PNW January 2023 Observations and Discussion

[SnowWillarrive]

2 minutes ago, Phishy Wx said:

the source of the new(er) St Helens one is also in a spot that's shaded/insulated from most of the solar radiation by the new vent cone in the caldera

I was just making a point that it doesn’t take very long for glaciers to form given the right conditions. I totally get that all major Cascade glaciers are in retreat. 

[Cascadia_Wx]

2 minutes ago, SnowWillarrive said:

To your point many of the Cascade glaciers were readvancing in the mid 1970s up until the early 80s. People would be surprised at how fast glaciers form and advance.  Doesn’t take thousands of years. 
 

Look inside the new glacier on Mount Saint Helen’s crater. It is already 300-500 feet thick and the only glacier rapidly advancing in the lower 48. 

I don’t see how the fact that cascade glaciers advanced during the last long term -PDO phase really goes against the fact that they’re melting now. According to Phil this we are currently in the next multi decadal -PDO phase anyway right now. Hate to imagine what will happen when that flips again.

I do agree with you that glaciers have a relatively quick response time when it comes to climatic conditions though, relative to many other geological processes we see.

[TT-SEA]

10 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

The summer thing is just plain weird.  We have seen more warming in the summer than anywhere else on the planet recently.  As you said having such hot summers with a Nina is ever stranger.

Actually May and December also warmed the most with the 1991-2020 update.    

[SnowWillarrive]

1 minute ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

I don’t see how the fact that cascade glaciers advanced during the last long term -PDO phase really goes against the fact that they’re melting now. According to Phil this we are currently in the next multi decadal -PDO phase anyway right now. Hate to imagine what will happen when that flips again.

I do agree with you that glaciers have a relatively quick response time when it comes to climatic conditions though, relative to many other geological processes we see.

I think we are both in agreement. I just hope whatever trend that started at the turn of the last Century reverses.  

[Rubus Leucodermis]

47 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

I totally forgot to check on that last night.  Tonight should be a great night too, but it sounds like it's not worth the trouble.  What part of the sky and what time did you see it?

Northern part of the sky (not far from Ursa Minor), after moonset, which was around 2:00 am today and will be around 3:00 am tomorrow. Locator map here: https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/spot-circumpolar-comet-ztf-c-2022-e3-in-binoculars/

[Cascadia_Wx]

Just now, SnowWillarrive said:

I think we are both in agreement. I just hope whatever trend that started at the turn of the last Century reverses.  

It would be nice. And my confusion with your other post was with the first paragraph, not the second. The Crater Glacier on St Helens has been really fun to watch. All it took was some topographically favorable conditions to develop to see some really explosive glacial development at that elevation in the SW Washington cascades. There are localized factors that can trump overall warming of course.

[snow_wizard]

Actually a really nice snap to it out there today.  Currently 35 with and a bit breezy here.

[snow_wizard]

6 minutes ago, SnowWillarrive said:

I think we are both in agreement. I just hope whatever trend that started at the turn of the last Century reverses.  

I think we are all in agreement on this stuff.  The disagreement is just semantics.  

[BLI snowman]

11 minutes ago, SnowWillarrive said:

Not sure why I got a confused face on my post. The new glacier inside the crater at Mount Saint Helen’s took 40 years to form. 

Eh, I think that that is indeed misleading because the eruption in 1980 simply disrupted the existing glaciers up there so much and some regeneration was inevitable. That doesn't mean the long term trend is for further growth.

[snow_wizard]

10 minutes ago, TT-SEA said:

Actually May and December also warmed the most with the 1991-2020 update.    

December is absolutely shocking to me.  We've had a lot of cold ones this century.  1999 through 2006 was pretty bad though.  I would bet 2007 to present has actually been cooler.

[Cascadia_Wx]

1 minute ago, BLI snowman said:

Eh, I think that that is indeed misleading because the eruption in 1980 simply disrupted the existing glaciers up there so much and some regeneration was inevitable. That doesn't mean the long term trend is for further growth.

This is a good point. The volume of pre-eruption glacial ice on St Helens won’t be approached by the new glacier.

[Cascadia_Wx]

1 minute ago, snow_wizard said:

December is absolutely shocking to me.  We've had a lot of cold ones this century.  1999 through 2006 was pretty bad though.  I would bet 2007 to present has actually been cooler.

Just in the last decade, December 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019 and 2020 were all pretty balmy. 

[ShawniganLake]

13 minutes ago, TT-SEA said:

Actually May and December also warmed the most with the 1991-2020 update.    

Kind of surprised by December 

[TacomaWx]

1 minute ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

This is a good point. The volume of pre-eruption glacial ice on St Helens won’t be approached by the new glacier.

Definitely, global warming is definitely a factor in that but also the fact the mountains peak elevation is also roughly 1500’ lower too. That makes a bit of a difference. 

[Doinko]

Just now, Cascadia_Wx said:

Just in the last decade, December 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019 and 2020 were all pretty balmy. 

2021 was also warmer than normal in a lot of places south of Portland

[snow_wizard]

4 minutes ago, BLI snowman said:

Eh, I think that that is indeed misleading because the eruption in 1980 simply disrupted the existing glaciers up there so much and some regeneration was inevitable. That doesn't mean the long term trend is for further growth.

This will be very useful for determining trends in the short term as opposed to long term which the glaciers on other mountains measure.

[Cascadia_Wx]

Just now, TacomaWx said:

Definitely, global warming is definitely a factor in that but also the fact the mountains peak elevation is also roughly 1500’ lower too. That makes a bit of a difference. 

Of course. But there is also a much larger area of the peak that is now almost completely sheltered from sunlight year round, by the crater wall.

[SnarkyGoblin]

19 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

You need to think long term on this stuff.  What we have seen in our lifetimes is meaningless in the overall scheme of things.  This is where people get thrown off.  As I've mentioned repeatedly they strongly suspect the glaciers in glacier national park were not there before the little ice age.  Just food for thought.

Actually that's exactly what we need to be looking at.  It's literally the most important part of the current discussions of climate change. The issue is that things are changing so rapidly (ie our lifetime).

I don't know how someone so interested in weather can be so ignorant on this subject.

[snow_wizard]

On that table showing that every month has warmed so much...it's only one station.  A much more useful metric would be change for the entire Puget Sound Lowlands.  There is a lot of UHI going on with the area around Sea-Tac.

[Cascadia_Wx]

3 minutes ago, Doinko said:

2021 was also warmer than normal in a lot of places south of Portland

Tiger!!!

[TacomaWx]

Just now, Cascadia_Wx said:

Of course. But there is also a much larger area of the peak that is now almost completely sheltered from sunlight year round, by the crater wall.

Oh yeah that’s true it did erupt northwards so it’s sheltered on from the south side. Before this conversation I hadn’t given much thought to the specifics of the glacier up there. 

[Cascadia_Wx]

Just now, snow_wizard said:

On that table showing that every month has warmed so much...it's only one station.  A much more useful metric would be change for the entire Puget /sound Lowlands.  There is a lot of UHI going on with the area around Sea-Tac.

Ever thought about getting into gymnastics?  

[BLI snowman]

6 minutes ago, ShawniganLake said:

Kind of surprised by December 

Got to remember though that just losing the 1981-1990 period likely skewed December's needle a tiny bit.

Decembers 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1990 were all seriously cold months.

[snow_wizard]

9 minutes ago, SnarkyGoblin said:

Actually that's exactly what we need to be looking at.  It's literally the most important part of the current discussions of climate change. The issue is that things are changing so rapidly (ie our lifetime).

I don't know how someone so interested in weather can be so ignorant on this subject.

I'm just saying the climate has gone through ENORMOUS changes before man could have possibly had any effect.  Some catastrophic climate changes int he past have happened in a matter of decades.  The changes now are at a slow pace.  Why do people discount rebound from the little ice age so easily?  That could explain much of the current warming and glacial retreat.  We don't know enough about the Medieval Warm period to make a good judgment.

[TT-SEA]

47 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

I'm thinking we are kind of out of synch on our definitions and expectations of possible implications on this.

I am very confused... you seem to be talking about totally separate things as if they are the same.  

You clearly pointed to the actual stratospheric warming that is happening.    But that way up above the 500mb pattern.  When stratospheric warming is significant enough it totally disrupts the stratospheric PV and links up with the troposphere and then it can deliver very cold air to the surface and completely change the 500mb pattern.    From what I understand... that is what happened in January 2019 and what totally changed our Nino winter in February.   

But if the stratospheric warming fails to disrupt the stratospheric PV then its meaningless to the weather patterns below because the cold air remains locked up in the stratosphere.   That appears to be what is happening this time.   And there will likely be no assistance from a SSW event similar to 2019.

You are talking about the 500mb PV lobe that is stuck in eastern Canada.   That is much lower and totally different and just part of the weather systems we track all the time.    And when it moves out... that does not mean its going to get cold here.   In fact it seems like that might just make things more progressive.     Or maybe it helps out later.   Who knows.

12Z ECMWF at 240 hours as an example.

 

[Deweydog]

4 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

On that table showing that every month has warmed so much...it's only one station.  A much more useful metric would be change for the entire Puget Sound Lowlands.  There is a lot of UHI going on with the area around Sea-Tac.

 

[snow_wizard]

2 minutes ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

Ever thought about getting into gymnastics?  

You are just totally unfair with everything I say.  Most people can see that I think.  What's wrong with looking at rural stations vs urban ones for decade to decade change?  I just have a hard time believing every month was warmer.  I haven't seen the same thing in my records.

[snow_wizard]

2 minutes ago, TT-SEA said:

I am very confused... you seem to be talking about totally separate things as if they are the same.  

You clearly pointed to the actual stratospheric warming that is happening.    But that way up above the 500mb pattern.  When stratospheric warming is significant enough it totally disrupts the stratospheric PV and links up with the troposphere and then it can deliver very cold air to the surface and completely change the 500mb pattern.    From what I understand... that is what happened in January 2019 and what totally changed our Nino winter in February.   

But if the stratospheric warming fails to disrupt the stratospheric PV then its meaningless to the weather patterns below because the cold air remains locked up in the stratosphere.   That appears to be what is happening this time.   And there will likely be no assistance from a SSW event similar to 2019.

You are talking about the 500mb PV lobe that is stuck in eastern Canada.   That is much lower and totally different and just part of the weather systems we track all the time.    And when it moves out that does not mean it does not mean it going to get cold here... in fact it seems like might just make things more progressive.    

12Z ECMWF at 240 hours as an example.

 

 

The point I have made is the SSW happened and we need to give some time to see if the 500mb PV gets disturbed from it.  It might still happen.  I think the way each of us jumps from talking about 10mb level to 500mb level is where some confusion is taking place.

[TigerWoodsLibido]

6 minutes ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

Tiger!!!

What'd I miss? It's 40F and sunny.

[lowlandsnow]

11 hours ago, Phishy Wx said:

well this is depressing

 

Hinman Glacier has disappeared 

 

https://www.krem.com/article/tech/science/environment/washingtons-hinman-glacier-gone/293-f8d476d5-dd20-43de-905e-56b1435fefd6

 

SEATTLE — The largest glacier between the high peaks of Mount Rainier and Glacier Peak has melted away after a long battle with global warming.

For thousands of years, the Hinman Glacier graced the crest of the Washington Cascades in what is now King County.

Fifty miles due east of downtown Seattle, Mount Hinman sits deep in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, midway between Snoqualmie Pass and Stevens Pass.

Nichols College glaciologist Mauri Pelto led a team to Mount Hinman in August 2022, as he has most summers since 1984. This time, they found its namesake glacier was no more.

In its place were just a few stranded patches of snow and ice.

“This is the biggest North Cascade glacier to completely disappear,” Pelto told KUOW. “I’ve seen a bunch of small glaciers disappear, and to see one of the larger glaciers disappear is more striking.”

Until recently, the Hinman was one of four named glaciers that provided cool water to the Skykomish River in the hottest, driest time of the year.

The glaciers of the Skykomish basin have lost 55% of their surface area since the 1950s, according to Pelto.

“What that means is, you have 55% less of an ice cube there to melt all summer long,” Pelto said.

As the Hinman dwindled to almost nothing in recent decades, late-summer flows got lower in the Skykomish River, bad news for salmon and farmers.

The Hinman Glacier was ancient, though how ancient is unknown. It might date from the retreat of the Cordilleran ice sheet, which left glaciers atop the Cascades and Olympics 14,000 years ago. Pelto said there is strong evidence that the Hinman was older than the explosion of Mount Mazama, which created Oregon’s Crater Lake, 7,000 years ago.

In the 1950s, the Hinman Glacier flowed a mile and a half from the broad top of 7,492-foot Mount Hinman to the valley floor nearly 2,000 feet below.

Mount Hinman and its neighbors gained protection from direct human disturbance in 1976 when they were designated part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. But that designation couldn’t protect Hinman’s snow and ice from a warming climate: They were no match for the rising temperatures of the fossil fuel era.

“Once the largest glacier between Mount Rainier and Glacier Peak,” mountain climber and guidebook author Fred Beckey wrote in the 2000 edition of his Cascade Alpine Guide, “the Hinman Glacier has separated into three masses, with a greatly diminished area.”

In 1958, the Hinman Glacier covered 320 acres, about half the size of Seattle’s Lake Union. In August 2022, the biggest patch of ice Pelto’s team found was about 10 acres—too small and too thin to flow, the defining characteristic of the moving ice masses called glaciers.

Glaciers are rivers of ice. They flow from year to year, as their own weight compresses snow into ice, and generate striking features like deep crevasses and deep-blue ice, sculpting the land beneath them as they go.

Another glacier on Mount Hinman, the Lower Foss, preceded the Hinman into oblivion, while one other, the Foss, remains, though it has shrunken by 70% since the 1950s.

The rounded peak and the glacier on its northwest side were named for Everett dentist and mountain climber Harry B. Hinman in 1934. He started the Everett branch of the Mountaineers in 1911.

Few people ever touched the Hinman Glacier, reachable only by off-trail scrambling and mountaineering deep inside the rugged Alpine Lakes Wilderness.

But the Hinman touched many people by keeping the Skykomish River cool and flowing each summer and providing water for fish and farmers when they needed it most.

RIP (rest in precipitation), Hinman Glacier.

Anyone know why the article doesn't count Honeycomb glacier as being the largest between Rainier and Glacier Peak?

 

[SnowWillarrive]

16 minutes ago, BLI snowman said:

Eh, I think that that is indeed misleading because the eruption in 1980 simply disrupted the existing glaciers up there so much and some regeneration was inevitable. That doesn't mean the long term trend is for further growth.

I was simply pointing out that favorable conditions over a short period can lead to good growth. Just like what happened in the 1970s. Hope that clears up my views. 

[Cascadia_Wx]

Just now, lowlandsnow said:

Anyone know why the article doesn't count Honeycomb glacier as being the largest between Rainier and Glacier Peak?

 

I was also wondering why they didn’t mention the Cinnamon Toast Crunch glacier.

[TT-SEA]

15 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

 

The point I have made is the SSW happened and we need to give some time to see if the 500mb PV gets disturbed from it.  It might still happen.  I think the way each of us jumps from talking about 10mb level to 500mb level is where some confusion is taking place.

The stratospheric warming has to knock out the stratospheric PV first and then link up with the troposphere below before it can have much of an impact on the 500mb pattern.   It has to break through the lid.  That seems very unlikely to happen this time.

You seem to be missing that crucial step in the process.    

[lowlandsnow]

Honeycomb is a stupid name but it's a real glacier

 

[Cascadia_Wx]

Just now, lowlandsnow said:

Honeycomb is a stupid name but it's a real glacier

 

I looked it up. It looks like that glacier is near or on Glacier Peak, which is probably why they didn’t include it.

[joelgombiner]

11 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

I'm just saying the climate has gone through ENORMOUS changes before man could have possibly had any effect.  Some catastrophic climate changes int he past have happened in a matter of decades.  The changes now are at a slow pace.  Why do people discount rebound from the little ice age so easily?  That could explain much of the current warming and glacial retreat.  We don't know enough about the Medieval Warm period to make a good judgment.

I assume you are referring to D-O events here?

The inference of catastrophic climate changes over decades is based on oxygen isotope ratios of water molecules in Greenland ice cores. Those records indicate that the oxygen isotope composition of the snow falling on Greenland changed within decades, but they don't tell you much about temperature in other locations, like the Pac NW. 

[Phishy Wx]

an SSW happened?

lol, was it the most under publicized one in history

 

hmmm pretty sure that wasn't a full on SSW

[ShawniganLake]

I’ve been up to the Athabaska glacier in the Columbia ice fields. It’s shocking how far they have receded in recent decades.  It’s losing 15-20feet of thickness per year currently 

[Deweydog]

8 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

 

The point I have made is the SSW happened and we need to give some time to see if the 500mb PV gets disturbed from it.  It might still happen.  I think the way each of us jumps from talking about 10mb level to 500mb level is where some confusion is taking place.

A gift for you…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_stratospheric_warming
 

You’re not entirely wrong, Jim, although you definitely seem ironically hung up on what is a fairly minor warming episode when compared to an event which results in a reversal (2018, 2019, 2021…). When you were upset with people earlier this month for putting too much emphasis on a possible event, the potential was a few notches better, as was the potential timing.

[Deweydog]

Glacier retreat was also a HUGE topic of conversation here on 2/3/89.