PB+J wrote:
Where I live we don't get too much below freezing very often, or for more than a few days.
That would be Shangri-la for an Upper Midwesterner. "Cold" is a pretty relative term with a sliding scale, so my people tend to use descriptive modifiers of increasing intensity like "not so", "a bit", "rather", "very", "bitterly", and "dangerously" (there are others, but they're unprintable here). Right now we're at dangerously cold - some call it bitter, which it is, but it's also dangerous, as the hospitals will attest; the homeless and ill-dressed are hardest hit with frostbite which, when severe, can cost you fingers, toes and ears. And, as you might guess, under prolonged exposure it can kill you. So it's no joke. No cold-related fatalities yet so far as I know, but they wouldn't come as a surprise. Me, I just have to go bundled up from my heated apartment to my nearby car to a heated shop and back again, so my exposure is typically negligible (the car takes a while to warm up, but at least you're sheltered). After this deep-cold snap is over and the temps rise to about 28F (-2C), we'll be calling it "warm, finally". As I said, it's all relative, and of course it depends on who's talking.
What's of real consequence is wind chill: Although the MPLS air temperature right now is -3F (-19.5C), on a windless day it wouldn't be so bad if you're acclimated; but the wind chill right now is at -20F (-28.9C), which means the effect on exposed flesh is comparable to that of -20F on a windless day. There's a way to calculate wind chill, but I just check the weather sources because they do the work for me. When the wind chill is at -20F, you pay attention. Yes, sir.
If one compares today's high (-3F) to the average local high for this time of year (28F), I think one might just possibly detect a bit of a disparity. Apparently records are being broken all over, but I haven't been paying close attention. I'll be in more of a mood in a few days.