2016 Blizzard did break the snowfall record in New York City’s Central Park, says Weather Service
Three months after a blizzard paralyzed the Mid-Atlantic region with more than two feet of snow, the National Weather Service (NWS) announced it is adjusting the snowfall total upward for New York City and downward for Newark, New Jersey, due to measuring errors made during the storm.
The new total snowfall in New York of 27.5 inches at Central Park breaks the all-time record of 26.9 inches, set in 2010. Until Thursday's 34-page snowfall post-mortem analysis, the New York snowfall total stood just 0.1 inch shy of the record.
In making the adjustment, the NWS cited a "communication error" between the its local office on Long Island and the Central Park Conservancy, which takes the official snowfall measurements in the park. The "snow team" from the NWS said they found the mistake when reviewing the weather logbook from the Conservancy.
You May Also Like
The snow review team also invalidated the preliminary snowfall total at Newark International Airport of 28.1, finding that the staff at that facility measured snowfall hourly instead of the standard procedure of once every six hours. This likely inflated the snow measurement.
The assessment does not provide a new snowfall total for that location, though. Instead a NOAA press release states: "Meteorologists at the National Weather Service will follow a scientific method to determine the accurate total before it is sent to NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information for certification."
Meanwhile, the old Newark snowfall record of 27.8 inches, set in 1996, moves back to the number one spot on the all-time biggest snowstorms list, the agency said.
The agency also validated a controversial snowfall total at Washington National Airport, where 17.8 inches was recorded despite much higher amounts being reported in nearby areas.
The Washington Post has raised questions about this total, and its reporting revealed that staff at the airport had to use alternate means of measuring snow after losing sight of their flat board that is typically used for such data collection.
The NOAA report found that there were snowfall measurements made near the airport that matched the 17.8-inch total, and that "while the observer could not locate the snow measurement board for several hours during the afternoon of January 23rd, proper measuring procedures were followed."
The NWS found that the board was buried by the snow, which the report says "is reasonable given the six-hour period between official snow depth measurements. The observer measured total snow depth, which was consistent with the depth on the SMB, once the board was located."
However, snow depth is a fundamentally different measurement than snowfall, and can result in lower amounts since over time — such as during the course of six hours — snow compacts, leading to lower measurements. The report does not address this issue.
The report does recommend that weather observers use flags to better mark the locations of their snow measurement boards in the event that strong winds blow snow on top of them.
The NWS validated other snowfall totals, including at Dulles International Airport and in Philadelphia.
The report is an unusual one for the NWS, which typically conducts service assessments after major weather events that are focused inward at how the agency performed, rather than on whether snowfall records were accurate. (Such a service assessment on the blizzard is underway within the NWS.)
However, because this storm was historic and many questions were raised about some of the totals, particularly in Washington, the agency produced the review.
"It’s important that we scrutinize questionable measurements and reject those that scientists deem invalid to ensure the public’s continued confidence in the U.S. climate record," said NWS director Louis Uccellini, in a statement.
In invalidating two snowfall measurements out of the nine sites examined, the report does raise questions about snowfall readings taken in other storms and in other places around the country.
Clearly, there is a need for better education about the agency's procedures and standards, otherwise every storm will result in a similar review.
Topics New York City
Andrew Freedman is Mashable's Senior Editor for Science and Special Projects. Prior to working at Mashable, Freedman was a Senior Science writer for Climate Central. He has also worked as a reporter for Congressional Quarterly and Greenwire/E&E Daily. His writing has also appeared in the Washington Post, online at The Weather Channel, and washingtonpost.com, where he wrote a weekly climate science column for the "Capital Weather Gang" blog. He has provided commentary on climate science and policy for Sky News, CBC Radio, NPR, Al Jazeera, Sirius XM Radio, PBS NewsHour, and other national and international outlets. He holds a Masters in Climate and Society from Columbia University, and a Masters in Law and Diplomacy from The Fletcher School at Tufts University.
