Two-week Cold Spell Coming to an End
Prince George, B.C. – The cold spell experienced in much of British Columbia over the past two weeks is about to vanish, resulting in much more seasonal temperatures.
Environment Canada meteorologist Ross Macdonald says “we’re going to warm things up a little bit here. We’ve had very, very cold temperatures the last couple of weeks withy the cold arctic air entrenched right across the province. We’re going to see that come to an end as we’ll see a bit more of a westerly push and some milder maritime air is going to make its way right across most of the province come Sunday and into Monday.”
Macdonald says we’ve been getting daytime highs in the minus 20s “but come Sunday we’re going to start to see a weather system pushing onto the coast and start to spread some milder air into the interior. It’ll take a little bit of time to kind of flush out that cold arctic air but we are expecting the daytime highs to get closer to minus 2 and minus 1 for Sunday.”
Skiers and snowmobilers will be happy to hear Macdonald’s advisory that “as the change comes, though, will come a little bit of precipitation as well, so some snow is expected on Sunday as well.” As far as amounts go he says “for snowfall amounts through Prince George we’re looking for Sunday for anywhere between 5 and 10 centimetres at this point.”
“In addition, once we kind of open this change in the weather pattern we’re going to get another system that will push through on Monday as well, so likely seeing some more snow on Monday and perhaps even into Tuesday. So additional amounts come Monday and Tuesday of 5 to 10 centimetres as well.” Macdonald also says that with the fairly quick turnaround from cold to much warmer temperatures there is also the possibility that we’ll see some freezing rain mixed in with the snow.
Despite the lengthy cold snap it does not appear any low temperature records were broken. “Well it’s really tough,” Macdonald says “we’re looking back at some of the data, specifically for Prince George, in terms of breaking overnight low minimum temperature records and really we’ve been cold and I think the real story is the prolonged cold spell that we’ve had.”
He says looking at records over a 30-year period, “typically in December we see about four days with lows lower than -20, and I don’t need to tell you that we have higher numbers than that. Actually, as of Friday morning we hit our tenth day with lows lower than -20, so it’s been a pretty good cold snap.”
Macdonald says “In terms of breaking any daily records though we’ve been certainly cold but we need to actually be even colder, if you can believe it. To break those records we probably need it to push into the low -30s or even -40s. We weren’t quite there.”
He does acknowledge that “it’s been a little while since we’ve seen a good push of arctic air right through the province and go through all of B.C., not just Prince George and the central interior but penetrate the valleys of the southern interior as well as all the way to the coast and be a snow-maker for some of the Metro Vancouver and Victoria areas.”
The BC Coroner’s Service says the province-wide cold period may be responsible for at least three deaths this month, two in the Cariboo-Chilcotin and one in the upper Fraser Valley. All three deaths are under investigation.
For the week ahead in the Prince George area Macdonald says “it looks like we’re out of any risk of heading back into the deep freeze that we’ve seen for the past couple of weeks. I think we’re going to stay relatively balmy in comparison to what we’ve seen. Certainly with temperatures much more seasonal, averaging out at this time of year to -4 as a daytime high and -12 as an overnight low.”
“We’re going to see those more seasonal norms right through the week heading into Christmas eve and Christmas Day.”
This cold will be back in about three weeks and it will be more intense and a longer duration going long into middle February. That’s the way it seems to work in a cold winter… like a one two punch, or the passing of an eye in a hurricane.
The cold blob or ‘polar vortex’ swings from our our North, and back to Asia, and back and it takes a few weeks to work its way around the Northern hemisphere.
Eagle, that could very well happen. With “Global Warming” and all that other crap, oh yeah, Climate change, it’s a wonder meteorologists can forecast anything accurately. Usually we have a cold snap before Christmas, then early and late January, then another mid February, but, even the Inuit are having trouble with “Global warming”. Haven’t seen the cold temps like -50 F since the 50’s and 60’s, so in this region, it is definitely getting warmer, but it’s all cyclic.
Your comment is hilarious.
Talk about blowing smoke up your a##!
I know lol. My guess is as good as there’s.
Time Will Tell
You see how “soft” we are all getting..”Cold Spell ” .-20 used to be expected and we started really whining at -33ish. Now we all start complaining at -10. Lol..
I love how the weather guys get all smug when they can’t talk about their ‘global warming’ agenda.
This is just what the warmists have been waiting for! Now they’ll be out in force again! Ha, ha!
No. It’s you deniers that constantly try to use localized weather events as anecdotal evidence that anthropogenic driven climate change, on a global level, does not exist.
They must carry the underachiever gene . Us achievers know different . Achievers know what us humans are able to do . Achievers own their abilities . We own the things we do and did . That’s the difference . Underachievers don’t pay their dues because they deny they are culpable . Nothing is easy but who wants nothing .
hahaha actually you are wrong as usual. Very few have said there is no anthropogenic effect on climate. The question gets to how much, how little, and even any out side of regional affects. It is you warmers that deny climate change before man. Heck there is no understanding of the natural causes so how can there be an understanding of anthropogenic cause.
If you don’t agree, show the proof.
So cold is weather but hot is climate is that what you are saying.
They found one of the largest marine fossils in the Peace years back … this area was once submerged … a couple cm rise of sea levels seems pretty moderate. The planet changes continually ….
Seamutt, Please quit trying to act like you or your denier cohorts here are some sort of “centrists” when it comes to anthropogenic climate change. I have read enough of yours and others comments to see that you people swing much closer to the argument that it doesn’t exist than that it does.
And, really, you or any of the other right wing sycophants on this site telling me that I’m wrong doesn’t make it so. It only makes it what you believe in your own mind.
That proves absolutely nothing when it comes to climate change. All it proves is that, at one time, this area was part of the sea floor. Tectonic forces would explain why fossils of marine life can be found in areas that are now dry.
A couple of centimeters rise in sea level is “no big deal”, unless you are one of the myriads of people who live in areas that are nearly at sea level right now. For them, a “couple of centimeters” will be disastrous for their survival.
Well we had more than a couple of centimetres of sea rise recently and life goes on. On our family property in the South China Sea the whole island is so low to sea level every storm that comes through caused flooding.
Last year we built a three foot high retaining wall around the important areas and filled it in with sand and rocks. Problem solved until it needs to be done again if ever. It’s an inconvenience but change is slow and people adapt.
Paying a carbon tax to globalists that are using the issue to implement global governance isn’t a solution that will solve the worlds problems and stop climate change. If you are truly concerned about people living in low laying islands I think the only solution is to help them mitigate the changes or to relocate them… anything else is only providing a false hope and using them to further ones own political agenda.
Also Seamutt, for the record, I am not a “warmer”. I’m of the belief that if there is a problem, maybe we should proactively do something about it now rather than wait until it becomes a concrete intractable certainty.
I guess that doesn’t apply to you or your cohorts, since I’m sure you people are thinking, “we are going to be dead before any of this hits us. Let our descendants figure out how to survive it if it does turn out to be true”.
So how do you know there is a problem? Just what is the problem? Show me the problem? What problem?
The earth is shown to be greening, is that the problem?
Seriously, I’m not wasting any more time debating a delusional. Especially one like you, who demands evidence of a problem while claiming that “the Earth is greening”, without presenting one shred of evidence that any such thing is occurring.
What are you going to do now? Refer me to “Watts up with that”?
“All that extra plant growth can’t keep up with the 40 billion tons of carbon dioxide humans dump into the atmosphere every year.
Incidentally, some of that greening is in the arctic. That place is usually covered in snow and ice except warmer temperatures have been causing it to melt. That’s not a place we want to see green.
Of course, this hasn’t stopped the deniers, who tend to ignore inconvenient facts like that and instead just tout how the earth getting greener must be a good thing.
Of course, deniers gonna deny. Using this study to say that climate change is good is like getting in a massive car accident and being happy you don’t have to vacuum out the car anymore.”
So hahaha you got nothing then? Tyipical.
So hahaha your only response is to sling mud, ow mature. Do you know how to do an internet search? Try earth greening.
Hey I used to unthinkingly go along with mann is cooking the earth bs until I saw Gore’s fantasy movie and realized what a crock. So I started researching and discovered this climate thing is all about money, wealth redistribution and politics no science.
I would recommend a site like WUWT and have an open mind. There is much information to be had on that site from very knowledgeable people. Read and think about it, at least try or are you afraid to discover how taken in you are. Don’t quit, expand your world.
Extra c02 is there some proven science out there saying that is a bad thing?
Whats wrong with a greening arctic, forests have been much father north in the past than they are today. You do realize we have been living in a continuous ice age for the last 2.5 million years or so and are now nearing the end of the present interglacial.
Hey deserts are greening but I guess to you that is a bad thing. I suppose you would rather see them covered in environmentally disastrous solar farms.
There is 3000 gigatons of c02 in the atmosphere, and you are worried about 40 billion tons. Where is the proven science science that life giving c02 is a bad thing. Tell what is the recommended level of c02? C02 has been at 7000 ppm in the past and hey the earth did not turn into a cinder. The danger is if c02 gets too low, most life will end.
Why do you deny climate change. Climate has always changed, why do you deny that?
Ever heard of the Holocene maximum, well the earth has been cooling since, the last 7000 years.
Oh by the way there has been no statistically significant warming for the last 20 years, even NASA acknowledges that, how in convenient.
Hey cold records broken in metro Vancouver in the last week. In your world that is weather right.but if high temps are broken that is climate, right.
“In summary, the mid-Holocene roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in the summer months and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven “astronomical” climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.”
“I’ll just take a moment to remind Anthony (Watts) that RealClimate is a web-site run by highly qualified climate scientists for the purpose of rational conversation on their subject of expertise, not an angry firehose blast of ill-informed accusations, paranoia and flat out lies like Watts Up With That.”
taken from wottsupwiththat.com
seamttsays- ” well the earth has been cooling since, the last 7000 years”
Thanks dude. That would explain the receding glaciers and rising sea levels.
Glaciers been receding long before man could have had any effect. So was man that ended the last glaciation? Glaciers expand and recede. How do you explain receding glaciers uncovering ancient forests and human habitats.
I think digitus you have confused the Holocene maximum with something else as usual. The warming since the little ice age has only been about .7c, hardly a heatwave, NOAA.
Are you talking about rent seeking scientists? Ever looked at the contributors to WUWT?
What’s the readership of realclimate compared to WUWT? That comparison will blow your socks off. How many awards has realclimate earned, none, nada. WUWT has a long list of awards, check it out. Anthony Watts has solar power and drives an electric car. Didgitus what do you have?
Digitus, why don’t you get on a debate in WUWT and just show them how wrong they are. Oh wait you will come up with some sorry excuse not to.
Why do you deny climate change?
Around and around we go.
There was a recent scientific study on the effect of pollution on climate change.
The scientists using airplanes collected samples of air over a highly industrial area. These air samples were studied and kept on file. They then had major pollution reduction equipment and process’s implemented and over a period of 20 years they monitored the particulates in the air over the polluted area.
The result was flabbergasting to the scientists because what they found was that by removing the fine particulates in the air, they reduced pollution, but the big surprise was that once the pollution improved, the sunlight was able to get through the clouds, and the result was that the area became much warmer that it was when it was polluted.
I believe this story was on the Knowledge Network a few months ago.
In any event we now know that by reducing pollution into the air, we are in fact allowing the temperature to rise, which of course causes global warming.
Put that one in your pipe and smoke it.
What happens with a major volcanic event?
Are you saying reducing pollution then is a bad thing?
I see we have the usual AGW denier crowd on here today… have fun!
Remember, just because you deny gravity exists, does not mean gravity stops existing. Same with human caused global warming, you can deny it’s existence all you want, that still won’t make it go away. Argue all you want, in the end, a sack of hammers will always be a sack of hammers.
Exactly! There are renewable energy resources that we can either use or ignore their existence. Solar, wind, wave, tidal, geothermal…
It is there for the taking!
They are all clean sources. Our technology to harvest them and store them is advancing no matter what the arguments of naysayers are. Nobody can stop the progress of research and science.
Why do the deniers keep arguing? Beats me!
They argue because renewables are about more energy , efficient energy added to the energy mix . The fossils want the whole market and less energy means more money for them . The fossils will have to compete and in order to compete they will need more subsities than they get now . Why would anyone one complain about more , cheaper energy ? Makes no sense , right ? Why would anyone complain about some one going renewables to make their life more efficient financially ? Logic would dictate , the more the merrier . The more , the cheaper it will be for me , right ? It’s the old stupid thing , people on mass vote against their own self interest , even with their dollars . You can’t fix stupid .
Because it is not cheaper and would not even exist in any real form if it didn’t have billions of dollars it gets from “fossil fuels”
Many complain on this site that 8 cents per kWh for the next 100 years which site C will cost is too high because using fossil – namely NG would be cheaper. And yet SolarCity with Elons guiding fist will be building a massive solar site in the US that he hopes will be able to produce electricity at 8 cents per kWh for its 25 year lifespan
Oh, and Elons 8 cents is US dollars and BC Hydro is 8 cents in CAN dollars
Check Popular Mechanics where a headline on science states that solar power is now the world’s cheapest energy! In Chile for instance solar power is now half the price of power generated by coal. India has just completed the world’s largest solar power plant, larger than the mega one in California.
Once again, just because you sell it cheap or give it away free doesn’t mean that is the actual cost of producing it. Check out the cost of the solar site to be built in Dubai – the actual estimated total cost is twice that of Site C and the annual output is the same – yet the sale price of the electricity is projected to be less. Maybe BC Hydro should share in some of that subsidy for clean renewable energy and allow it to drop the price for its customers.
There is so much money floating around in subsidies to solar it boggles the mind, and it all comes from the global warming craze. Soon it will all come crashing down and the reality will set in and the 4 billion we throw at it annually for other countries to benefit now that Trudeau doubled our contribution is just ridiculous. Why did he not take that money and build a huge solar or wind site here at home rather than blowing it to make him look good in Paris?
Well, here’s something really interesting! I was just about to call it a day when I came across a photo in an article that I was reading about Mary Vaux Walcott, born July 31, 1860.
Mary was a skilled wildflower artist, photographer, amateur botanist, glaciologist, and promotor of the scenic beauty of the Canadian Selkirks and Rockies.
What caught my eye was a photograph taken of Lake Louise, 1909, courtesy of the White Museum of the Canadian Rockies (V653-PS-118). As I was there during the summer of 2015, I found the image strikingly similar!
So, after a quick look through my digital pictures library, I compared my photos of the lake and glacier with the one taken in 1909.
The size of the glacier was almost identical! Almost, because when I looked closer, I could clearly see that the photo that I had taken in 2015, showed a slightly larger amount of snow and glacier! Not much larger, but larger none the less to that shown in the photo from 1909!
Interesting or what! They had global warming at Lake Louise in 1909!
Comments for this article are closed.