Comments on: Note to NCDC climate report authors: try using the telephone next time

By: bill

bill — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:22:44 +0000

Data for power outages is here:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/disturb_events_archive.html
Need to hunt around for the rest of it.
but doing a quick count I get these figures:
2009 29 to march
2008 105
2007 51
2006 60
2005 56
2004 89
2003 50
2002 14
2001 1
2000 14
1999 18
The early reporting does not seem to be consistent

UK performance here:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Info/performance/

By: Pamela Gray

Pamela Gray — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 23:38:52 +0000

There were weather extremes in many places in and around 1913. I would wager a bet that the jet stream was in its loopy Northern track and the PDO had a La Nina (and probably more than one) event interspersed with smaller El Nino’s.

So I went on a short trek to find out. Sure enough. Between 1910 and 1920, there were several La Nina’s interspersed with overall smaller and fewer El Nino’s.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Pdoindex_1900_present.png

By: GlennB

GlennB — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 23:10:30 +0000

I’m left wondering such things as whether trees grow and power lines, wood and steel fatigue, and if they do whether failure would be more likely to happen during good weather or bad.

By: GlennB

GlennB — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:54:55 +0000

Flanagan (22:40:14) :

“In any case, this explains why there’s been an increased reporting of electrical failures, but NOT why there’s an increasing fraction of them which are due to tornadoes and storms.”

I agree, the report only uses this increase to create the assumption that global warming is increasing tornados and storms.

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:11:43 +0000

Pamela Gray (08:53:42) :

Ric, come now. You have no idea why Phoenix is cooler? Do you know nothing at all about weather pattern variations? Cold fronts? Warm fronts? Jet stream behavior? Pressure gradients? These are all easily studied, followed, and used to predict weather pattern variation. Yes, yes, the Sun provides a steady source of heat when it gets through, but not so much when it is mixed with Earth’s unending variations of its own atmosphere. There is no pebble in my shoe and I am just an amateur at weather pattern variation reasons.

Of course I know all that, I’m a New England weather geek!

I was just acknowledging an inside joke. Ryan mentioned “The last time such a streak lasted this long? 1913.” 1913 was the last time we had a month without sunspots until maybe last year.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/08/31/sun-has-first-spotless-calendar-month-since-1913/

So 1913 -> few sunspots -> cool Phoenix
2009 -> few sunspots -> cool Phoenix

While this isn’t proof that few sunspots -> cool climate, Leif would post that there’s still no plausible mechanism for that link that he’s seen, and he’s look at a lot of suggested links.

By: Jean Brown

Jean Brown — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:34:00 +0000

Everyone is also missing another common issue with stats – things that are related are not necessarily causal.

The grid failures are much more related to an aging grid and lack of maintenance due to cost cutting than to the weather.

Also, increased population densities in vulnerable areas causes the outages to have bigger impacts on more people.

By: J M Whitman

J M Whitman — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:14:55 +0000

Ric:
“They probably feel more like small stones in his hiking boots to him . . .”

A scientist who is cautous/self questioning/objective – one who has those virtues stands the test of science/time.

By: Ron de Haan

Ron de Haan — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:12:10 +0000

Without any comment:
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/editorials/4377-us-governments-climate-con-job

By: AnonyMoose

AnonyMoose — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:25:58 +0000

Maybe an Information Quality correction should be requested for that one graph.

By: Mike Abbott

Mike Abbott — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:14:19 +0000

I believe Warren misspelled the EIA guy’s last name. According to the EIA web site, it is Makens, not Makins. I left a note on Warren’s blog, too.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:48:13 +0000

Just another case of grab someone else’s database and shove it into a PC and out comes another science paper.

Boy oh boy, the kind of scientists we have today are so prolific and hasty to come up with significant conclusions for their analysis that I doubt they would have time for a phone call….

Reminds me of the whole Hockey stick thing…data largely based on one person tree ring plugs taken about 30 years ago on a hill top in Denver…

Reminds me of the computerized AGW conmclusions from long term ground based temperature measurements records….nobody ever bothered to take a look at the stations themselves….of course not – they were too busy extrapolating the end of the world in a CO2 induced inferno…

Anyone see a trend here?

By: Pamela Gray

Pamela Gray — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:53:42 +0000

Ric, come now. You have no idea why Phoenix is cooler? Do you know nothing at all about weather pattern variations? Cold fronts? Warm fronts? Jet stream behavior? Pressure gradients? These are all easily studied, followed, and used to predict weather pattern variation. Yes, yes, the Sun provides a steady source of heat when it gets through, but not so much when it is mixed with Earth’s unending variations of its own atmosphere. There is no pebble in my shoe and I am just an amateur at weather pattern variation reasons.

By: Jeff B.

Jeff B. — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:49:26 +0000

The folks at these government agencies that keep advancing these hysteria laden reports are not real scientists. The real scientists I know are much more cautious, methodical and skeptical of their own work. Particularly with respect to data. The whole climate arena has become perverted by politics and subsidy.

By: Mark T

Mark T — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:39:32 +0000

Flanagan (08:08:41) :

Mark, are you serious? Do you believe people didn’t notice a failure when it was induced by the weather before?
No, but that’s not what I said, either (read up on various red herrings).

Other causes could simply be those that are reported better for a variety of reasons. Maybe the non-weather causes are the ones that automatically get logged for safety reasons, i.e., human caused failures. I don’t know, but unlike you, I don’t automatically assume a specific outcome simply because it fits my pre-conceived beliefs.

Of course, to expect any sort of objective and logic response from you would be… illogical.

Mark

By: Colin

Colin — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:30:56 +0000

Flanagan, what part of ‘most of the slope is due to better reporting’ do you not understand? Yes, the local utilities knew about and fixed weather related outages. No, the reporting of data to other agencies was not good. Very large steps were taken in this direction after the 2003 northeastern grid outage.