Saturday, March 30, 2024

Significant Early April Winter Storm Potential

 Forecast model guidance remains in strong agreement in an anomalous evolution and structure of the 500mb pattern moving through the week of April characterized by strong ridging building into the Pacific-Northwest region during the early part of the week and shifting into the Inter-mountain West region along with significant trough amplification within the Northeast as the ridging within the Inter-mountain West continues building northeast into the Arctic domain, it will connect with the ridging within the Arctic domain, characterizing a highly negative Arctic Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation. This enhances the amplification of the trough across the Northeast:

12z March 30, 2024 run of the GEFS valid for 12z Tuesday:


12z March 30, 2024 run of the GEFS valid for 0z Thursday:


Highly anomalous weather patterns tend to produce anomalous weather and should this evolution verify, which is becoming increasingly likely, there will surely be some anomalous weather within New England. That anomalous weather would be in the form of accumulating snow and potential for significant accumulations. The period of interest is Wednesday, April 3 - Thursday, April 4, 2024.

Accumulating snow within New England during April can and does happen, however, climatologically speaking it is typically the higher terrain (generally above 1,000 feet in elevation), especially the farther north into New England one goes. In the case of this setup, these areas would stand the greatest potential for significant snowfall accumulations and winter storm impacts. However, given the anomalous nature of this setup, plus plenty of available low-level cold air, The 12z March 30, 2024 run of the GFS shows temperatures across New England at 925mb (~2,500 feet above ground level) just below freezing Wednesday morning:


Now it is important to understand where we are in the calendar. We are moving into the first week of April, average temperatures are much warmer than they are in the previous few months. In fact, during early April the average high temperature across many of the climatological stations is pushing into the 50's. So clearly, there has to be one heck of a cold anomaly in the lowest levels and a strong source of low-level cold advection to obtain temperatures cold enough to support snow for elevations below 1,000 feet and towards the coastal Plain. 

There is another factor to consider with this system as well. The premise of this post focused on the 500mb pattern, however, we did not divulge into the surface. Associated with this anomalous 500mb pattern will be a low pressure system at the surface which slowly progresses eastwards across the mid-western states during the first few days of the week. There is potential for secondary low pressure develop and rapid strengthening. If this occurs, and where it occurs, will have great implications on the sensible within the region. Development and strengthening around or south of Long Island would result in colder low-level airmass to the coast and dynamic cooling could result in even colder temperatures down to the surface. This scenario would increase the potential for snow, even down to the coast and increase the potential for accumulating snow for elevations below 1,000 feet. 

This is going to be a wild few days of storm tracking and this one has potential to yield some major surprises. As of now, the highest potential for a significant winter storm will be for elevations above 1,000 feet and within northern New England:



Wednesday, February 14, 2024

Tuesday, February 13, 2024 Storm Recap - Uncertainty, Mayhem, and Communication

 Well - where do I begin and how do I begin? If you were following the forecasts for this storm you may have noticed a theme; an increase in snowfall forecasts moving through the weekend with some significant increases in some spots Sunday and even Monday morning. Then Monday afternoon came...the 12z European forecast model made a significant jump south, then subsequently various other forecast models followed this theme. At one point, it was becoming a concern that even northern Connecticut may see nothing. This was a stunning turn of events. We've seen forecast models make big jumps 36-48 hours out, even 24 hours out, but 12 hours out, almost unheard of in this day in age of advanced modeling. During the day Monday, forecasts drastically started to change with significantly lowering snowfall totals across northern areas and increasing totals towards the south coast. Then Monday evening and overnight came...and well the rest is history. 

So, what happened? Why did we see forecast model guidance make a near 180 Monday afternoon, make a significant shift south, only for the storm to end up a bit farther north? Is this a case of a horrific performance by our forecast models or was something just overlooked? The easy answer here is a mixture of both. But the answer to this is much more complicated and complex than just a one word answer. Below, we will revisit the storm from the perspective of our forecast models and then apply good ole meteorology. There is a phrase which sometimes gets tossed around in the field of meteorology, "Meteorology not modelology". What does this mean? In a nutshell, forecast is much more than just taking the output of a model(s) and saying, "this is my forecast". Forecasting is an art - its is a skill and the skill level is highest when a forecaster takes ample time to digest all the information and apply their knowledge of meteorology to create a forecast. A forecaster who is skilled in this department can develop a great understanding of what forecast models may have a better handle, where some forecast models may struggle more than others, and can sniff out trends before they even happen.

Below, we will look at the NAM, GFS, and European forecast models. Yes, there are many other models out there but I don't want to make this post any longer than it will turn out to be and the context of what is being discussed can be applied to other models. For a large part, this is more for visual referencing and I am using College of DuPage as my data source, therefore, I am able to be consistent with the outputs. Once inside 24 hours the HRRR will be incorporated as well.

Forecast Models - Initialized 12z Sunday, February 11, 2024

 Here is the forecast 500mb vorticity field from Sunday morning, valid for Monday evening. We want to focus on the northern stream/southern stream energies (shown in the reference just below).


Notice there are some large differences between each model in the strength, structure, and placement of the southern stream energy with some structural differences within the northern stream energy. We can also note some differences within the Pacific-Northwest and northern Inter-mountain West region which likely had some influence on the downstream energies. 


What is the importance with these northern stream and southern stream energies and why are these differences noteworthy? In the event of a stronger southern stream energy, this would increase the likelihood for the storm to track north, passing just south of southern New England, favoring heavy precipitation across much of the region. However, with the northern stream and associated confluence, there would be an extent as to how far north this storm could get. In the event of a weaker southern stream energy, the storm would be more likely to track well south of the region, with much lighter, if any precipitation. The northern stream was a bit more complex. In the event the two energies phased (which was becoming unlikely) or the northern stream had at least some interaction, this would help drive a more north track, increasing the potential for heavier precipitation across the region. 

So, how did these differences at the 500mb level translate to the surface? While there are differences between all three models, notice how the European model is south and east with the western edge of the precipitation shield. This becomes important as we get closer to the event:


Let's fast forward to Tuesday morning and see what the 12z runs of the NAM, GFS, and Euro were forecasting in terms of QPF for early Tuesday morning. While there are certainly some differences, the one striking aspect of this is heavy precipitation across all of southern New England. This signal (amongst other factors) was increasing confidence for a significant region-wide storm:


This intense precipitation had substantial merit based on the following:

1. Surface low pressure passing south and east of the region (shown just above).

2. Mid-level/low -level pressure developing just south of the region and tracking northeast (shown just below).

3. Entrance region of the upper-level jet stream favoring upper-level divergence (not shown yet).

Each of these forecast models was developing a low pressure at the 700mb level around or just south of Long Island and tracking it east-northeast. This is nearly textbook for a band of extremely heavy precipitation to move right across the region:


Forecast Models - Initialized 12z Monday, February 12, 2024

Fast-forwarding to Monday's 12z runs the NAM and GFS were continuing to advertise heavy precipitation across much of southern New England in similar fashion to Sunday's guidance. The Euro, however, made a stride south. When this occurred, this started to raise some eyebrows:


 Forecast Models - Initialized 18z Monday, February 12, 2024

Forecast model guidance Monday afternoon continued with the theme of shunting the heaviest precipitation south, with some guidance barely getting heavier precipitation to the Connecticut-Massachusetts border. The Euro was leading the way with the south trend:


Forecast Models - Initialized 0z Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (Monday evening)

As Monday evening forecast model guidance was rolling in, a mere several hours before the onset of precipitation, forecast models continued with the more south track and a south shunt of heaviest precipitation. It was now becoming apparent along and north/west of I-84 very little snow was going to occur with the highest totals across southern Connecticut and into Rhode Island and perhaps Southeast Massachusetts:


The 0z NAM, GFS, and European forecast models had cut back significantly on the amount of precipitation which was expected to fall across southern New England. Based on these forecast totals, it was difficult to believe northern Connecticut (along and north/west of I-84) would see more than 3-4 inches with totals upwards of 6-10 inches across southern Connecticut into portions of Rhode Island and southeast Massachusetts. This was turning into one of the largest model busts inside of 24 hours in recent memory:


The Result

So, what was the result? How did the storm fare. Below, is a compilation of snowfall totals received by the National Weather service:


 What...in...the...heck...? What happened across central Connecticut? Forecast model guidance, just hours beforehand, had cut back on forecast precipitation so much, it was starting to become clear northern Connecticut may not even see a few inches with barely 3-4 inches for the Hartford area, yet over a FOOT occurred in a narrow swath from northeast Connecticut southwest through Hartford into Danbury with 7 inches as far north as Windsor Locks. What an absolute wild, bizarre turn of events. Within 24 hours we go from what looked to be a crushing from the Massachusetts Turnpike into central Connecticut to nothing from along the Massachusetts turnpike into northern Connecticut and barely more than a few inches into north-central Connecticut to a narrow strip of a foot-plus from northeast Connecticut through Hartford southwest into Danbury. How does this happen?

Theory

Did our computer forecast models let us down? Did they just perform one of the greatest busts in recent memory, and perhaps one of the greatest busts inside of 12 hours ever? Was something overlooked by forecasters? As stated in the opening, there is a combination of these two factors. There is no denying forecast models struggled, however, there were hints and signals this scenario was still likely to occur. So why were these missed? Below, I will present some of my theories and ideas. I want to state that this is just my opinion as a professional meteorologist and just because this is my opinion does not mean it is correct. Others may disagree and have a different viewpoint. That is totally fine, differing viewpoints is what drives this filed and is it what drives a forecaster to want to better themselves. 

1) The use of model snowfall maps. 

Don't get me started on these. One of these days I am going to dedicate a blog post to these so I won't provide much specifics about this right now. Since modeled snowfall maps (which aren't produced by forecast models, they're produced by vendors) have been introduced, I believe they have led to lazy winter weather forecasting. If you follow weather on social media, these maps are so widely used and tossed around, especially when they're spitting out large numbers. 

For this storm, there was a lot of analysis going on by using trends in the snowfall output to justify changes within the storm. My simple answer here is - that is a terrible idea. If a forecast model (or models) are showing a decrease (or increase) in precipitation, a forecaster should be asking themselves, why that is and whether that makes sense. 

2) Solely focusing on QPF maps.

QPF maps are an incredible forecasting tool. While forecast models can struggle greatly with QPF, assessing QPF output and combining this with an assessment of the situation is a major part of forecasting snowfall accumulations or rainfall accumulations. Like the snowfall maps, however, QPF trends were being analyzed to visualize the trends but again, there needs to be a, "does this make sense" thought process behind this. 

3) The importance of Fundamentals 

Forecasting is an art. Being a good or great forecaster requires knowledge of forecast models, knowledge of historical weather and patterns, and an understanding of how the atmosphere works. A great forecaster isn't afraid to be wrong, learns from their mistakes, and a great forecaster understands there is much more to a forecast than being right or wrong. A forecast that is correct, but for the wrong reasons is not correct. Forecasting is much more than looking at the output of a forecast model and then rolling out some thoughts. Creating a great, accurate requires a great deal of time. 

I saved this point for last because I wanted to elaborate into greater detail on this aspect. Ultimately, applying fundamentals to the forecasting process, even when forecast model guidance was decreasing the precipitation totals may have prevented the panic of reducing snowfall totals across much of the region (outside of along and north of the Massachusetts turnpike). Above, we looked at how the NAM, GFS, and European forecast models were cutting down precipitation totals and shifting the highest totals southwards. But what we didn't look at was whether this made sense. 

Anyone who understands southern New England snowfall climatology understands that our heaviest snows and biggest storms tend to occur when low pressure at the surface takes a northeast trajectory and passes through the latitude/longitude of 40°N/70°W. Additionally, when low pressure centers develop just southwest of Long Island and strengthen as they move northeast this favors the heaviest banding of snow to impact the region. What was just described here within this paragraph is exactly what forecast models were indicating multiple days out. This is why, especially as we got closer, the storm was being hit harder and forecasts for snow were increasing. There was increasing confidence and consistency in this exact scenario occurring. 

So, what happened in these last 24 hours. Did something drastically happen with the surface low pressure track and development/track of the low pressure centers at 850mb and 700mb? Let's take a look.

0z NAM - Initialized Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (Monday Evening) 

850mb Vertical Velocity and Height - 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

Vertical velocity is a measure of how quickly air is rising or sinking. The more positive the value, the more rapidly air is rising, the more negative the value, the more air is rapidly sinking. This chart also displays the height level (in meters) the 850mb level can be found. I've outlined where the NAM had developed the 850mb low and where it was tracking. If you look at the vertical velocity values, you'll notice extreme upward vertical motion (rising air) right within the center of the low pressure. Scrolling back up to the precipitation field, you'll see this matches very closely with where the 0z NAM had the heaviest precipitation. Going back to fundamentals, we would expect or anticipate the strongest upward vertical motion to be northwest of the low. I've outlined where this would be expected in purple:


700mb Vertical Velocity and Height - 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

At the 700mb level, the NAM was not forecasting a closed off low pressure at 15z, however, by 18z a low was closing off just south of Cape Cod. We continue to see the highest vertical velocities very close to the low center. I've once again outlined where you would expect the strongest vertical motion to be in purple:


0z GFS - Initialized Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (Monday Evening) 

850mb Vertical Velocity and Height - 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

The 0z GFS was similar to the NAM at the 850mb level with 850 low development south of Long Island and tracking northeast. Like the NAM it was pegging the greatest vertical velocities towards the center of the low. Based on 850 low development and track you would expect the greatest lift to be north and to the west:


700mb Vertical Velocity and Height - 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

At the 700mb level some noticeable differences versus the NAM and if you recall, even during the 0z run the GFS was more north with the heaviest precipitation and that matches up better with what you'd expect based on the low tracks:

0z Euro - Initialized Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (Monday Evening) 

850mb Winds and Height- 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

Unfortunately, there is no vertical velocity plot for the European forecast model on College of DuPage, however, we can still view 850mb and 700mb low via height field overlaid with wind field. While the Euro is farther south with the 850mb low, based on the track you would still expect heavy precipitation at least back to the I-84 corridor:


700mb Winds and Height - 15z Tuesday (Left) 18z Tuesday (right)

Similar to the 0z NAM, the European model was not developing a closed low pressure at 700mb by late Tuesday morning, however, it was by early Tuesday afternoon. Based on the development and track, you would expect the strong upward vertical motion north and west of the low and right across southern New England. 

Assessment 

While forecast model guidance continue to shift the axis of heaviest precipitation south and subsequently lower precipitation totals, based on how forecast models were continuing to evolve the low-levels and mid-levels of the storm, this did not make sense. Forecast models were placing the greatest vertical velocity values close to the low pressure centers, which was a vast change from earlier runs where forecast models had the strongest vertical velocity values moving across southern New England and northwest of the low pressure tracks. 

There was another signal in place for enhanced upward vertical motion across southern New England. Forecast models had southern New England in the right entrance region of the upper-level jet, a favorable quadrant for rising motion:


Verification

As Tuesday morning arrived, many were likely surprised as majority of Connecticut was experiencing not only heavy snow, but portions of central Connecticut were into some prolific snow with rates exceeding 2 inches per hour! What the heck happened? SPC mesoanalysis showed intense 850-700mb frontogenesis traversing across Connecticut, which is exactly what you'd expect based on the forecast low tracks:


So the question now remains, why was forecast model guidance continuing to shift south with the axis of heaviest precipitation and why did they back off the the heaviest precipitation north and west of these low pressure tracks? Unfortunately, that is not something I have much of an idea on, however, forecast models can underdo precipitation north and west of the low tracks. As we saw with the 0z guidance, forecast models were pinging the greatest upward motion very close to the low centers. Typically with these bands of heavier precipitation induced by developing and strengthening low pressure centers, as the low pressure centers develop and mature, a band of heavy precipitation will develop well north and west of the low pressure centers, sometimes as far as 50-75 miles north and west. In situations where these lows become stronger, the banding will then collapse closer to the low pressure center. In this situation, the forecast models were bypassing the initial step here and just developing everything in close proximity. 

Ultimately, all forecasters should have held firm with original forecasts and not go into panic mode just because forecast models were cutting back on QPF and because model snowfall maps were indicating less snowfall. While this certainly should have been a flag, or a cause for concern, a more thorough and detailed analysis should have been conducted to determine why that was occurring and whether it made sense. It is also very likely the evolution of the northern stream energy, southern stream energy, and their interaction ended up being different than forecast models anticipated 12 hours out. These may have all ended up evolving in a way favoring a bigger hit. 

Below, was my forecast for this storm (top) versus what occurred. One could say all I had to do was just shift this down some miles and tighten the gradient. If I had more time/energy I would have made an updated map but l would have not made those changes. I would have went significantly less for Connecticut and maybe do 4-7 inches southern and 2-4'' northern so it would have been much worse if I did something so this map makes the forecast better than it would have been. I would have been JUST AS GUILTY for lowering totals and just taking the reduced precipitation totals and running away. I did also scream bust Monday evening. 


For anyone involved in weather forecasting, there is no doubt this event was a tremendous learning experience. We can't forget the basic fundamentals of forecasting and sometimes we need to rely on our knowledge and understanding of the atmosphere over computer forecast models. While computer forecast models are excellent and allow us to do our jobs, they are not perfect and we must remember, there is a recent they are called model guidance. 

This was also a great test in communicating weather and communicating uncertainty, especially as we get within hours of a weather event occurring. We live in a day and age where everyone expects perfection and everyone wants pinpoint details days out. Unfortunately, we must remember it doesn't always work out that way. 


Sunday, February 11, 2024

Tuesday, February 13, 2024 Winter Storm

 A significant winter storm is expected to impact southern New England overnight Monday through Tuesday afternoon. Southern areas, especially towards the coast will see rain to start, however, any rain is expected to transition to snow. Portions of the region will see a heavy, wet snow with strong winds along the coastal Plain. This will introduce the likelihood for scattered power outages. 

Synopsis

A potent piece of shortwave energy within the southern stream becomes an open wave as it rapidly ejects northeast from the southern Plains through the Tennessee Valley and towards the northeast. Meanwhile, shortwave energy within the northern stream undergoes slight amplification as it digs southeast across Canada. Several days ago, there were signs these two energies would phase. This would have resulted in an even more powerful storm, but could have raised concerns about track and how far north the rain/snow line would reside. The more likely scenario now is the northern stream acts as a bit of a kicker, this should help the system track a bit farther south and east, increasing the likelihood that most everyone sees accumulating snow:


Surface low pressure associated with the southern stream vorticity initially is located well inland, closely matched with the placement/track of the vorticity as the system is initially closed. However, as the wave opens up, the surface pressure will weaken with a secondary area of low pressure developing around Delaware/Maryland then tracking east-northeast, passing south of Long Island. The low-level and 700mb low pressure development track will be a bit northwest of the surface low. This will favor heavy precipitation traversing much of southern New England:


The 12z GFS suggests intense lift traversing across southern New England evident by strong frontogenesis moving across the region. This is very consistent with several other forecast models as well:


Discussion

The most noteworthy aspect of this storm will be the forward speed. This will be a factor in preventing greater accumulations from occurring. The worst of the storm will likely be confined to a 3-4 hour window where snowfall rates will range 1.5'' - 2.5'' per hour. Another factor influencing accumulations will be snowfall ratios. The greatest ratios will be across the far interior where a colder thermal profile will support greater snow growth and fluffier snow. Snowfall ratios across the far interior should range anywhere between 10:1 and as high as 13:1. Moving south across the region (through central and southern Connecticut into southeastern Massachusetts) snowfall ratios may struggle to near 10:1 and could be less. 

With a deepening surface low pressure, winds will increase towards the coastal Plains where winds could gusts 30-40 mph. This may induce blizzard conditions at times and lead to very low visibility. Inland winds may gust 20-30 mph yielding low visibility and some blowing/drifting snow where the snow is drier in nature. 

Power outages could become a concern towards southern areas where wind gusts will be stronger and snow will be more on the wet and heavier side. 

With this, let's get into the forecast:

  • Precipitation begins across southwestern Connecticut during the mid-to-late overnight Monday with precipitation overspreading areas to the north and east during the early morning. Many areas (especially along and south/east of I-84) may even briefly begins as rain or a wintry mix, however, precipitation should quickly change to snow. 
  • Snow intensity picks up extremely quickly, with the heaviest of the snow falling between about 9:00 AM through about 3:00 PM before rapidly tapering off. Snow tapers off quickly from the southwest to the northeast with the more intense snows occurring later and ending later farther northeast in the region. 
  • Snowfall rates during the height of the storm range between 1.5'' per hour and 2.5'' per hour. 
  • Winds along the coast gust 30-40 mph. Scattered outages are possible due to strong wind gusts combined with heavy, wet snow. 
  • Winds farther inland gusts 20-30 mph. Power outages will be more on the isolated side and occur where snow is on the wetter side. 
  • Major travel impacts are likely Tuesday. Travel is not recommended unless it is high priority.
Below is what I am thinking:


 

Saturday, January 13, 2024

Sunday, January 14, 2024 Snow Squalls

 A potent Arctic cold progresses across New England Sunday. While the brunt of the Arctic air remains confined to the central United States, upper-Midwest, Ohio Valley, and Tennessee Valley regions, it will still be very cold and wintry across southern New England behind the front. 

The leading edge of the Arctic air will be defined by elongated and potent vorticity. A vorticity maximum will round the base of an amplifying trough across our region and strengthen, resulting in a great deal of positive vorticity advection across New England Sunday:

This system will be associated with vigorous dynamics characterized by a 500mb mid-level jet streak which may approach or exceed 150 knots. This is about as strong of a mid-level jet you'll ever see and will help promote vigorous lift across the region:


Associated with the feature will be steep mid-level lapse rates ranging between 6.5 C/KM to as high as 7.7-7.8 C/KM. These lapse rates will help aid in weak instability within the region. This weak instability will aid in lift:

In addition, there will be a very steep lapse rate from the surface to about 15,000 feet above the ground. This bufkit sounding for Windsor Locks, CT illustrates this well. This look is suggestive of instability:


The response from the strengthening shortwave and positive vorticity advection will be a strengthening southerly flow in the low-levels of the atmosphere which will help transport sufficient moisture into the region to interact with the front. The steep low-level lapse rates will also help to promote the mixing down of stronger winds aloft:


What are we looking at? 

As moisture increases along and ahead of the Arctic front, scattered snow squalls are likely to develop ahead of the cold front with potential for a line of moderate-to-heavy snow to develop along the Arctic front. This can be thought of like summer downpours and thunderstorms where you get a 15-30 minute period of heavy precipitation, but in this case instead of rain you have snow occurring. 

These snow squalls could produce 2-3 inches of snow in a very short amount of time on a local level. Strong wind gusts would occur as well and this would contribute to extremely dangerous travel conditions for a brief period of time as visibility drops to almost zero and roads become icy very quickly. There is even potential for thunder and lightning given the steep lapse rates and instability. If you are caught in a snow squall the best thing you can do is pull over or off the road (in a safe spot) and let the squalls pass. Snow under squalls becomes intense very quickly and conditions can deteriorate in the blink of an eye.

The time frame for these snow squalls is between 1:00 - 5:00 PM. 




Friday, January 5, 2024

Sunday, January 7, 2024 southern New England Winter Storm

 Our first widespread, accumulating snowfall event of the season is upon us! Snow lovers were starved after pretty much a shutout (some places did get some snow) during the month of December. If you happened to read my winter outlook, I mentioned January and February were going to be active and we are off to those races! Anyways, let's get right into all the fun science and meteorological applications and thought process behind the forecast.

Synopsis

A frontal system moving across the Gulf Coast states Friday lifts northeast across the mid-Atlantic region during the day Saturday. An area of surface low pressure develops within the mid-Atlantic and strengthens as it lifts northeast off the mid-Atlantic coast and passing south and east of Long Island:


Discussion

As the low moves over the open waters, this is where the fun begins! Thanks to the temperature gradient which exists between the water and land this time of year, combined with the jet stream dynamics, the surface low will begin to strengthen. As the surface low strengthens and the circulation elongates we'll see a low pressure center develop about 5,000 feet above the ground. Thanks to a strong latitude horizontal gradient, this will help to strengthen this low pressure circulation as the system is passing northeast south of Long Island.:


This track of the 850mb low, combined with the fact that it will be strengthening places a good portion of southern New England in a very favorable spot for an intense band of snow to traverse. This is indicated very well assessing 850mb frontogenesis on both the GFS (left) and NAM (right) forecast models:

Several forecast soundings across the region all show good cross hair signature (when maximum lift bisects the snow growth zone). When/where this is occurring, snowfall rates will be heaviest, snow growth will be best, and snow ratios will be highest. We'll look at a few examples below:


This system will also have a copious amount of moisture to work with. Forecast model guidance develops 50+ knots of easterly inflow at 850mb, throwing a great deal of moisture into a cold low-level airmass. The result will be plenty of snowflakes developing:


While we're well within the 48-hour window of start time, there remain a quite a bit of uncertainties within our forecast model guidance. This has become an increasingly annoying theme the past few years. There are differences with the overall track and speed of development. Some forecast models are on the more amped side, resulting in a farther north and west track and development. This introduces warmer air into southern areas and would also result in the greatest frontogenesis and subsequent banding shifting farther north. This would also increase potential for subsidence in southern areas. 

Forecast 

  • The highest totals should be confined to interior east-central Massachusetts into southern New Hampshire, and southwestern Maine. This is where snowfall ratios should be the greatest throughout the duration of the storm and where the intense banding is likely to persist the longest. In fact, there may be a swath of snowfall of 12-16 inches within this zone!
  • Towards southern Connecticut. snow ratios will be held back due to some warmer air in the lower levels, just above the surface. Snowfall ratios improve briefly as the intense banding lifts north. 
  • Easterly surface winds off the warmer water will hold back accumulations greatly across extreme coastal Connecticut, southern Rhode Island, and far eastern Massachusetts. 
  • Snow will also be on the wet side across southern Connecticut into interior southeast Massachusetts. This could result in isolated downed tree limbs and power outages. 
  • Snow begins Saturday evening (between 7:00 PM-10:00 PM from southwest to northeast), with intensity quickly picking up through the evening. 
  • The worst of the storm is between 11:00 PM - 5:00 AM, however, for northeastern areas this will be extended through much of Sunday morning. 
  • Light snow lingers through much of Sunday with moderate to at times, heavy snow across interior northeast Massachusetts. 
Below is my snowfall forecast:






Sunday, October 29, 2023

2023-2024 Winter Outlook

 Disclaimer

        While I am a meteorologist, seasonal forecasting is not my expertise. However, it is a interest I have had for many years. After nearly a decade of putting seasonal forecasting on the back burner, I have decided to get back into it. Seasonal forecasting is a different breed than your typical day-to-day forecasting as seasonal forecasting relies on trying to understand how the global atmospheric (and oceanic) circulations will evolve several weeks-to-months down the road. Studying historical weather patterns and comparing them to current conditions and projected evolution can provide significant clues several weeks out. As always, there are caveats as meteorology is not an exact science. There will be degrees of error and sometimes forecasts will be flat out wrong. One trait of a great forecaster is trying to understand what went wrong within the forecast and using this as a learning process. When it comes to forecasting, one of the most important aspects of a forecast is understanding the science behind it. If a forecast was correct, but the methodology behind the forecast was wrong, the forecast was not correct. Understanding what went wrong within a forecast is one of the best methods for a forecaster to grow and increase their skill.

    This outlook will contain numerous composites. Two main datasets were used:

  1. 20th Century Reanalysis Version 3 (20CRV3) 
  2. NCEP/NCAR R1
20CRV3 contains data beginning January 1836 through December 2015 and NCEP/NCAR R1 contains data beginning January 1948 through present. Given years prior to 1948 are being assessed, it was imperative to use the 20CRV3 dataset to capture this data. You'll also notice (especially within the GIF animations) differing climatological periods. When dealing with anomalies (departure from average) I felt it imperative to compare a year (or period) to it's own climatological period of record (which is typically 30-years) rather than the most current climatological period of record which is 1991-2020. It doesn't make sense to compare a period in the 1920's to averaged conditions between 1991-2020. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the climatological periods with the year range for that climatological period (the years that would use that climatological period):

Table 1

    Since data for the NCEP/NCAR R1 dataset does not begin until January 1948, I used the 20CRV3 dataset between 1900-1980 and NCEP/NCAR dataset for 1981-Present. This is because the earliest climatological period for the NCEP/NCAR dataset would be 1951-1980 given the dataset does not begin until 1948.

ENSO (EL Nino-Southern Oscillation)

Background

    The state of ENSO can play a significant role in the oceanic and atmospheric circulation patterns worldwide. When EL Nino or La Nina conditions are presented, established, and the ocean is strongly coupled with the atmosphere, these conditions can be significant drivers of the atmospheric circulation patterns. What are EL Nino and La Nina and what state are we in? The most common and widely used method of defining EL Nino or La Nina conditions is via the Oceanic Nino Index (ONI) created by the Climate Prediction Center (CPC) which focuses on sea-surface temperature anomalies (departure from average) within the equatorial Pacific. The equatorial Pacific is broken down into 4 different ENSO regions (Figure 1).

    Per the CPC's definition, an ENSO event is defined as EL Nino or La Nina when sea-surface temperature anomalies (SSTAs) between latitudes 120°W and 170°W and longitudes 5°S and 5°N (designated as ENSO Region 3.4) are at or above +0.5°C for a minimum of 5-consecutive trimonthly periods (EL Nino) or at or below -0.5°C for a minimum of 5-consecutive trimonthly periods (La Nina).

Figure 1: Courtesy of https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/monitoring-content/teleconnections/nino-regions.gif

    While the CPC's method is most widely used and accepted, it is important to understand that many other definitions are published and accepted. Earlier in 2022, Eric Webb introduced the Ensemble Oceanic Nino Index (ENS-ONI). For more information on Eric Webb please visit the following:

https://www.webberweather.com/bio.html

For more information on the ENS-ONI please visit the following:

https://www.webberweather.com/ensemble-oceanic-nino-index.html

A link to his paper further explaining the ENS-ONI can be found here:

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.7535

    When creating a list of EL Nino and La Nina winters, I used both the ONI and ENS-ONI. The ONI only dates to 1950 while the ENS-ONI dates to 1850, however, my focus is from 1900-Present. While accuracy and validity of many meteorological variables decreases as one advances backward in time, it is still important to build upon a larger data set. 
 
    It should also be understood that the ONI and ENS-ONI are focusing solely on oceanic conditions (temperatures and temperature anomalies) within the equatorial Pacific. Due to the coverage of the Pacific Ocean, anomalous water temperatures within the basin can heavily influence atmospheric circulations, however, this is not always the case. There are two components to ENSO: oceanic component (sea-surface temperatures) and atmospheric component (air pressure, wind speed, wind direction). If the ocean-atmosphere are coupled this will strengthen the impact of the ENSO event and the ENSO event will play a significant role in atmospheric circulation patterns. If the two are not coupled, the role the ENSO event will have on the atmospheric circulation patterns will be lessened. 

    The Southern Oscillation Index (SOI), which is a measure of air pressure differences between Tahiti and Darwin, Australia and the Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI), which incorporates sea-level pressure, the zonal (west-east) and meridional (north-south) component of the surface wind, sea-surface temperatures, and outgoing longwave radiation (measure of clouds/precipitation) are two indices which can provide context into how coupled the ocean-atmosphere are. 

    In addition to defining ENSO state, the strength of an ENSO event, evolution of the ENSO event, and structure of the ENSO event (placement of greatest SSTAs) can play a critical role in the event's impact on atmospheric circulations. Strength and location of tropical forcing (rain/thunderstorms) can also be critical. 

Current ENSO State

    After three-consecutive years of La Nina conditions present within the equatorial Pacific, La Nina quickly faded during the winter of 2022-2023. Since the demise of La Nina, we've seen a rapid reversal of sea-surface temperatures within the equatorial Pacific with a transition from cooler-than-average waters to warmer-than-average waters (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Courtesy of https://vortex.plymouth.edu/myowxp/sfc/sst-a.html

    SSTAs within the four ENSO regions are also solidly above-average (Figure 3). After rapid warming through the summer months in all regions there has been some leveling off towards the end of the summer and early this fall. Note: ENSO Region 1.2 is the most volatile region and is prone to the greatest and quickest temperature changes. 

Figure 3: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/ssta_c.gif

    Earlier this summer, the CPC announced the emergence of EL Nino. Based on the current SSTA configuration across the equatorial Pacific and the longevity of these anomalies, we will be looking at an EL Nino state for the winter of 2023-2024. Now that we've established the ENSO state, it is important to understand previous EL Nino events and how each played a role in atmospheric circulation patterns.

Evaluating Historical EL Nino Events

     Table 2 shows a list of all EL Nino winters (40 in total) combining the ONI and ENS-ONI. For this outlook, winter is defined as December-January-February-March (DJFM).

Table 2

    Figures 4a (left) and 4b (right) below portray 500mb height anomalies for all EL Nino winters combined. Two sets of composites were created as the reanalysis page allows up to a maximum of 20 individual years to be input and we have a total of 40. Two different data sets were also used: 20th Century Reanalysis Version 3 (20CRV3) and NCEP/NCAR R1. Data within 20CRV3 starts 1836 and ends in 2015. Data within NCEP/NCAR starts 1948 through the present. Given we're dealing with years dating prior to 1948, the 20CRV3 dataset was used to plot the first set of 20 EL Nino events (1902-1903 to 1963-1964) and the NCEP/NCAR dataset was used to plot the next set of 20 EL Nino events (1965-1966 to 2018-2019). A climatological period of 1900-1950 was used for the first set with a climatological period of 1960-2010 was used for the second set.

Figure 4a (left) Figure 4b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    We can draw three conclusions on what seems to be typical during an EL Nino winter with respect to the 500mb pattern across the northern hemisphere:
  1. Below-average heights (trough) around the Aleutians extending into the Gulf of Alaska. This indicates a deeper than usual Aleutian Low Pressure. 
  2. Above-average heights (ridging) within the Arctic domain extending into Canada and northern-tier of the United States. 
  3. Below-average heights (trough) across the southern half of the United States. 
    Note: You may notice the below-average heights across the southern half of the United States seem to be more pronounced in the first set of EL Nino winters. This may be due to the dataset being used (20CRV3 vs. NCEP/NCAR) and it may also be indicative of EL Nino events acting a bit more differently. There is some research indicative of this, however, that goes beyond the scope and purpose of this outlook. 

    If we look at each EL Nino event separately (Figure 5), we can see that a degree of spread exists between each event where these prominent features may vary in strength, structure, or even a complete reversal of these anomalies.

Figure 5: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    In terms of temperatures, this pattern typically correlates to above-average temperatures across Canada and the northern-tier of the United States with below-average temperatures across the southern United States (Figure 6a and 6b). The 40 years were split into two composites like what was done with the 500mb height anomalies. 

    Note: You may also notice below-average temperatures seem to be more pronounced in the first set of 20 EL Nino winters. This also may be a product of the different datasets being used, EL Nino's behaving differently more recently, and also the legends are not equal.

Figure 6a (left) 6b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Looking at each EL Nino event separately (Figure 7), you can see a degree of spread can exist well from one EL Nino event to the next.

Figure 7: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
    In terms of precipitation, EL Nino winters typically feature drier-than-average conditions across the Pacific-Northwest, northern Inter-mountain West, and within the Ohio and Tennessee Valley regions. Wetter-than-normal conditions are seen within California and along the southern United States (Figure 8a and 8b). The 40 EL Nino winters were split into two composite sets as well with a climatological period of 1895-2000 used. 
 
Figure 8a (left) 8b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

       Note: The second set of 20 years seems to feature wetter-than-average conditions across California, Southwest, and Great Plains. While this is also partly due to the unequal legends, this could also be due to behaving more differently recently.

    Looking at precipitation anomalies for each individual EL Nino event (Figure 9), it's pretty clear significant variation can occur on an event-to-event basis.

Figure 9: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Mentioned in the background, the strength of an ENSO event (and in this case, EL Nino) can also be very important. A weaker event, especially when the ocean and atmosphere aren't coupled, may have little impact and influence on atmospheric circulation patterns whereas a stronger event, especially when the ocean and atmosphere are coupled, may have a significant influence on atmospheric circulation patterns. 
   
    The strength of ENSO events is characterized as weak, moderate, and strong with a super-strong designation for the most anomalous of events. One metric for characterizing the strength of an ENSO event is based on the SSTAs within ENSO Region 3.4. Table 3 provides the SSTA thresholds for each strength designation.
Table 3

    As Eric Webb points out on his website, there are also other metrics for classifying the strength of an ENSO event. One other metric uses the values of the ENS-ONI and ranks based on percentile. This can be read within the "ENSO Phase and Intensity" section on Eric Webb's website (linked above). For the purposes of this outlook, the CPC's method was used. 

    Using the thresholds presented in Table 3 and the list of EL Nino winter's from Table 2, Table 4 provides a breakdown of each EL Nino event by strength.

Table 4

    The criteria I used to define the strength was using the peak trimonthly ONI or ENS-ONI value during the event. There were several events in which the peak ONI was on the borderline of the strength designation thresholds. For those events, I added them into the weaker of the two phase categories but denoted it was borderline. There were also some events where the ONI or ENS-ONI differed slightly and they were categorized accordingly as well. Note the super-strong events of 1965-1966, 1972-1973, 1982-1983, 1997-1998, and 2015-2016.

    Like we did above with all EL Nino winters, we will look at 500mb height anomalies, temperature anomalies, and precipitation anomalies for weak EL Nino winters, moderate EL Nino winters, strong EL Nino winters, and super-strong EL Nino winters. Doing so can help us identify if we can find consistent signals depending on the strength of the event. 

    Given what was discussed within the disclaimer about the different datasets, two composites have to be made to illustrate what is typical of each strength in terms of 500mb height anomalies, temperature, and precipitation. One composite will consist of years which the 20CRV3 can incorporate and the other will consist of years with the NCEP/NCAR R1 can incorporate. 

    Figure 10a and 10b below illustrate a composite of 500mb height anomalies combining all weak EL Nino events. There are striking differences noted between figure 10a and 10b. Below-average heights are quite pronounced just south of the Aleutians and across the eastern third of the United States within figure 10a. These two features are noticeably absent in figure 10b. 

Figure 10a (left) 10b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
This is something that will be discussed later in this outlook, but the height anomalies around the Aleutians are part of what is called the Pacific-North American (PNA) teleconnection index. As we'll see looking at each individual weak EL Nino event below (Figure 11), in these earlier years, there were some winters in which the below-average height anomalies (indicative of a much stronger-than-average Aleutian Low) were quite pronounced along with the below-average heights across the eastern United States. 

Figure 11: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Temperature anomalies associated with weak EL Nino winters (Figure 12a and 12b) typically feature below-average temperatures across the eastern third of the United States with above-average temperatures across the western United States. Since temperatures can be strongly correlated with the 500mb pattern, it's not a surprise to see the cool anomalies dampened in figure 12b which is coincident with the lack of below-average heights within this region.

Figure 12a (left) 12b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Assessing each weak EL Nino individually (Figure 13) we can see a good portion of weak EL Nino winters featured above-average temperatures towards the west with below-average temperatures within the east, however, there are some events which don't fit this mold.

Figure 13: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
    Precipitation Anomalies during weak EL Nino winters (Figure 14) tend to feature drier-than-average conditions across the Pacific-Northwest, northern Intermountain West, and within the Tennessee Valley region with wetter-than-average conditions within the Southwest and Florida.

Figure 14: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

       Assessing each weak EL Nino individually (Figure 15) shows that there can be significant variation in precipitation anomalies for a given weak EL Nino winter with the greatest variation occurring within the western United States.

Figure 15: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Moving into the set of moderate EL Nino winters, the signal of below-average heights in the vicinity of the Aleutians into the Gulf of Alaska and across the eastern United States is much more pronounced than with weak EL Nino winters. (Figure 16a and 16b).

Figure 16a (left) and 16b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

     Assessing the 500mb height anomalies for each moderate EL Nino individually (Figure 17) we see there is a clear signal for below-average heights within the southern and eastern United States, however, we also see some of the more recent moderate EL Nino's have deviated from this with more in the way of ridging (above-average height anomalies).

Figure 17: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

        Temperature anomalies during moderate EL Nino winters tend to be cooler-than-average across much of the United States, particularly the eastern third of the country (Figure 18a and 18b).

Figure 18a (left) 18b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Precipitation during moderate EL Nino winters (Figure 19) tends to be below-average across the Pacific-Northwest, northern Inter-mountain West, Ohio/Tennessee Valley regions, and within the Northeast. Above-average precipitation tends to occur within California and within the far Southeast into the mid-Atlantic.

Figure 19: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    However, assessing each moderate EL Nino event separately (Figure 20), we can see a great deal of spread can exist event-to-event, similar to that of weak EL Nino winters. 

Figure 20: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Getting into strong EL Nino winters, the 500mb pattern (Figure 21a and 21b) continues with the theme of below-average heights around the Aleutians and Gulf of Alaska indicating a stronger Aleutian Low with below-average heights across the southern United States. Again we note that this signal becomes a bit more muted in the more recent stretches of strong EL Nino episodes.

Figure 21a (left) 21b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
    Assessing the 500mb height anomalies for each strong EL Nino winter individually (Figure 22) we can clearly see a major shift in the pattern over the United States between EL Nino events pre-1970 and post-1970 with strong EL Nino winters post-1970 featuring more in the way of ridging within the country.

Figure 22: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
    Given the significant differences within the 500mb pattern between strong EL Nino events prior to 1970 and post-1970, it's no surprise we see that reflected with temperature anomalies as well (Figure 23a and 23b).

Figure 23a (left) 23b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Precipitation anomalies for strong EL Nino winters (Figure 24) are certainly a bit different than during weak or moderate EL Nino winters. While the northern Inter-mountain West and Ohio/Tennessee Valley regions are drier-than-average, the Pacific-Northwest is a bit on the wetter side with above-average precipitation with California and along the deep South,

Figure 24: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    In Figure 25, assessing each strong EL Nino winter individually, we can see there can be significant variation in precipitation anomalies which falls in line with what we've seen during weak and moderate events.

Figure 25: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    We can also separate strong EL Nino events into a separate category - super-strong as a way to distinguish the most anomalous of events. 

    The 500mb pattern during super-strong EL Nino winters (Figure 26) features below-average heights associated with a very strong Aleutian Low within the Gulf of Alaska with the below-average heights across the southern United States less pronounced while above-average heights across Canada into the northern-tier of the United States are much more pronounced.

Figure 26: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Assessing the 500mb height anomalies for each super-strong EL Nino winter individually (Figure 27), albeit a small sample-size, we generally see a muted pattern featuring below-average height anomalies across the southern United States with more pronounced above-average height anomalies across Canada and northern-tier of the United States. Note the winter of 2015-2016, almost absent of the below-average height anomalies across the southern United States.

Figure 27: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Temperatures associated with super-strong EL Nino winters (Figure 28) tend to be above-average across the northern-tier of the United States and with the lack of below-average heights within the southern United States, temperatures are fairly close to average.

Figure 28:Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
    
Assessing each super-strong EL Nino winter individually (Figure 29) shows these events tend to feature above-average temperatures across most of the country with the exception being the super-strong EL Nino event of 1965-1966.

Figure 29:Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
  
  In terms of precipitation (Figure 30), super-strong EL Nino winters tend to be wetter-than-average across the Pacific-Northwest (a huge change from other EL Nino strength classification), West, and the Northeast into the mid-Atlantic with somewhat drier-than-average conditions across the south (also a big change).


Figure 30: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/
   
    When assessing precipitation anomalies for each individual super-strong EL Nino winter (Figure 31) we see there isn't a ton of deviation, however, we note the very dry winter of 1965-1966 which likely heavily skews the mean given the small data sample.
 

Figure 31: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

  ENSO Evolution 

    Now that we've exhaustively looked at historical EL Nino events (with a focus on the 500mb pattern, temperature anomalies, and precipitation anomalies we want to assess how this EL Nino has evolved thus far (with respect to sea-surface temperatures) and how the EL Nino projects to evolve. There are two types of EL Nino:

1) Canonical which is your typical EL Nino in which sea-surface temperatures warm off the Pacific side of the South American coast, or ENSO region 1.2 (Please revert back to Figure 1), and build westwards across the equatorial Pacific as easterly trade winds weaken.   

2) Modoki - This EL Nino event consists of the warmer water within the central Equatorial Pacific with colder waters east and west of these warmer anomalies. 

    Now only is how the EL Nino develops critical, but its evolution can be critical as well. For example, there are some canonical EL Nino events which transitioned to modoki events as the winter progressed. This is something that has to be kept in mind as we near closer to northern hemisphere winter. 
 
   As we assess ENSO evolution we are going to focus on the following:

1) The CPC's Oceanic Nino Index (ONI) which we will use as a guide in classifying the strength of this EL Nino event. 

2) The Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) - This product is widely regarded as a better indicator of the actual ENSO strength than the ONI alone. 

3) The Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI) - This product is a great tool to assess how coupled the ocean-atmosphere are. 

4) Evolution of sea-surface temperatures - This can tell us alot about the structure of the event. Are the warmest anomalies located in the eastern portion of the ENSO region (east-based event), do they build uniformly throughout the ENSO region (basin-wide event), or do they shift towards the western portion of the basin (west-based event)? Of course, we also need to keep in mind the modoki event.  

5) Depth of warmest temperatures - This can be a great indicator in assessing whether the ENSO event may continue to strengthen or not. 

6) Trade winds at the 850mb level - Across the northern hemisphere, trade winds blow east-to-west. This normal flow tends to yield upwelling of cooler waters off the Pacific side of South America and the easterly trade winds push the waters westward. However, when these trade winds weaken (or in some cases, reverse) waters can warm and this can lead to the development of EL Nino conditions. 

Oceanic Nino Index (ONI)

    Earlier within this outlook, we touched upon the ONI and Table 3 provided thresholds of sea-surface temperature anomalies for each strength designation. In Table 5 below, we look at the ONI going back to 2010. EL Nino events are highlighted in red with La Nina events in blue. While we don't see a "red" or EL Nino designation yet, this is because we have not had 5 consecutive trimonthly periods where the ONI has exceeded +0.5°C. This will occur once the ASO (August-September-October) value is calculated early in November. We do see, however, that JJA value was +1.1°C and the JAS value was +1.3°C. These values suggest we are currently dealing with a moderate EL Nino (referring to the thresholds provided in Table 3).

Table 5: Courtesy of https://origin.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ONI_v5.php

   Southern Oscillation Index (SOI)

        As mentioned previously, the SOI is an index which measures the differences in sea-level pressure between Tahiti and Darwin, Australia. When SOI values are positive, this coincides with above-average sea-level pressure over Tahiti with below-average sea-level pressure over Darwin, Australia. Negative values of the SOI yield an opposite sign of pressure anomalies at each location. Given EL Nino's are typically associated with below-average sea-level pressure over Tahiti and above-average sea-level pressure over Darwin, during EL Nino episodes, the more negative the SOI the more coupled the ocean-atmosphere are said to be. Table 6 provides SOI values dating back to 2010. Figure 32a and 32b shows the average sea-level pressure anomalies in the vicinity of Tahiti and Australia for EL Nino events.

Figure 32a (left) 32b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

Comparing to the defined EL Nino and La Nina events from Table 5, you can see the La Nina episodes matching up with prolonged periods of positive SOI values and EL Nino episodes matching up with prolonged periods of negative SOI values. The SOI values presented below were obtained from the following source: https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/soi/

Table 6

    Since the demise of La Nina during the 2022-2023 winter, we note that SOI values have quickly transitioned from positive to negative, falling in line for what we would expect with a rapidly developing EL Nino. As mentioned above, the SOI is regarded as a better tool for evaluating the strength of an ENSO event over just the ONI itself. 

    Table 7 provides SOI values for each EL Nino event, looking at SOI values during the summer through early fall and then again during the late fall through early spring. 

Table 7

    Table 8 provides a breakdown of SOI values for the same periods as Table 7 for each weak, moderate, and strong EL Nino based on the ONI.

Table 8

Figure 33a - 33d look at sea-level pressure anomalies for weak EL Nino events during the summer through early fall (33a and 33b) and late fall through early spring (33c and 33d). 

Figure 33a (top left) 33b (top right) 33c (bottom left) 33d (bottom right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Figure 34a - 34d look at sea-level pressure anomalies for weak EL Nino events during the summer through early fall (34a and 34b) and late fall through early spring (34c and 34d). 

Figure 34a (top left) 34b (top right) 34c (bottom left) 34d (bottom right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

    Figure 35a - 35d look at sea-level pressure anomalies for weak EL Nino events during the summer through early fall (35a and 35b) and late fall through early spring (35c and 35d). 

Figure 35a (top left) 35b (top right) 35c (bottom left) 35d (bottom right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/

We can easily conclude the structure of sea-level pressure anomalies around Tahiti and Australia become much more apparent during moderate and strong EL Nino events with a stronger signal of below-average sea-level pressure anomalies around Tahiti and above-average sea-level pressure anomalies around Australia.  

    Next we will assess SOI values since the beginning of the year (Table 9). It should be noted when looking at current SOI values the Climate Prediction Center's (CPC) dataset was used. This is because the CPC has a more recent update of the SOI than the previous source provided above. It should be noted that each source has a slightly different calculation so if comparing the two datasets, the overall numbers may differ. The CPC data was obtained from the following source:
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/enso/soi

Table 9

If we look at sea-level pressure anomalies from June-September and thus far in the month of October (Figure 36a and 36b) we note the above-average sea-level pressure anomalies around Australia, however, sea-level pressure anomalies around Tahiti are relatively close to average (both during the summer and the month of October). 

Figure 36a (left) 36b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

SOI Conclusion: At least thus far, while the ONI is indicative of a moderate EL Nino event, the structure of sea-level pressure anomalies associated with the SOI are not as representative of a moderate EL Nino. This is something to closely watch going through the next several weeks because if we don't see sea-level pressure anomalies respond to the oceanic conditions, the event will not be as strong advertised. 

Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI)

    The MEI incorporates 5 different variables (sea-level pressure, the zonal and meridional components of the surface wind, sea-surface temperature, and outgoing longwave radiation). Given this incorporates both oceanic and atmospheric components, the MEI is a great tool to assess how coupled the ocean-atmosphere are during a particular event. This can also be used as a metric for strength as if an event is strongly coupled, the event is more likely to be a significant driver in the atmospheric circulation. Positive values of the MEI correlate to EL Nino conditions with prolonged periods of positive values linked to EL Nino episodes. Negative values of the MEI correlate to La Nina conditions with prolonged periods of negative values linked to La Nina episodes. It should be noted MEI data only dates to 1979, thus we can't evaluate the MEI for ENSO events prior to 1979. 

    Table 10 provides MEI values dating back to 2010. Comparing to the defined EL Nino and La Nina events from Table 5, you can see prolonged periods of positive MEI values correlate to EL Nino events while prolonged periods of negative MEI values correlate to La Nina events. All MEI values below were obtained from the following source: https://psl.noaa.gov/enso/mei/

Table 10
    Table 11 provides MEI values for each EL Nino event, looking at MEI values during the late spring and early summer through fall and then again during the fall through late winter.

Table 11
    
    Table 12 provides a breakdown of MEI values for the same periods as Table 11 for each weak, moderate, and strong EL Nino based on the ONI.

Table 12

    Given EL Nino events are associated with positive MEI values, given that we know the MEI is a great tool to assess how coupled the ocean-atmosphere are, we can conclude the more positive the MEI value, the more coupled the ocean-atmosphere is. Values close to and above 1 represent and ocean-atmosphere coupling which is stronger while values closer to (or below) 0.50 represent a much weaker coupling. 

    Looking at MEI values since the beginning of the year (Table 13) we see the negative MEI values associated with the decaying La Nina during the end of winter with a rapid rise in the MEI through the summer with the latest reading at 0.6. 

Table 13

MEI Conclusion: The MEI has rapidly transitioned from negative to positive, which falls in line with the rapidly decaying La Nina and quick transition into EL Nino conditions. Should the MEI continue to rise over the next few months, this will indicate an ocean-atmosphere which is strongly coupled and enhance the impact the EL Nino will have on the atmospheric circulation. We will discuss the MEI a bit more below with some additional insight on where the MEI may trend. 

Evolution of Sea-surface Temperatures

    Earlier in this presentation of this outlook, we briefly looked at the evolution of sea-surface temperature anomalies over the past year (Figure 2). We are going to go more in depth regarding the evolution of sea-surface temperatures, assess the depth of the warmer waters, and look at 850mb trade winds. We will use this assessment, combined with incorporating the ONI, SOI, and MEI to gauge a basis of where this EL Nino may head strength wise as we move into the winter. 

    Figure 37 looks at sea-surface temperatures within the equatorial Pacific from late July towards mid October with Figure 38 looking at sea-surface temperature anomalies during the same period. We can note the following:

1. Very warm sea-surface temperature anomalies spanning the equatorial Pacific (consistent with EL Nino).

2.  A westward expansion of well above-average sea-surface temperature anomalies into the equatorial Pacific Ocean. 

3. A decrease and reduction of the more extreme sea-surface temperature anomalies with the greatest decrease within the Nino 1.2 region.

Figure 37: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/sstanim.shtml
Figure 38: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/sstanim.shtml

        Figure 39 looks at the depth of sea-surface temperatures across the equatorial Pacific with Figure 40 looking at the anomalies at different depths. We note the following:

1.The depth of the warmer waters across the eastern equatorial Pacific are very shallow with the greatest depth of warmer waters out towards the central and western Pacific. Now - this isn't totally uncommon, especially since the eastern equatorial Pacific typically features the upwelling of cooler waters due to the cool ocean current off the South American coast. 

2. Moving into the Fall, we note a significant decrease in the depth of the warm anomalies within the eastern equatorial Pacific. 

Figure 39: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/wkxzteq.shtml

Figure 40: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/wkxzteq.shtml

    Next, we'll look at 850mb zonal wind anomalies across the equatorial Pacific (Figure 41). Blues and purples correlate to easterly and stronger easterly trade winds with reds and pinks correlating to weak easterlies or even westerlies getting towards the pinks. We note a recent strong westerly wind burst between 150°W and 150°E. This recent westerly wind burst could help to re-ignite the EL Nino a bit over the next week. We also note the forecast for another burst of westerly winds (though not as intense) moving towards the end of the month. 

Figure 41: Courtesy of http://mikeventrice.weebly.com/hovmollers.html

ENSO Evolution Conclusion: While we saw a rapid transition from La Nina to EL Nino and the two most recent trimonthly value of the ONI are indicative of a moderate EL Nino, the SOI tells us that this event is not as strong as indicated (thus far), however, the MEI indicates the ocean-atmosphere are likely to become coupled which will enhance the influence of the EL Nino event. The assessment of the sea-surface temperature evolution tells us there isn't a whole lot in place for this EL Nino event to strengthen any further, however, this recent westerly wind burst may give the EL Nino a bit of a push. Based on all of this, I am anticipating this EL Nino will end up as a strong EL Nino (per ONI criteria), however, unless the sea-level pressure anomalies around Tahiti and Australia become more reflective of a strong EL Nino, this EL Nino may act more like a moderate EL Nino event. 

Tropical Forcing

    In addition to a particular ENSO event, strength, and structure, tropical forcing can play a critical role in the atmospheric circulation and can sometimes be a better discriminator than ENSO itself. One measure of tropical forcing is by assessing outgoing longwave radiation (OLR). From the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), OLR is a measure of the amount of energy emitted to space by Earth's surface, oceans, and atmosphere. As such, it is a critical component of the Earth's radiation budget. OLR values are often used as a proxy for convection in tropical and subtropical regions since cloud top temperatures are an indicator of cloud height (National Center for Atmospheric Research Staff (Eds). Last modified 2022-09-09 "The Climate Data Guide: Outgoing Longwave Radiation (OLR): HIRS." Retrieved from https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/outgoing-longwave-radiation-olr-hirs on 2023-10-22). Essentially, the location and strength of convection (rain and thunderstorms) can play a critical role in the atmospheric circulation. 

    The schematic below (Figure 42) presents the Pacific Walker Cell Circulation pattern during ENSO neutral conditions, EL Nino conditions, and La Nina conditions. 

Figure 42: Courtesy of https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/enso/walker-circulation-ensos-atmospheric-buddy

    We can see that during EL Nino conditions, convection is typically shifted east of 180° while during ENSO Neutral or La Nina conditions convection is typically west. As shown in Figure 43, the placement of convection (indicated by the darker blues) can differ from EL Nino event-to-event as well as how robust the degree of convection can be.
    
Figure 43: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

    After assessing OLR anomalies for each individual EL Nino event. EL Nino events were also broken down based on where the tropical forcing (indicated by the convection) was located (Table 14). Given what we see with the schematic presented in Figure 42 which shows an eastward shift in convection during EL Nino events, it makes sense the list of events where OLR anomalies are east of the dateline is the largest while the list of events where OLR is focused west of the dateline is least (which is more typical of ENSO Neutral and La Nina conditions).

Table 14

    Figures 44-46 show averaged OLR anomalies for December-March broken down into being focused West of the Dateline (Figure 44), Centered Around the Dateline (Figure 45), and East of the Dateline (Figure 46). 

    
Figure 44: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Figure 45: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Figure 46: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

    Figures 47-48 look at 500mb height anomalies for EL Nino events where tropical forcing is focused west of the dateline (Figure 47a, Figure 47b, Figure 48). As the length of this outlook is already beginning to rival The Odyssey I am only going to post composites looking at 500mb. 
  
Figure 47a (left) 47b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Figure 48: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

    Figures 49-50 look at 500mb height anomalies for EL Nino events where tropical forcing is centered around the dateline (Figure 49a, Figure 49b, Figure 50).

Figure 49a (left) 49b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Figure 50: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 
    
Figures 51-52 look at 500mb height anomalies for EL Nino events where tropical forcing is east of the dateline (Figure 51a, Figure 51b, Figure 52).

Figure 51a (left) 51b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Figure 52: Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Table 15 provides a breakdown of where the tropical forcing is located for each EL Nino strength:

Table 15

    What is the current state of tropical forcing? Figure 53a (left) looks at OLR anomalies across the equatorial Pacific since November of 2022 with figure 53b (right) looking at OLR anomalies from a global perspective with the date centered on October 22, 2023. 

Figure 53: Courtesy of https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtml#current

    Tropical Forcing Conclusion: Dating back to last fall, the greatest degree of convection and tropical forcing has been predominately west of the dateline, even with the emergence of EL Nino, which as we know from above, is not very common during EL Nino episodes. It is very possible we could see an eastward shift with the tropical forcing as we move towards winter, but for now tropical forcing has been consistently west of the dateline. 

Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)

    Our next assessment revolves around the PDO. The PDO is often described as a long-lived EL Nino-like pattern of climate variability (Zhang et al. 1997). While ENSO episodes may only last several months to a few years, the state of the PDO (positive or negative) can be dominant for as long as 20-30 years with some intra-year variability due to influences of ENSO state. Figure 54 provides the typical sea-surface anomaly patterns associated with each phase of the PDO. Given the structure of sea-surface temperature anomalies within the equatorial Pacific, there is a close connection between PDO and ENSO with EL Nino events more likely to occur during warm phases of the PDO and La Nina events more likely to occur during cool phases of the PDO, however, as we'll see further down that is not always the case!
Figure 54: Courtesy of http://research.jisao.washington.edu/pdo/

Where do we stand with the PDO? Looking at the structure of sea-surface temperature anomalies within the Pacific (Figure 55) and comparing to that of Figure 54, we see a resemblance to the cool phase or a negative PDO given the highly anomalous warm sea-surface temperatures spanning the north Pacific, however, we notice over the past month these warm anomalies have started to fade. Given this, it appears the negative PDO is rapidly eroding.
Figure 55: Courtesy of https://vortex.plymouth.edu/myowxp/sfc/sst-a.html

    Table 16 provides a breakdown of PDO values for the months of December - March and averaged for the period during EL Nino Winter's. It is pretty clear majority of EL Nino events are associated with the warm phase of the PDO, but that is not always the case. The PDO data was obtained from the following source: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/pdo/

Table 17
    
What is the importance of the PDO? Figure 56 looks at 500mb height anomalies for some of the most positive PDO winter's on record (Figure 56a) and most negative PDO winter's on record (Figure 56b). We can see  positive PDO's typically result in a stronger Aleutian Low with a much weaker Aleutian Low during negative PDO's. Given what we know about EL Nino's influence on the Aleutian Low, the combination of EL Nino and positive PDO can result in a very strong Aleutian Low.

Figure 56a (left) and 56b (right): Image provided by the NOAA-ESRL Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder Colorado from their Web site at https://psl.noaa.gov/ 

Pacific-North American Teleconnection Pattern (PNA)

    While the PDO is a long-lived pattern of climate variability, the PNA is more on the shorter scale in terms of fluctuations between the positive phase and negative phase. The PNA is one of the most prominent modes of low-frequency variability in the Northern Hemisphere extratropics  and consists of a pattern of air pressure anomalies at four locations over the Pacific Ocean and North America (Climate Prediction Center). Figure 57 shows the average 500mb pattern for the positive phase and negative phase of the PNA. 

Figure 57: Courtesy of https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-variability-pacific-north-american-pattern

        If we take a look at the positive phase of the PNA, we notice striking similarities to the 500mb pattern associated with a positive PDO and EL Nino conditions with the deep Aleutian Low. Table 18 provides PNA values for December-March and averaged over these months for all Nino's. Note that data for the PNA only goes back to 1950. PNA data was obtained from the following source: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/pna/

Table 18

PDO/PNA Conclusion: Given the recent trends regarding sea-surface temperatures within the Pacific Ocean and a focus on the North Pacific where we've seen weakening warm anomalies, the negative PDO seems to be rapidly weakening. It is very possible we see a PDO signal which isn't overly strong this winter and we see the PDO continue to become less negative and perhaps become a bit more reflective of a positive PDO. 

    For the PNA pattern, we can likely expect a PNA which is more positive than negative moving through the winter, however, given the PNA can go through short-term fluctuations we may see periods where the PNA is positive (perhaps even quite positive at times, especially if the degree of ocean-atmosphere coupling becomes strong) and periods where the PNA is more neutral or even slightly negative. The PNA will be a big player in how active the weather pattern is across the United States this winter.

Quasi Biennial Oscillation (QBO) and Influences on the Stratosphere and Polar Vortex (PV) 

    One of our final aspects we will discuss is the QBO and its influence on the stratosphere and the polar vortex (both the stratospheric polar vortex and tropospheric polar vortex). The pattern configuration across the Arctic can be a significant player in the weather conditions across the United States, particularly the northern portion of the country. The QBO measures zonal winds within the stratosphere which circulate the equator. These winds alternate between westerly and easterly and start at about 10mb and migrate downwards before dissipating at 80mb. As these winds descend through the stratosphere they are replaced by winds of the opposite direction. Descending westerly winds within the stratosphere are known to enhance, or strengthen the polar vortex while descending easterly winds increase the potential for sudden stratospheric warming (SSW's) events and a weaker polar vortex. This can increase the potential for blocking patterns across the high latitudes of the Arctic, favoring shots of colder, Arctic air to become displaced into the northern United States. 

    Table 19 provides QBO values since the beginning of 2022. QBO data was obtained from the following source: https://acd-ext.gsfc.nasa.gov/Data_services/met/qbo/QBO_Singapore_Uvals_GSFC.txt

Table 19

    QBO Conclusion:
Since winter of 2022-2023, we have seen a reversal in the QBO with the westerly phase of the QBO diminishing and a developing easterly phase with descending easterly winds. This could have significant implications on the Arctic domain this winter, particularly on the polar vortex. The polar vortex is a low pressure system which exists 24/7/365 and is strongest in winter and weakest during the summer. As mentioned above, the easterly phase tends to result in a weaker polar vortex. given we have an established easterly QBO within the stratosphere (which likely has not yet peaked), this could make it difficult for the polar vortex to become established and strong during the winter. This would increase the likelihood for polar vortex displacement and potentially a greater frequency of Arctic intrusions of colder air into the northern United States. 

Modoki EL Nino 

    Before we wrap up this winter outlook, there are a few things to discuss which will be done briefly as this is already very long. In terms of EL Nino, structure, and evolution one thing to watch is whether this EL Nino transitions into a modoki EL Nino. Typically, EL Nino events evolve within ENSO regions 1.2 (reference Figure 1) and build west towards the central equatorial Pacific. A modoki EL Nino is one in which the warm anomalies occur within the central equatorial Pacific and are flanked by cooler water temperatures on east side of the warm anomalies. Modoki EL Nino events have seem to become increasingly common since the 1980's and it is extremely interesting as this is about the time we've seen a significant flip in how EL Nino seems to impact the atmospheric pattern. Table 20 provides a list of modoki EL Nino Winter's. This does not include any transition winters.

Table 20

    There are other considerations which should be addressed as well such as solar activity and volcanic activity which can have an impact on how the global circulation evolves during the winter and have impacts on the stratosphere and polar vortex. My knowledge in this regard is quite limited and as such, should these factors play a significant role my forecast would be wrong (even if it appeared I was fairly close). 

2023-2024 Winter Outlook

    Ideally, I would like to do a month-to-month breakdown as well, however, time is becoming of the essence and I will never be able to complete this outlook. So I will just focus on the winter as a whole. Essentially, I think there will be increased likelihood for intrusions of Arctic air east of the Rocky Mountains with an active jet stream across the southern United States and up along the East Coast. What has been a remarkably wet summer in the Northeast United States will likely persist through the winter and this should result in increased potential for wintry events. 

    While many winters over the past 10-15 years have been dominated by the atmospheric configuration across the Pacific, this winter will likely be made by how the configuration evolves across the Arctic. If blocking patterns really struggle to materialize this winter, this forecast would be garbage and we would see the likelihood of above-average temperatures for much of the country, however, the extreme southern states, coastal mid-Atlantic, and coastal Northeast would likely remain active with above-average precipitation. 

Below, is what I am thinking for winter as a whole. Figure 58 provides temperature forecast for December-March and areas which are most likely to feature above-average temperatures, near-average temperatures, and below-average temperatures for the winter as a whole. Figure 59 provides precipitation forecasts for December-March and areas which are most likely to feature above-average precipitation and below-average precipitation. 

EL Nino Peak Strength: 

I am expecting the EL Nino to peak as a strong event per the ONI, however, based on the SOI I would anticipate this EL Nino acts more like a moderate EL Nino...and perhaps even a lower end moderate unless we see some significant reflections within the SOI. 

Figure 58

Figure 59