Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Weather
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Most Climatically Diverse State/Province
Colorado 14 18.67%
Utah 1 1.33%
New Mexico 5 6.67%
Washington 13 17.33%
Montana 2 2.67%
Nevada 2 2.67%
Oregon 5 6.67%
Idaho 1 1.33%
Wyoming 1 1.33%
Arizona 9 12.00%
Alaska 4 5.33%
California 39 52.00%
Hawaii 8 10.67%
British Columbia 12 16.00%
Texas 2 2.67%
Yukon 1 1.33%
Other 1 1.33%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-20-2016, 08:43 PM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
5,699 posts, read 4,933,827 times
Reputation: 4943

Advertisements

So I found these interesting Koppen maps on Wiki, they probably are not super accurate, but I think they do a pretty good job. So which of the following states/provinces have the most diverse climates? Also something to keep in mind is that some of these states only have a tiny microclimate that represents one of the climates, so for instance Washington has 14 distinct climates, but it's only dominated by 4 or 5 of them. Also some climates are more similar than others. Also when voting pick your top three picks.

State/Province [number of climates]

Colorado [16]

Utah [15]

New Mexico [14]
Washington [14]

Montana [13]
Nevada [13]
Oregon [13]

Idaho [12]
Wyoming [12]

Arizona [11]

Alaska [10]
California [10]
Hawaii [10]

British Columbia [9]
South Dakota [9]

Nebraska [8]
Texas [8]

Yukon [5]

Alberta [4]
Connecticut [4]
Florida [4]
Kansas [4]
Massachusetts [4]
New Jersey [4]
Newfoundland and Labrador [4]
New York [4]
North Dakota [4]
Nunavut [4]
Ohio [4]
Pennsylvania [4]
Rhode Island [4]

Illinois [3]
Indiana [3]
Iowa [3]
Maine [3]
Maryland [3]
Michigan [3]
Minnesota [3]
New Hampshire [3]
North Carolina [3]
Northwest Territories [3]
Ontario [3]
Quebec [3]
Saskatchewan [3]
Virginia [3]
West Virginia [3]

Georgia [2]
Kentucky [2]
Manitoba [2]
Missouri [2]
New Brunswick [2]
Nova Scotia [2]
Oklahoma [2]
South Carolina [2]
Tennessee [2]
Vermont [2]
Wisconsin [2]

Alabama [1]
Arkansas [1]
Delaware [1]
Louisiana [1]
Mississippi [1]
Prince Edward Island [1]

Also you can discuss any inaccuracies on the maps, or some unexpected climates found in some of these places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-20-2016, 10:36 PM
 
Location: In transition
10,635 posts, read 16,710,622 times
Reputation: 5248
I would have guessed California would be #1 followed by Alaska and then BC just due to the size, latitudinal spread and mountainous terrain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2016, 10:45 PM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
5,699 posts, read 4,933,827 times
Reputation: 4943
Quote:
Originally Posted by deneb78 View Post
I would have guessed California would be #1 followed by Alaska and then BC just due to the size, latitudinal spread and mountainous terrain.
Yeah I had a similar inclination, but it's understandable why Colorado would be so high since it straddles both sides of the rockies so it experience different precipitation patterns whereas California only experiences mediterranean precipitation patterns. Also considering how large they are, they're not all that diverse only in there most southern regions are they super diverse.

Also I think this map uses colder thresholds for C climates since it considers Spokane to be Csb even though it's Dsb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Norman, OK
2,850 posts, read 1,972,142 times
Reputation: 892
Those are some nice maps, but I prefer the 0°C isotherm for C/D climate split.
I originally put California, but I can also see Colorado because it has more variation in precipitation seasonality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 10:43 AM
 
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,615,202 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by grega94 View Post
Yeah I had a similar inclination, but it's understandable why Colorado would be so high since it straddles both sides of the rockies so it experience different precipitation patterns whereas California only experiences mediterranean precipitation patterns. Also considering how large they are, they're not all that diverse only in there most southern regions are they super diverse.

Also I think this map uses colder thresholds for C climates since it considers Spokane to be Csb even though it's Dsb.
Not all of CA is mediterranean precip pattern, the deserts and mountains get the summer monsoon
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Foreignorland 58 N, 17 E.
5,601 posts, read 3,507,696 times
Reputation: 1006
California, British Columbia and Washington.

This is because I prefer to look at extremes of climate and large they are. No place in Alaska for example has hot summers, all of Colorado's climate zones are elevation-inspired and the state lacks a sea-level frost-rare climate, which in my mind disqualifies them.

California wins due to the mere co-existence of Eureka and Death Valley. It's a shoe-in. British Columbia is in second due to Tofino, Osoyoos and Fort Nelson being in the same province.

LaPush and Spokane combine to make Washington third.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
5,699 posts, read 4,933,827 times
Reputation: 4943
Quote:
Originally Posted by lommaren View Post
California, British Columbia and Washington.

This is because I prefer to look at extremes of climate and large they are. No place in Alaska for example has hot summers, all of Colorado's climate zones are elevation-inspired and the state lacks a sea-level frost-rare climate, which in my mind disqualifies them.

California wins due to the mere co-existence of Eureka and Death Valley. It's a shoe-in. British Columbia is in second due to Tofino, Osoyoos and Fort Nelson being in the same province.

LaPush and Spokane combine to make Washington third.
Spokane isn't even that dry or hot, Tri cities are much hotter and drier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Washington County, PA
4,240 posts, read 4,921,031 times
Reputation: 2859
Quote:
Originally Posted by srfoskey View Post
Those are some nice maps, but I prefer the 0°C isotherm for C/D climate split.
I originally put California, but I can also see Colorado because it has more variation in precipitation seasonality.
I agree about the 0 deg split. I find it quite hard to call Cleveland or Philadelphia "subtropical".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 12:02 PM
 
Location: Philly suburbs
168 posts, read 105,966 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by speagles84 View Post
I agree about the 0 deg split. I find it quite hard to call Cleveland or Philadelphia "subtropical".
I agree they shouldn't be subtropical but the mean temp for Philadelphia in January is above 0C

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia#Climate
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2016, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
5,742 posts, read 3,517,961 times
Reputation: 2658
Quote:
Originally Posted by lommaren View Post
California, British Columbia and Washington.

This is because I prefer to look at extremes of climate and large they are. No place in Alaska for example has hot summers, all of Colorado's climate zones are elevation-inspired and the state lacks a sea-level frost-rare climate, which in my mind disqualifies them.

California wins due to the mere co-existence of Eureka and Death Valley. It's a shoe-in. British Columbia is in second due to Tofino, Osoyoos and Fort Nelson being in the same province.

LaPush and Spokane combine to make Washington third.
Yes, this makes a lot of sense. Rather than counting Köppen it's better to consider extremes of temperature and precipitation. California, BC, and Washington do well in this regard. However, I'd suggest putting BC on top: neither California nor Washington have a real subarctic climate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Weather

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top