Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Consequences => Topic started by: ClimateChange on June 03, 2013, 07:22:13 AM

Title: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: ClimateChange on June 03, 2013, 07:22:13 AM
I know the focus of this board is on the Arctic, but I wish more people would take note of the dramatic changes that are occurring right here in America. Yet it's a common misbelief that climate change is on hiatus or not having the impact here that it is in the Arctic. The models play into this misbelief because they don't match up with what the real trends show. Part of the problem is everybody alive today was born into a globally-warmed world, so our perception of normal is already skewed.  If we could invent a time machine to transport people back to 1810 (or even 1860 for that matter) when the earth's atmospheric concentration of CO2 was only very slightly elevated by humanity, this would eradicate a lot of the denialism or confusion about global warming. Because the records that survive from this era disclose that the climate from that era would be so starkly different from the one today.

Here in northeast Ohio, for instance, it no longer gets cold in the winter. In fact, since the 1960s, the annual extreme wintertime minimum temperature has been increasing on average 2 to 3 degrees every ten years! And this is not an urban heat island effect, these trends are also documented at rural and suburban sites. This winter, widely regarded as a cold winter in the popular opinion, media, etc. never even reached zero. Historically, temperatures below zero would occur on 5 to 10 days a winter, now they occur less than one time per winter and rapidly they are disappearing from existence.

What this suggests to me is that global warming is progressing much faster than is being realized when one looks solely at the global temperature data sets. It also suggests that there are other factors at work here. The scientific research often focuses on how the Great Lakes will be affected by climate change. There should be more focus on how the Great Lakes will affect global warming trends. Like in the Arctic, I suspect that the eventual loss of wintertime ice cover on the lakes will greatly increase global warming and that's what we're seeing in the loss of extreme cold in the region. By contrast, weather models erroneously suggest that summer temperatures will increase more than winter in this part of the world. The Lakes are rapidly warming -- faster than nearby land air temperatures, in fact, due to the change in ice behavior. Lake Erie is icing out several weeks earlier than it used to, and in recent years this has led to unprecedented spring and summer water temperatures. Eventually I think it will reach a tipping point where the water temperature gets extremely hot (90+) during the summer and stays warm (40+) all winter long. This will cause a dramatic change in the climate of the surrounding areas.

It's worth noting that if current trends persist (i.e. a 2-3 degree increase in extreme winter time minima ever ten years), the coldest temperature recorded wouldn't be much below 30 by the early 22nd century. Unfortunately, global warming is expected to increase in speed and intensity during that period due to increased emissions, so it may start to warm even more rapidly. I suspect the climate of Cleveland may resemble that of present-day Miami by 2100 or so (assuming an 800 ppm+ CO2 atmosphere). A more appropriate comparison would be the Eocene era climate of Wyoming, when fossil evidence shows crocodiles and palm trees dwelled in that state. The only reason even the hothouse Eocene era could support that was due to the presence of a large, prehistoric body of water which modified the continental climate of the region -- just like we'll see with the Great Lakes in the future!
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: ccgwebmaster on June 03, 2013, 02:35:30 PM
I know the focus of this board is on the Arctic, but I wish more people would take note of the dramatic changes that are occurring right here in America.

One of the things I'm happy about this forum for is that it isn't just about the Arctic and there is apparently room on the edges to discuss all sorts of other topics, even where the relationships are rather convoluted and tenuous. I think it fair to say there is already plenty of discussion about changes in America - and to some extent other parts of the world (if you read through posts).

I would like to say America is not the only part of the world experiencing climate change and we would do well to take a whole world view on this. If your wish is that more Americans take notice of what is happening in their own country (and the world...) - I understand - if it is that people who have nothing to do with America take more notice of American problems, I cannot agree - America already gets a disproportionate amount of attention globally at the cost of poorer people in many nations.

This is first and foremost a global problem, given that no nation has an opt out. By any measure there are other extremely important global players besides America, and from a humanitarian point of view there are many other people less advantaged in trying to deal with the consequences of all this.

[EDIT] I'd like to clarify that a bit - my feeling is that at least half the population of the planet is underrepresented (for example, India, China, Africa) in terms of our awareness in western nations (is there anyone in the forum from any of those parts of the world?). Given that this is a global problem I think tribal self interests are a threat to meaningful action (in the sense that no action is meaningful if the outcome is ultimately failure).

[EDIT] I've followed up on that theme in a more appropriate thread here (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,192.msg6644.html#msg6644 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,192.msg6644.html#msg6644)). I don't want to detract from the great lakes as a valid topic - apologies for the misdirection (and any element of peevishness about being inundated with US centric news/information/material).
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: TerryM on June 03, 2013, 10:04:34 PM
ccg


i think Climatechange may have a point re. the changes that the Great Lakes may have on climate. My proximity to the lakes may be affecting my judgment, but it seems as though the state of such large bodies of water might affect weather as far away as James Bay or even Southern Greenland? If so it's probably of more than local concern.


Terry

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: OldLeatherneck on June 03, 2013, 11:15:45 PM

...........i think Climatechange may have a point re. the changes that the Great Lakes may have on climate. My proximity to the lakes may be affecting my judgment, but it seems as though the state of such large bodies of water might affect weather as far away as James Bay or even Southern Greenland? If so it's probably of more than local concern.
Terry

Terry, I remember Dr. Jeff Masters on Wunderground discussing this issue in a post sometime in 2012.  Other than this past winter of 2013, recent years have much reduced ice levels which provides more water vapor to fuel "lake effect" snow events.

We are entering a completely new climate regime globally.  One which may continue to change more frequently than decadally.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: ghoti on June 04, 2013, 01:46:51 AM
Apparently the lack of winter ice on Lake Superior has resulted in inbreeding of the wolf population on Isle Royale. Wolf migration used to happen over the ice in the past keeping the gene pool somewhat more diverse.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Anonymouse on June 04, 2013, 10:19:43 AM
I was born in the midwest and had noticed, in an idle way, during my teenage years, a lessening of snow during winter.  My dad grew up on the very northern (US) edge of Lake Superior, and has all kinds of observations on how the past logging has completely changed the populations of tree growth (now they are all "junk" trees, ie: soft pine) based on his grandpa's experience of what it used to look like.  The "blowdown" in the Gunflint Trail a few years ago was startling to many people, and the fire danger up there is still extreme. 

EDIT: In regards to the great lakes, there is a lot of concern.  They are a huge source of fresh water that, in addition to being increasingly populated by invasive exotic species, are also under pressure to export that water as far as Los Angeles (in some forums).   The water wars will commence unless we come to our senses.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Anonymouse on June 04, 2013, 11:34:55 AM
ccg:

Your points are all very valid.  The world should be up on the CC issue.  But if the states are starting to talk about this, it is a good thing. They are responsible for most of this mess up until now.  But if the rest of the world is to be included in this conversation, they need to talk.  This forum is a place for that.  It is easy to start a thread, but less easy to keep it alive.  Personally, I would welcome a discussion dedicated to observations from people who live in less-represented areas of the world.
I am still unwilling to link to this site in other places, though, for obvious reasons.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tigertown on January 01, 2017, 07:36:40 PM
The lakes seem to have retained a little warmth from last summer, the same as other bodies of water have recently. I read that a cold blast froze pretty much everything over last February in just a matter of a few days. May not be as likely this year, even with all the Arctic air that is escaping. Earth NS shows most surface temps. to be around 40 C.
NOAA Report:
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F&hash=35d7d5d7526c9897dfb55501e320295a)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: JR-ice on January 01, 2017, 08:34:42 PM
As a resident of Syracuse NY, this topic hits close.  "Lake effect" snowstorms (and rainstorms) impact us tremendously, even though we are not a typical shoreline Great Lakes city.  Higher lake temperatures means more opportunities for snow to come streaming from as far away as Superior, across northern Huron, then across Ontario to be dumped into upstate New York.  I also feel like the winters as not as cold as when I was a kid.  It used to get so cold, that you would wake up to the sound of the trees "cracking."  It still gets cold, but just not for as long.

For me, at least, it seems like the biggest impact of climate change in this region to this point has been an increase in extremes and variability.  The drought/heat in summer and inconsistent snow cover in winter is extremely hard on the plant and animal life here.

I guess it remains to be seen if an Arctic blast can change things on the lakes this winter...
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on February 20, 2019, 09:46:21 PM
I will attempt to restore this thread over the coming weeks.

I intend to post updates on Great Lakes water temperature and freezing season, as well as other related information, which might be of interest to some on the board.

Wang, J., X. Bai, H. Hu, A. Clites, M. Colton, and B. Lofgren, 2012: Temporal and Spatial Variability of Great Lakes Ice Cover, 1973–2010. J. Climate, 25, 1318–1329, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4066.1

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2011JCLI4066.1

Abstract: "In this study, temporal and spatial variability of ice cover in the Great Lakes are investigated using historical satellite measurements from 1973 to 2010. The seasonal cycle of ice cover was constructed for all the lakes, including Lake St. Clair. A unique feature found in the seasonal cycle is that the standard deviations (i.e., variability) of ice cover are larger than the climatological means for each lake. This indicates that Great Lakes ice cover experiences large variability in response to predominant natural climate forcing and has poor predictability. Spectral analysis shows that lake ice has both quasi-decadal and interannual periodicities of ~8 and ~4 yr. There was a significant downward trend in ice coverage from 1973 to the present for all of the lakes, with Lake Ontario having the largest, and Lakes Erie and St. Clair having the smallest. The translated total loss in lake ice over the entire 38-yr record varies from 37% in Lake St. Clair (least) to 88% in Lake Ontario (most). The total loss for overall Great Lakes ice coverage is 71%, while Lake Superior places second with a 79% loss. An empirical orthogonal function analysis indicates that a major response of ice cover to atmospheric forcing is in phase in all six lakes, accounting for 80.8% of the total variance. The second mode shows an out-of-phase spatial variability between the upper and lower lakes, accounting for 10.7% of the total variance. The regression of the first EOF-mode time series to sea level pressure, surface air temperature, and surface wind shows that lake ice mainly responds to the combined Arctic Oscillation and El Niño–Southern Oscillation patterns."

Image one below: "Weekly time series of LIA for (a)–(f) each of the six lakes and (g) total Great Lakes during the period 1973–2010. Units for lake ice area are km2 (left vertical axes) and fraction divided by the lake surface area (right vertical axes)."

Image two below: "Annual-mean lake ice area for (a)–(f) each of the six lakes and (g) total Great Lakes ice anomaly during the period 1973–2010. The linear lines are the trend in annual lake ice coverage calculated from the least squares fit method. Unit for the vertical axes is km2."
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Ktb on February 20, 2019, 10:06:55 PM
For those interested in the history, and current and future problems of the Great Lakes, you should read The Death and Life of the Great Lakes by Dan Egan.

Absolutely fascinating book covering a range of topics related to the Great lakes, including invasive species, extinction events, purposefully introduced species for game, and more.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 25, 2019, 02:42:48 PM
Great Lakes continue a decades long trend of increasing water levels.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2019/05/06/great-lakes-water-levels-surge-some-record-highs-predicted/1122888001/
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Klondike Kat on May 25, 2019, 03:30:31 PM
Yes, water levels are much higher recently.  This contrasts with the much lower levels during the first decade of this century.  Due to the bottleneck in southeast Michigan, outflow is greatly restricted.  Hence precipitation (largely snowfall) has a larger effect on lake levels that most others.  Most locals consider low levels to be the greater concern.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: bbr2314 on May 25, 2019, 09:53:09 PM
Yes, water levels are much higher recently.  This contrasts with the much lower levels during the first decade of this century.  Due to the bottleneck in southeast Michigan, outflow is greatly restricted.  Hence precipitation (largely snowfall) has a larger effect on lake levels that most others.  Most locals consider low levels to be the greater concern.
I don't think it is coincidental that 2012/13 marked the state change here. I wonder how damaging another few years of increasing levels would be? (or, permanently increasing levels). 12" here and 12" there, suddenly you have 2'+ of what is essentially localized sea level rise (rather, lake level rise) in the span of only a decade.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: bbr2314 on May 25, 2019, 09:57:57 PM
This is actually something I had not even considered or fathomed possible. But how bad would another few inches on top of the current situation be? We may soon find out. Erie is already 5" above its all-time record for May, Michigan and Huron are 2" below, Superior is 2" above, and Ontario is even. This is essentially rapid / potentially catastrophic SLR in action. I would imagine it would only take another very bad winter for things to become "catastrophic" instead of merely record-setting.

https://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/Great-Lakes-Information/Great-Lakes-Water-Levels/Water-Level-Forecast/Weekly-Great-Lakes-Water-Levels/

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 27, 2019, 02:22:00 PM
The water level of the Great Lakes rises and falls seasonally and the longer term trend of the Lake Michigan does not suggest imminent catastrophe.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 29, 2019, 12:07:17 AM
I don't know if this is AGW, but Toronto island homes are flooding:
https://toronto.citynews.ca/video/2019/05/23/homes-on-toronto-islands-starting-to-flood/
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 29, 2019, 08:00:49 PM
Commute along Lake Michigan (live in Chicago) to get to work. The breakwaters that serve to protect the shoreline in places are nearly covered with water.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: vox_mundi on June 07, 2019, 07:55:03 PM
Great Lakes at Highest Water Levels Ever Recorded for Month of May
https://weather.com/news/news/2019-06-03-great-lakes-highest-levels-flooding-may

Waves crashing over sea walls.

Water flooding homes and businesses.

Docks and marinas underwater.

Fish swimming on what used to be dry land.

This is the scene around the Great Lakes, particularly Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, as every one of the Great Lakes are at their highest levels ever recorded for the month of May.


The problem has been ongoing throughout the spring, but reached critical levels in May. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Detroit said Lake Ontario rose an additional 18 inches last month alone, putting it 24 inches higher than it was at the same time last year. Lake Michigan-Huron rose 9 inches, Erie rose 6 inches and Superior rose 5 inches. Those lakes were all 9 to 13 inches higher than a year ago, and each of the Great Lakes was between 1 to 6 inches higher than ever recorded for the month of May.

Additionally, record high water levels are possible on all the Great Lakes and Lake St. Clair this summer.


(https://newscdn.weigelbroadcasting.com/kVMLF-1557524830-embed-Great%20Lakes2.png)

https://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/Great-Lakes-Information/Great-Lakes-Water-Levels/Water-Level-Forecast/Weekly-Great-Lakes-Water-Levels/

While the higher waters improve shipping channels and allow bigger boats to go through, they wreak havoc on businesses and property owners along the shoreline. Parts of Toronto and Detroit have flooded, as well as other communities in Michigan, Ohio, New York and Pennsylvania.

The situation becomes even more dire when heavy winds push waters up onto the shoreline and into streets, businesses and homes. ... “That causes erosion, that causes the soil to slough away, so people can actually lose their property, inches and inches of their property, and over time that adds up,” Domske said.

... The high water levels on Lake Superior are manageable, but only if the forecasters are wrong about the lake's projected rise, Capt. Donald Kilpela Jr. said.

Right now, only a few docks in his small, Upper Peninsula home of Copper Harbor are submerged by the swollen lake. ... the Upper Peninsula community can weather the record-high Lake Superior water level, but only if the lake holds fast.

"It cannot go another inch higher," said Kilpela Jr., who operates The Isle Royale Queen IV ferry. "Then things get really compromised."

The lower Great Lakes are impacted even more because of water levels flowing down from the upper lakes, she added.

... A recent study also found the Great Lakes region was warming faster than the rest of the country, leading scientists to predict that flooding will only become worse in coming years.

https://twitter.com/sydneydschaefer/status/1128324054111477762
https://twitter.com/john_kucko/status/1131510760134381568

----------------------

How much extra water is in Lake Erie now at its record high? - 79 days of flow over Niagara Falls
https://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/2019/06/how-much-extra-water-is-in-record-high-lake-erie-79-days-of-flow-over-niagara-falls.html

(https://www.cleveland.com/resizer/Xu6_-4E3_mZEsGxDd_AU1p9B4T8=/600x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-advancelocal.s3.amazonaws.com/public/B34VASDJ7BA5HABBELEV7M5F2Q.jpg)

Picture all the water that powerfully flows over the Niagara Falls at any one time.

It would take doubling that flow for nearly three months to bring Lake Erie back down to normal levels.


That’s one way to get a handle on just how much extra water is in Lake Erie. Another way is to picture the entire state of Ohio covered by a half-foot of water.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Klondike Kat on June 07, 2019, 09:34:49 PM
Yet, it was a mere decade ago that climate change was thought to have caused the record low water levels in the great lakes.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071230093533.htm
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: vox_mundi on June 07, 2019, 10:45:24 PM
From your source, KK:


Quote
... "We cannot be certain that the present observed water level drop is caused by factors related to global climate change, or that it portends a long-term problem," the study states. But the ongoing decline in water levels make it "prudent to include lower lake levels in future management planning," the researchers note.[/size][/font][/color]
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 10, 2019, 07:40:45 PM
Climate change driving changes in lake levels:
https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-driving-rapid-shifts-between-high-and-low-water-levels-on-the-great-lakes-118095

EDIT: And these changes are endangering the piping plovers:
https://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2019/0617/Endangered-shorebirds-threatened-by-rising-Great-Lakes
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 17, 2019, 08:58:41 PM
https://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/2019/08/climate-change-could-trigger-drastic-swings-in-great-lakes-water-levels.html
Michigan may not get a break anytime soon from high lake levels wreaking havoc across the state, but when it does, the pendulum likely will swing the other way.
That’s according to researchers with the University of Michigan, who say climate change is behind heavy precipitation that has engorged the Great Lakes as well as water tables throughout the state.
It also will be behind periods of dry weather in coming years that will result in low water levels, said Richard B. Rood, a professor in U-M’s Department of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering.

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 20, 2019, 11:59:23 PM
Quote
If you asked me a few months ago about 2017 being a once-in-a-lifetime event, I would have agreed. But this past spring the water levels of Lake Ontario were higher than two years ago. The beach was under water, the road leading to it submerged, and the marshland had joined the bay. And my grandson and I couldn’t bike to the next town, so no ding-ding.
A once-in-a-lifetime scenario has now happened twice in three years and just last week the area returned to normal. But the summer is almost over.
Something is going on here. The city has people pumping water out of the beaches, thousands of sandbags hold off rising water levels, which is why the Toronto Islands were closed again this year, and because I can’t do my route and we can’t get to the ding-ding, it’s personal.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2019/08/19/washed-out-family-bike-ride-a-climate-change-harbinger-for-all.html
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 21, 2019, 04:46:04 PM
Tom,
Plagiarism is using other's text and presenting it as your own, like you did just above.  When quoting material, quote it! (There is even an "Insert Quote" tool.)  No wonder you got in trouble on other forums (as you indicated someplace on the ASIF). 

Do you have any opinion about what you posted?  Does this parallel your experience? Do you think it's sad?  Does this information build on or contrast to a particular previous post?  Not every post requires personal commentary, but probably most posts should include something

I recall learning in high school journalism class that quoting others' work and commenting here and there basically makes it legal.  Quoting without commenting makes it potentially a copyright violation.  This is different from what you did - no evidence of a quote can be found in your last post.

Edit:  A post script:   I believe frequent posters have a responsibility to set high standards, and therefore reach out.  (Yup - that's my belief, and not necessarily anybody else's.)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: blumenkraft on August 21, 2019, 05:15:33 PM
Sigh, whatever Tom does, he gets backlash.  :-[

Quoting without using the quotes feature is a common thing, even on this forum. I agree it's not correct, quotes should be marked as such but why is it worth mentioning when Tom does it while others do it all the time too?

I disagree that information or likes shared need a commenting per se.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 21, 2019, 06:15:47 PM
I frequently do not go to links, so do not experience how frequently technical plagiarism happens on the ASIF.  My journalism training says "Just don't do it."  My scientific training says "Don't ever do anything that looks like it." That Tom wrote on the ASIF (someplace) that it was a problem on some other forum in his experience influenced my writing a public post. 

So, why plagiarize?

Even starting "From the article:" and then (without other comment or quote marks or quote windows) copy paste would be better practice.

Quoting (without quotes, etc.) an article that starts "If you asked me …" sure makes it look like the poster is the author of those words.  I checked to see if Tom was the author of the article; they don't appear to be the same person.   Jerry Amernic lives in Canada while Tom Mazanec (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=profile;u=2280) is based in Ohio.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: blumenkraft on August 21, 2019, 06:53:46 PM
Let's agree on 'not correct' instead of 'plagiarism', ok?  ;)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wili on August 21, 2019, 07:15:04 PM
Well, yes, it is not correct. But the specific term for that kind of failure to be correct is in fact "plagiarism."

To wit:

Quote
... All of the following are considered plagiarism:

    turning in someone else's work as your own
    copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
    failing to put a quotation in quotation ...
(emphasis added)

https://www.plagiarism.org/article/what-is-plagiarism
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Neven on August 21, 2019, 11:07:29 PM
I've added the quote tags for Tom.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: oren on August 21, 2019, 11:56:53 PM
Just recently Tom started adding short quotes along the links he posts, which I found a marked improvement as I rarely click the links. Next on the agenda is marking these quotes as quotes. But don't throw the baby with the bathwater, these frequent updates in various threads are quite useful.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 22, 2019, 12:59:47 AM
How do you use this quote tool?

Yeah, I found it.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 22, 2019, 04:55:40 AM
Wonderful! :)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 22, 2019, 02:36:21 PM
If I actually were plagiarizing, I would hardly put a link to the source article right after it.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 22, 2019, 07:20:27 PM
I understand people who list a lot of references sometimes (inadvertently?) plagiarize referenced papers, but it would certainly be odd with only one reference!  Yes, I never believed you intentionally plagiarized: you were just getting interesting material onto the ASIF, with unintended consequences (me!  ::)).  I'm glad Wili offered a definition of the behavior (that includes with or without intent possibilities).
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wili on August 22, 2019, 09:38:20 PM
Tom--I, for one, hope you keep posting. Many of your titles and links are quite interesting to me.

ALSR similarly started by dumping a lot of links. With some prompting, we got him to indicate what it was he found particularly interesting from each link, with sufficient (properly quoted) text included to make clear what the piece was about. I consider him to be among the most important posters on this forum now. You might look at some of this posts for some points on how to make your contributions even more valuable to us all.

Thanks ahead of time for future posts. (And yes, plagiarism is still plagiarism, whether it is intentional or not. But as a once-upon-a-time teacher of writing, I would generally be more lenient to students who were doing it by accident, which were most of them, since they were mostly sophomores still learning the basics.)

Best wishes,
wili
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 23, 2019, 01:23:39 AM
I considered it obvious that those were quotes. I have seen others do quoting the same way here. And you could send a PM to the person if you think it is wrong. We are getting a little nasty sometimes here.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 23, 2019, 02:48:03 AM
Great Lake dwarfs sea-level rise. Water is up 6 feet
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1061024613
Quote
Waves crashing against the jetty at South Haven, Mich., where water levels on Lake Michigan are breaking records. Worldwide/Newscom

GRAND HAVEN, Mich. — Streets are flooded in "Coast Guard City, USA," and the maritime rescue force is responding to dangerous events not seen for decades on Lake Michigan.

Boats ramming breakwalls and other objects hidden below the lake surface. People and pets nearly swept off piers by crashing waves. Swimmers fighting riptides that have drowned 30 people so far this year. Beach walkers becoming trapped between pounding surf and cliff-like dunes.

Welcome to the nation's "Third Coast," where climate change is fueling conditions that have turned the Great Lakes into the erratic high seas of the Midwest.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on August 23, 2019, 03:10:53 PM
In Chicago, there are stretches of shore line where the water edge is now covering grass of lakefront parks.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 25, 2019, 10:57:52 AM
I got called out on the old Fourth Turning forum ~20 years ago for copyright violations for copying and pasting articles, so I have since just posted headlines and links. But I go called out here for not giving enough information, so I went to posting quotes from the articles. I did them just as posters like vox_mundi post excerpts, so I thought it was alright. Does anyone call vox_mundi a plagiarist? But I finally figured out how to use the quote feature.
I got called out for starting too many threads. So I tried shoehorning my posts into the threads, and then got PMs saying I'm not always on topic.
I already winnow down the articles on Daily Climate to what I consider important, but you don't like how many I still post, so I'll try to just post very important ones. I don't have time for putting in all this reading and posting to get this grief.
I've tried to be a good poster, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how to please you all.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: blumenkraft on August 25, 2019, 11:10:33 AM
I've tried to be a good poster.

And you have done a great job with it.

You always follow the demands on posting etiquette even if they are harshly worded or even outright insulting. That's a remarkable display of patience.

Still, you will never please everyone i guess. Just keep doing your thing man. :)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: SteveMDFP on August 25, 2019, 11:15:03 AM
I've tried to be a good poster.

And you have done a great job with it.

You always follow the demands on posting etiquette even if they are harshly worded or even outright insulting. That's a remarkable display of patience.

Still, you will never please everyone i guess. Just keep doing your thing man. :)

+1
To post is to invite criticism, this is the nature of an online forum.
Tom has shown openness to criticism, and real efforts to post in ways that are helpful. 
I appreciate Tom's work.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 25, 2019, 11:25:57 AM
BTW, this is my first post on Sunday/Friday.
I used to give up the internet on Friday ("Friday remains a day of penitential observance") and Sunday ("Keep the Sabbath Holy"). Twenty years ago, that was a reasonable observance. But more and more of my life has gone online (television, music, email, etc.) Last night I was sick and could not post. That was the straw that broke the camel's back.
I guess its back to no meat Fridays and just the regular Sunday Mass (I also go each weekday morning, which is why I wanted to do something extra Sunday).
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: oren on August 25, 2019, 01:05:30 PM
Tom, please remember you can't please everyone. Online posting requires a somewhat thick skin and some deep breaths, even on a science-oriented forum. Also don't forget that the satisfied majority is mostly silent, while those that are unhappy will usually speak up. This skews the feedback. The "like" system was added as a way for people to show appreciation without unnecesaary posts. Looking at your Like count, it seems you have quite a few silent thanksgivers.
Btw, I can't imagine two days a week offline...
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 25, 2019, 01:38:50 PM
Yeah, Oren. in 1999 it was one thing, comparable to giving up meat, something Catholics used to do weekly and often more (for example, Tuesdays in honor of the BVM). Now we are supposed to replace abstinence with something comparable if we eat meat.
Now going offline is like living without electricity. Yeah, maybe Queen Victoria lived without electricity, but it is a lot harder today.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 25, 2019, 02:17:19 PM
Yes, I know the high levels of the Great lakes are not SLR, but they may give us a foretaste of what SLR will mean for the coastlines of the world.

Summer on the swollen Great Lakes
The lakes rose this year to levels not seen in decades. A 1,234-mile drive around one of them revealed what all that water has left behind — vanishing beaches, closed roads, new islands.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/us/great-lakes-water-levels.html
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Klondike Kat on August 25, 2019, 03:20:25 PM
Tom,
I do not feel that the situation along the shores of the Great Lakes can be related to global SLR.  Just last decade, the water levels were so low that many residents were unable to launch their boats into the water.  A few decades prior, there was another issue with high water.  This is more a cyclical issue, and trying to tie it to global SLR is probably not a good idea.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: oren on August 25, 2019, 04:03:20 PM
KK, just read what Tom wrote.

Quote
Yes, I know the high levels of the Great lakes are not SLR, but they may give us a foretaste of what SLR will mean for the coastlines of the world.
A foretaste of what SLR might feel like. Not tied.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 04, 2019, 07:23:28 PM
Here is more of my area's "this is what high water looks like"
'Bigger picture, it's climate change': Great Lakes flood ravages homes and roads
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/03/great-lakes-region-flooding-climate-crisis
Quote
This summer, as rain relentlessly poured down on the Great Lakes region, Detroit declared a rare state of emergency. The swollen Detroit River had spilled into the low-lying Jefferson Chalmers neighborhood – an event not seen near this scale since 1986.

Volunteers sandbagged the area as the city’s overwhelmed sewer system spilled raw sewage into the river, which connects Lake Huron and Lake Erie. Across the channel from Jefferson Chalmers, water damaged the historic boathouse on Belle Isle, a 982-acre island park that remains partly shut down because of flooding.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on December 12, 2019, 03:16:42 AM
The Great Lakes Have Been Filled to the Brim for Months and It Could Spell Trouble This Winter

https://weather.com/safety/winter/news/2019-12-11-near-record-high-levels-great-lakes-increase-risk-coastal-erosion


"The Great Lakes set several monthly records for highest levels during the May through August period and lakes Erie and Ontario set all-time records this summer.

The reason for the record-high levels this year in the Great Lakes? Excessive precipitation in the region.

Above-average precipitation has plagued the Midwest for most of this year. The dominant pattern featured a parade of storms that dumped heavy snow and rain in the central U.S. since late last winter.

Chicago, Green Bay and Muskegon, Michigan, have all experienced their wettest year-to-date on record as of Dec. 8, according to the Southeast Regional Climate Center. Most locations in the Midwest have seen a top-10 wettest year-to-date.

All this precipitation eventually flows into rivers and lakes, including the Great Lakes. As a result, the wetter-than-average trend in the central U.S. this year has kept Great Lakes water levels high."

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on January 11, 2020, 05:17:02 AM
Great Lakes Ice Cover Nearly a Record Low For Early January

https://weather.com/news/news/2020-01-08-great-lakes-ice-cover-low-early-january

"Ice cover throughout the Great Lakes is nearly a record low for early January because warmer than average temperatures have dominated the region so far this winter.

The total ice coverage on the five Great Lakes was 1.5% on Tuesday, or the second lowest for Jan. 7, according to NOAA's Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL). Ice cover on that date has averaged about 13.9% since records began in 1973.

...

Great Lakes ice cover usually peaks later in winter, sometimes in late February or early March. The current conditions are not reflective of what the peak might be in the next month or two because that will depend on long-term weather patterns.

Last year started out nearly as slow, but then colder conditions moved in and the ice cover peaked at 80.9% in early March. That's much above the average yearly peak of 55.7%.

On the flipside, early January 2017 had about 3% ice coverage. Persistently mild temperatures through February that year prevented ice growth and the season only had a maximum peak coverage of 19.4%.

What really stands out is Lake Erie has no ice coverage right now.

Lake Erie is the shallowest of the Great Lakes, which usually makes it freeze up fastest. The lake's ice coverage has averaged 27.7% by Jan. 7.

The lack of ice on Lake Erie could keep it primed for lake-effect snow deeper into the winter compared to normal unless more persistent cold air arrives soon.

All of the other four Great Lakes are also trailing behind their average ice cover for this time of year."


Attached is a graph showing the date of maximum ice extent on Lake Superior, from 1973 to 2019. Note that 50 days is Feb. 19th and 63 Days is March 4th.

Line is five year running average.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on January 11, 2020, 04:28:17 PM
I live in Chicago and beaches line the shoreline. They are being destroyed this year and many will not exist this spring. On my drive to work this morning, there is a gorgeous beach house built in the early 1900's on the south side that has waves rolling through it. All of these old structures are masonry and brick with more roof than walls so this one will survive the storm. The beach is another story.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 18, 2020, 12:04:02 AM
Chicago More Vulnerable to Climate Change than Miami, Says ‘Death and Life of Great Lakes’ Author
https://news.wttw.com/2020/01/16/chicago-more-vulnerable-climate-change-miami-says-death-and-life-great-lakes-author
Quote
At the point when Egan was writing his book, which synthesizes a decade of his reporting on the lakes for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Lake Michigan was at a near record low. In 2020, it’s at a near record high.

“In the past, it would take a quarter-century to go from low to high. We just did it in five years,” Egan said.

Going back to the 1840s, Lake Michigan has reliably peaked or bottomed out within 3 feet of an average level, for a total 6-foot swing. “Chicago was built on that assumption, so was Milwaukee,” said Egan.

The new norm could be 5-foot variations, for a 10-foot swing, he said, and that’s cause for alarm.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 24, 2020, 10:25:06 PM
My cousin ran a fishing charter on Lake Erie, so I know a little about this:
Voluntary Measures
Lake Erie turns toxic every summer. Officials aren’t cracking down on the source.
https://grist.org/food/ohio-officials-know-how-to-stop-lake-erie-from-turning-toxic-but-no-one-will-do-it/
Quote
The algae are natural. This slow-motion crisis, however, is largely manmade — and neither the federal government nor states are effectively cracking down on the major contributor.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: TerryM on January 25, 2020, 05:28:02 AM
^^
Good link - Thanks!


The scum is heavy on our Canadian shores.
It's as bad as what we used to see in Lake Mead Nevada, and the fish there all turned into females at one point!


I wonder if this is somehow related to the lowering testosterone levels recorded in NA males?
Terry
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on February 06, 2020, 10:12:35 AM
Great Lakes Ice Cover Nearly a Record Low For Early January

https://weather.com/news/news/2020-01-08-great-lakes-ice-cover-low-early-january

"Ice cover throughout the Great Lakes is nearly a record low for early January because warmer than average temperatures have dominated the region so far this winter.

The total ice coverage on the five Great Lakes was 1.5% on Tuesday, or the second lowest for Jan. 7, according to NOAA's Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL). Ice cover on that date has averaged about 13.9% since records began in 1973.

....

What really stands out is Lake Erie has no ice coverage right now.

Lake Erie is the shallowest of the Great Lakes, which usually makes it freeze up fastest. The lake's ice coverage has averaged 27.7% by Jan. 7."

UPDATE: as of February 5th the ice cover for the Great Lakes is at 6.5%, meaning it is at half the average for a month ago.

Lake Erie continues to be ice free.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: be cause on February 06, 2020, 12:13:40 PM
I was wondering why bbr had been so quiet this winter . I just looked .. his last post was on my dad's 100th birthday .. his last visit to the forum was on my 60th ..

 certainly this winter thus far has run very differently to his expectations .. and encouraged hibernation .. :)  ..  b.c.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: blumenkraft on February 06, 2020, 12:42:14 PM
No, he's banned.

He said some very very stupid shit and Neven had enough.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: dnem on February 06, 2020, 12:43:42 PM
Yes, I summed up this winter's strong PV, cold arctic/warm continents, low snow cover weather as the "bbr is gonna have to wait winter" over on the freezing thread a few days ago!  Seriously, I am seeing more references in more places to the general idea that despite decent SIE gains this winter, we are set up for an early and fast warmup this spring.  It will be fascinating to see if this verifies.

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on February 06, 2020, 01:51:29 PM
No, he's banned.

He said some very very stupid shit and Neven had enough.

It's too bad it had to be that way. He was a lot of fun at times.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: gerontocrat on February 06, 2020, 03:14:08 PM
& bbr would have not enjoyed the season so far.

Ice cover
5 Feb 2020  6.5%
5 Feb 2019  36.9%
5 Feb 2018  50.3%

Also when the ice cover is low, one expects to hear about "Lake-Effect Snow", but this season very few instances reported on Wunderground.news.

All part of low snow at low latitudes, high snow at high latitudes?

Local businesses complaining - no ice fishing

https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/compare_years/

Water Levels
https://weather.com/news/weather/news/2020-02-04-great-lakes-record-high-mean-average-level-january
Quote
Water levels on the Great Lakes were much higher than average in January, setting new high-water records on three of those lakes. The mean water level for the month, calculated by taking the average of each day's water level, topped the all-time January record on lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

January's mean water level on lakes Huron and Michigan was 581.56 feet, surpassing the previous record for January of 581.3 feet set in 1987 (the two lakes are treated as the same lake by the Army Corps of Engineers). The long-term average for January is 578.41 feet.

Lake Superior, the largest and deepest of the five Great Lakes, also broke its all-time January record-high water level. The mean water level last month was 602.72 feet, just above the previous record of 602.69 feet set in 1986. January's long-term average is 601.48 feet.

The two remaining Great Lakes, Erie and Ontario, did not break any records in January, but their water levels were still significantly above average for the month.

Lake Erie had a mean water level of 573.49 feet last month, narrowly missing its all-time January record high by 0.2 feet (2.4 inches). That's more than 2 feet higher than average for the month.

Lake Ontario's mean January water level was only about 0.35 feet shy of its all-time record for that month, or about 1.6 feet (19 inches) higher than the long-term January average.

Water levels across all of the Great Lakes on Jan. 31 ranged from 4 to 27 inches higher than the levels on the same date last year, the Army Corps of Engineers said in its latest weekly report.

Levels on lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior are expected decline over the next month, falling 1 to 3 inches by early March. Still, water levels will remain significantly higher than average heading into the spring. Lake Erie's level is predicted to hold steady, while Lake Ontario is forecast to rise an inch between now and early March.

"High water levels and potentially record-high water levels are expected to persist for at least the next six months, so flood-prone areas are expected to remain vulnerable," said the Army Corps of Engineers.

Why Are Water Levels So High?
The Great Lakes set several monthly records for highest levels from May through August in 2019, and lakes Erie and Ontario set all-time records last summer.

The reason for the persistently high levels in the Great Lakes? Excessive precipitation in the region.

Above-average precipitation has plagued the Midwest for most of the past year. The dominant pattern has brought a parade of storms that dumped heavy snow and rain in the central U.S. since late last winter. Most locations in the Midwest had one of the 10 wettest years on record in 2019.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: blumenkraft on February 06, 2020, 04:30:04 PM
It's too bad it had to be that way. He was a lot of fun at times.

Well, i don't know. Remember, when he blamed the french revolution for climate change. That's just a tick too insane.

BTW, only recently i learned that Joseph Goebbels had a similar talking point about jews and the french revolution. Verry crazy Nazi stuff...

Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on February 06, 2020, 05:02:23 PM
& bbr would have not enjoyed the season so far.

Ice cover
5 Feb 2020  6.5%
5 Feb 2019  36.9%
5 Feb 2018  50.3%

Also when the ice cover is low, one expects to hear about "Lake-Effect Snow", but this season very few instances reported on Wunderground.news.

All part of low snow at low latitudes, high snow at high latitudes?

Local businesses complaining - no ice fishing

https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/compare_years/

Water Levels
https://weather.com/news/weather/news/2020-02-04-great-lakes-record-high-mean-average-level-january
Quote
Water levels on the Great Lakes were much higher than average in January, setting new high-water records on three of those lakes. The mean water level for the month, calculated by taking the average of each day's water level, topped the all-time January record on lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

January's mean water level on lakes Huron and Michigan was 581.56 feet, surpassing the previous record for January of 581.3 feet set in 1987 (the two lakes are treated as the same lake by the Army Corps of Engineers). The long-term average for January is 578.41 feet.

Lake Superior, the largest and deepest of the five Great Lakes, also broke its all-time January record-high water level. The mean water level last month was 602.72 feet, just above the previous record of 602.69 feet set in 1986. January's long-term average is 601.48 feet.

The two remaining Great Lakes, Erie and Ontario, did not break any records in January, but their water levels were still significantly above average for the month.

Lake Erie had a mean water level of 573.49 feet last month, narrowly missing its all-time January record high by 0.2 feet (2.4 inches). That's more than 2 feet higher than average for the month.

Lake Ontario's mean January water level was only about 0.35 feet shy of its all-time record for that month, or about 1.6 feet (19 inches) higher than the long-term January average.

Water levels across all of the Great Lakes on Jan. 31 ranged from 4 to 27 inches higher than the levels on the same date last year, the Army Corps of Engineers said in its latest weekly report.

Levels on lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior are expected decline over the next month, falling 1 to 3 inches by early March. Still, water levels will remain significantly higher than average heading into the spring. Lake Erie's level is predicted to hold steady, while Lake Ontario is forecast to rise an inch between now and early March.

"High water levels and potentially record-high water levels are expected to persist for at least the next six months, so flood-prone areas are expected to remain vulnerable," said the Army Corps of Engineers.

Why Are Water Levels So High?
The Great Lakes set several monthly records for highest levels from May through August in 2019, and lakes Erie and Ontario set all-time records last summer.

The reason for the persistently high levels in the Great Lakes? Excessive precipitation in the region.

Above-average precipitation has plagued the Midwest for most of the past year. The dominant pattern has brought a parade of storms that dumped heavy snow and rain in the central U.S. since late last winter. Most locations in the Midwest had one of the 10 wettest years on record in 2019.

The reason that many areas have not had lake effect snow piling up is that the temperatures are too warm.  Most of the precipitation is falling as rain.  Many areas saw one of their rainiest on record.  Further north, areas in upper Michigan have exceeded average snowfall to date by 1-3 feet.  Similarly, northern Minnesota is having one of its snowiest winters in record.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on February 06, 2020, 08:58:21 PM
No, he's banned.

He said some very very stupid shit and Neven had enough.

It's too bad it had to be that way. He was a lot of fun at times.

In an early November record breaking cold snap in the U.S., he stated that this was clear evidence of the beginning of a regional ice age that would become more generalized over time.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on February 06, 2020, 09:01:00 PM
Chicago is know for its Lake Michigan shoreline, a continuous stretch of parks and beaches. They are taking a beating. Entire beaches have disappeared this winter.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on February 25, 2020, 08:18:51 AM
The average time for peak ice on the Great Lakes is here, and cover continues to be exceptionally low. Extent for February 24th is the 4th lowest on record (back to 1973), behind 2012 (4.56%), 1998 (6.2%), 2002 (6.4%). It is only the fourth time that extent has been below 10% for this date.

February 24th
2010-2019 avg: 37.34
2018: 50.5%
2019: 57.2%
2020: 9.0%

While Lake Superior tends to peak during the first week of March, and some growth in extent is expected over the next week, Lake Erie's maximum extent is usually reached around the 18th of February. These two lakes currently show the largest divergence from the mean.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on February 26, 2020, 10:51:14 PM
Looks like we will witness the consequences of open water on the Great Lakes.  Areas downwind are forecast to receive several feet of snow this week.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 27, 2020, 04:25:22 PM
20-foot waves may be coming to the Great Lakes due to approaching winter storm
Quote
Lake Ontario could get waves of up to 20 feet near its center, Guy said. Waves as tall as 10 feet could form on Lakes Huron and Erie, peaking on their southern shores.
...
Meantime, blizzard warnings are posted in New York, just south of Buffalo and north of Syracuse, where 2 to 3 feet of snow combined with 40- to 50 -mph winds will make for whiteout conditions.

Travel will be nearly impossible, he said.
...
Increased snowfall this season in the region owes in part to low ice coverage on the Great Lakes, as moisture continues to feed precipitation, Guy said. The lakes this week are 9% covered in ice, compared with a typical 42% average coverage, he said. That's the lowest on record since 1973. ...
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/27/weather/14-foot-waves-great-lakes-winter-weather/index.html
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: ZeaLitY on May 11, 2020, 06:16:33 AM
Lost my entire weekend reading my way through the forums! Big thanks to Tom and everyone else for amassing such a great collection of news and studies here. The collapse subreddit has gotten shorter and shorter on real climate change content over the years, and so it'd be wonderful to call this a new home.

The Great Lakes are a primary destination for a lot of people on r/collapse/ and elsewhere who want to escape climate change's worst effects in the short and mid-term. I wasn't immune to this, and have networked with a few Yoopers myself, surprised at how few degrees of separation I had with the area once I started talking to people. This thread has been fascinating as the lake-level rise totally escaped my radar over the last several months (COVID-19, Australian bushfires, etc. dominated headlines instead, I suppose). It's raised a few points that contrast with conventional knowledge that the Great Lakes are the panacea for those looking to survive:


One feels a bit like Burgess Meredith in the Twilight Zone when staring down the magnitude of research on things like this to read through (and deduce the intersections between) when possessing so little time. Too much to process. I would absolutely appreciate any speculation on this stuff; thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: oren on May 11, 2020, 06:51:31 AM
Welcome, ZeaLitY.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 29, 2020, 03:10:02 PM
The 09.2020 issue of National Geographic has an excellent article on the impact of the shrinking winter on the Great Lakes area starting on page 74.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 01, 2020, 02:32:20 PM
The 09.2020 issue of National Geographic has an excellent article on the impact of the shrinking winter on the Great Lakes area starting on page 74.

According to the graph on page 85, the maximum ice coverage on the Great Lakes has  increased 10% over the past 25 years.  Indeed, the maximum ice coverage reached a maximum in the late 70s, dropped until ~2005, and has been rising since. 
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: kassy on September 01, 2020, 10:08:32 PM
So there is plenty of everything for all in the hardcopy, thanks for the heads up.  ;)
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 01, 2020, 11:03:56 PM
The 09.2020 issue of National Geographic has an excellent article on the impact of the shrinking winter on the Great Lakes area starting on page 74.

According to the graph on page 85, the maximum ice coverage on the Great Lakes has  increased 10% over the past 25 years.  Indeed, the maximum ice coverage reached a maximum in the late 70s, dropped until ~2005, and has been rising since.

This is slightly misleading. There was a deep trough (in terms of max cover) from 1998-2003, but the 2003-2019 trend for max cover is much lower than the period between 1973-1998 (lower minima, and less frequent maxima).
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 01, 2020, 11:23:48 PM
The 09.2020 issue of National Geographic has an excellent article on the impact of the shrinking winter on the Great Lakes area starting on page 74.

According to the graph on page 85, the maximum ice coverage on the Great Lakes has  increased 10% over the past 25 years.  Indeed, the maximum ice coverage reached a maximum in the late 70s, dropped until ~2005, and has been rising since.

This is slightly misleading. There was a deep trough (in terms of max cover) from 1998-2003, but the 2003-2019 trend for max cover is much lower than the period between 1973-1998 (lower minima, and less frequent maxima).

Not really.  We are saying the same thing in different words,  Saying the max cover reached a maximum in the late 70s is more precise, but not much different than stating that it was higher in the period 1973-1998.  Similar with saying that the max ice cover dropped or that there was a deep trough. 

Plotting each individual year results in significant scatter in the data.  Using a 5-year average shows the trends much better.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 02, 2020, 12:09:57 AM
The reason it is not more precise to say that it reached a maximum in the 70s is because the data set starts in the 70s. Wording it that way makes it sound like there's a cycle of increasing and decreasing max ice cover (and we are currently increasing again), when we in fact know the long term trend has been one of decline.

Also, 2019 was a low max extent year, which your graph doesn't capture (called 2020 in the below annual graph).

In addition, average annual ice cover (AAIC; amount of ice on the lakes each day during freezing season averaged over the whole season) has been lower during recent maxima than at times of comparably high maxima pre-1998; that is to say, the maximum extent lasts less time. Other than 2014-2015 the freezing seasons are getting shorter and less severe.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 02, 2020, 12:29:14 AM
The reason it is not more precise to say that it reached a maximum in the 70s is because the data set starts in the 70s. Wording it that way makes it sound like there's a cycle of increasing and decreasing max ice cover (and we are currently increasing again), when we in fact know the long term trend has been one of decline.

Also, 2019 was a low max extent year, which your graph doesn't capture.

In addition, average annual ice cover (AAIC; amount of ice on the lakes each day during freezing season averaged over the whole season) has been lower during recent maxima than at times of comparably high maxima pre-1998; that is to say, the maximum extent lasts less time. Other than 2014-2015 the freezing seasons are getting shorter and less severe.

Actually, 2020 was the low max year, and is captured in that graph - it is part of the 5-years surrounding 2018. 

Without data from before 1975, we cannot make scientific claims about the maximum ice coverage prior to then.  Again, the max ice is less and the freezing season is shorter than pre-1998.  Since then, the max ice is more and the freezing season is longer. 

How can we be certain that the long term trend is one of decline, if the past two decades is one of increase?
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on September 02, 2020, 02:49:10 AM
Pretty clear from that chart that Great Lakes ice cover is in a long steady decline.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 02, 2020, 03:24:59 AM
Pretty clear from that chart that Great Lakes ice cover is in a long steady decline.

What chart?
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Sebastian Jones on September 03, 2020, 01:33:15 AM
Pretty clear from that chart that Great Lakes ice cover is in a long steady decline.

What chart?
The chart in post 75 by Wdmn.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Shared Humanity on September 03, 2020, 01:58:55 AM
Pretty clear from that chart that Great Lakes ice cover is in a long steady decline.

What chart?
The chart in post 75 by Wdmn.

yes.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 03, 2020, 02:40:50 AM
Pretty clear from that chart that Great Lakes ice cover is in a long steady decline.

What chart?
The chart in post 75 by Wdmn.

yes.

Not sure what you are seeing in that chart, but it clearly does not show either a long or steady decline.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 03, 2020, 02:41:28 AM
The reason it is not more precise to say that it reached a maximum in the 70s is because the data set starts in the 70s. Wording it that way makes it sound like there's a cycle of increasing and decreasing max ice cover (and we are currently increasing again), when we in fact know the long term trend has been one of decline.

Also, 2019 was a low max extent year, which your graph doesn't capture.

In addition, average annual ice cover (AAIC; amount of ice on the lakes each day during freezing season averaged over the whole season) has been lower during recent maxima than at times of comparably high maxima pre-1998; that is to say, the maximum extent lasts less time. Other than 2014-2015 the freezing seasons are getting shorter and less severe.
Without data from before 1975, we cannot make scientific claims about the maximum ice coverage prior to then.  Again, the max ice is less and the freezing season is shorter than pre-1998.  Since then, the max ice is more and the freezing season is longer. 

How can we be certain that the long term trend is one of decline, if the past two decades is one of increase?

There are a few ways to answer your superficially rigorous questioning.

1) Non-scientific measurements/anecdotal evidence: Did you read the Nat Geo article? They refer to shipping records which talk of break up and start of season, which do not give us max ice cover, but provide some information on Great Lakes ice.

2) Related information about the physical system and accepted physics: We know that the climate has been warming, including around the Great Lakes (as the Nat Geo article also states), and so we have good reason -- i.e. temperature records and physics -- to believe that ice cover was not lower prior to the 1970s than it is now. Nor do we have reason to believe that max ice would have been significantly higher in the 70s than the 1900-1970 period.

3) Meaning of "long term trend" in the satellite records: Finally, in lieu of other satellite data the long term trend is from 1973-2020. And the trend is one of decline in maximum cover.

It is certainly interesting that there have been some very harsh winters in the 2010s, but without some contextualization your graph and the wording of your post are misleading, as I stated in my previous post.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 03, 2020, 02:40:10 PM
1)  Yes, I did read the article.  The reference to the shipping records was rather vague and did not provide much information.

2)  Like most everywhere, the temperature in Michigan has risen, and recent temperatures are the highest recorded.  However, the average temperature during the 25-year period from 1955-1980 was lower than the previous 25-year period, so the ice cover may have been lower during the 1930-1955 time frame.  Prior to that it was likely much higher. 

3)  Overall, the maximum ice cover is less at the end of the dataset (2020) than the beginning (1973).  A simple linear line will show a declining trend, with an R2 of 0.08.  Even that is highest skewed by the first decade of data.  Remove the first 10 years of data, and there is no trend over the past 38 years.

That does not make my post misleading.  Rather, it is misleading to state that the maximum ice cover is declining, when that decline stopped decades ago.  Since we agree that there was a low or "trough" from 1998-2002, and it had affected the recent trend, to gloss over that by saying that the ice is still in decline is a more misleading statement.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 04, 2020, 09:12:05 PM
1) You are right that it was a minor reference, and I wish the article had been more robust; however, what is stated is that, "overall [the shipping records show] a clear signal of human-caused warming since the industrial revolution." Which, as you agree in your second point, would mean also a sign of declining ice cover.

2) Yes, this is true (I will have more on the topic soon). There is no disagreement here, and this seems only to reaffirm my point. It would be cherry picking to say this supported your argument that max ice cover "peaked in the 1970s," because we know there was a c.1930-1954 warm period in the temperature record. Rather, if we're comfortable making that claim, we should be comfortable to say that it peaked in the pre-industrial, early industrial period; i.e. the long term trend -- even outside of the satellite record -- is one of decline.

3) This seems like more cherry picking given what you've already admitted. But, the article also talks about certain lakes having less clear trends, due to shallow waters, etc. If we take, for example, Lake Superior (see below), the last 38 years do indeed show a clear trend, even if the R value is low due to lots of inter-annual variability.

You've done almost the exact same thing as those who were claiming there was a "hiatus" in warming, and you seem to concede (as the evidence clearly shows), that the long term trend has been of decline.

As I stated previously, I do think it is remarkable -- and I wish more discussed in an approachable way -- that we've had some extremely cold winters around the Great Lakes in recent years. However, the minima in max extent continue to be "post-1998" level (and, there are many more years reaching below 30% cover than in the period prior), showing that the system has indeed changed. The inter-annual variability has gone up, and the system seems to be oscillating. If you have good reason to believe that when it settles, lake ice will continue to grow, I would really love to hear your case. I tend to believe -- along with most scientists -- that within the next 30 years, we will see lake ice on the Great Lakes mostly disappear.

Now imagine we had not had this exchange and your original post (that I took issue with) was the last and only word. Can you see all that would have been left out, and how that might be misleading to the casual reader... how it might actually even feed a narrative of climate change denial?
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 04, 2020, 09:35:21 PM
You've done almost the exact same thing as those who were claiming there was a "hiatus" in warming, and you seem to concede (as the evidence clearly shows), that the long term trend has been of decline.

As I stated previously, I do think it is remarkable -- and I wish more discussed in an approachable way -- that we've had some extremely cold winters around the Great Lakes in recent years. However, the minima in max extent continue to be "post-1998" level (and, there are many more years reaching below 30% cover than in the period prior), showing that the system has indeed changed. The inter-annual variability has gone up, and the system seems to be oscillating. If you have good reason to believe that when it settles, lake ice will continue to grow, I would really love to hear your case. I tend to believe -- along with most scientists -- that within the next 30 years, we will see lake ice on the Great Lakes mostly disappear.

Now imagine we had not had this exchange and your original post (that I took issue with) was the last and only word. Can you see all that would have been left out, and how that might be misleading to the casual reader... how it might actually even feed a narrative of climate change denial?

I think we can agree on the first three points, except to say that I did not claim that the max ice cover "peaked in the 1970s," just that that was the highest in the given dataset.  Based on the temperature data back to the late 19th century, I said that the max ice cover was, "likely much higher."

To the casual reader that may be the case, but I am less interested in what the naïve may garner from a statement than ensuring that the statement is correct and that deniers are not using it to claim that we are misleading the people with questionable claims.  The wild swings are intriguing, and I do not have an answer as to why recent max ice cover has increased.  It may just be similar to the "hiatus."  If I were to bet, I would bet that future lake ice will be less.  However based on recent winters, I would not wager too much.  I do not believe that the lake ice will disappear within he next 30 years.  We may experience lower maxima, and possibly lower minima, but the temperature rise is unlikely to prevent the lakes from freezing.  Very difficult to prevent the water from freezing when the air and land temperatures are well below zero.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 05, 2020, 01:16:16 AM
Some related data, which further confirms the overall warming trend's impact on ice around the Great Lakes, can be found in the table below (taken from the paper Historical Trends in Lake and River Ice Cover in the Northern Hemisphere, Magnuson et al, 2000).

Table shows statistically significant changes in freeze, and break-up date for many areas around the Great Lakes (look for Michigan, Minnesota, NY, Wisconsin or Ontario).
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 17, 2020, 05:25:30 AM
The following is the first of two posts, due to the large number of images.


Satellite records for Great Lakes ice cover only go back to the winter of 1972-1973 (referred to as 1973).

There are two annual measurements for each of the five Great Lakes plus Lake St. Clair for this time period. One is the maximum ice extent reached during the season in percentage of lake cover, and the other is average annual ice cover (AAIC), which is calculated by averaging the extent recorded on each day of the freezing season.

Living near Lake Superior, I took some interest in both temperature records for the area, and the ice data for the late.

Looking at the data, I found that extreme minimum temperatures between Dec. 1 and March 31st from some weather stations (Sault Ste Marie Canada (-20C or lower), Sault Ste Marie, Michigan (-17.78C or lower), and Duluth, Minnesota (-20C or lower)) around Lake Superior gave a very strong correlation with AAIC (0.899085 SSM Canada; 0.8670059 Duluth; 0.9098268 SSM Michigan), and that summing these figures across stations produced an even stronger correlation (Fig 1, correlation = 0.9287145). (Unfortunately, due to incomplete data sets I could not look at other weather stations around the lake).

An ad-hoc mathematical relationship was found between the count of these extreme cold days and AAIC for each weather station, and was again strongest when the counts for all three were summed (Fig. 2, r2 = 0.8927). This relationship allowed for some predictive power during the freezing season (by using two week forecasts, for example), which was of use due to an interest in having forewarning of the possibility of ice bridges forming to some of the large off-shore islands on the lake. The latter being possible because AAIC has a high predictive power for max ice extent (Fig 3, r2 = 0.9358), and max ice extent is a good predictor of years when ice bridges formed.

The temperature data for Duluth went back as far as 1949, SSM Canada to 1962, and SSM Michigan to 1932. Because of strong relationships between extreme cold days and AAIC, and AAIC and max extent, as well as the the count of days reaching -17.78C or below in SSM Michigan, and the count of days reaching -20C or bellow in SSM Canada (Fig 4), I have been able to create some back projections of both AAIC and max extent extending to 1932, which I will share in the following post.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 17, 2020, 05:54:09 AM
This is the second of two posts.

Fig 5 Shows Annual Average Ice Cover (AAIC) for Lake Superior from 1973-2020 (Yellow) and several back projections of AAIC.

The first back projection (Green: 1962-1972) was made using the actual data from all three weather stations, since all three went back to at least 1962. R2 for model = 0.8927.

The second back projection (Red: 1949-1961) was made using the actual data from Duluth and SSM, Michigan. R2 = 0.8676

The third back projection (Orange: 1949-1961) was made using the same model used for the first (green) projection, by combining the data from Duluth and SSM, Michigan, with a projected count of extreme days in SSM, Canada (using the relationship shown in Fig 4, above; R2 = 0.8842).

Finally, a back projection (Blue) was made fro the period 1932-1972 using the actual count from SSM, Michigan, combined with the projected count for SSM, Canada. This was done through 1972, so that the period of 1962-1972 could be compared between the strongest model (Green) and the one with the most extrapolation (Blue).

Fig. 6 Shows a the maximum extent of ice cover on Lake Superior (Yellow: 1973-2020), and several back projections of maximum extent from 1932-1972 based on the projections of AAIC outlined above. The relationship between AAIC and max extent is given in Fig. 3, above.

The colours are the same as those on Fig 5.

The data suggests that while Lake Superior experienced somewhat lower ice levels from the late 30s until the late 50s, compared to the period from 1959-1980 (a pattern reflective of the global mean surface temperature anomaly; Fig 7), the general trend has been of a decline in both area covered, and maximum extent. With the exception of 1932 (known as the year without a winter), a notable decline in minima for both AAIC and max extent can be observed beginning in the 1980s, and particularly after the 1998 "super" el nino. Also of note is the increased inter annual variability, especially notable in the maximum extent data over this same period.

Whether these models have any value, or could be improved upon is an open question, but I found them to be interesting enough to be worth sharing. I hope that some of the readers of this forum agree.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: oren on September 17, 2020, 05:56:28 AM
Quote
I hope that some of the readers of this forum agree.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 17, 2020, 07:14:02 PM
Quote
I hope that some of the readers of this forum agree.

Indeed.

Same here.  Your graphs seem to add evidence to the 70s (and perhaps 60s) having higher ice cover than the preceding and ensuing years.  Yes, the general trend is a decrease from those higher years.  After 2012, the trend seems more tenuous.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 18, 2020, 10:49:57 PM
Thank you Oren and The Walrus,

@The Walrus
Yes, the graphs show a peak in the period you had pointed out. During our earlier conversation I expected ice levels to be slightly lower prior to that based on the temperature data I had already processed, and the global surface temperature record.

However, I have since added another data set to my modelling (from Houghton, Michigan). The data set was missing 4 years, but still produced a strong predictive relationship to AAIC for temperatures reaching -17.78C (0F) or below when this count was summed with other stations.

So, I was able to model the years 1962-1972 with this new relationship (r2 = 0.8909; Black on Fig 8 below), and the years 1950-1961 with a relationship between Duluth, SSMUS and Houghton (r2 = 0.8697; Purple on fig. 8 below). Fig 8 (the first one below) shows these new models along with the ones provided in the previous graph of AAIC (Fig 5 above).

The average of these models (Fig 9 below) shows a less dramatic change between the late 30s until the late 50s and the subsequent period. This is also reflected in the average of the models for maximum extent (Fig 10 below).

As for the post 2012 period, it is so short, and includes what is clearly an extremely exeptional year in 2014 (compare the AAIC for this year with the rest of the data set to see how exceptional it is), that I am hesitant to say that the "pause" in the trend is anything more than short term noise. Unfortunately, only time will tell.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: The Walrus on September 19, 2020, 02:01:03 AM
Very nice wdmm. 
We two seem to be the most interested in this post due to living within the Great Lakes.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: wdmn on September 24, 2020, 06:49:33 AM
Thank you. I appreciate your interest.
Title: Re: Regional/Local Impacts of Global Warming in the Great Lakes
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 24, 2020, 11:09:00 AM
Make that three (Lake Erie for me).