WUWT readers may recall last summer when the ASOS weather station at the Honolulu Airport malfunctioned, giving a whole series of shonky readings that resulted in a string of new record high temperatures being set. What was even worse, is that NOAA, knowing the records were based on faulty equipment, let them stand anyway even when a nearby NOAA station demonstrated the records were false.
WUWT reader “Geo” alerted me to the issue at DCA in “tips and notes”, and I made some immediate screencaps of the data which I have below. The DCA ASOS station at Washington National/Reagan Airport is part of the COOP A network which makes climate observations. First, a look at the station itself.
By siting standards, it at first glance appears to be well sited, being over 100 meters from the nearest runway, in the grass, and on the bayside riverside:
But on closer inspection it appears to be sited over asphalt:
From the ground, NOAA has this photo and more:
Here’s the hourly data in question, note the big jump at midnight and the 87.1F recorded at the 6 hour preceding mark. What’s odd about it is that its a big jump compared to the readings in the hour before and after, plus it occurred during thunderstorms and light rain. It seems unlikely.
Nearby Andrews AFB, just a few miles away, doesn’t show a similar jump in readings. It shows 64F and light rain at midnight, and a 6 hour max of 73F.
The high 87.1F reading at DCA made it into the official climatological report for Friday May 28th, which places it at 12:25AM, in the middle of rain and thunderstorms. It seems pretty clear that the reading is erroneous.
http://www.weather.gov/climate/getclimate.php?wfo=lwx
I recorded all the screen caps above last Friday, May 28th. I figured I’d wait to see if the NWS staff caught this and corrected it.
Sure enough, they did:
That’s the right way to do it. But is the 76F reading at 127AM valid? With a malfunctioning sensor, who knows for sure?
Now the question is: why does one NWS office fix an obviously faulty ASOS reading in the climate record while another ignores it and leaves it as a new record? Are there not standards for handling such things organization wide?
Another question is: how many events like this go undetected due to a lesser, non obvious magnitude, and remain in the climatic record?
Invariably, such events almost always (though there are rare exceptions) seem to embrace a warm error, be it electronic or human error, or even transcription error, such as “Dial M for METAR“.
And yet, there has been a large migration of GHCN to airport systems both in the US and globally.
At ICCC4, Apollo 17 astronaut and geologist Harrison Schmitt came up to me after my talk to tell me that I was “spot on” with criticizing the use of airport sensors for climate, because they were designed for a different mission. It was a proud moment for me, having watched this man walk the moon as a boy in high school. He said to me (and I’m going on recollection):
“The only purpose of the ASOS system is to measure the runway conditions for flight safety. I’ve seen runway temperatures vary as much as ten degrees from other airport locations. These shouldn’t be used for climate.”
The data at Reno, NV airport, showed not just siting differences, but a UHI factor also.
I agree with Dr. Schmitt’s assertion, and given that ASOS continues to produce faulty data, perhaps it is time to look at ASOS data issues on a broader scale.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That 76F is probably accurate. We have had extremely hot nights lately in the Mid-Atlantic.
Yesterday I was travelling with a storm front blowing through and the temperature difference was 12 degrees celcius in a 50 kilometer trip.
Isn’t there a situation that happens rarely on the tail end of a thunderstorm where a pocket of compressed hot air from up in the thunderhead descends rapidly and can cause artificially hot temps locally for a brief period of time?
Perhaps it captured this? Even in the remote possibility of this happening it still needs to be thrown out as an anomaly.
REPLY: Yes there is, it’s called a heatburst. See more here. I may have a way to check to see if this was likely at DCA, and I’ll report back what I find. – Anthony
REPLY2: Here’s the DCA ASOS data plotted as it appears on Weather Underground:
http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KDCA/2010/5/28/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA
While there was elevated wind, if there was a dry heatburst from a thunderstorm, I’d expect to see a corresponding sharp drop in dewpoint, but it drops gradually. The fact that the dewpoint system is fog mirror based in ASOS, while temperature is done with a separate sensor and looking at the data where temp and dewpoint don’t track, suggests a sensor error to me.
Note also, in the screencap of NWS tabular data that from 11pm to midnight on 5/27, the dewpoint remained constant at 62F while the temperature zoomed from 69F to 84F. Sensor error is the only explanation for that.
More on the ASOS sensors here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/10/inside-the-asos-ho83-tempdewpoint-sensor/
Temperatures and climate should stay far apart from each other.
There is too many variables in just reading a thermometer such as elevation, location, material surroundings, water, heat sources, human error, machine error, etc.
Different “Geo”, btw, than the one (me, that is) that usually comments on arctic ice. Just in case anyone wonders if I was branching out into ASOS.
Well, actually, I did take some pics of an ASOS in South Dakota last year, but still, this one wasn’t me.
ASOS= Automated Surface Observing System ( yes? )
What is missing is the note that the NWS DCA had (but is not there anymore) just after their revision….it stated that the ASOS had failed between the hours of midnight and 4am……but now they are still using data while knowing (or at least stating) that it had failed (1:27am)
In the end, I think the temp did (later in the day) get up to 76 (off hour ob)…….
The dew point did not changed it stayed at 62 while the temperature jumped from 69 to 84. That seems a little unreal to me.
Perhaps there is another reason for the quick temperature increase. Most people don’t know that the dewpoint thermocoolers for the old dew point sensor remain on in most, if not all HO-1088’s, as per instructions from NWS. This is a heat source, which is normally taken care of by the ventillation fan, which draws air up from the bottom of the sensor housing and out through the “top cap.” If the fan fails, the only indication is that the temperature sensor reads quite high for a long time, as the temperature readings are 5 minute averages taken in sequence, then the average centered over the 5 readings. If, by some wind condition, or by an intermittant failure of the fan, the readings for the 5 minutes are corrupted, then, even if a maintenance flag is issued, the data may not be checked by the responsible WFO and flagged, allowing such erroneous readings to be accepted by NCDC at the end of the month. It appears that this might be the case, if quality control at the WFO is not done properly, and it would therefore appear in the record. By the way, the dewpoint cooler being run is nonessential, as, at most sites, a new sensor has been substituted (I believe the designation is the DTS-1).
REPLY: Yes, spot on, many have been upgraded with the separate DT-1 units, because the HO-83 and 1088 are soooo bad. You explanation is plausible here. – Anthony
Just a thought…
Pathetic. Truly pathetic. And these guys are the scorekeepers?
DCA has always been an odd place for DC’s official climate record. As can be seen in the photos, it sits just yards from a very wide portion of the Potomac River. The river actually bends around DCA, with water to the north, east and south of the ASOS.
Why do climate scientists continue to use data using a source which is unsuitable for purpose? I’m appalled they call this science!
I really wonder about the maintenance and calibration on these ASOS and AWOS systems. When a pilot is approaching an uncontrolled airport, the main thing he or she wants to know is what runway is in use. In that case, one listens to the ASOS/AWOS to determine which way the wind is blowing. At one local airport (Pickens County, SC), the AWOS wind function hasn’t been working for several years. I just dialed it up at (864) 843-5801 and the wind information is still “missing”. Why the feds don’t fix it, I have no idea. So I called them up.
First, I called the FAA Aviation Safety Hotline in D.C. at 1-866-TELL-FAA. I got a bored woman who didn’t understand anything I was telling her, and got snotty after I had to tell her the third time that the airport was in South (not North) Carolina. She referred me to the South Carolina FSDO so I called them at (803) 765-5931. All I got was a recording and then dead air. I hung up after 3 minutes of dead air.
It really makes one feel safe to know these people are looking out for the flying public, doesn’t it? /snark
Geo says:
June 1, 2010 at 6:02 am
What is missing is the note that the NWS DCA had (but is not there anymore) just after their revision….it stated that the ASOS had failed between the hours of midnight and 4am……but now they are still using data while knowing (or at least stating) that it had failed (1:27am)
In the end, I think the temp did (later in the day) get up to 76 (off hour ob)…….
_____________________________________________________________________
If you look at the data from midnight to four AM the data is all over the place. It would indicate a loose connection aggravated by the rain perhaps? and was later fixed. I see the problem in my old trucks speedometer every time it rains. It registars 100 mph crawling down my rutted gravel drive…
10 pm 73
11 pm 69
Midnight 84
1 am 78
2 am 82
3 am 76
4 am 80
5 am 68
These types of out and out lies do the reputation of NOAA and climate scientists in general absolutely no good.
I do not think we should be appalled by such errors: these are real world gizmos operated by humans, employed mostly by government agencies. Errors are inevitable.
What is appalling is that “scientists” lately do not seem concerned that the data on which they base their apocalyptic scenarios is so faulty. Climate Science, properly understood, is in its infancy. It needs time spent on first principles, especially collection of accurate, non-biased data. The best climate science being done on earth seems to be here at Wattsupwiththat.com, with Anthony Watts and others scrutinizing the data collection process for all these other sloppy “scientists”, who cannot be bothered.
KW
Tenuc says:
June 1, 2010 at 7:06 am
Why do climate scientists continue to use data using a source which is unsuitable for purpose? I’m appalled they call this science!
___________________________________________________________________________
Because it was never science it is propaganda used to generate more wealth for the politicians and their handlers and tighter control of people other wise known as advancing “Global Governance”
“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” Al Gore Remember the “Danish text” would hand control over to the World Bank.
“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance. From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace.” Jacques Chirac
“….the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” David Rockefeller
http://www.tasmantimes.com/world-government-quotes/78/
“National auto-determination” is another way of saying national sovereignty and democracy. or in other words a form of “Socialism” ” “What unites the many different forms of Socialism.. is the conception that socialism (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) must be handed down to the grateful masses in one form or another, by a ruling elite which is not subject to their control…” http://search.marxists.org/archive/draper/1966/twosouls/0-2souls.htm
If you believe the records have been cultivated for warming trends for a few decades, then you must understand there is a limit to the distortions that can be added without outright and discoverable lies.
The scientists we distrust have projected a rate of warming that will not be sustainable if their finger is on the scale. The finger will have to get heavier each year until it is obvious to anyone who cares to look.
Feeling the Heat: Global Warming and Rising Temperatures in the United States
Executive Summary
Globally, the year 2007 tied for the second warmest year on record, behind the record warmth of 2005. This warmth is part of a long-term trend toward rising temperatures and extreme weather events resulting from global warming.
Global average surface temperatures have increased by more than 1.4°F since the mid-19th century. In 2007, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that the evidence of global warming is “unequivocal” and that human activities are responsible for most of this rise in temperature.
To examine recent temperature patterns in the United States, we compared temperature data for the years 2000–2007 with the historical average, or “normal,” temperature for the preceding 30 years, 1971–2000. Our data were collected at 255 weather stations—those with the highest quality data—in all 50 states and Washington, DC. Overall, we found that temperatures were above the 30-year average across the country, indicating pervasive warming.
Turns out those 255 high quality stations were Airport ASOS stations.
The Ecofascists are working very hard to close down the debate at James Delingpole’s site by hacking peoples’ login IDs.
Pointman
We should all know by now that the liberals perpetrating this hoax will never back down, regardless of how much evidence is shown to refute them, or how much their deceit is exposed.
Yes, that’s concrete. The telltale “Y” at the end of the pathway is the giveaway.
By the way, I sent you some commentary on the Central Park, NY, site, which I re-surveyed on Sunday site. Another heavily warming site. “It’s worse than we thought.” (And the previous site was on a rooftop, for which I have two eyewitness reports. I have photoed the previous site.)
Has anyone compared airports v the rest, or v rural sites in the surface records?
REPLY: Yes Zeke Hausfather did one for GHCN, not sure though how valuable it is since in USA there is so few “rural” stations. -A
KevinM says:
June 1, 2010 at 8:19 am
If you believe the records have been cultivated for warming trends for a few decades, then you must understand there is a limit to the distortions that can be added without outright and discoverable lies.
The scientists we distrust have projected a rate of warming that will not be sustainable if their finger is on the scale. The finger will have to get heavier each year until it is obvious to anyone who cares to look.
The problem is that this has already occurred and many of the sheeple are still following blindly. Remember, these types of catastrophic predictions have been made since James Hansen et al opened their mouths and began to speak about the climate. Their predictions have been falsified and they just keep nudging the records along closer and closer to their beliefs without any repurcussions. See 1998 is hotter than 1932 for proof. I say “is” instead of “was” because it was hotter in 1932, but according to the records now, 1998 is hotter.
This highlights the very serious dichotomy that exists between theoretical and observational scientists. As a retired lifelong obsevational, instrumental astronomer I was very much aware of this problem. You, Anthony, as someone who has a “feel” for your equipment, its capabilities and drawbacks, obviously understand this and are able to show up the appalling arrogance/ignorance of the people who pontificate on the future of the earth’s climate (I see the Met Office are now predicting that the number of very hot nights which are potentially lethal for older people could increase fivefold by 2040!).
Keep up the good work, Anthony!
Extremely small nit to pick:
Reagan National Airport is not on the Chesapeake Bay. It’s situated on the West bank of the Potomac River, and quite a distance from the Bay.
REPLY: Yeah, I never know when one begins/ends thanks for the clarification. -A