Image: AccuWeather.com
The AccuWeather.com Long-Range Forecasting Team is predicting another brutally cold and snowy winter for a large part of the country, thanks in large part to La Niña... yet again.
La Niña, a phenomenon that occurs when sea surface temperatures across the equatorial central and eastern Pacific are below normal, is what made last year's winter so awful for the Midwest and Northeast. Monster blizzards virtually shut down the cities of New York and Chicago. Last winter was one of New York City's snowiest on record.
La Niñas often produce a volatile weather pattern for the Midwest and Northeast during winter due to the influence they have on the jet stream. The graphic below shows the position the jet stream typically takes over the U.S. during La Niña.
This graphic illustrates the common position the jet stream takes over the United States during La Niña.
The way the jet stream is expected to be positioned during this winter's La Niña will tend to drive storms through the Midwest and Great Lakes. Last year, the jet stream steered storms farther east along the Northeast coast, hammering the Interstate 95 corridor.
Therefore, instead of New York City enduring the worst of winter this year, it will likely be Chicago.
"The brunt of the winter season, especially when dealing with cold, will be over the north-central U.S.," stated Paul Pastelok, expert long-range meteorologist and leader of the AccuWeather.com Long-Range Forecasting Team.
Chicago, which endured a monster blizzard last winter, could be one of the hardest-hit cities in terms of both snow and cold in the winter ahead.
AccuWeather.com Long-Range Meteorologist Josh Nagelberg even went so far as to say, "People in Chicago are going to want to move after this winter."
While winter's worst may not be focused over the major cities of the Northeast this year, the region will not get by unscathed. Pastelok warns there could be a few significant snow and ice storms that could pack a punch.
Ice events could also be a problem for areas farther south from the southern Plains to the southern Appalachians this season, while a significant severe weather threat develops in the Lower Mississippi Valley in February. This threat is extremely concerning for the areas in Mississippi and Alabama that were devastated by tornadoes in the spring.
The West is expected to be split between mild and dry conditions in the Southwest and highly-variable, frequently-changing weather elsewhere.
Chances that Texas pulls out of its epic drought this winter are extremely slim with below-normal precipitation predicted for a large portion of the state.
Brutal Winter Ahead for the Midwest, Great Lakes
Hands down, AccuWeather.com's long-range experts agree that the Midwest and Great Lakes region will be dealt the worst of winter this year.
Bitterly cold blasts of arctic air are expected to invade the northern Plains, Midwest and Great Lakes December through January, while snowfall averages above normal. "A couple of heavy hitters are possible [during this time]," Pastelok said in relation to the snow.
In terms of both snow and cold, this winter is expected to be the worst in Chicago.
Full Winter Forecast for the Midwest and Great Lakes
More Monster Snowstorms for the Northeast This Winter?
Overall, this winter is not expected to be as extreme as last winter for the Northeast's major cities. However, there could still be a few snow or ice storms that have a significant impact.
See what we're tweeting about
17 Comments
Add CommentLooks like TexaS STILL dry this winter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you but I much prefer Environment Canada or NOAA on weather.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur wooly worms have actually been more accurate over the past decade. Doesn't say much for the state of the science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI seem to remember this is going to be the worst hurricane season yet,a few years back.Then there were none.Hope the same forecast failure happens again.But it's been a long time since we had a really bad winter in the midwest.I remember a few winters in my youth in Iowa,and I am not looking forward to any thing like those.Haven't seen twenty to thirty foot snow drifts after a four day blizzard in quite a while.I remember they were across the top of railroad cars.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne thing was left out of this report, the center of gravity of the solar system. It is possible to have up to 4% more or 4% less sunshine than usual. While the amount of sunshine usually varies by less than 2% it usually has an effect. When there was over 3% less sunshine in 1976 it snowed in Miami, Florida.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCalculate the increase or decrease in absolute temperature predicted by the decrease in sunshine caused by the position of the center of gravity of the solar system each month and then you will have a more accurate prediction.
I have a question: Last year you had oil spill in Mexican Golf and a cool water on west of Central America.But this year there is no oil spill.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSummary of the chart: Chicago's prediction well above average, but not as bad as last year. Minneapolis, a little above average, but much less severe than last year. Same for Philly and NY. How does this justify the headline "Brutal Winter Predicted for US" ???? Every time someone succeeds in hooking me into an article that is inconsistent with the tag line, I hate them a little more. Brutal winter predicted for scientific american.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy cats have been listless and that means a 3% humidity drop in Paraguay in 2017 and more sunshine in Tecumseh, Kansas, in 2013. It also explains the 2011 municipal elections in Portugal. Small things matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnyone who makes specific long range weather predictions is fooling themselves and opens the climate scientists to additional criticism. They should state their predictions as probabilities which is what their models are providing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhere the hell is Mr. Mann's Hockey Stick?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisColder? More snow? He promised WARMER weather. Eh, Mr. Mann? Where art thou?
I'll be thinking of you, Mr. Mann, while I shovel snow this winter. Not nice thoughts, either.
Predicting the end of an ice age but calling it "La Niña" is one way not to draw fire from scaremongers. An ending-ice-age is hard to explain with "cooler water and cooler air" at the equator. When scientists cannot explain something they give it a name (La Niña}.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHotter water and hotter air at the equator (global warming) causes more moisture to travel north, and causes more snow and ice at the North Pole. This implies that "global cooling" causes less snow at the North Pole but more snow at Chicago.
I think we are having "global cooling" now, which results in retreating glaciers. More snow in winter in Chicago is the result of "global cooling".
Hotter air is a product of ElNoNo. The ice age is not ending but rather the ice is merely dormant before it does something else. Cooler air and water is warmer than cold air and water and at various intervals it appears to be at the equator. A few years prior to that it was somewhere else. The theoretical implications of this are not widely understood.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientists try to explain things by naming them. This is called the fallacy of nomenclature, i.e., if you can name something you can understand it. For example, if I were to refer to something as “an extenuating example of a modified Zorpher syndrome” it would sound like I knew what I was talking about. It might even be good for a journal article somewhere.
Hotter air and water causes moisture to travel up and the snow at the North Pole may have come from Chicago or possibly Gary, Indiana – depending, of course, upon where it came from. Retreating glaciers are only preparing to have another go at it and, technically, are not retreating. One could say that they're advancing to become water again. Subsequent findings may confirm this, or not. This concept is known as the Arnold principle, named after Hefland Arnold who spent 87 years experiencing weather and climate. His writings were terse and to the point but nevertheless illuminating.
The sum of all this is that what seems like snow at the North Pole was once a Glacier that had rained on Chicago and this is ElNoNo
What are your wooly worms saying now??? Give us a heads up already.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI once thought I had Zorpher syndrom because I kept speaking Portugese and I don't even know Portugese! Fortunately it turned out that I was just a jerk and wasn't actually suffering from Zorpher's.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCommenting on an article by commenting about a comment is "making a point but using a lot of words".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut it is also a way to further hide the conclusion that global cooling is happening.
Rising average global temperature can occur if equatorial regions cool slightly while northern regions warm slightly. This is because loss of heat from the Earth occurs as the fourth power of temperature, which can explain how global cooling can occur although average surface temperature seems to be rising. The equator radiates much more heat because it has a higher temperature. An average cooling at the equator is thus a better indication that global cooling is happening.
So, did Mann predict warmer weather each year for every region on Earth? Or did he predict that, while some regions might be colder for some years, temperatures would generally increase when looking at the worldwide average? Is it possible that temperatures might temporarily be colder in the U.S. this year, but the worldwide average still be warmer? Is it even possible that in some years the worlwide average might be cooler than the preceding year, but that generally the trend is increasing temperatures?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo matter what the predictions based on scientific studies, climate trends, warming, cooling, industrial gasses, permafrost or cow farts, all it takes is for one big volcano, large earthquake, meteor strike, giant solar event, etc. and it's all back to square one.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis mystical notion that human beings are in control of something as inherently complex and unpredictable as climate is pure wishful thinking, an ego trip for people who want to feel important and powerful by making predictions and guiding policy. They might as well be witchdoctors and shamans.
This is like the natives making stone statues on Easter Island to keep bad things away. The bad things that came weren't even phased by their stupid superstitions and bogeymen. What was coming on just kept coming on, and all the energy spent on the pointless prevention might have worked if it had been spent on resistance, flight and survival.. I’m sure the slavers that showed up to carry them away thought, “How stupid can you get.”
Every item you recycle, every light bulb you change, every bird-whacking windmill you put up, every solar cell you buy will be wiped away into nothingness when Yellowstone explodes next time, and there will be a next time. There may be reasons to do some of these things in the short run - say, saving money, for example (questionable at best) - but it's not going to be a magic solution to some kind of Armageddon.
If you want to spend useful effort on this problem make plans to survive those things, not to think that you can magically prevent them by going through rituals and making offerings, or by electing people who tell you what their magical solution is.
Got it. Bad weather is coming sooner or later. Learn how and prepare to survive it. You cannot make it go away by incantations, sacrifices and prayers.. Time to grow up.