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.
What? Saint Petersburg? Why that place of all places? Falun for example has higher highs in every month, less precipitation and slightly more sunshine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakobsli
Yeah Oslo is good, but even using 1971-2000 the annual average for Oslo (Blindern, 94 m) is 6.2C...thus Oslo is disqualified for this thread.
From an official climate report:
Stats that are purely means could be 24h means and not max/min means, and so they could be warmer than in reality. I don't know if Oslo would be below 6'C for 1981-2010 though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lommaren
Having looked around a bit in EuroRussia I think this one may be the least bad after all:
Either way, for my pick I decided to look for places with high diurnal range yet lowish continentality, keeping the means low even though the highs are good, and keeping the winters at acceptable temperatures.
I instantly started thinking about interior B.C, and lo and behold, there were some really good candidates.
For starters, there's Quesnel. The absolute best part about this region is the incredibly short winters and early spring. Difference between January and February is 3.3'C, and February and March 4.9'C! Warm lovely summers as well, with decent length.
But without a doubt the winner is Cranbrook! Average high of about 12'C, 2200h sunshine, really warm summers with decent length, and I mean just look at that spring warmup! A little dry perhaps, but with those means, I don't think it should too arid, especially since there's snow in winter preserving a bit of the water until spring.
Then there has to be an honorable mention for Uyuni, Bolivia, which would be the winner if it weren't for the completely deadly altitude and UV radiation as well as aridity,
Stats that are purely means could be 24h means and not max/min means, and so they could be warmer than in reality. I don't know if Oslo would be below 6'C for 1981-2010 though.
What? Saint Petersburg? Why that place of all places? Falun for example has higher highs in every month, less precipitation and slightly more sunshine.
Falun is compared to an older reference period. Ariete would call my choice rediculous and I wouldn't want to be embarrassed in public
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baba_Wethu
I thought you didn't like cold winters?
All climates with 5C means have crap winters, so won't matter in that instance
Looking at Cranbrook it probably takes the cake though. A bit chilly summer nights, but at least that means I could still have three layers of cover in bed even in summer
My solution to crappy climates like Nyköping - sleep under as much as possible so one could at least pretend it's summer year round This one is 7C in means though and is better than anything a 5-6C mean could ever serve up. 23/13 in summer and 1/-4 in winter is not so bad in comparison.
I hope Uyuni's charts have basis in reality though! 15C high and -13C low in the same month is like what the hell even for that altitude and latitude
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.
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.
No need to look any further, we've got the winner right here
