US forecast: Hot, dry weather to linger

Jul 19, 2012 by SETH BORENSTEIN

(AP) — U.S. government weather forecasters predict the unusually hot dry weather that has gripped much of the nation will linger into autumn, especially for the parched Midwest heartland.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's outlook for August through October shows that nearly every state likely will have hotter than normal temperatures. Much of the Midwest is likely to be drier than normal, too.

The , issued Thursday, indicates a high probability for little rain for all or parts of 15 states for August. The region encompasses Illinois, Indiana, Missouri and Iowa and the states generally surrounding them. The outlook improves a bit over three months, shrinking to just eight states.

Above normal rainfall is forecast for New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah and parts of Nevada and southern California through October.

Explore further: Brazil builds giant tower in Amazon to monitor climate

5 /5 (2 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Melting snow threatens spring flooding in north

Mar 19, 2009

(AP) -- The Red River of the North along the Minnesota-North Dakota border faces the nation's greatest threat of spring flooding, the government said in it's weather outlook Thursday.

Winter forecast cold north, dry south, heavy snow

Oct 20, 2011

(AP) -- Winter looks to be cold and wet across the northern tier of states, and the drought will worsen in the South, where conditions are expected to be warmer and drier than usual, government forecasters said Thursday.

Spring flooding? Not this year, US forecasters say

Mar 15, 2012

At least it's a dry heat. The federal government's spring weather forecast offers no respite from warmer weather, but the country should get a break from the spring flooding that's hit the last four years.

Recommended for you

Putting a value on what nature does for us

Sep 12, 2014

A new online resource, developed by researchers at the University of Cambridge in collaboration with other organisations based in Cambridge, helps those in both the public and private sector see how changes ...

User comments : 20

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

NotParker
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 19, 2012
June 2012 was tied for 10th driest. The only June this century to make the top 10. 2002 was 25th driest. 1933 was driest.

June 2012 was 14th warmest. 1933 was the warmest.

Shootist
3 / 5 (4) Jul 19, 2012
Cold and wet in the land formerly known as England however.
Deathclock
3.6 / 5 (7) Jul 19, 2012
Weather is not climate /yawn.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 21, 2012
The U.S. grain belt is rapidly reverting to desert as the globe continues to warm.

Americans can expect ever more crop failures and ever higher food prices as a result.
NotParker
3 / 5 (4) Jul 22, 2012
Funny. The grain belt was doing so well they could afford to sell 40% of the crop to be burned in cars.

Drought happens every 20 - 30 years. Sometimes it is bad.

"The US Drought of 1988 was one of the worst droughts ever in the United States. It was a multi-year drought which began in 1988 and continued into 1989. The drought caused $60 billion in damage (between $80 billion and $120 billion for 2008 USD). The drought was the occasion of the worst blowing-dust events since 1977 or the 1930s in many locations in the Middle West including a protracted one which closed schools in South Dakota in late February 1988. During the spring records for lowest monthly total and longest interval between measurable precipitation were set, for example, 55 days in a row without rain in Milwaukee, and during the summer two record-setting heat waves developed, exactly as they did in 1934 and 1936. The concurrent heat waves killed 4,800 to 17,000 people in the United States."
NotParker
3 / 5 (4) Jul 22, 2012
Wet and dry is cyclic.

Sometimes it is wet (green) and sometimes it is dry (amber).

http://www.ncdc.n...2_pg.gif
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 22, 2012
" the vast majority of America is in the middle of the worst drought since 1956. The darker the color -- orange, red, or purple -- the worse the drought is."
http://www.fool.c...maKMn3Nq
ubavontuba
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 23, 2012
The U.S. grain belt is rapidly reverting to desert as the globe continues to warm.

Americans can expect ever more crop failures and ever higher food prices as a result.
You mean like how AGW alarmsists originally predicted extreme desertification of the Sahel? LOL.

"The study suggests huge increases in vegetation..."

http://news.natio...ara.html
NotParker
1 / 5 (2) Jul 23, 2012
"Fifty-five percent of the continental U.S. was in a moderate to extreme drought by the end of June, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., said in its monthly State of the Climate drought report.

That's the largest percentage since December 1956, when 58 percent of the country was covered by drought."

"The nation's most devastating drought occurred in the 1930's during what many refer to as the 'Dust Bowl' years. The drought affected almost the entire Plains and covered more than 60% of the US during its peak in July 1934. It brought devastating economic impacts to many and caused the migration of millions of people from the Plains to other parts of the country, many to the Western US. Although the nation has not since experienced a drought as severe as the drought of the 1930's, subsequent droughts (e.g. those of the 1950's, 1988 and 2000) have also had serious economic and societal impacts."

Howhot
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 23, 2012
In some areas of the US, much of the corn crop is a total loss due to MAJOR drought conditions, and what has grown is toxic that it can't even be used for livestock. It will have to be used for green fuel. It some areas of the US, like in Texas, the drought is worst than the dust bowl. For Texas, these drought conditions have just continued from year to year.

It's a consequence of climate change, no doubt. The whole beginning of this year has been one of extremes across all of the glob, and unless you have your head in a hole, it is obviously one of many effects as a result of AGW.

The very fact, that there are deniers is proof that it is real, and certain powers would like that reality manipulated for there own gains. It's like an the episode of Star trek, Next Gen; where Captain Picard is captured and tortured by a kardasian. "How many lights are there"? the integrator would ask. Picard would say "there are TWO lights!", and the integrator would say "No, there are 3 lights"
NotParker
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 23, 2012
.. Texas, the drought is worst than the dust bowl.


"July 19: Extra! Extra! Its the Drought Monitor Map weve been waiting for the one that tallies last weeks plentiful rains. As expected, much progress was made. Perhaps the most notable change on the map: almost all of Southeast Texas is in the white, meaning completely drought-free and likely to stay that way.

In addition, the rains were so strong in Central Texas that parts of the area moved down a whole drought stage in just one week. Travis County, which contains Austin, moved from Stage 2 of the drought to mostly Stage 1. (There is still a small sliver in the northwestern part of the county in Stage 2.) Williamson County, directly north of Travis County, moved from mostly Stage 3 to mostly Stage 2. Several counties west of San Antonio moved from Stage 2 to Stage 1 in just one week as well.

As Texas gradually pries itself out of drought ... "

AGW Cult Member: Picard called you a TARD!!!!
ubavontuba
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 23, 2012
In some areas of the US, much of the corn crop is a total loss due to MAJOR drought conditions,
And in some areas, its doing just fine. Crop losses due to drought are not unusual.

...It's a consequence of climate change, no doubt. ...it is obviously one of many effects as a result of AGW.
So you think all droughts are the result of AGW? No drought ever happened before this supposed AGW? Hardly.

The very fact, that there are deniers is proof that it is real,
How does that work?

...and certain powers would like that reality manipulated for there own gains.
Ah, so it's all one vast conspiracy then? Maybe you believe in a UFO coverup, as well?

Fear-mongering and unsubstantiated declarations are all you have. Where's the science?
NotParker
2 / 5 (4) Jul 23, 2012
The very fact, that there are deniers is proof that it is real,


How does that work?


LOL. Priceless.
Howhot
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 23, 2012
Opp's I said it was two lights, and instead it was four.  The cardassian interegator was insisting there were 5 lights even though Picard was right.  There were only four.    Regardless of that detail, the point I wanted to make was the like cardassian saying there were 5 lights, the global warming deniers are propagandists tools. 
 
http://www.slate....hts.html
Lets look at the dictionary definition of what a drought is; A drought is "A prolonged period of ABNORMALLY low precipitation." , or "A long period of ABNORMALLY low rainfall, lasting up to several years". So, you deniers talk as if a drought is a normal thing; when actually it is ABNORMAL. It's another extreme weather event, just as is all of the other bizarre weather we have had. Here is the current US drought monitor.

http://droughtmon...tor.html

Texas still looks pretty bad in parts, but so does the whole of the central US, the "bread basket" of USA.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (4) Jul 23, 2012
Lets look at the dictionary definition of what a drought is; ...It's another extreme weather event, just as is all of the other bizarre weather we have had.
Is "Chicken Little" scaremongering all you have to offer?

Either you are very young and inexperienced in the ways of the world, or you are a fool. Which is it?

"Drought is a normal, recurring feature of climate; it occurs in virtually all climatic regimes. ...It is rare for drought not to occur somewhere in North America each year. ...The largest area affected by drought occurred in 1934, when more than 65% of the nation experienced severe or extreme drought. Other significant drought episodes, ...occurred in the 1890s, 1910, 1925-26, 1931-40, mid-1950s, 1964-65, 1976-77, 1983, 1988-92, 1994, and 1996.

http://www.ametso...ht2.html
Howhot
3 / 5 (4) Jul 23, 2012
Let coin a new acronym! GWD. a Global Warming Denier!

The very fact, that there are deniers is proof that it is real,
How does that work?


Well, if you were correct, scientist would agree with you, and I would too. There wouldn't be any deniers. Since you are not correct, and science is, you are a denier. That is proof that global warming is real.

But seriously, all issue of any real impact on mankind are met with a class of people that would rather deny GW's existence. In the case of Climate change from CO2, this directly competes financially with the fossil fuel industry. Coal and Oil are the aging dinosaur of industries and climate change, just like the pollution issues is in direct competition with Coal, Oil and Gas. It is their propaganda campaign that has stifled the acceptance of Global Warming by the masses effecting needed responses and regulation. The deniers are part of the brain washed masses.

rubberman
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 24, 2012
"Above normal rainfall is forecast for New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah and parts of Nevada and southern California through October."

Perhaps a shift in agricultural zoning until this blatently temporary condition no longer persists....
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (2) Jul 24, 2012
Well, if you were correct, scientist would agree with you,
Many do.

http://en.wikiped..._warming

and I would too.
I don't believe you. It appears your personal/emotional identity is bound to AGW alarmism. Whether it's real or not, doesn't seem to matter.

There wouldn't be any deniers. Since you are not correct, and science is,
Remains to be seen.

you are a denier.
Apparently then, you don't know how science works.

That is proof that global warming is real.
So if I say I doubt fairies exist, that's proof fairies exist?

Cool! So...

I doubt I'm a billionaire! "Poof!" Look at that!

I doubt Star Trek is real! "Poof!" "Raise shields, fire photon torpedoes!"

Cool!

You're an AGW cultist and an idiot.

Howhot
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 24, 2012
Well, if you were correct, scientist would agree with you,

Many do.


Most don't. That's your problem isn't it? You sided with the wrong side of what logic says and so to look impressive to your looser buds, you deny the facts.

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (2) Jul 25, 2012
Most don't. That's your problem isn't it? You sided with the wrong side of what logic says and so to look impressive to your looser buds, you deny the facts.
This is your problem, you think it's about "taking sides."