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.
That level of snowfall is just ridiculous! So, one January day in every two years doesn't have snowfall?! Winter is too long more so than too cold, but the rest of the year isn't too bad, and the sun is very similar to what we get here. C-.
Yes, similar sunshine amounts to London, but with an earlier peak in May, which I'm not sure I'd like.
It would also help, for your desired scenario, if the NAm polar winter highs were as powerful and stable as the Siberian High, but sadly, that is not the case, as they have to constantly battle it out with warm subtropical air from the Gulf of Mexico. This subtropical air can sometimes penetrate even northern Ontario and Quebec.
I love when the Gulf "takes" over for a few days in the winter. It saves the climate in North America from being miserable like China. Think about the nasty pollution from inversion layers, etc... that would happen if high pressure dominated the winter in NA. It's why the sun can be shining in winter in Beijing and all you see is haze. The low pressure systems from the Gulf help clear out the air in the East part of NA.
That would be a help as well. However, considering that modest elevations in the snowbelt (Tug Hill Plateau, Houghton) receive 200+ inches of snow even now, it wouldn't take all that big of an elevation increase or increase in lake area to crank up some 300-inch totals. You could even get those totals going with only a stronger polar high with no geographical changes.
If there was much larger lake area, significant mountain ranges downwind of the lakes, and stronger polar highs and minimized subtropical influence, I think that 200-300 inches would be standard for the snowbelt cities. It actually wouldn't surprise me to see some isolated 400 inch totals in some of the higher-elevation villages in that scenario.
Of course, it wouldn't be wise to have a polar high that's too strong, because then all the wintertime moisture outside of the snowbelts would be cut off! The snow totals would be suppressed. I outlined one scenario in this topic, which you commented on. Perhaps we should revive that topic....
I would have another scenario. Let's say you have a 20,000 foot mountain across the northern border of the US. What would the climate in the US be? I presume most of the Great Plains, Midwest, and the Northeast would become subtropical at least, with the Gulf Coast becoming tropical.
I think central Canada would become cold deserts, wastelands basically.
Another scenario is to extend the arctic ocean southwards to the southern limit of Hudson Bay. Greenland would become ocean. That would greatly reduce the NA polar highs or almost eliminate them. Nothern Canada may resemble southern S. America (S Chile) and most of Southern Canada would be subtropical I believe.
This kind of climate would probably be responsible for a rise in the prominance of Canada as a cold climate would not be a barrier to development as it is now.
A for me. True winters and not too hot (though they should be a bit cooler, than not A+).
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.
