Surfacestations update – we are within sight of the goal

I’m pleased to announce that the www.surfacestations.org project has reached a major milestone, with 67% of the 1221 USHCN network now surveyed.

819 of 1221 stations have been examined in the USHCN network. Of the 819, 807 have been assigned a site quality rating. In some of those cases we’ve found the stations closed, or we are waiting for supplemental information to enable assigning a rating.

The Google Earth map below shows current coverage. We are in sight of the goal. However there are still some holes, especially in south Texas, Alabama, Idaho, Arkansas, Missouri and Illinois.

See this Google Earth generated image. The circles with question marks are stations left to be surveyed.

surfacestations_usa_googlemap_012509

Click for a larger image

A Google Earth USHCN Station Rating Map (KML file used to generate the above image) is available – download here

You can download the Google Earth application for free from this link

Sincere thanks to Gary Boden for this contribution! This is a very useful tool to help locate stations as hi resolution lat/lon values and descriptions are available from each map icon. Of course, Google Earth will also plot driving directions too.

I’m hoping to reach a minimum of 75% before I start doing data analysis. I want to find more rural stations, with the hope of finding more of the better sited stations since the lions share is comprised of CRN3-5 stations. I’m hoping those of you that live near some of these “holes” can help. if you can, please leave a comment below and I’ll help you locate stations. You’ll also need to visit the website www.surfacestations.org and register as a volunteer. It’s free and easy.

Here is what the current rating breakdown looks like:

surfacestations-ratings-012509

click for a larger image

For those unfamiliar with the rating system, it is identical to the one used by NOAA/NCDC to select sites for their new Climate Refernece Network (CRN) They drew this rating scheme from a paper published by Michel Leroy, of MeteoFrance, that he devised for their meteorological network. Here are the details:

Climate Reference Network Rating Guide – adopted from NCDC Climate Reference Network Handbook, 2002, specifications for siting (section 2.2.1) of NOAA’s new Climate Reference Network:

Class 1 (CRN1)- Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3 (<19deg). Grass/low vegetation ground cover <10 centimeters high. Sensors located at least 100 meters from artificial heating or reflecting surfaces, such as buildings, concrete surfaces, and parking lots. Far from large bodies of water, except if it is representative of the area, and then located at least 100 meters away. No shading when the sun elevation >3 degrees.

Class 2 (CRN2) – Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25 centimeters. No artificial heating sources within 30m. No shading for a sun elevation >5deg.

Class 3 (CRN3) (error >=1C) – Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10 meters.

Class 4 (CRN4) (error >= 2C) – Artificial heating sources <10 meters.

Class 5 (CRN5) (error >= 5C) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.”

Here is how the survey status breaks down by state. States highlighted have less than 50% coverage and are in the need of the most help from volunteers.

State Number of Stations Survey Report Done Percent Reported
Alabama 15 8 53%
Arizona 26 21 81%
Arkansas 15 7 47%
California 54 54 100%
Colorado 25 17 68%
Connecticut 4 4 100%
Delaware 5 4 80%
Florida 22 21 95%
Georgia 23 20 87%
Idaho 26 17 65%
Illinois 36 13 36%
Indiana 36 33 92%
Iowa 23 13 57%
Kansas 32 27 84%
Kentucky 13 7 54%
Louisiana 18 17 94%
Maine 12 10 83%
Maryland 17 9 53%
Massachusetts 12 12 100%
Michigan 24 19 79%
Minnesota 33 30 91%
Mississippi 32 25 78%
Missouri 25 11 44%
Montana 44 27 61%
Nebraska 45 27 60%
Nevada 13 13 100%
New Hampshire 5 4 80%
New Jersey 12 8 67%
New Mexico 28 17 61%
New York 59 28 47%
North Carolina 29 26 90%
North Dakota 24 15 63%
Ohio 26 15 58%
Oklahoma 45 36 80%
Oregon 41 28 68%
Pennsylvania 24 11 46%
Rhode Island 3 3 100%
South Carolina 29 20 69%
South Dakota 24 11 46%
Tennessee 15 12 80%
Texas 48 24 50%
Utah 40 24 60%
Vermont 7 6 86%
Virginia 19 7 37%
Washington 44 35 80%
West Virginia 13 6 46%
Wisconsin 22 13 59%
Wyoming 33 26 79%

For those that wish to help here is what you need to do:

1. Visit www.surfacestations.org and register as a volunteer. It’s free and easy.

2. Look over the the How To Guide for surveying a station. All you need is a digital camera, and optionally a portable GPS, but it is not mandatory. A GPS that can get you to a lat/lon you enter is helpful though.

3. Find a station that is unsurveyed by using either the Google Earth KML file download above, or by looking for stations with no entries yet in the Surfacestation image gallery database

When you decide on stations to survey, drop a comment here to make sure we don’t get duplication of effort.

4. Locate the details on station that you want to survey. The KML file has popup ballons for each station that gives details, and you can get lat/lon from doing a right click and “properties” for a station in Google Earth.Google Earth can give you driving directions. Note that lat/lon values are not alway accurate. I’ve seen them spot on, and sometimes they are as much as a 1/2 mile off., but they’ll generally get you close.

You can also visit the NCDC MMS database here: http://mi3.ncdc.noaa.gov/mi3qry/login.cfm and use the “guest login” button. Then do a search for the station name and match up with the city and the USHCN station # ID in the Google Earth KML file balloon. Getting that USHCN ID# right is crucial, as some towns may have 2 or three COOP stations which are not part of the USHCN network. Once you find the right station, click on the link. Be sure to note iuf it says “current” or not.

Another clue to make sure you have the right station in the NCDC database is the “station type” field which will say something like “COOP-A, COOP, LAND SURFACE, A, A” If there is no “A” in the description, then it is not a climate station.

Also check the “Location tab” in the NCDC database, which will say something like like “fire station” or “sewage treatment plant”…you maye have to look down a few entries from the top. Once you have that, some Google web searches will often help you narrow down a likely street address if the Google Earth imagery doesn’t help you visualize the location.

The “Equpiment tab” is also useful, since it will tell you what to look for. Here is a photo link that has most of the usual components of a climate station hat will help you get an idea.

5. If you determine that the station is located at a private residence, you’ll need help locating the observer. For that you need to find the observer name. Thankfully these exist on the NCDC database also, as a signature on many of the B91 forms the observers send in. To find B91 forms with observer names, go to this url:

http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/coop/coop.html

Then narrow down the state and station name in the web form, and click through to see what B91 forms are available, if you don’t see any within the last 6 -12 months, chances are the station is closed (a growing problem).

Download one and you may see an observer name at the lower right. A web lookup for the name and address may lead you there. Most private observers are interested and helpful. Just be sure that you advise them that you only want to get photos of their station and immediate surroundings (6 photos minimum: NSEW at about 20-30 feet, and two overall wide shots showing the station in relation to it’s surrounding) and that you are not going to reveal their names, addresses or phone numbers in any way, or any other private info.

6. Plan your trip. If you have trouble, or need help locating a station, drop a comment here.

7. Set your camera for 3.1 megapixels (2048×1536) for best results. Or use a photo editor program later to shrink the images to that size if you use a higher resolution. High resolution is good for long distance shots, such as are sometimes required when the station is at a fenced public facility like a water plant. You can then later crop out areas of the hi-res image. It’s like having an extra zoom level. All images should be 2 megabytes or less in size for uploading.

8. Fill out the station survey form (available here ) as best you can, making notes about the station. be sure to save it as a Adobe Acrobat PDF file, which is what is need to upload into the database. A free print to PDF application is available here at www.primopdf.com should you need one.

9. Navigate to the empty folder for the station you surveyed at the Surfacestation image gallery database and click on “add a photo” or “add items” on the left menu. Don’t try to do them all at once, as you may get a time out if your connection speed is slow. Doing 4 at a time really works well. Here at this link is what a completed survey looks like after uploading.

10. Drop us note at info { at } surfacestations dot org to let us know! Or if you need help.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

90 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Peter
January 25, 2009 7:26 pm

Anthony,
Is there an effort going forward in Canada to do the same thing?

Robert Bateman
January 25, 2009 7:29 pm

Doesn’t look very promising for doing anything but reading heat island weather. If we paved over the US entirely, at least we’d be measuring the real world.

Basil
Editor
January 25, 2009 7:35 pm

Anthony,
Prioritize the stations in Arkansas that need to be done, and if feasible, I’ll do some of them.
Basil
REPLY: Will do, look for an email soon. – Anthony

January 25, 2009 7:36 pm

Anthony,
In my humble opinion this is an incredibly important effort. Thanks for having the foresight and wherewithal to make this happen.
Imagine, data which people can agree on.

Johnnyb
January 25, 2009 7:46 pm

I’m getting a 404 error when I try to download the map. I see an unchecked station near me, but would need a more detailed map to find it.
REPLY: Fixed, try it now. Anthony

Joel
January 25, 2009 7:50 pm

Hello Anthony,
I live in Alabama and will be happy to help. I’ll register and you can call on me anytime.
Thanks for keeping this going.
Joel Black
REPLY: Great, let me know when you have completed registration at the website. – Anthony

Fred Gams
January 25, 2009 7:53 pm

Congratulations Anthony!
This is a great achievement which should have been done by those scientists who use the data.

Allan M R MacRae
January 25, 2009 7:54 pm

United States and Global Data Integrity Issues
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow
Jan.27, 2009
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/DAleo-DC_Brief.pdf
Abstract
Issues with the United States and especially the global data bases make them inappropriate to use for trend analysis and thus any important policy decisions based on climate change. These issues include inadequate adjustments for urban data, bad instrument siting, use of instruments with proven biases that are not adjusted for, major global station dropout, an increase in missing monthly data and questionable adjustment practices.
********************

January 25, 2009 8:00 pm

Anthony, I’ve been to your surfacestation site, but was unable to find which stations in Central/South Texas were surveyed and which were not.
I accidentally found what looked like a survey done at the San Antonio International Airport when I Googled it, and Temperature, and your site came up near the top.
Is there a database listing unajusted temperatures? I’d like to see if I can “tease out” the UHI effect of a newly completed clover leaf next to SAIA (SAT), using trends from surrounding stations. Google Earth shows the before picture. Also found a good after photo.
REPLY: Google NCDC and then use the “free data” link. That will give you original unadjusted and unfilled data in PDF and tabular form for individual stations. – Anthony

January 25, 2009 8:02 pm

I think I may have googled SAIA and weather station.

anubisxiii
January 25, 2009 8:03 pm

Congratulations!
This project is one of the things that drew me to your blog, originally.

January 25, 2009 8:10 pm

This is a major achievement. When 69% of the surveyed stations that are used to report official temperatures are artificially 2 – 5 degrees too high, it would appear that putative global warming is not nearly as much as has been claimed.
This is how science was done from the Enlightenment until WWII, by people interested in finding out what’s up with that, before big money began to alter the process. I don’t recall Einstein, Tesla or Newton applying for government grants.
Kudos for pursuing the truth — a rare commodity these days.
REPLY: Thanks, but a caveat. Those error values are estimates (from NCDC and Michel Leroy, not mine) and may vary significantly with distances, structures, terrain, vegetation, and surfaces nearby the station. NCDC adopted this system mainly to choose the best possible sites. The real issue is how few CRN1 and CRN2 rated sites exist in the network. Those still unsurveyed of that caliber are the ones I want to find. – Anthony

Rob
January 25, 2009 8:24 pm

Anthony,
I just registered at surfacestations. I live in Southwesten Colorado (Pagosa Springs) and am near a number of unsurveyed sites. I am always traveling through Durango, Saguache, Del Norte, Chama (NM), Aztec (NM), etc. I can get started as soon as I am “okayed”.
Rob Emigh
REPLY: You should have a reply email with a confirmation link to click on by now. Stand by for some instructions and “help-how to” to be posted here – Anthony

January 25, 2009 8:26 pm

Wow, there’s a lot data available at that link:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/mpp/freedata.html
REPLY: Hey Tom, there are a number of stations near San Antonio that need surveyed. Do you think you could help? – Anthony

January 25, 2009 8:34 pm

Do you think you could help? – Anthony
Sign me up. How “near” ?

January 25, 2009 8:43 pm

Anthony, just found the KML help info on Google Earth.
Will try to get your map to function in the am.

Rob
January 25, 2009 8:48 pm

I’m officially “okayed” and ready to go.
Rob
REPLY: See instructions I’ve added above – Anthony

January 25, 2009 9:05 pm

Funny, Just the other day I read at one of the sanctioned AGW sites that the purveyors of Surfacestations.org (that’s us) had lost interest in the process of surveys and has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for denialists.

January 25, 2009 9:35 pm

I just signed up as well Anthony. I didn’t realize how bad Illinois was covered. There are at least 3 stations within 1.5 hours of me.

tokyoboy
January 25, 2009 9:45 pm

In Japan, Junsei Kondo, Professor emeritus of Tohoku University (one of the top-rated governmental universities) has surveyed Japanese stations for years:
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~rk7j-kndu/kenkyu/ke04.html
(sorry for the language)
His main conclusion is: out of some 100-150 stations, only 3 or 4 stations are reliable as to the measurement criteria, and others excrete craps.
Hoping this could help you somehow.

January 25, 2009 9:53 pm

Anthony,
Ellen and I are planning a trip to Idaho in August to survey stations on the west side of the state. I know that is quite a few months away, but unless others can get there sooner, we will survey as many stations as we can find.
Russ

January 25, 2009 9:54 pm

I first visited this site after googling something along the line of “how is global average temperature measured”. In my ignorance, I was expecting to be referred to some sort of definitive temperature measurement organisation, perhaps operated for many years by the UN or an Ivy League university. What I found was a startling reality. Global average temperature is calculated from reports from “old-fashioned” weather stations of the kind situated at my old school and from satellite measurements going back only thirty years.
One of the references provided was to surfacestations and another to WUWT. The rest is history, for me very important history. I have learned more than I ever thought I would know about the scientific arguments on both sides of the AGW debate. Not that I pretend to understand the technical details of any of it, but I do understand the English language and both sides have been explained clearly and politely on WUWT by people of great technical knowledge who have been prepared to spend their time translating jargon into words and concepts a non-scientist can understand.
In every field of investigation it is important to examine the primary evidence carefully because the strength of the primary evidence dictates the inferences that can be drawn from it. It also sets the parameters for analysis of secondary evidence. For example, we might accept a margin of error of 2% in secondary evidence if the primary evidence has a margin of error of 1%, but we cannot sensibly do so if the primary evidence has a margin of error of 3%.
What is chillingly clear from your survey to date, Mr Watts, is that much of the primary evidence relied upon by those asserting imminent disaster is affected by a huge margin of error. Even more chilling is that those who argue the most vociferously for drastic and expensive action against CO2 do so without acknowledging the clear defects in the primary evidence they rely upon.
Like other commenters before me, I thank you for the wonderful work you have done and look forward to learning even more in the months and years ahead.

Jeff Alberts
January 25, 2009 9:59 pm

Anthony, I see there are a few stations in Western Washington still to be done, but can’t zoom in well enough to see what they might be. do you have a link to the actual google maps page so I can see if they are within my grasp?
Thanks!

Fred Gams
January 25, 2009 10:13 pm

On a previous topic of interest…
Possible natural explanation found for West Antarctica’s warming
South Pole – In 2008, scientists from the British Antarctic Survey reported a layer of volcanic ash and glass shards frozen within an ice sheet in western Antarctica [the same place the one degree Fahrenheit warming has been reported]. The volcano beneath the ice sheet “punched a hole right through” due to its heat and force. This geologic event (a volcano) may prove to be the source of the recent warming seen in West Antarctica in what has otherwise been reported as a 50-year cooling trend seen in East Antarctica.
Dr. David G. Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey said, “This is the first time we have seen a volcano beneath the ice sheet punch a hole through the ice sheet.”
From The New York Times:
“Heat from a volcano could still be melting ice and contributing to the thinning and speeding up of the Pine Island Glacier, which passes nearby, but Dr. Vaughan doubted that it could be affecting other glaciers in West Antarctica, which have also thinned in recent years. Most glaciologists, including Dr. Vaughan, say that warmer ocean water is the primary cause.”

Jeff Alberts
January 25, 2009 10:49 pm

Heh, i’d love to do Olga, WA, it’s only about 24 miles straight-line distance, but only accessible by ferry. Would have to go to the Orcas Island ferry landing, then drive from there. Will have to see if I can talk the wife into it.
Cle Elum and Stehekin are in or over the passes, not a good time to attempt them right now, especially this year.
I see Seattle hasn’t been done, looks like the station is supposed to be at Husky Stadium. I could give that one a go too.
Just got a GPS for Xmas, gotta break the sucker in.

1 2 3 4