About 15 inches of heavy snow are forecast for my drive to the dentist tomorrow, with 0.3 inch accumulating by noon, then diminishing precipitously. I’m confused. High temperatures will only graze freezing. Why so little accumulation? I’ll blame snowjackers.
Anyway, if four storms like this blow in, I’ll take those 60 inches pretty painlessly - unless PG&E cuts power again before our generator is installed. But I’ll still stick with my quiz answer: 60 one-inch snowfalls. Spread them out over four months. They’ll help keep dust down on our dirt road.
I had to choose between “ideal for skiing” (we have both x-country and modest downhill nearby), and “least inconvenient for work, school, etc.” If the latter, getting it all over with would make sense, with two or three major snow events (one sixty-incher would be TOO huge, destroying much infrastructure, I imagine).
But I went with the skiing, so twelve 5-inch events spread across the winter sounds about right.
Another DC-area resident checking in. I opted for four 15-inch storms.
My figuring goes like this: each storm like that will shut down the area for a day or two, but that would be pretty much it.
In this era of telework, we could have a repeat of Snowmageddon, and I’d still have to work. I could work while in my pajamas, sitting at my desk in the guest room, but I’d still have to work. So I don’t gain any free time anymore when the government shuts down due to snow. So the sooner things are back to normal, the better, AFAIAC.
Forget the snow–the temperatures alone would likely cause an evacuation of the whole area. Our infrastructure isn’t set up to handle it. Pipes would freeze, power lines would collapse from ice buildup, people would freeze to death because the furnaces in their barely-insulated houses couldn’t keep the place warm enough to live in. The average lows here never get within 10 degrees of freezing.
Here in the Denver 'burbs we already average 78"/year, usually in 3-12 inch installments with the deeper falls coming in the early Spring. In 20 years I can remember two events over 24". That would be a pain in the ass if it happened all the time, but I really enjoy big snows when they happen. So for the poll I said two 30" storms. But that’s just my aesthetic preference. Ferreals I like it the way it is because snow around here tends to evaporate before it melts. Melting snow is good for the plants and watersheds, whereas the evaporating stuff is just migrating to fall again in The Midwest, and they don’t need it.
I voted for one big 60" storm, but with two conditions: (a) I have enough notice to stock up beforehand, and (b) my power and heat stay on.
I have a RWD car, and I hate disruptive snowfall. I’d much rather have one “big one” where the dog and I might be stuck inside for a few days than a bunch of random storms interrupting my plans all winter.
I’d have to figure out the whole “digging out” thing, though, since I’m only 63" tall. Maybe condition #3 is that it rains (a nice melting rain) a day or two later.
I think people discount what 60" would actually mean. Take a look at pictures from Newfoundland from last week after only half that amount. There were 12-15’ drifts, roads were impassible for several days - and this is a place used to heavy snowfall. At 60", there will be structural failures everywhere, and it’s not like ambulances and firetrucks will take a few extra hours to get across town - they won’t be making it for a few days.
Sixty inches isn’t “whee, we’re stuck inside for a couple days.” It’s “holy shit, people are dying.”
