NOAA had been calling for La Nina this Fall/Winter for North America since last spring. They issued a La Nina Watch, said La Nina had a 75% chance of happening, then they canceled the La Nina Watch on September 8th, 2016 and said that La Nina wasn’t favored to happen.
Today, NOAA has issued a new La Nina Watch giving La Nina a 70% chance of happening again…
Weird!
“Synopsis: La Niña is favored to develop (~70% chance) during the Northern Hemisphere fall 2016 and slightly favored to persist (~55% chance) during winter 2016-17.” – NOAA, today
Tons of NOAA information about the La Nina Watch issued today below:
Antici…pation: October 2016 ENSO forecast
What a difference a month can make! Since my last post, the tropical Pacific has changed gears, and now forecasters think there’s a 70% chance that La Niña conditions will develop this fall. However, any La Niña that develops is likely to be weak, and forecasters aren’t quite as confident that La Niña conditions will persist long enough to be considered a full-blown episode, giving it a 55% chance through the winter.
Ch-ch-ch-changes
When I wrote last month, the tropical Pacific wasn’t giving us much evidence that the atmosphere was responding to the slightly cooler-than-average ocean surface, and most of the computer models were predicting that sea surface temperatures would head back toward average.
Remember, La Niña (just like El Niño) requires action in both the ocean and the atmosphere. During La Niña, the ocean surface in the central and eastern tropical Pacific gets cooler than normal, leading to sinking air and less rain above that region, just as the waters near Indonesia get warmer and cause more rising air and rain. This stronger Walker Circulation is completed by stronger east-to-west surface winds and west-to-east upper level winds.
This atmospheric circulation works to enhance the cooler ocean surface, both by blowing across the surface just like you’d cool the surface of your coffee, and also by causing cold water from the deep ocean to rise up. Have you ever blown on the surface of a cup of coffee that has cream in it, but hasn’t been stirred up? You’ll see the cream rise up to the surface, brought there by the circulation you’ve created.
Enough with the coffee! Get back to La Niña!
Right, sorry. Anyway, we really didn’t see much of this cycle happening during the summer. Some weak indications were there, but nothing really locked in, and nothing was giving forecasters much confidence that La Niña was still developing. Also, the greater cooling in the tropical Pacific Ocean that had been forecast by earlier computer model predictions from the spring and summer didn’t happen.
Then, starting around mid-September and continuing through the beginning of October, the trade winds in the central tropical Pacific area picked up.
Short-term fluctuations in the wind like this can be difficult to predict more than a week ahead of time. This burst was associated with subseasonal variability—changes that happen over a few days or a couple of weeks.
Several other indicators also started to look more La Niña-like during September, including more clouds and rain over Indonesia and less in the central Pacific. The two measurements we use to follow the relationship between the conditions in the east/central Pacific and Indonesia, theSouthern Oscillation Index and the Equatorial Southern Oscillation Index, are both positive. This means lower-than-average air pressure over Indonesia and higher-than-average in the east/central Pacific—a more-active Walker Circulation. (Check out Tony’s post about the many ways we measure ENSO.)
And then, of course, there’s the sea surface temperature in the Niño3.4 region, which dropped slightly during September, averaging around 0.6 degrees C below average, and became even cooler toward the end of the month.
The amount of cool water below the surface increased a bit during September, too, after a few months of gradual reduction from the large amount that was present in the spring. This cooler water provides a source for future surface cooling.
All this adds up to a renewed La Niña Watch, as it looks like conditions are favorable for La Niña to develop.
However…
El Niño and La Niña are seasonal phenomena, meaning that these specific conditions have to be present for several months in a row. There can be short-term fluctuations in the winds, pressure, and so on, but the average over the several months must be consistent. This is why ENSO is considered a seasonal climate, not weather, phenomenon.
So we’ll watch the tropical Pacific closely over the next month, to see if the suggestions of La Niña that showed up in the second half of September are here to stay. The current computer model forecasts {{check link}} are predicting a few more three-month-average periods of around half a degree (C) below average in the Niño3.4 region—right at the La Niña threshold.
A weak La Niña likely means lower confidence impacts on U.S. weather and climate during the winter compared to a stronger event. Stay tuned for an upcoming post about the Climate Prediction Center’s winter outlook.
NOAA is a corrupt government organization that doesn’t know their head from their ass. Vegas would do a better job of predicting the weather than these clowns who are consistently wrong year after year. They manipulate data to show no existent warming trends to “prove” the “global warming,” aka “climate change,” scam is “real.” They are frauds. This is not conspiracy theory. Look at the raw data, unadjusted, in homogenized data and see for yourself. You will be shocked. People who believe the crap are either:
A. Part of the scam (fed gov)
B. Grift off the scam (e.g. University researches who get grants to go on exotic annual vacations to “prove” climate change)
C. Useful idiots (eg people who are to lazy or stupid to research the issue and come to their own justified opinion and instead just parrot the party line)
The alarm clock has been ringing for years. It’s time to wake up.
GTFO with that noise. Nobody’s buying it. The ship has sailed. The train has left the station. You and your ilk lost your argument with science a long time ago.