During January, the average contiguous U.S. temperature was 35.5°F, 5.4°F above the 20th century average, ranking fifth warmest in the 126-year record. This was the ninth consecutive January with temperatures at least nominally above the 20th century average for the month.

The January precipitation total for the contiguous U.S. was 2.70 inches, 0.39 inch above average, and ranked in the wettest third of the 126-year period of record. The February 2019–January 2020 precipitation total was 34.95 inches, 4.99 inches above average and ranked third wettest for this 12-month period.

This monthly summary from NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides to government, business, academia and the public to support informed decision-making.

January Temperature

Much-above-average temperatures were observed across much of the Great Lakes and Northeast as well as parts of the Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, the southern Plains and West. Michigan ranked fifth warmest, while Wisconsin and Rhode Island ranked sixth warmest. No state in the Lower 48 ranked average or below average for the month.

Temperatures during the first part of winter were warm enough across the Great Lakes to keep surface water temperatures above freezing across a large portion of the basin. As a result, lake-effect snow events become possible much later in the season than on average, which can lead to higher seasonal snowfall totals. Basin-wide ice cover spiked briefly at the end of January — approximately 35 percent of average for this time of year. Lake Erie, which averages just over 50 percent ice coverage at the end of January, was only 0.4 percent frozen on January 31.

In stark contrast to the record warmth experienced during 2019, the Alaska average January temperature was −6.2°F, 8.4°F below the long-term mean. This tied with 1970 as the 13th coldest January on record for the state and the coldest January since 2012.

McGrath ranked fourth coldest while Kodiak and King Salmon ranked fifth coldest for the month. The coldest average temperature reported across the state during January was −30.4°F in Chicken, AK — 9.5°F below average. The coldest daily minimum temperature of −62°F was also reported in Chicken on January 10.

Cold January temperatures aided in the recovery of the Bering Sea Ice extent during January, which increased to 81 percent of average for this time of year.

January Precipitation

During January, much-above-average wetness was observed across the Pacific Northwest as well as portions of the central and southern U.S. The state of Washington ranked fourth wettest while Oklahoma ranked sixth wettest on record.

Below-average precipitation occurred across much of the Southwest, Florida and portions of the High Plains and Northeast. Rhode Island ranked sixth driest and Massachusetts ranked tenth driest for January.

Alaska had its 14th driest January since records began in 1925 and the driest January since 2006. The Central Interior division was record dry for the month. Despite the below-average statewide precipitation, snowfall was plentiful across the Panhandle and other near-coastal locations.

According to the January 28 U.S. Drought Monitor report, approximately 11 percent of the contiguous U.S. was in drought, similar to the coverage at the end of December. Drought conditions expanded and shifted slightly across parts of Oregon, the state of Washington and Idaho. Improvements occurred across portions of the Southwest and Hawaii, while drought was eliminated in both Alaska and Puerto Rico during January.

https://www.windy.com/-Satellite-satellite?satellite,30.069,-125.684,3,internal

Earth’s long-term warming trend can be seen in this visualization of NASA’s global temperature record, which shows how the planet’s temperatures are changing over time, compared to a baseline average from 1951 to 1980. The record is shown as a running five-year average.

According to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Earth's global surface temperatures in 2019 were the second warmest since modern recordkeeping began in 1880.

Globally, 2019 temperatures were second only to those of 2016 and continued the planet's long-term warming trend: the past five years have been the warmest of the last 140 years.

This past year, they were 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (0.98 degrees Celsius) warmer than the 1951 to 1980 mean, according to scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

“The decade that just ended is clearly the warmest decade on record,” said GISS Director Gavin Schmidt. “Every decade since the 1960s clearly has been warmer than the one before.”

Since the 1880s, the average global surface temperature has risen and the average temperature is now more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit (a bit more than 1 degree Celsius) above that of the late 19th century. For reference, the last Ice Age was about 10 degrees Fahrenheit colder than pre-industrial temperatures.

This plot shows yearly temperature anomalies from 1880 to 2019, with respect to the 1951-1980 mean, as recorded by NASA, NOAA, the Berkeley Earth research group, the Met Office Hadley Centre (UK), and the Cowtan and Way analysis. Though there are minor variations from year to year, all five temperature records show peaks and valleys in sync with each other. All show rapid warming in the past few decades, and all show the past decade has been the warmest.

Using climate models and statistical analysis of global temperature data, scientists have concluded that this increase mostly has been driven by increased emissions into the atmosphere of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases produced by human activities.

“We crossed over into more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit warming territory in 2015 and we are unlikely to go back. This shows that what’s happening is persistent, not a fluke due to some weather phenomenon: we know that the long-term trends are being driven by the increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere,” Schmidt said.

Because weather station locations and measurement practices change over time, the interpretation of specific year-to-year global mean temperature differences has some uncertainties. Taking this into account, NASA estimates that 2019’s global mean change is accurate to within 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit, with a 95% certainty level.

Weather dynamics often affect regional temperatures, so not every region on Earth experienced similar amounts of warming. NOAA found the 2019 annual mean temperature for the contiguous 48 United States was the 34th warmest on record, giving it a “warmer than average” classification. The Arctic region has warmed slightly more than three times faster than the rest of the world since 1970.

Rising temperatures in the atmosphere and ocean are contributing to the continued mass loss from Greenland and Antarctica and to increases in some extreme events, such as heat waves, wildfires, intense precipitation.

NASA’s temperature analyses incorporate surface temperature measurements from more than 20,000 weather stations, ship- and buoy-based observations of sea surface temperatures, and temperature measurements from Antarctic research stations.

These in situ measurements are analyzed using an algorithm that considers the varied spacing of temperature stations around the globe and urban heat island effects that could skew the conclusions. These calculations produce the global average temperature deviations from the baseline period of 1951 to 1980.

NOAA scientists used much of the same raw temperature data, but with a different interpolation into the Earth’s polar and other data-poor regions. NOAA’s analysis found 2019 global temperatures were 1.7 degrees Fahrenheit (0.95 degrees Celsius) above the 20th century average.

NASA’s full 2019 surface temperature data set and the complete methodology used for the temperature calculation and its uncertainties are available at data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

GISS is a laboratory within the Earth Sciences Division of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The laboratory is affiliated with Columbia University’s Earth Institute and School of Engineering and Applied Science in New York.

NASA uses the unique vantage point of space to better understand Earth as an interconnected system. The agency also uses airborne and ground-based measurements, and develops new ways to observe and study Earth with long-term data records and computer analysis tools to better see how our planet is changing. NASA shares this knowledge with the global community and works with institutions in the United States and around the world that contribute to understanding and protecting our home planet.

For more information about NASA’s Earth science activities, visit www.nasa.gov/earth.

The slides for the Jan. 15 news conference are available at NOAA/NCDC website (PDF).

NOAA’s Global Report is available at www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201913

Related report from Copernicus

• Copernicus Report: 2019 was the second warmest year and the last five years were the warmest on record

https://www.windy.com/-Temperature-temp?temp,14.520,-48.516,3,internal

Ever find a white box with a parachute and shreds of a balloon attached to it? The National Weather Service has been utilizing balloons for decades to the measure the upper atmosphere. Where it returns to Earth is up to Mother Nature.

Depending on season, it may land a few miles away from its launch location, or a few hundred miles away. The equipment remains may not be discovered for weeks or months, especially if it lands in farm fields.

The Weather Bureau began its upper atmosphere observations in 1894, utilizing kites tethered by piano wire. The downsides of this method were the limited distance kites could ascend (less than 2 miles), the inability to use them if the wind was too light or too strong, and potential for the kites to break away.

While manned balloons had previously been used in Europe, this was also a dangerous method. The kites gave way to airplanes in the 1930s, which also had weather and height limits.

The concept of using balloons to launch weather equipment has not changed in several decades.

Testing of unmanned balloons to carry the weather instruments began around 1906 at the Weather Bureau's Mount Weather facility in Virginia. The balloons, similar to the kites, were tethered, but were reaching heights over 20,000 feet. By 1909, work began in portions of the central U.S. in testing the use of free-rising balloons. Heights of 14-15 miles were reached near Indianapolis and Omaha.

These balloons were tracked from the ground to determine winds aloft, but any other data was not available until the equipment was retrieved; this led to the development of radio-meteographs (or "radiosondes") that sent the data back to the launch site. Crude radiosondes were tested in the 1920's and saw widespread deployment in the 1930's.

Several models of radiosondes have been used over the years, but the concept of using a balloon to carry the weather equipment has persisted to the present day. Twice a day, at 92 stations, the NWS launches these balloons.

They are filled with hydrogen or helium, and once launched, the balloon will typically ascend to an altitude of at least 100,000 feet before rupturing. When released, the balloon is about 5 feet in diameter, but will expand to 20-25 feet in diameter before rupturing in the thin air. A parachute is usually attached to slow the equipment's descent back to the surface.

While the number of employees involved in upper air launches has decreased over the years, launches still require someone to inflate and release the balloon. However, even this is changing. Recent efforts in Alaska have focused on testing automated launch systems.

An "autolauncher" can release 24 balloons before needing to be restocked. The technology has been deployed to all 13 balloon launching stations across Alaska, where weather and staffing can make it difficult to conduct manual launches on schedule.

For more information, check out the following links: A Brief History of Upper-Air Observations (NWS Headquarters), NOAA news release on the autolaunchers (May 2018). Also, you can watch a balloon launch on our YouTube channel.

Chris Geelhart (chris.geelhart@noaa.gov)

https://www.windy.com/-Satellite-satellite?satellite,internal

The season produced 18 named storms, including six hurricanes of which three were “major” (Category 3, 4 or 5). NOAA’s outlook called for 10-17 named storms, 5-9 hurricanes and 2-4 major hurricanes, and accurately predicted the overall activity of the season.

During each and every hurricane season, thousands of workers across the federal government coordinate with NOAA to safeguard Americans against the threat posed by hurricanes,” said U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. “From advanced warnings to business aid, the Department of Commerce stands ready to help Americans from a storm’s formation to long after its dissipation.

This year marks the fourth consecutive above-normal Atlantic hurricane season. The only other period on record that produced four consecutive above-normal seasons was 1998-2001. Also this year, five tropical cyclones formed in the Gulf of Mexico, which ties a record with 2003 and 1957 for the most storms to form in that region. Of those, three — Barry, Imelda and Nestor — made landfall in the U.S.

NOAA provided around-the-clock support to communities before, during and after each tropical weather threat,” said Neil Jacobs, Ph.D., acting NOAA administrator. “The expertise of our forecasters, coupled with upgrades like those to the Global Forecast System model and our next-generation environmental satellites, helped NOAA and its partners save lives and protect property all season long.

A graphic listing 2019 Atlantic tropical cyclone names selected by the World Meteorological Organization.The 18 named storms that formed are designated with a red slash through their name. They are listed in alphabetical order: Andrea, Barry, Chantal, Dorian, Erin, Fernand, Gabrielle, Humberto, Imelda, Jerry, Karen, Lorenzo, Melissa, Nestor, Olga, Pablo, Rebekah and Sebastien.

The three major hurricanes this season were Dorian, Humberto and Lorenzo. Hurricane Dorian is tied with three other hurricanes — the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane, 1988’s Hurricane Gilbert and 2005’s Hurricane Wilma — as the second strongest hurricane on record in the Atlantic basin in terms of wind (185 mph).

In all, four storms made landfall in the U.S. during the 2019 season: Barry, Dorian, Imelda and Nestor.

This season’s activity ramped up in mid-August during the normal peak of the season, as we predicted,” said Gerry Bell, Ph.D., lead seasonal hurricane forecaster at NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. “The above-normal activity is consistent with the ongoing high-activity era, driven largely by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, which entered a warm phase in 1995. Conditions that favored more, stronger, and longer-lasting storms this year included a stronger West African monsoon, warmer Atlantic waters, and weak vertical wind shear across the western Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico.

An average season has 12 named storms, six hurricanes, and three major hurricanes.

2019 Atlantic Hurricane Season Summary

Hurricane response by the numbers

During the 2019 season, NOAA’s hurricane hunter aircraft and crews flew 57 missions over 430 hours, which along with the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the Air Force Reserve, provided critical data that aided in storm forecasting and research.

In addition, NOAA’s King Air crew collected more than 26,939 aerial images covering more than 4,300 square miles of areas affected by Hurricane Dorian, including shoreline, ports and impacted inland areas of several Bahamian Islands to aid in emergency response.

NOAA and NOAA-supported researchers from the U.S. and Caribbean deployed 30 autonomous ocean glider missions in the Atlantic this season, which provided more than 75,000 observations of ocean temperature and salinity to operational hurricane forecast models. Ocean temperature and salinity data provide important clues about hurricane intensification.

Looking ahead

The 2020 hurricane season will officially begin on June 1 and NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center will provide its initial seasonal outlook in May. Now is the time for families and communities to become Weather-Ready and prepare for the season ahead.

https://www.windy.com/-Satellite-satellite?satellite,internal

Visible, infrared and microwave imagery from NASA satellites help forecasters understand if a storm is organizing or weakening. The Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) instrument aboard NASA-NOAA’S Suomi NPP provided an infrared and nighttime image of Kammuri on Nov. 28 at 1:39 p.m. EST (1639 UTC) that shows it is consolidating and strengthening. The circulation was obscured by the central dense overcast or CDO. CDO is a large central area of thunderstorms surrounding its circulation center, caused by the formation of its eyewall. It can be round, angular, oval, or irregular in shape.

Suomi NPP found a noticeable increase in the size of the CDO, perhaps an indication of some strengthening of the storm.

William Straka III, a researcher at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Space Science and Engineering Center’s Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies used the satellite data to create imagery. Straka said, “Collocated observations of the location of the CDO and microwave imagery are important to help measure the intensity of a tropical cyclone, by seeing how far the center of circulation is within the storm and the temperature difference in the cloud tops in the CDO. Since microwave imagers can see ‘into the cloud,’ this helps in determining the location of the tropical system.”

Straka also noted “However, an important thing to note is that the circulation in one satellite channel is not completely surrounded by the convection.”

At 7 p.m. CHST, local time, Guam (4 a.m. EST/0900 UTC) on Nov. 29, the National Weather Service in Tiyan, Guam noted that the center of typhoon Kammuri was located near latitude 14.5 degrees north and longitude 137.3 degrees east. That puts the eye of Kammuri about 350 miles north-northwest of Ulithi, 350 miles north of Yap, 395 miles north-northwest of Fais and 505 miles west of Guam.

Kammuri is moving west-northwest at 7 mph. It is expected to make a turn toward the west-southwest with a slight increase in forward speed over the next 24 hours. Maximum sustained winds have increased to 85 mph. Kammuri is forecast to maintain this intensity through Saturday, Nov. 30. Typhoon force winds extend outward from the center up to 35 miles. Tropical storm force winds extend outward from the Center up to 145 miles.

The forecast track for Kammuri takes the storm due west toward the Philippines. The forecast from Joint Typhoon Warning Center has Kammuri intensifying to about 125 knots (144 mph/232 kph) by December 1, 2019, which would be the equivalent to a Category 4 storm in the Atlantic. The storm is expected to make landfall in the central and northern Philippines on Dec. 3.

Typhoons and hurricanes are the most powerful weather event on Earth. NASA’s expertise in space and scientific exploration contributes to essential services provided to the American people by other federal agencies, such as hurricane weather forecasting.

For updated forecasts visit weather.gov/gum/Cyclones

Rob Gutro
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center

Related content

• The latest Typhoon Kammuri (Tisoy) updates
• What is a tropical cyclone

https://www.windy.com/-Satellite-satellite?satellite,6.948,131.704,5,internal

In that episode, besides crushing politicians, Oliver provided nice recap of how weather business works and how important is a role of the paid-by-taxes government agencies like NWS/NOAA in US, or Copernicus (ECMWF) here in Europe.

Great news is that HBO made whole weather section available for anyone to watch on the show's YouTube channel. Worth watching, insightful and funny as hell :)

https://www.windy.com/-Satellite-satellite?satellite,13.667,81.475,5,internal

A spiraling cloud pattern, known as a von Kármán vortex, formed off the west coast of Mexico’s Baja California Peninsula on May 13, 2019. The atmospheric phenomenon seen here by NOAA-20 was named after Theodore von Kármán, a Hungarian-American aerospace engineer who co-founded NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Von Kármán vortices typically form when the prevailing wind is diverted by elevated land features such as islands, mountaintops or volcanoes. These topographic features disrupt the flow of the air, and the result is beautiful spiral patterns in the clouds. In this case, the von Kármán vortices formed off the southeast coast of Guadalupe Island, which is located about 150 miles off the west coast of Mexico’s Baja California Peninsula.

This image was created by combining three of the high resolution thermal and visible channels from the NOAA-20 satellite's VIIRS sensor. The combination of these channels enhances the contrast between clouds, water, and land surfaces, with the ocean appearing black in this imagery.

Credits: NOAA Environmental Visualization Laboratory

The approach took a closer look at seawater temperature and salinity reflecting the ocean

The study, published in the January 2019 issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, could help uncover many details of long‐term ocean climate variability with much higher than previously achievable spatial resolution. The work used comprehensive information of the Northwest Atlantic (NWA)—one of the most climatically important and data-rich regions of the world ocean.

Developing a New Ocean Climatology

Many ocean parameters, such as temperature, salinity, oxygen, and nutrients are collected by a number of international organizations for monitoring and studying the ocean’s condition and change. The collected observations are used to create monthly, seasonal, and annual values of those parameters employing the objective analysis of historical oceanographic data.

Essentially, ocean climatologies describe the average long-term state of the ocean.

Essentially, ocean climatologies describe the average long-term state of the ocean. Researchers map ocean data at specified depths and resolutions on a regular grid with the grid horizontal dimensions in latitude and longitude measured in degrees (°). For example, one degree of latitude or longitude is about 60 nautical miles, approximately 69 statute miles. The ocean data within grid cells, averaged over decades or longer, are called “ocean climatologies.” Essentially, ocean climatologies describe the average long-term state of the ocean.

This higher spatial resolution helped to assess ocean climate decadal-scale variability with unprecedented magnification

This higher spatial resolution helped to assess ocean climate decadal-scale variability with unprecedented magnification. In the NWA region, characterized by perhaps the highest density of data coverage in the world, the research team created a new temperature and salinity climatology, a subset of the WOA. The team wanted a testing field for inquiry into ocean climate change on a decadal time span. This new NWA regional climatology (NWARC) included WOD data from nearly six decades, beginning in 1955. The large volume of temperature and salinity data available from long-term observations in the region allowed a much higher resolution than attainable in most other regions of the world ocean. This higher spatial resolution helped to assess ocean climate decadal-scale variability with unprecedented magnification.

A 1° x 1° grid (about 60 square nautical miles) was a standard resolution of ocean climatologies for many years and has been only recently replaced by a higher resolution grid of 1/4° x 1/4° (about 15 square nautical miles). In the NWARC case, the NCEI Regional Climatology team drilled down further, to the resolution of 1/10° x 1/10° (about 6 square nautical miles), to examine the temperature and salinity structure that reflected energetic mid-sized ocean currents.

Results of the NWARC Study

One of the primary goals of the research based on NWARC was to find out if the cumulative effects of the ocean currents—eddies, meanders, filaments, and rings—would become evident in high‐resolution mapping over periods of a decade or longer. The authors successfully proved that this is a case for the NWARC.

“The high‐resolution versions of the NWARC, on 1/4° and 1/10° grids, provide a more precise depiction of the ocean climate state and its variability with details not attainable in coarser‐resolution analyses,” the authors stated.

Similar to how a magnifying glass can allow the viewing of details in a specimen that are undetectable by the human eye, the finer details of the ocean structure and change emerged from zooming into the ocean data

Similar to how a magnifying glass can allow the viewing of details in a specimen that are undetectable by the human eye, the finer details of the ocean structure and change emerged from zooming into the ocean data. In the Northwest Atlantic, the authors diagnosed a very localized multidecadal subsurface heat gains southeast of the Gulf Stream. The finer grid showed details that the coarser mapping could not reveal in principle. Similar to how a magnifying glass can allow the viewing of details in a specimen that are undetectable by the human eye, the finer details of the ocean structure and change emerged from zooming into the ocean data.

Besides providing an indispensable tool for ocean research, ocean mapping contributes to the study of Earth’s climate. Within the Earth’s climate system, the ocean absorbs heat at a greater capacity than the atmosphere or land. Thus, better and more detailed knowledge of ocean thermal variability facilitates more precise charting of ocean heat content and contributes to gaining a clearer picture of climate shifts over several decades.

When it breaks off, Chris Readinger, a physical scientist at the U.S. National Ice Center (NIC), said the iceberg will likely cover nearly 700 square miles, which equates to approximately twice the size of New York City. While this sounds huge, Readinger noted that the physical size of the iceberg isn’t really that spectacular if you look at the extended history of icebergs that dates back to the 1970s.

“I don’t think it would even be in the top 20 of the biggest bergs,” Readinger added. “It’s a sizeable berg for sure, but it wouldn’t be historical in terms of size.”

For comparison's sake, the Delaware-sized iceberg (known as A-68) that broke off of the Larsen-C Ice Shelf in July of 2017, measured approximately 2,250 square miles.

While the physical size of the potential iceberg isn’t especially remarkable, the crack’s proximity to the British Antarctic Survey Halley VI Research Station is concerning.

In 2012 researchers noticed a previously dormant crack, known as Chasm 1, beginning to extend toward the McDonald Ice Rumples, explained Christopher Shuman, a glaciologist with NASA’s Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory. Then, on Oct. 31, 2016, glaciologists spotted what’s become known as the Halloween Crack on a part of the Brunt Ice Shelf that previously hadn’t shown signs of rifting or cracking.

As a result, Halley VI Research Station was relocated further inland during the region’s 2016-17 summer season to avoid being cut off from the rest of the Brunt Ice Shelf. Although the station was designed to operate year-round, the British Antarctic Survey decided to close its doors for the 2019 winter season because of unpredictable conditions caused by the growing crack on the ice shelf.

Chasm 1 has been extending approximately 33 feet per day for the last few weeks, according to Bert Wouters, an Earth scientist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Now, it’s only a matter of time before Chasm 1 extends just a few more miles and releases an iceberg from the shelf. Once the calving event occurs, the fate of the remaining Brunt Ice Shelf is largely unknown.

“We don’t know what this really means for the remaining ice in the Brunt,” Shuman explained. “The Halloween Crack itself separates a more northerly part of the Brunt from the part where Halley Station is, so we’re going to have to watch and see whether the Brunt continues to maintain contact with the McDonald Ice Rumples or has further break back along Chasm 2 as that may lead to more worrisome changes for the remaining ice.”

So while it’s difficult to predict how this could affect the overall health of the ice shelf, Readinger says the NIC has a pretty good idea of where the iceberg will go when it breaks off.

“It would likely enter the Weddell Gyre, which is the circular ocean current which is just east of the Antarctic Peninsula,” Readinger said. “If it gets in there and it stays floating and doesn’t get stuck on the ocean floor, it could circle around and then be out toward the Antarctic Peninsula in maybe a year or less.”

Nearly 90 percent of an iceberg is actually below the surface of the water, so in a less exciting scenario, there’s always a chance it could get grounded or stuck on the ocean floor.

Regardless of what happens, Readinger said scientists at the NIC will be using satellite imagery to track the new iceberg as long as it measures at least 26 square miles.

Currently, the NIC is tracking three named icebergs floating in the South Atlantic near Argentina so that cargo and passenger ships are aware of these potential hazards. Like all the others, this soon-to-be iceberg, the NIC will follow its whereabouts until it’s too small to be tracked. Then the remaining fragments will likely be tracked by South Atlantic countries like Argentina because they could still be considered hazardous for vessels in those waters.

https://www.windy.com/annotation/5ca7522dade88d001cd025de

This monthly summary, developed by scientists at NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides to government, business, academia and the public to support informed decision-making.

February 2019 Temperature

• The February temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.42°F above the 20th century average of 53.9°F and was the fifth highest for February in the 1880–2019 record. February 2016 is the warmest February with a global temperature at 2.18°F above average.

• Record warmth during February was mostly limited to ocean areas, specifically across parts of the Barents Sea, the Southern Ocean off South Africa’s southern coast and off of Australia’s southeastern coast and the East China Sea. Record-warm temperatures were also observed across parts of southern Mexico, northeastern Brazil and the Indian Ocean. No land or ocean areas had record-cold February temperatures.

• The February globally averaged land surface temperature was 1.87°F above the 20th century average of 37.8°F. This value was the 15th highest February land temperature in the 140-year record. However, this was the smallest (least warm) February temperature departure from average since 2014.

• The most notable land surface temperature departures from average during February 2019 were present across much of the Northern Hemisphere. The most notable cool temperature departures from average were present across much of Canada and the contiguous U.S. as well as parts of central Asia, where temperatures were 5.4°F below average or cooler. Meanwhile, much of Alaska, Europe, central Russia and the Far East had temperatures that were 7.2°F above average or higher.

• South America, Europe and Oceania had a February temperature that ranked among the eight warmest Februarys on record. Meanwhile, Africa and North America had their smallest (least warm) February temperature since 2014. North America was the only continent that had a February temperature that was below average.

• The Caribbean region had a February temperature that ranked as the sixth highest February on record. Meanwhile, the Hawaiian region had its smallest (least warm) February temperature since 2013.

• The February globally averaged sea surface temperature was 1.26°F above the 20th century monthly average of 60.6°F — the second highest global ocean temperature for February in the record, behind 2016 (+1.46°F). The five warmest February global ocean temperatures have occurred since 2010.

Sea Ice and Snow Cover

• The February average Arctic sea ice extent tied with 2015 as the seventh smallest in the 41-year record at 347,000 square miles (5.9 percent) below the 1981–2010 average, according to an analysis by the National Snow and Ice Data Center using data from NOAA and NASA. During February 2019, sea ice extent retreated in the Bering Sea, while sea ice growth occurred in the Barents Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk.

• Antarctic sea ice extent during February was 160,000 square miles (13.4 percent) below the 1981–2010 average. This was also the seventh smallest February extent on record. The Antarctic sea ice reached its annual minimum extent on February 28 and again on March 1 at 954,000 square miles — the seventh lowest minimum extent in the satellite record.

• According to data from NOAA and analyzed by the Rutgers Global Snow Lab, the Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent during February was 170,000 square miles above the 1981–2010 average. This was slightly above average and the 23rd largest snow cover extent in the 53-year record. The North American snow cover extent was the largest since 2010 and the fourth largest on record, while the Eurasian snow cover extent was the 12th smallest on record.

Seasonal (December 2018–February 2019)

• The December 2018–February 2019 average temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.51°F above the 20th century average of 53.8°F and the fourth highest for December–February in the 1880–2019 record. The yearly global land and ocean surface temperature for the three-month season has increased at an average rate of 0.13°F per decade since 1880; however, the average rate of increase is twice as great (0.25°F per decade) since 1981.

• Record-warm temperatures during the three-month period were present across much of Australia and its surrounding Southern Ocean as well as parts of East China and Barents Seas, the southeastern Pacific Ocean and the Southern Ocean off South Africa’s southern coast. No land or ocean areas had record-cold temperatures during December 2018–February 2019.

• The globally averaged land surface temperature for December–February was 2.20°F above the 20th century average of 37.8°F. This was the eighth highest for December–February in the 140-year record.

• The most notable warmer-than-normal land surface temperature departures from average during December 2018–February 2019 were present across much of Alaska, the southeastern contiguous U.S., central Russia, Europe, southwestern Asia, Australia and the Southern Ocean off of South Africa’s southern coast. These areas had temperature departures that were 3.6°F above average or higher. Meanwhile, the most notable cool temperature departures were present across much of Canada, the northern contiguous U.S. and central Asia, where temperatures were 2.7°F below average or cooler.

• Oceania had its warmest December–February on record. Australia, which is part of the Oceania region, also had its warmest December–February on record. South America and Europe had a December–February temperature that ranked among the seven highest such period on record.

• North America and Asia had their smallest (least warm) temperature departure from average for December–February since 2014. The Caribbean region also had its smallest (least warm) temperature departure from average for the three-month season since 2012 and the 10th warmest since regional records began in 1910.

• The December–February globally averaged sea surface temperature was 1.26°F above the 20th century average of 60.5°F — the second highest for December–February in the record, trailing behind 2016 by 0.25°F.

Year-to-date (January–February 2019)

• The year-to-date temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.51°F above the 20th century average of 53.8°F — the fourth highest for January–February in the 140-year record.

• The first two months of the year were characterized by warmer-than-average conditions across much of the globe’s land and ocean surface. Notable warm temperatures were present across much of Alaska, southwestern and central Asia, as well as Australia. The most notable cooler-than-average temperatures were present across much of Canada and the western half of the contiguous U.S.

• Record-warm temperatures during the year-to-date period were present across much of Australia and its surrounding Southern Ocean as well as parts of East China and Barents Seas, the southeastern Pacific Ocean, the Southern Ocean off South Africa’s southern coast, and across parts of northeastern Brazil. No land or ocean areas had record-cold temperatures during January–February 2019.

• The year-to-date globally averaged land surface temperature was 2.29°F above the 20th century average of 37.4°F. This value was the eighth highest for January–February in the record.

• Oceania’s January–February 2019 temperature was 3.24°F above average and the highest such period since continental records began in 1910. South America had its fifth highest such period on record. However, North America had its smallest (least warm) January–February temperature departure from average since 2008.

• The year-to-date globally averaged sea surface temperature was 1.21°F above the 20th century average of 60.6°F. This was the third highest for January–February in the 1880–2019 record.

Find a more complete summary of climate conditions and events for February 2019.

Enhanced risk of severe storms are possible with damaging winds and tornadoes. Some larger population centers in enhanced risk area are Memphis, Bartlett, Southaven, Greenville and Collierville.

Stay safe and get up to day rain/thunder forecast.