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.
This map places Edmonton in the E zone. But Edmonton has 5 months above 50°F and doesn't look it should be near the boundary at all.
One of the funny things about this map...is if you look closely you’ll notice what looks like a "tongue" stretching down toward the general vicinity of Edmonton (find the 113 W and 53 N intersect). My guess (and only a guess - ?), is that there is a huge data void in much of interior Western Canada (like much of Canada). So they extrapolated using the only station they had (Edmonton).
One of the funny things about this map...is if you look closely you’ll notice what looks like a "tongue" stretching down toward the general vicinity of Edmonton (find the 113 W and 53 N intersect). My guess (and only a guess - ?), is that there is a huge data void in much of interior Western Canada (like much of Canada). So they extrapolated using the only station they had (Edmonton).
There are plenty of weather stations in Western Canada. Almost every main town has one.
From the map you posted, Juneau falls right into the green Do zone.
Ya technically Juneau is a borderline maritime climate just like the rest of SE Alaska and British Columbia, and Washington coast.
That being said it does not matter because it is only a narrow sliver of land that goes one or two miles inland before it hits high mountains. The map posted above does not do it justice because within a few miles inland the mountains rise pretty sharply and the climate transitions into a much colder alpine climate.
For those on the east coast who have never visited SE Alaska it is harder to appreciate how rapidly the climate changes on the Northwest coast of North America. In the middle of April You can literally go from 7 degrees Celsius (45 degrees) and raining to -4 C (25 degrees) with 10 feet of snow on the ground within a few miles from the coast line.
Subartic climates suck...I already find Brussels (belgium) greyer wetter and colder at 50°30' North Latitude than my home city Paris at 49°, so I imagine places at 60° Lat locations! (shiver)
That's why lines drawn on a climate map should (I think) only be used as a rough guide and not a hard line in the sand.
Subpolar maritime climates are, I have felt for some time, the biggest problem with Koppen’s climate scheme.
Many extremly humid maritime climates in the Kuril Islands, parts of Kamchatka, southern Alaska, and parts of Quebec and Newfoundland are classed as “subarctic” because the coldest month is under -3 degrees Celsius or 26.6 degrees Fahrenheit. In my view these climates have much more in common ecologically and meteorologically with the “subpolar oceanic climates” of northwestern Europe, the Aleutians and southern Chile:
Very heavy precipitation eapecially in winter when classic “subarctic” climates are dry and allow extremely deep soil freezing
dominance by oceanic cold-core lows rather the continental plateau cold-core anticyclones (in fact this dominance can be more constant in colder east coast subarctic climates than on west coasts)
absence of permafrost due to extreme snow cover and mildness, whereas “subarctic” taiga climates most typically have discontinuous or, in Asia, continuous permafrost
much heavier Quaternary glaciation (more snow and cooler summers)
highly maritime fishing-based economies rather than hunting or reindeer herding
vegetation much lower and softer-leaved than taiga
As I see it, the real division in subpolar and polar climates is between maritime climates and continental ones, and that this can be defined best in terms of mean annual temperature – a maritime subpolar climate having an annual mean at or above 0° Celsius or 32° Fahrenheit and a continental one having it's annual mean below this but with at least one month above 10°C or 50°F.
Living as I do in the hot, ancient land of Australia, these places fascinate me like few others; nonetheless I have no liking for humid subpolar oceanic climates despite avowedly hating hot weather and loving cool summers. The winters are just too gloomy and snowy, as I can testify from a short stay during the 2009/2010 winter in Helsinki (not quite subarctic but still quite strongly influenced by the Atlantic): it was so dark, cold and grey on two of the three days there I could nor rate the climate highly.
Last edited by mianfei; 01-29-2016 at 10:32 PM..
Reason: Additional difference
The winters are just too gloomy and snowy, as I can testify from a short stay during the 2009/2010 winter in Helsinki (not quite subarctic but still quite strongly influenced by the Atlantic): it was so dark, cold and grey on two of the three days there I could nor rate the climate highly.
I doubt many appreciates gloomy, dark and grey days in the darkest part of the winter.
Helsinki is quite continental, not either subarctic or subpolar oceanic.
This map places Edmonton in the E zone. But Edmonton has 5 months above 50°F and doesn't look it should be near the boundary at all.
Agree, not a very accurate map at all.
It just "roughly" shows the various climatic zones, imo very roughly,
all the zones.
Edmonton shouldn't be in the E zone, same with "Peace River" area NW of Edmonton,
centered around Grande Prairie.
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.
