July continues warm and dry
July 9th, 2011 at 2:56 am by Bill Steffen under Bill's Blog, Weather
Click on the graphics to enlarge. The first is the Naefs 8-14 day outlook. Next we have the 8-14 day temperature and rainfall forecasts from CPC. Both maps predict a continuation of our warmer than average weather. That will certainly be the case this week and probably next week. The CPC map has the center of the warmer than average air right over Michigan. The first 8 days of July were 3.6 degrees warmer than average and this will be the fourth month in a row that’s warmer than average. Note the cooler than average forecast along the Pacific Coast, typical for a cold PDO. The rainfall forecast from CPC shows the upper level ridge and center of the heat in the southern High Plains and Southwest. It forecasts above average rain here in the Great Lakes with “ring of fire” type thunderstorm complexes coming down from the WNW or NW. I have always thought that we’d catch a couple of these this summer. There is above normal rainfall forecast in the Southeast. Tampa got soaked Friday AM with 5.37″ of rain at McDill AFB. The high temperature in Tampa was only 80. Other rainy places on Friday: 4.5″ Xenia IL, 3.74″ Evansville IN, 2.48″ Wilmington DE, 2.01″ Lexington KY (my sister drove through that), 1.81″ Asheville NC, 1.45″ Philadelphia. Hot spots Friday: 110 Phoenix AZ and Wichita Falls TX, 105 Dallas, 100 Oklahoma City. Cool spots (highs): 60 Grand Marais in the U.P., 64 at Copper Harbor and 59 in Eureka CA. Our best chance of rain will be late Sunday to midday Monday. Then dry for the mid part of the week.
I’ll take the warmer temps with the possibilities of rain. Summertime has arrived!
Yes, Summer is here! Excellent weather, no doubt about it! Keep the nice weather train a rolling, Bill!
Hi Bill,
Is there a web-site that publishes this information? If there is, could you please forward it me.
Thanks
JJCoopes@aol.com
Here’s a link to the latest 8-14 day outlooks: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/814day/ If you look at the blue bar on the left side, you’ll see links to the NAEFS and the 6-10 day forecasts…and a lot more.
On the heat and rain subject. On the way down here the weather was nice and sunny but hot!!! While we did have some rain in Alabama. one time there was we had what seemed to be a bucket of water just tossed at us (it rained hard for about 100 feet and that was all I never seen such a small area of rain) On the heat front form the east side of Montgomery AL to Troy, AL the car read 100° (that would have made fixxers day)
And yes yesterday we drive on I 75 in some of that rain. And sometimes the rain down here comes down so hard its like driving in a bad lake effect snow squall. (you cant see a thing)
Right now its cloudy warm and extremely humid.
SlimJim
im glad we finally have some nice, warm weather. hopefully the rest of july & august are nice as well. i think we deserve it.
Another warmer-than-average month, huh? Interesting. Didn’t you just post that we were having fewer days above 90 degrees?
all the long term forecasts including the upcoming winter one is nothing but speculation.
Educated speculation, more like. You can look at a number of long-term oscillations (ENSO, PDO, NAO, AO, etc.) and see their historic effects on different parts of the country. If you find analog years that have similar-phase oscillations as what we have now, you can make an educated guess on the long-term trends for different parts of the country (e.g. Persistent trough on the west coast, rainier here, drought there, teleconnected ridge here, etc.)
Haven’t you noticed that Bill can usually beat the models with his long-term forecasts? Remember last summer? He said hot, they said cold.
based on computers that are usually wrong. the bottom line is not one person can accurately forecast what the winter will be like 6 months out. bill also said this summer would be about average and lessons said well below average. if the rest of july and most of august is hot as currently forecast, then they were both off.
the bottom line is may & june were both crap months, we deserve this nice weather. i don’t think anyone can argue that cort.
also as far as severe weather events, while we have had a few, it appears this summer may be a quiet one.
I don’t think I was arguing with you that we deserve the warm weather. I think it’s been wonderful out there last week and I wish summer would last longer up here.
You’re right, severe weather has been fairly normal around here this spring/summer. A few good events but mostly quiet. 2010 and 2008 were unusual years with a high volume of severe weather. Northern Lower Michigan has had the most severe weather since 2008, so good for them. It seems like the wealth is spread out a little bit more; not quite an I-94 & south year.
You’re an interesting guy to try to pin down, fixx. I can’t figure you out sometimes. If computer models are always wrong and human long-range forecasts have no skill, why were you fretting about them so much this spring? You must have posted dozens of times worrying about them. I do also think that you squandered a few opportunities to really enjoy the June weather. You described a warm, post-thunderstorm evening as “shot”, while Swatz was able to spend the remaining 3 hours of daylight kayaking. You also described an 89 degree, 75 dewpoint, 99 heat index day last week as “okay.” Why? Scattered high clouds and fair-weather cumulus?
June had an equal number of days in the 90s as it did in the 60s. It had more days in the 80s than it had in the 70s. June 2011 had 3.34″ of rain, and the average is 3.67″. Sure, the average amount of night-and-day sky cover was 60%, but the percent of possible sunshine received was 63. There were 8 days sunny, 15 days partly cloudy, and 7 days cloudy. In my opinion, it was pretty much exactly what every June is like: sometimes hot and sometimes cold. Michigan’s climatological peak for severe weather is also in June, so July and August usually aren’t as active.
If only I wasn’t working this weekend, I’d grab some sprites.
cort i like to keep things interesting on here!
Oh his fiery intellect makes me drool.
B.D.
It is summer…
It is suppose to be warm.
And the greenhouse gas/global warming stuff is a lie. (A criminal lie!)
The cap and trade folks are thieves trying to kill the economy of the USA for the benefit of China and India who are the cause of MOST of the worlds pollution and acid rain.
If any of that 24 feet of snow in the western mountains is left after the summer it will mean the glaciers are growing again.
This years growing season hs going to be at least 3 weeks shorter than last years thanks to the cool and rainy spring we had.
What is hillarious is the people in places like the California, Arizona, and Texas deserts complaining about warming and drought…
Deserts are suppose to be hot and dry.
100% agree
If it’s a drought, it’s not normal. If it were normal, we wouldn’t call it a drought. Climates are defined by highs, lows, precip, etc. Yes, the desert is supposed to be dry and hot, but it’s hotter and dryer than normal, hence the complaints. And yes it’s summer, but as I recall, the great Bill Steffen is calling for global cooling. His claims are unsubstantiated as of yet. And no, leftover snow does not a glacier make, knuckle head.
The cap and trade folks are not scientists. People will find a way to get rich off of any situation, not excluding this one, but that doesn’t speak to the science, the trends, the fact that burning fossil fuels creates acid rain, carbon dioxide, and release mercury. Cort, I whole heartedly agree with your assessment that localized temp trends do not support or disprove global climate change. It’s something very important to remember when Bill starts posting story after story about cold spells and snow on the roads in the mountains. Thanks.
The weather is often not “normal” by your definition, bigD. Climate is a cycle of average, above average and below average conditions. One desert has been colder and snowier than “normal” (actually average is a better word) – that’s northern Chile. One desert (well, almost desert) has been hot and dry (E. Arizona to the High Plains, esp. west Texas). I think that with the current and future ocean current pattern (cold PDO, cold AMO in maybe 10 years, more frequent La Ninas than over the next 20 years), the dimming sun and volcanic activity…that the Earth will either slightly cool or hold steady temperature-wise over the next 20 years. I think those factors are important. I’m not saying CO2 is a non-factor, I’m saying that it’s not the sole driver of climate like the alarmists say (note I didn’t use the word “believe”) it is…I said “say”. If mercury is so bad…why am I being forced to use mercury-filled light bulbs in my house? http://www.maine.gov/dep/rwm/homeowner/cflbreakcleanup.htm Why are we sending another 2,000 jobs to China?
We’ve already discussed the mercury issue. I agree. CF bulbs are not the answer. LEDs are. Averages, of course, are calculated by adding all the highs and lows and dividing, but when the highs outnumber the lows, the average ascends. People can’t even predict what’s happening on Earth, who’s research are you basing your dimming sun theory on? And, volcanoes? Are you saying that we’ll have more volcanic activity over the next 20 years? …because ash does the same thing aerosols do and you thought that whole China thing was BS. I don’t get you. Where’s the logic?
hey bill, looks like a heat wave coming…
The highs don’t “outnumber the lows”. We always have a high and low. The new 30-year averages are going up because we’ve knocked out the coldest decade (the 1970s) and replaced it with a relatively warm decade (the 2000s). Despite the warmer temperatures, we had more snow in G.R. in the 2000s than any previous decade…so our average snowfall in G.R. will rise to 74″. Here’s more on declining solar activity (note that we are in a sunspot minimum and are forecast to stay that way for perhaps 30 years) and the Little Ice Age: http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/Little-Ice-Age-caused-by-dimmer-sun-experts-say-1073933.php This will be the weakest sunspot cycle in more than 100 years. You said “people can’t predict what’s happening on earth”. I’ll assume that also means the IPCC?
This from the WSJ (Henry Waxman), Big Daddy.
Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won’t pinch wallets, behind the scenes they’ve acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them.
The reality is that cost estimates for climate legislation are as unreliable as the models predicting climate change. What comes out of the computer is a function of what politicians type in. A better indicator might be what other countries are already experiencing. Britain’s Taxpayer Alliance estimates the average family there is paying nearly $1,300 a year in green taxes for carbon-cutting programs in effect only a few years.
C’mon its all about the money, don’t be so naive, Big Daddy!
There is a point made in this article about climate change.
You must be in favor of what Henry Waxman says, right Big Daddy?
Actually, Bill. I was referring to Storm Team Eight.
When I wrote lows, I didn’t mean lows for the day. I was referring to statistical lows. No one has taken the seventies out and put them aside, except Exxon-Spencer, due to the fact that he doesn’t trust any measurement that’s been taken before NASA started gathering satellite data. Come on, man. And I’m not sure how many time I have to remind you that the seventies were cool because of aerosols. The Clean Air Act was in 1970 and it took a decade before the aerosols had fallen back to Earth. The consequence was a cool decade. It’s the same thing Steelie posted about with regard to China’s use of outdated coal burning equipment. And yes they’re communist. So is Michigan.
Dan, Nice MANBEARPIG cut and paste. You wrote earlier about Henson’s lack of credibility, and then you cut and paste this garbage and try to pass it off as yours? Dude, your writing is easy to pick out. If I read it and it doesn’t make sense, I know YOU typed it. Yes the obstructionist republicans are complaining about the fact that the democrats want reduce tax breaks for BIG OIL. Big surprise. Oil companies like Exxon are making $40 billion-plus per year and the republicans want to give them more cash!! …to the point that they’ll shut everything down to do it. Greedy pigs.
As far as Cap and Trade goes, yes, keep it! This program will save billions in health care costs, not to mention lives. You people will trade money for every and anything. The democrats were right not to compromise.
Well, you don’t believe me. I searched out Hansen’s information because its easy to see that that guy is a lunatic.
Many people will take his word as credible. Hansen is not credible. I found that article on Cap n Trade because you brought it up. You said in your post that others will look for the money, right? I figured if WSJ had Waxman in the article, then you might be credible!
Those are two points that I brought up to refute your statements. By the way, what about the DEBATE with Bill? You seem to keep talking tough and then putting these irritating smiley faces at the end of your posts. Is that to display your arrogance, Big Daddy?
You should commit to the debate. What would you have to lose?
Pig Headed, maybe that is true. It is also true of you. Go back and read your posts.
By the way you never answered my questions about the debt and spending from the “anointed one” Do you know how much that BO has spent? Also, how much money do you think the government brings in each month?
You cannot answer those questions, huh?
You are so hyper focused on the environment that you cannot even see that we will be saddled with HUGE DEBT. So will our children and our children’s children, Big Daddy. This doesn’t seem to bother you. Why do you think BO wants to raise the debt ceiling, c’mon think about it?
So, when is the debate between you and Bill?
You are missing the point! That is common for you, Big Daddy. You appear to be only capable of what you want to see!
It’s the money! Keep spending, right? What about jobs and the economy?
Cool your jets, Big Dan. You get yourself all worked up. Listen, what I’m saying is that we live in a free market society, and that people will seek out ways to make money off of any situation. It’s the nature of things. That’s why I’m so surprised that people give Al Gore crap for investing in green technologies. I mean the guy would be stupid not to.
I know the conservatives are all excited about the debt. It’s just funny how disinterested they were in it when Bush was outspending every other president in history. Smells hypocritical to me. Obama IS spending a lot of cash, and I’m not defending that, although he is closing two Bush wars down, fixing a broken economy, and repairing our image to the world. But, heck, look around. The entire world is in a recession at this point. Europe’s tanking, even China’s coming to a screeching halt. What’s your answer to this? Give more money to the rich? Come on, man. The answer is easy, works projects, tax breaks for small businesses, incentives to keep jobs in the US…all the stuff Obama is already doing. Give it time. He’s fixing things, but it’ll take time to dig out from eight years of complete idiocracy. ;(
More spin and nonsense from bigDaddy. Last year, Gore’s venture capital firm loaned a small California firm $75m to develop energy-saving technology. The company (Silver Spring Networks) produces hardware and software to make the electricity grid more efficient.
The deal paid off in a big way, when the Energy Department announced $3.4 BILLION in smart grid GRANTS, the New York Times reports. Of the total, more than $560 million went to utilities with which Silver Spring has contracts. Note the word “GRANTS”. Your TAX DOLLARS were given to the company and a sizable portion went into Gore’s pocket. None of these firms is anywhere near profitable, and many of these energy ventures eventually go out of business or continue living off these “grants” while producing far less green energy than promised.
Here’s the record of the last two years: http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/report_card_on_obamas_first_tw.html It ain’t pretty. Nothing has changed in Guantanamo. Here’s the story on Afghanistan:
The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is a NATO-LED security mission in Afghanistan ESTABLISHED BY THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL on 20 December 2001 by Resolution 1386[1] as envisaged by the Bonn Agreement.[2] It is engaged in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present).
ISAF was initially charged with securing Kabul and surrounding areas from the Taliban, al Qaeda and factional warlords, so as to allow for the establishment of the Afghan Transitional Administration headed by Hamid Karzai.[3] In October 2003, the UN Security Council authorized the expansion of the ISAF mission throughout Afghanistan,[4] and ISAF subsequently expanded the mission in four main stages over the whole of the country.[5] Since 2006, ISAF has been involved in more intensive combat operations in southern Afghanistan, a tendency which continued in 2007 and 2008. Attacks on ISAF in other parts of Afghanistan are also mounting.
Troop contributors include from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania, Denmark, Belgium, Czech Republic, Norway, Bulgaria, and many other members of the European Union as well Turkey, South Korea, Azerbaijan, Singapore and a few other non-NATO members.
As opposed to a unified U.N. Security Council resolution and a Congressional resolution, the President started lobbing cruise missiles into Libya on his own…without consulting Congress.
And here’s the story of the National Debt (Clinton best, Reid and Pelosi the worst): http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/obama-deficit-2011.jpg
Yes, Big Daddy, Obama is spending a lot of cash. Is the economy growing? If you look it up, the GDP has only shown 1.56% growth, its almost a recession! Do we really need to have debt ceiling raised? It is only so that Obama can SPEND more money! When Bush left office the Federal Deficit was 500 billion. Under Obama’s watch is 1.3 Trillion. This is one of the promises he ran on, right? Didn’t he say he was going to reduce it? Also, he clearly presents himself that he has NO PLAN in which to reduce the deficit! Mark my words, Big Daddy! Obama has a spending problem. Do you really think Obama has an answer? He keeps blaming the republicans, why? That is not leadership! He should be generating solutions! Oh and opening up the Federal Reserve of Barrels of Oil, didn’t help us at the gas pumps, did it?
He only seems to apologize to other countries. That is not improving our image.
Fun fact:Obama has launched MORE cruise missiles than ALL other Nobel PEACE Prize recipients COMBINED!!!
Unemployment 9.2% after massive amts of $$$$ to fund pay-outs to cronies….gas TWICE what it was on avg. when he took office…ADD Libya to WAR..HUH…ZONE..higher debt and deficit…MORE czars than ever…more regulation/controls and beaurocracy…higher rates of poverty…etc,etc,etc
THIN…VERY THIN. And again you (BILL) are slurring the truth. To begin with, Gore’s firm lent $75 million to a ‘small’ company? Silver Springs Network is contracted with fifteen power companies from across the US. They’re anything but small. Secondly, we’re in a free market. They wouldn’t be so wildly successful if they weren’t proven producers, besides, Gore’s firm wouldn’t have lent them the money otherwise.
One of Obama’s campaign promises was to move us forward away from coal and oil. What you republicans would spend on tax breaks for big coal and oil, Obama and the democrats would spend on expanding green technologies. Now, I’m confused by your problem with giving grants to power companies, except that these grants mandate some form of environmental responsibility. What the GOP would give out with no strings attached, Obama has given out, but with strings. -A great idea, because now they can’t raise prices based on increased regulations. -A win-win for the middle class consumer, less CO2 at the same price.
So what you’ve done is linked that $3.4 Billion to the environmental firms rather than the power companies, even making the outrageous, unsubstantiated claim that these firms are not producing green technologies or living off the fat and then going under. I’m sure a certain amount of corruption exists out there, but you have no evidence and so, once again are slurring the truth.
As far as your analysis of the US’s involvement in Libya and Afghanistan goes, okay. You established a link between the US and NATO. Good job. The way the US conducted itself in Afghanistan under Bush is a joke and the whole world knows it. Obama took over and got the job done. Bin Laden’s dead, in case you hadn’t heard.
Obama’s attack on Libya took guts, but in my opinion was impulsive. I agree he should have asked for approval. But the real story is how quickly he’s ending these conflicts. Bush/Cheney used these wars as a way to funnel tax dollars into the pockets of corporations (kind of like what Snyder’s doing in Michigan). The war machine is yet another way the GOP can take money from the middle class. That’s why Bush pulled support from the effort to kill Bin Laden, and that’s why they refused to pull out of Iraq – which by the way is not in the middle of a civil war like Dumbsfeld said they would be.
Bottom line…it has been very expensive fixing eight years of Bush, and if the idiot obstructionist GOP doesn’t vote to raise the debt ceiling, the US will slide right back into that recession they put us in to begin with.
It’s NOT free market if you get huge government grants from taxpayers to give to your buddies! It’s free market if the new energy can compete with the old energy. It will do that by being cheaper, by being of a higher quality, or by convincing the public that it’s worth investing (privately, through freely making an individual choice to pay more for the product or service). It’s not free market if the government forces you to buy the product (which is not a choice – you people are “pro choice” on abortion, but anti-choice on everything else). You’re the ones who believe in tax breaks! Look at the waivers (tax breaks) on Obamacare for all the President’s, Reid’s and Pelosi’s friends. Does it make sense that McDonald’s gets a waiver, but Burger King doesn’t? That’s why you love the grants and waivers. You get to pick and choose who will win and who will lose. You bail out Chrysler, but not Circuit City. You’ll bail out Goldman Sachs, but not Lehman Bros. It’s POWER and it’s not fair. There should be an even playing field. It’s corrupt and contemptible and people like you are the reason why. Skyrocketing energy prices (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSZ62xiD4M) is NOT a win/win for the middle class!! It’s a HUGE BURDEN on the middle class, the lower class, women, minorities, children and the elderly. The Reid/Pelosi deficits are a terrible burden to place on our children and grandchildren: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/obama-deficit-2010.jpg to fund everything from an unnecessary war in Libya to Cowboy Poetry Festivals. The greediest people on Earth are Congress and their lapdogs like you bigD…stealing the wealth of the next generation.
The BAD news(FOR LIBERALS) is that the vast majority of Americans are WORSE off than nearly 3 yrs back when Obama took the reins/responsibility- see: HIGHER gas rates=greater transportation costs= higher product costs, and LOWER disposable income amts., as well as INCREASES in POVERTY RATE…and substantially more government controls/restrictions.THE GOOD NEWS(for liberals) is that “STYLE” AND PERCEPTION(+deception) often transcend SUBSTANCE AND REALITY/FACTS/TRUTH..unfortunately so for we conservatives
how about you just enjoy the weather, summer is short and the crap 6 months of cold & snow will be back before you know it.
It’s not hard to understand. The average high temperature in July in GR is 83. You can be warmer than average with fewer 90s. This can be achieved through increased humidity, which tempers the daily highs and also keeps the lows temperatures from being very low.
This is all moot anyway. Temperature trends at one location cannot prove or disprove global warming.
Yes, the 30-year average drops GRR down to 8.4 ninety-degree days per year. Of course, the drop in the average number of 90-degree days was caused by an increase in CO2 from Exxon … (pause)….BWA! HA! HA! HA! ….NOT!
YUPP WE have a HOT summer going Started out slow but man oh man the heat is on and the days are long, severe weather is gone get ready for dry hot sun with naked fun …..From out in the pool STAYING COOL 13 sprites down! INDYY!
Well, fixxer with all that heat and humidity around I think you may be off on the the severe weather as there is plenty of fuel! All we need is a trigger! Especially we are going to be on the “ring of fire” like Bill said!
we have had plenty of fuel for storms all year with little results. it means nothing at this point. personally i think it’s just going to be a overall quiet year for us here.
So we learned something new about how weird the weather is. We had more storms when there wasn’t as much “fuel” as there is right now. Seems like heat & humidity isn’t the only thing that storms require. The theory I’ve heard on this blog that warm air needs to be established before we get storms might need need some tweaking, yes?
agreed since we had more strong storms with 30 & 40 degree weather than with the summer heat.
By the way fixxxer I happen to like the snow and cold!
good for you… see you in november.
“winter nuts”
… agreed …
My sister in OKC had 110 for high today!!!& she LOVES the heat….i think she may have been adopted…she thinks I’M nuts for preferring cold/snow and moving family to Tug Hill,albeit 1 winter.
ps- fixxxer will appreciate this stat: in June, OKC had NO/0/ZIP days when the high temp. failed to reach 90+!!
July has been super nice so far. June wasn’t that nice, wet and cool. Escanaba has been warm the first 10 days of July.
Justin Ryan on WJBK-TV here in Detroit is predicting a high temperature (NOT heat index) of 99 for Detroit Metro Airport for Monday.
If this materializes, it will mark the second time in 10 days that Detroit will have touched 99 degrees.
Prior to this year, the last time Detroit Metro hit 99 degrees officially was close to 15 years ago, if I am not mistaken.
Here in G.R. we last made 100 in July 1988. Before that the most recent 100 was in 1964. We made 100 degrees a dozen times in the 1930s – peaking at 108 in July 1936. A mostly-ignored (no political gain), but significant factor in “climate change” is land use. Planting the Midwest in corn (and we now plant corn 4-6″ apart – before it was 18″) and soybeans has affected the climate 3 ways. We have fewer really hot days because the sun is hitting growing vegetation instead of baked, dry prairie. Keep in mind that a significant part of the Midwest is now irrigated. So the sun uses energy evaporating water that was previously used for sensible heating. Des Moines, Iowa hasn’t set a record high temperature in July since 1955. Second, you have warmer low temperatures. Dew points are higher because of transpiration and increased evaporation. That will raise minimum temperatures. Third, you get increased rainfall from higher dew points.
There’s a physical value we can assign to any substance. It’s called specific heat. The specific heat value is higher for water than it is for dirt or rock. I agree that irrigation can create a temperature buffer, but not for the reason you’ve stated. Replace a meadow with corn and you’re actually decreasing the number of plants that are transpiring, but by adding water you increase the specific heat value for the same land. The result is a temperature buffer, but don’t be confused. That ‘internal’ energy is eventually released as it is conserved and not destroyed. Without comparing land-use maps from before and after, it would be difficult to say how much impact this would have on Michigan weather, but if we take you at your word, then it might explain fewer exceptionally hot days and sustained warmer periods with warmer lows. But, Bill, again this is a regional phenomenon. Most of the world does not live downwind from the breadbasket of America. Your truly grasping at straws if your theory is that this is what’s causing the globe to warm.
The corn last year was 12-feet high…think 3-dimensional…a typical corn stalk will transpire 53 gallons of water (or about 4,000 gallons of water per day per acre) during it’s lifetime. That’s why a 12-foot high corn field will transpire more water than a 2-dimensional lake or an unirrigated meadow. The impact is not just from Michigan land use, it’s from a change in land use upstream from Michigan. What used to be baked out prairie west of Chicago is now irrigated corn and soybeans. That’s the case all the way out to east-central Nebraska and S. Dakota. The three factors I cited (fewer extremely hot days in summer, warmer minimum temperatures and higher rainfall) are clearly seen in the climate record and land use is the clear primary factor for the change. So, it is human-caused climate change, but not CO2. Just like the increased wildfires caused by man (arson, unattended campfires, discarded cigarettes) are not caused by CO2.