"Super" El Nino Misinformaton

The media and social media are abuzz with talk about the upcoming "Super" El Niño, with forecasts of low snowpack, drought conditions, and massive wildfires (see sample below). 

My local newspaper and some amateur social media are making similar claims.

Few of these scary claims are supported by the facts: in reality, the outlook is quite favorable for our region if a "Super El Niño" continues to develop.

Let me prove this to you.

Surprisingly, there is nothing called a "Super El Nino" in the scientific world.  

If the temperature anomaly (difference from normal) of the ocean surface in the tropical Pacific is 1.5 to 2 C above normal, it is called a strong El Niño.  More than 2C, a very strong El Niño.   The media calls this a "super"; the scientific community does not.

Below is the latest forecast by NOAA.  They are predicting a very strong El Niño this autumn (peaking around 2.2 C above normal).  

There is little doubt we will get a very strong El Nino, but this is not unprecedented, with others occurring in 1982-1983, 1997-1998, 2015-2016, and 2023-2024  (others have occurred before as well).

A KEY point is that very strong El Niños are very different animals than their more moderate cousins.  With different impacts.

Moderate to strong El Niños are typically associated with less snowpack and drier-than-normal conditions.

Very strong El Niños bring near-normal snowpack and plenty of moisture.  

Thus, our water resources are generally fine with very strong El Niños like the upcoming winter.

Want the proof?

Below is a plot of precipitation from October to April (our wet season) since 1980.  The red arrows indicate very strong ("super") El Nino years, and the yellow line is the average of the period (1980 to today).   

Very strong El Niño years are NOT particularly dry... their average is a bit ABOVE NORMAL.

What about snowpack?  

Let's check out a few sites, looking at April 1 snowpack (which is generally the date used for evaluations).

Crystal Mountain Ski area (around 6000 ft)?  Snowpack during very strong El Niños is nearly normal (horizontal line) during such years.

 The much lower Stampede Pass (4000 ft)?  Same story.  

 

Even LOWER at Snoqualmie Pass (below).  Same story...nearly normal snowpack during very strong El Niño years!

Very strong El Niño years have near-normal snowpack in our mountains.    I could show you a dozen other locations:  same story.

What about temperature?    Over Washington State at the surface, very strong El Niño years are about 1°F above normal, although one was below normal (2024).

With normal rain and mountain snow during a very strong El Nino year, the expectation is that there will be plenty of water next year for our region's needs.   

So those predicting drought, drastically reduced snowpack, and enhanced wildfires over the region will have a lot of the proverbial egg on their face next summer.  

So what exactly does a very strong El Niño do to the larger-scale atmospheric circulation around here?     I am a weather scientist and am curious!

Below is the average of the upper-level heights at 500 hPa (think pressure at 18,000 ft), showing the difference from normal for October through March of a very strong El Niño year.  Purple is much lower than normal heights/pressure (a strong trough).

Mama mia!   A HUGE intense low-pressure area over the north Pacific!

Let's look at the local implications of this intense pattern by examining the difference from normal in the winds around 5000 ft for such a very strong El Nino year (below).    

There are greatly enhanced winds from the southwest offshore, bringing in lots of moisture into the West Coast.  That means more precipitation. NO DROUGHT.

To demonstrate this, below is the difference in precipitation from normal for such very strong El Niño years.   A lot more precipitation over the West Coast, with the greatest increase over northern CA and southern Oregon.   

Our region will be a bit warmer than normal, but the additional moisture should result in near-normal snowpack in the mountains above 3500 ft.  Lots of water to fill reservoirs and moisten the soils.

No problem.

Announcement

I will hold a special online Zoom session at 10 AM on Sunday for Patreon supporters. I plan to talk about the winter forecast and answer your questions!

The Great Cooling Has Started

The Pacific Northwest has begun the late summer cooling period, with a substantial cooling occurring over the entire region.

A cooling that probably represents the end of hot weather for the remainder of the season.

Solar radiation is now rapidly declining as daytime shortens and the sun starts to sink towards the horizon, something illustrated by the plot below:

The latest forecasts for Seattle show temperatures only reaching the low 70s for the next ten days!

And the Tri-Cities only rise into the 80s

In fact, the whole region will be cooler than normal, something shown by the latest European Center AI forecast of the differences in surface temperatures from normal

For the next five days: cooler than normal (blue colors)

For the next five days, EVEN COOLER than normal

For the subsequent five days, near normal in the west and colder east of the Cascade:

BURR.... I am going to unpack some light sweaters!

With the pattern change, substantial precipitation is predicted over the next ten days (see below, through late Thursday of next week)

This change in weather should help damp down current wildfires.  

In fact, the fires have already gone into substantial decline, with only a few fires apparent on satellite imagery (red dots).  Very, very low fire activity in California.

Enjoy the transition.

Do I Believe in Global Warming?

Again and again I am asked: 

Do I Believe in Human-Caused Climate Change/GlobalWarning?

A very strange question.  Scientists rarely, if ever, use the term believe.

We never use the term " believe " when we apply Newton's laws of dynamics, the first law of thermodynamics, or any of the basic principles of atmospheric physics.   I have attended hundreds of scientific meetings and not once did a scientist use the term belief in describing human-caused global warming.

Science is not religion...at least it shouldn't be.  Conclusions should be based on accepted scientific principles and data, not beliefs.  

Religon

It appears that global warming has become like a religion to some people, replacing more traditional beliefs.  Apparently, a way to fill their lives with meaning and purpose.

As in many religions, there is the prediction of a catastrophic "end time", with total destruction, if people don't follow the approved "way".    

Self-appointed prophets describe the proper path that will lead to life (some shown below),

I made a decision 15 years ago to stand up against those who distort the science. 

Those who mislead the population.  Those who spread unnecessary fear.  Those who benefit financially from the exaggeration and lies.  

And woe to a person who stands against the apocalyptic climate vision.  They are cast out and rejected.  Worse than wrong.  Evil

I should know.....and have felt the wrath of name-calling and being cast out (by the Seattle Times and KNKX) for remaining with the science.  

So what are my views on climate/change and global warming?  

Quite honestly, I am pretty much in the mainstream.

I should note that I have published several dozen papers on climate issues, from modeling to data-driven studies.  I studied climate science under leaders of the field at the University of Washington, and worked on climate research at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) under one of the leading climate scientists in the world (Stephen Schneider, see below), with whom I published several climate papers.  I have had many NSF research grants on climate subjects.

Climatologist Stephen Schneider and I at NCAR

So what is my view, based on decades of research and study of the climate?

The planet is slowly warming, and increasing greenhouse gases due to humans are a major contributor

A planetary warming of about 1 C  over the past 50 years due to such gases (see plot below)

Most of that warming (about 2F) is due to humanity's greenhouse gas emissions.

A modest, steady warming of the planet.  

What about extremes?  

The warming is causing fewer cold waves, which is saving lives.  But there are worsening heat waves.  Since far more people die from cold than heat, fewer people are dying from extreme temperatures as the planet warms.  That will be true for a while.

The science and data indicate that hurricanes have not become more frequent as the planet has warmed (see below), but the strongest hurricanes may get more powerful by the end of the century.

Interestingly, even with global warming, deaths from extreme weather have declined substantially (by 90% or more), even with increasingly populated areas (see below).

This is due to greatly improved ability to adapt to climate extremes (e.g., air conditioning) and profoundly improved weather forecasting.

The scientific evidence and demonstrated societal impacts are clear:  human-caused global warming is a modest problem.  It is not an existential threat to humanity.

As a weather/climate scientist, my views are well within the mainstream.  

But unlike some, I am willing to take on the exaggerations of the "believers" and media that are happy to misinform folks to get more clicks or to secure funding from climate activists (like a certain local newspaper in Seattle). 

This blog gives me a tool to give my readers the truth.

I have paid a substantial personal price by taking on the "believers" (e.g., KNKX, Seattle Times, name-calling by commenters on this blog, name-callers on some amateur YouTube sites), but the price paid by society, panicked by exaggeration and falsehood, is worse.

Religion, not Science

The Autumn Weather Transition is Occurring

Autumn doesn't wait until September 22 in the Pacific Northwest.   

During most years, there is a transition to cooler temperatures and the return of rain during late August, and this year will not be different.

A plot of average temperatures at SeaTac Airport (below) illustrates my point.  Today (indicated by the blue line) is near the transition point.

This change is not only forced by changes in solar radiation intensity, but also by changes in the large-scale pressure systems that control our weather.

Let me illustrate these large-scale changes by showing you a series of average upper-air (500 hPa pressure, about 18,000 ft) monthly weather charts.

During mid-summer (July) there is a big ridge (dark red) over the Southwest and a weak trough centered to the north of us.  The jet stream (located where the colors change rapidly) is north of Washington State.   

By September, the situation is very different, with the southwest high pressure weakening and moving inland, and a trough (lower pressure) moving towards the west coast.  The weather implications of these changes are profound.

Consider what is going to happen during the next 15 days using the best forecast available (the European Center AI forecast), looking at the same type of upper level chart.

During the next 5 days, the upper-level ridge over the Southwest is apparent.

During the next 5 days, the SW ridge weakens and starts to shift eastward, and a strong trough moves into our region

And the map for the subsequent five days is downright scary with a very deep trough of low pressure (purple color) offshore:  cool and wet for us!

The implications for our weather are profound.   The European Center temperature forecast for Seattle shows highs falling into the lower 70s and 60s:   

Rain will return as shown by the forecast below for two 7-day blocks of time into the future.

No major heatwaves are predicted in these model runs, and it is rapidly getting too late in the season to get one.

Enjoy the "fall transition" in August.  One of the treats of living in the Pacific Northwest.

PS: The latest radar shows showers moving in!

Climate Change and the Little Giant Fire: The Real Facts

Perhaps the most impactful Washington State wildfire of this summer is the Little Giant Fire near Lake Chelan, ignited on July 15 by a lightning storm and now extending over 135,985 acres (see map below)

The fire is still active today, with plenty of smoke and flames (see satellite image yesterday afternoon)

There are many claims that this fire resulted from climate change, drought, and extreme heat (see below).   

As I will demonstrate in this blog, such claims are demonstrably false.  

One local newspaper has been particularly over the top with such claims (see below).

Those blaming the Little Giant Fire on global warming make several unfounded claims:

(1) That the fire was unusual, representing something new and unprecedented

(2)  That lightning, which initiated the fire, is increasing due to global warming

(3)  That the low snowpack this year (driven by global warming) was of central importance,  resulting in far earlier drying of the surface.  That in a "normal" year before global warming, the fire origin location would have been snow-covered.

(4)  That drought contributed to the surface fuels being unusually dry at the time of the lightning strikes.

All these claims can be easily shown to be false.

Location of the Fire Initiation

There are several claims that the fire started at 5000 ft or above.   

Satellite-based fire detection shows the fire initiation was down on the slopes at around 3900 ft (the red dot shows the start location).

It was claimed that the fire started in the forest; in reality, it began in a debris field of previous burns with downed logs, grass, and bushes (red dot shows the initiation location).

Below is a view of the fire-start area from below before it started.

A picture from below looking at the same location during the early days is shown below.  The fire was burning down the hill towards lower elevations.

This is a sample of what burned.  

The Truth About the Snowpack

As noted above, lightning initiated the fire around 3900 ft, after which it then burned towards lower elevation.

There is a nearby USDA Snotel site (Pope Ridge) at 3540 ft.  Just perfect for this fire.  The snowpack (snow water equivalent) at this site is shown below (black line is observed this year, green line is the long-term average).

Certainly, the snowpack was below normal this year.  It melted out on April 7 when the normal meltout is May 7.   A month early!

But since the fire did not start for more than two months into the future (July 15), the early melt-off was not relevant to the fire. 

 Even in a "normal" year, the snowpack would have been long gone and the moistening of the surface gone.

So low snowpack was not an element in this fire.

Lightning and Global Warming

Then there are the claims that the massive lightning "storm" that initiated this and many other local fires that day was the result of global warming/climate change.  And these claims cite some academic papers:

The problem is that lightning observations do not agree with or confirm these predicted trends.  

In fact, lightning strike numbers appear to be steady or declining over the U.S., including the Pacific Northwest (see below, trend from the NLDN network).  

Other networks (e.g., the UW WWLLN network) show the same thing.  I am working on a paper on this topic, by the way.

Bottom line:  Can't blame the lightning that started these fires on climate change!

Previous Fires

The region of the Little Giant Fire has burned many times before, including the historical period before the current global warming.

To demonstrate this, below are the regional fire areas from 1973 until 2025.  Much of the Little Giant Fire's footprint burned during that period.

For example, in 1994, the Tyee Creek fire also started in mid-July and burned a similar area. It was also started by lightning. 

The 1970 Entiat Fire burned more than 175,000 acres and consumed over 80% of the entire Entiat Valley. Lightning initiated.

The region around Lake Chelan is very vulnerable to wildfire for many reasons. 

 It is on the dry side of the Cascades, but gets frequent lightning. It is vulnerable to strong westerly winds descending the eastern side of the barrier. Fire suppression allowed unnatural tree densities that support massive wildfires. Highly flammable invasive grasses have moved in (eg., cheatgrass). And each fire leaves more debris to burn in the next configuration.

Fuel Moisture

Many of the online and media claims of global warming and drought contributions to the Chelan wildfire claim that the fuel moistures were low.

The data shows otherwise. 

Below are the estimated fuel moisture levels over the eastern slopes of the Cascade for bush (100-hr) and log-size (1000 hr) fuels.

They were within normal levels (gray shading).  Fuels are normally dry after mid-July on the Cascade slopes. Dry enough to burn without global warming.

Regarding claims of drought, here is the water-year precipitation (October 1 through July 15) for Chelan.  This year was a bit ABOVE NORMAL.   So much for drought.

What about the summer temperatures at Chelan (see plot for the past 50 years for June 1 to July 15)?  Nothing unusual or particularly warm.

  

Summary

When you examine the actual data, it is apparent that the Little Giant Fire has little to do with global warming and climate change.  

Science and facts matter.  Or at least it should.