Post by Babu on Sept 3, 2019 6:55:58 GMT -5
Europe is well known for being the warmest area of the planet for its latitude, at least among temperate latitudes. However, is that really the case? Using the lapse rates found at the Tibetan plateau of 5.8'C per kilometer of altitude I extrapolated what interior British Columbia would look like if it were sea level. I chose Creston because it was pretty warm for the altitude of 600m ASL, warmer, actually, than Cranbrook at 900m ASL (so in this case, the true lapse rate was even higher than 5.8'C, although this could of course be down to microclimate as well), as well as actually having some decent rainfall and not being Bsk unlike somewhere that's technically warmer for the altitude, but really dry, like Castlegar.
Creston's altitude is 600m ASL, which would mean an annual increase of 3.5'C with the 5.8/km lapse rate. However, since altitude tends to increase diurnal ranges, what I did was increase highs by 2.5'C and increase lows by 4.5'C, hopefully rendering a more realistic extrapolation. I didn't change precipitation or sunshine as those don't have a direct correlation with altitude.
At 49'N and a mean temperature of 11.8'C, Creston only gets beat by the Paris UHI station and, by 0.1'C, Saint Helier in Jersey. Considering maritime climates always have higher annual means at temperate latitudes, this means Creston and the interior British Columbia is the most impressive area of the planet at temperate latitudes in terms of temperature. Creston is also a lot less cloudy than the mediocre recorded average of 1998h would suggest because of all of the mountains blocking sunshine from being recorded. Calgary, being unobstructed by mountains gets 2400h of sunshine, and Cranbrooks airport, with mountains further away compared to Creston records 2200h. I would say that Creston probably would be around 2200h if no sunshine was obstructed by mountains, which means Creston is about as sunny as NYC, and sunnier than anywhere in Europe at that latitude.
I'd give this climate a B+ even though summers are warmer than I'd like, and winters have low diurnal ranges, just because of how amazing that temperature distribution is with December being the coldest month and spring warm-up being incredibly fast. What about you guys?
Creston's altitude is 600m ASL, which would mean an annual increase of 3.5'C with the 5.8/km lapse rate. However, since altitude tends to increase diurnal ranges, what I did was increase highs by 2.5'C and increase lows by 4.5'C, hopefully rendering a more realistic extrapolation. I didn't change precipitation or sunshine as those don't have a direct correlation with altitude.
At 49'N and a mean temperature of 11.8'C, Creston only gets beat by the Paris UHI station and, by 0.1'C, Saint Helier in Jersey. Considering maritime climates always have higher annual means at temperate latitudes, this means Creston and the interior British Columbia is the most impressive area of the planet at temperate latitudes in terms of temperature. Creston is also a lot less cloudy than the mediocre recorded average of 1998h would suggest because of all of the mountains blocking sunshine from being recorded. Calgary, being unobstructed by mountains gets 2400h of sunshine, and Cranbrooks airport, with mountains further away compared to Creston records 2200h. I would say that Creston probably would be around 2200h if no sunshine was obstructed by mountains, which means Creston is about as sunny as NYC, and sunnier than anywhere in Europe at that latitude.
I'd give this climate a B+ even though summers are warmer than I'd like, and winters have low diurnal ranges, just because of how amazing that temperature distribution is with December being the coldest month and spring warm-up being incredibly fast. What about you guys?
Lived:
Residence:
