Snow melt thunderstorms my a$$

I wonder how this term started. From what I hear, a local TV meteorologist came up with the term 25 years ago. However it started, there is no such thing as 'snow melt' thunderstorms in the real world. Theoretically, it could happen under just the right conditions, but in reality, Rick Ankiel has a better chance of hitting the strike zone from the moon.

I don't know what anyone really means by using the term, but I am guessing that melting snow is the main source of moisture. Doesn't happen. At most, 2 inches of water is lost from the snowpack on the warmest days (90 or above in Reno). Most of that water percolates down and runs off on the surface or goes into the groundwater. How much of this 2 inches actually evaporates? Not much considering that the snow and melt water is at 32 degrees. Then, if there is any wind, this moisture will get mixed out pretty quickly. Especially considering you have to moisten a depth of 5000+ feet to get any thunderstorms. Finally, add in that snow reflects a lot of sunlight and is a moisture sink during the day. How will you generate enough lift to pop a thunderstorm? Upslope winds are weakened until the snow melts.

Want some proof? Look at today's satellite at 4 pm PDT. The cumulus clouds were forming over the foothills of the Sierra, not near the crest where all the snow is. The convergence and lift was at the edge of the snow, where the cool air from the snow was causing downslope flow, not upslope. Where it met the upslope flow is where the thunderstorms formed.