also a sign of poor alignment in a car. I've been told that the inability to stop is a sign of bad brake adjustment. I've been told that sudden jerky stops are also a sign of bad brake adjustment. I've been told that an engine failing to heat up can be caused by a bad thermostat. I've been told that a car overheating can also be caused by a bad thermostat. Gosh, it's almost as if opposing extremes in a given system can be caused by the same thing!
Re: (Score:2)
No, local cold weather is not a sign of global cooling. If you look at the current temperatures across the whole northern hemisphere [climatereanalyzer.org] you'll see a patchwork of local cold and warm spots.
While some kind of patchwork of warmer-than-usual and colder-than-usual spots is natural, if you integrate surface air temperatures across the entire globe you'll it's warmer than any year in human history prior to the 1990s. This is the kind of picture that climate models have been predicting since the 1980s -- a mix of a
Re: (Score:2)
Sen. Inhofe, is that you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
we've been warming the world and now this is a sign of cooling. along with more snow to refill underground water sources, human water reservoirs and provide water for healthy soil
You didn't get the email from Woke Central. Hot dry weather in summer is proof of warming, and so is cold wet weather in winter. You knosw this is true because every storm gets that red Existential Problem (tm) banner on Commie News Network.
Re: and how is this bad? (Score:2)
You know, they threw you off Twitter because you couldn't behave yourself, Donald. Don't start your shit here. :'-D
- Mocking those concerned with a real problem? Check.
- Signs of a grossly inflated ego? Check.
- Attempting to sow discord and confusion to the detriment of others? Check.
- Using a nebulous "enemy" to attempt to coerce others? Check!
Go back to your hole, here's a goat. Go away.
Had to turn my 4wd on to drive in the city (Score:2)
Climate Porn (Score:1, Insightful)
They misspelled "typical winter storm in the Pacific Northwest ruined our narrative that rising temperatures and draught are turning the region into a desert".
Re: Climate Porn (Score:2)
Nah, they changed it because we have a bunch of anti-science cretins who couldn't figure out the meaning and instead tried to convince folks everything was fine.
It's not fine.
There's an actual issue.
People like you either lack the logical skills to process what's going on, or your just that sociopathic that you actually think you're smarter than those in the field.
Yep, science is wrong and can't get anything right... posts the moron into THE INTERNET probably from their CELLPHONE. Wonder where those came fr
Re: (Score:2)
That’s why the climate alarmists changed from Global Warming to Climate Change.
Climate change was the term from the 1950s. Global warming is the relative newcomer.
Re: (Score:2)
As someone who lives in the Pacific Northwest, and has done so for a long time now, I can confidently say that the 4' of snow we've had in the last week or so is very much NOT a "typical winter storm", nor were the two previous heavy storms in the weeks before it. In fact, this is the wettest December in 50+ years.
But sure, don't let reality get in the way of your CAGW denial. It's all a Communist lie, etc etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Can we push that back a year or two? I'd like to finish this series of books I'm writing before we sign off for good. For extra irony, I'd love to finish it the day before the earth gets obliterated so that nobody can read them.
Not a particularly unusual La Niña pattern (Score:3)
Snow isn't exactly common here in the maritime Pacific Northwest, but neither is it unheard of. And most of the predicted record cold temperatures didn't materialize - a week out they were saying "3F overnight", but per usual as we got closer to the event the predicted temperatures moderated significantly. We've gotten down to the upper teens where I live - which is something we see every few years.
The power stayed on, as did the internet - so I'm enjoying the weather.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, those are all directly in the path of the Fraser River outflow. Originally (a week out), when they were predicting 3F for more southerly areas (e.g. Tacoma, Olympia, Puyallup), the prediction for places like Bellingham was something around -8F. But as we got closer to the event, those extreme numbers moderated to temperatures more typical of a Fraser outflow event.
Don't get me wrong... 3F with 50mph winds is not pleasant! I love Bellingham, but wouldn't want to live there in the winter.
Re: (Score:2)
It hit minus 16C the other night here, about 3F, looking at the temperature records and my memory, it was record breaking with the records for this time of year being set mostly in the '50's or that cold winter of 1968. And don't forget, we haven't even entered January which is usually the coldest month. I'm in the hills (about 800 ft) north of the Fraser and have really enjoyed most winters this century with only a couple of inches besides the one year where we got 6 feet.
Lived here for over 30 years and k
Than Gaia (Score:2)
Thanks Gaia - the California mountains are about 50' short of snow over the last 5 years so this amount is helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, the regional climate getting bipolar disorder and swinging between "apocalyptic 500-year droughts" and "pouring rain that just runs off or causes mudslides and floods" is possibly even less helpful. A consistent, even if consistently worse, climate can be dealt with.
Totally normal, totally fine? (Score:2)
My area had historic heat wave very early in summer, followed by mass flooding, followed by insane cold very early in winter.
All fine. Buy moar coal.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot to mention the close to record setting drought and the fires.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot to take your meds again.
No, apparently he keeps ordering them online.
Re: (Score:1)
Wassamatta?
Can't find an appropriate forum to post your bullshit? Nobody gives a shit about your internet woes, because this isn't the place for them.
Re: Computers = dead. (Score:1)
What do other intelligent people do? Just because you're crazy doesn't mean you're a genius.
In Alberta (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm hoping for a month of -30 C to kill the mountain pine beetle [edmontonjournal.com].
From 2019:
Temperatures need to dip below about -30 C for four or five consecutive weeks to kill nearly all pine beetle larvae nestled inside tree trunks, said Nadir Erbilgin, a University of Alberta professor of forest entomology who studies the pine beetle.
“I’m not sure we will ever get those good old days of freezing, long-lasting temperatures in Alberta”
Re: (Score:2)
Just no. (Score:5, Interesting)
Climate change science is valid (people need to stop talking about it in the context of a belief system because it's not). Glaciers are melting everywhere as a result of this.
However people look like crackpots (and hence climate science looks bad along with them) when you say this or that record is being broken or this or that storm is really bad. Because all that has been happening anyway for the past century even before carbon was above 3.5.
Back in November there was a crackpot article about how we were going to have no storms this winter and there was going to be a massive drought because of that. Well for whatever reason we are getting two storms every week and the snowpack is looking good.
Pollution everywhere is bad and we need to limit the amount of carbon we dump in the atmosphere. What we don't need are political partisans screaming that the weather is bad when we've had bad weather and records broken since they started keeping track of the weather in the nineteenth century.
I'm much more worried about the health of the oceans due to pollution being dumped into them (like mercury and heavy metals that come from ships' bunker oil) and the overfishing that is going on than I am a bad storm or temperatures that manage to skate a couple of degrees above or below what has been recorded the last century and a half.
The more you sound like 'Chicken Little' the more people will turn off from your environmental message alltogether.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
We solved the problem of global warming regardless, people can stop running about like their hair is on fire. How did we solve it? We have options that are lower cost than fossil fuels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
These are options with much lower CO2 emissions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Options that are much safer. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/... [nextbigfuture.com]
There is no downside to solving global warming. We are likely to solve global warming by accident. One might even say we solved global warming
Yup. (Score:5, Informative)
Victoria, BC here. Been as low as -13C, but hovering around -6C most of the last three days.
After the 'heat dome' in the summer that had us just barely below 40C (a new record), this year has had the widest range of temperatures on record, at 50 degrees between peaks. And it'll also likely be the wettest year on record as well. (Nearly hit that in November.)
Nothing to see here, just move along. Apparently preferably in a large truck.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you can turn on your wind farms and spin them in reverse, blow some of that record cold over to the UK where they are set to have the hottest NYE on record: https://metro.co.uk/2021/12/27... [metro.co.uk]
What are we going to do about it? (Score:1, Offtopic)
I'm seeing many comments on how this severe winter weather is more evidence of global warming. I'll ignore the comments on how record breaking cold weather is potentially evidence against global warming. I will assume global warming is happening, that it is bad for us, and human activity is the cause, with the primary cause being CO2 emissions from transportation, electricity production, and other lesser contributions such as cement production and the refining of metal ores.
If we assume all this then what
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Nuclear power? Hell no.
Organize a campaign on web sites that use 3000X more CPU power than necessary to deliver information (because programming is hard, so let's go shopping and end up with 100 JS libs that track everybody).
Then once the campaign has progressed sufficiently, they'll fly a few million passenger miles and have a huge conference. There, they'll agree to something that won't really solve the problem. Enforcement will be via the honor system.
Then they'll all go back to their respective count
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah it sucks (Score:2)
The suckage is real.
19 degrees (f) overnight, lots of yucky wind and crap. (That's -7.2 degrees Celsius for the rest of the world.)
I hate it, but I'd hate it waaay more if I had to do something insane like drive to work. Fuuuuck that.
As it is my only exposure is when I go out to get more wood for the wood stove.
So much for global warming (Score:1)