Any way you slice it, warming climate is affecting Cascades snowpack

May 12, 2009

There has been sharp disagreement in recent years about how much, or even whether, winter snowpack has declined in the Cascade Mountains of Washington and Oregon during the last half-century.

But new research leaves little doubt that a warmer climate has a significant effect on the snowpack, as measured by water content on April 1, even if other factors keep year-to-year measurements close to normal for a period of years.

Water content can vary greatly depending on temperature and other conditions at the time of snowfall. Typically an inch of snow at temperatures near freezing will contain significantly more water than an inch of snow a colder temperatures.

"All things being equal, if you make it 1 degree Celsius warmer, then 20 percent of the snowpack goes away for the central Puget Sound basin, the area we looked at," said Joseph Casola, a University of Washington doctoral student in atmospheric sciences.

That means that even in years with normal or above-normal snowfall, the snowfall probably would have been even greater except for climate warming. The finding has implications for various water-dependent resources, including drinking water supplies, fisheries, irrigation and hydropower, and it could be applicable to other areas of the Cascades in the Pacific Northwest.

Annual snowfall variability makes it difficult to plot a meaningful trend, Casola said. Starting in a year with high snow accumulation will imply a significant decrease over time, while starting in a year with average or low snow totals will imply little change or even an increase. So, for example, measuring from 1944 to 2005 shows just a slight decline in snowpack but changing the starting year to 1950 more than triples the decline.

However, the measurements also show a slight increase in the last 30 years, a period of significant climate warming. That is probably because trend measurements include declines from climate warming as well as increases and decreases from other factors. For example, several of the lowest-snow winters in the Puget Sound area were during El Niño years, while many of the highest-snow winters were during La Niña years. Those two climate phenomena in the South Pacific can have significant impact on Northwest weather. Likewise, the amount of can be affected by a long-term climate cycle in the North Pacific called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which changes between positive and negative phases on the order of every 20 years.

"Global warming can be reducing your snowpack over time, but other factors can mask the impact of the warming," Casola said. "Conversely, in a period of dry years global warming would tend to exacerbate the effects."

The new research used four different methods to examine decades-long records of water contained in Cascades snowpack in the central Puget Sound basin on April 1 of each year. Scientists used simple geometry to estimate temperature sensitivity of snowpack, made detailed analysis of seasonal snowpack and temperature data, used a hydrological model to examine the data, and analyzed daily temperature and precipitation measurements to estimate water content of snowpack on April 1.

"If you assume precipitation is the same every year and look at the effects of temperature alone, all the ways we examined the data converge at about a 20 percent decline in snowpack for each degree Celsius of temperature increase," said Casola.

He is lead author of a paper detailing the work, part of his doctoral thesis, which is being published online May 14 in Journal of Climate, published by the American Meteorological Society. Co-authors, all from the UW, are Lan Cuo, Ben Livneh, Dennis Lettenmaier, Mark Stoelinga, Philip Mote and John M. Wallace.

While there still is uncertainty in the trend data, people can expect to see lower spring snowpack more frequently in the future, with low-snow winters bringing low-flow summers, Casola said. Winter precipitation in the Cascades is likely to be similar to what is recorded now, but more of it will be rain.

Casola notes that businesses, resource manager, utilities and irrigators increasingly accept the notion of climate change, and many try to incorporate the information into long-term plans.

"Now they want to know, 'What does this mean for my operation?'" he said. "People are becoming more savvy to the issue of climate change. They want to be aware of changes that might be coming and to identify areas in their systems that perhaps need to be modified."

More information: www.ametsoc.org/PUBS/journals/jcli/index.html

Source: University of Washington (news : web)

Explore further: Water crisis threatens thirsty Sao Paulo

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

New century of thirst for world's mountains

May 18, 2006

By the century's end, the Andes in South America will have less than half their current winter snowpack, mountain ranges in Europe and the U.S. West will have lost nearly half of their snow-bound water, and ...

Dirty snow causes early runoff in Cascades, Rockies

Jan 12, 2009

Soot from pollution causes winter snowpacks to warm, shrink and warm some more. This continuous cycle sends snowmelt streaming down mountains as much as a month early, a new study finds. How pollution affects ...

Climate change could impact vital functions of microbes

Jun 03, 2008

Global climate change will not only impact plants and animals but will also affect bacteria, fungi and other microbial populations that perform a myriad of functions important to life on earth. It is not entirely certain ...

Recommended for you

New paper calls for more carbon capture and storage research

1 hour ago

Federal efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must involve increased investment in research and development of carbon capture and storage technologies, according to a new paper published by the University of Wyoming's ...

Coal gas boom in China holds climate change risks

6 hours ago

Deep in the hilly grasslands of remote Inner Mongolia, twin smoke stacks rise more than 200 feet into the sky, their steam and sulfur billowing over herds of sheep and cattle. Both day and night, the rumble ...

User comments : 7

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

GrayMouser
3.3 / 5 (7) May 12, 2009
"That means that even in years with normal or above-normal snowfall, the snowfall probably would have been even greater except for climate warming."
"Annual snowfall variability makes it difficult to plot a meaningful trend"
If? May? Might?
Can we have some Science here?
jonnyboy
3.3 / 5 (7) May 12, 2009
"So, for example, measuring from 1944 to 2005 shows just a slight decline in snowpack but changing the starting year to 1950 more than triples the decline."


This is exactly the problem with man-made GCW, the Gorites choose a particular year that suits their purposes while the rest of us pick any other year to show that GCW is part of the natural variation.
dajobe
3.4 / 5 (5) May 13, 2009
Nice to see that the up and coming climatologists are able to give all the appearances of knowing future weather based on contradictory statements, variable assumptions and convenient manipulation of available data. I will therefore assume that this has the same level of accuracy as the current 7 day forecast. To sum it all up...it is meaningless, but will never be admitted.
vanderMerwe
3.7 / 5 (6) May 13, 2009
The global warming BS in Phyorg just never stops, does it?
arcticireland
4 / 5 (4) May 13, 2009
The global warming BS in Phyorg just never stops, does it?


Why no mention of the snow in Saudi Arabia? or the advancing Hubbard Glacier in Alaska ?
GrayMouser
5 / 5 (2) May 16, 2009
The global warming BS in Phyorg just never stops, does it?

Why no mention of the snow in Saudi Arabia? or the advancing Hubbard Glacier in Alaska ?

Silly person... Because the climate is warming. These inconvenient facts would just confuse the masses in to thinking for themselves.
arcticireland
not rated yet May 17, 2009
The global warming BS in Phyorg just never stops, does it?


Why no mention of the snow in Saudi Arabia? or the advancing Hubbard Glacier in Alaska ?


Silly person... Because the climate is warming. These inconvenient facts would just confuse the masses in to thinking for themselves.


:) :)