NCAR: Number of record highs beat record lows – if you believe the quality of data from the weather stations

12 11 2009
SurfaceStationsReportCover

click for PDF

I’ll have a lot more on this study later, but for now just a short rebuttal.

I believe this study is hopelessly flawed due to the fact that the authors take the data from the weather stations at face value without considering bias due to measurement error or siting error, both of which are rampant in the US surface station network.

Read my report at left.

While not all situations with poorly sited weather stations affect trends, a weather station like this one at the University of Arizona’s parking lot in front of the atmospheric science department is represenative of the kinds of problems that would lead to an increased number of new high temperature records set.

 

Tucson1.jpg

Above: official USHCN weather station, in the parking lot, Atmospheric Science Dept. University of Arizona, Tucson. Photo: Warren Meyer

 

Plus then there’s the error problem. For example we saw this summer that Honolulu set new record highs, but they turned out to be in error. The kicker is that NOAA let the records stand anyway! The problem is that a number of climate stations are at airports. Watch this NWS employee say on record that these airport weather stations are placed for aviation purposes…not necessarily for  climate purposes.”

So take this NCAR study with a grain of salt, since the authors did not address any of these issues.

From NCAR: Record High Temperatures Far Outpace Record Lows Across U.S.

BOULDER—Spurred by a warming climate, daily record high temperatures occurred twice as often as record lows over the last decade across the continental United States, new research shows. The ratio of record highs to lows is likely to increase dramatically in coming decades if emissions of greenhouse gases continue to climb.

“Climate change is making itself felt in terms of day-to-day weather in the United States,” says Gerald Meehl, the lead author and a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “The ways these records are being broken show how our climate is already shifting.”

temps

This graphic shows the ratio of record daily highs to record daily lows observed at about 1,800 weather stations in the 48 contiguous United States from January 1950 through September 2009. Read the rest of this entry »





HadCRUT for September out – finally – but has data holes

5 11 2009

Lucia beat me to a post on this, so I’ll give her the honor here. Interesting thing though, the delay of Hadley may have provided a better data presentation. – Anthony

Guest Post by Lucia from The Blackboard

Guess what? The much anticipated Hadley monthly surface temperature anomalies are now available. I always use the NH+SH simple average.

Guess what else? According to this metric, the global surface temperature anomaly September 2009 cooled relative to August 2009 dropping from0.548C to 0.457C. In contrast, GISSTemp, NOAA/NCDC, UAH and RSS all reported distinctly warmer anomalies in September relative to August. This divergence is a pit surprising– though I’d have to plough through numbers to see if this sort of mismatch is unprecedented in the record.

One of the interesting happenings this month was Hadley’s decision to delay processing because they considered the some data they received to be obviously wrong. We don’t have details on precisely what was wrong about it, but I noticed large blanked out areas on their map:

Figure 1: Missing temperatures in Africa.
Figure 1: Missing temperatures in Africa. Read the rest of this entry »




How not to measure temperature, part 91: find the official climate thermometer in this photo

26 10 2009

It has been awhile since we’ve looked at stations in the United States Historical Climatology Network. Last night I was doing quality control and updates to the database and came across this photo by Surfacestations.org volunteer John W. Slayton. He’s been surveying dozens of stations this summer and has been adding quite a number of USHCN surveys to the database. We all thank him.

This photo has been retouched to minimize the sun glare. Find the thermometer.

Junkyard_MMTS_org

Official NOAA Climate Station of Record, Fillmore, UT - click to enlarge

Give up? Here’s the photo labeled to point it out: Read the rest of this entry »





How bad is the global temperature data?

13 10 2009

By Joseph D’Aleo, AMS Fellow, CCM

In this recent post, we discussed the problems with recent data that showed the argument presented by the EDF’s millionaire lawyer playing clueless environmentalist on Lou Dobbs Tonight that this will be the warmest decade is nonsense. This claim was well refuted and Al Gore’s credibility disassembled by Phelim McAleer, of the new documentary Not Evil, Just Wrong that challenges the lies and exaggerations (totalling 35) in Al Gore scifi horror comedy film, An Inconvenient Truth. 9 were serious enough for a UK judge to require a disclaimer itemizing them be read whenever, the movie was shown in the schools.

The world’s climate data has become increasingly sparse with a big dropoff around 1990. There was also a tenfold increase in missing months around the same time. Stations (90% in the United States which has the Cadillac data system) are poor to very poorly sited and not properly adjusted for urbanization. Numerous peer review papers suggest an exaggeration of the warming by 30%, 50% or even more. The station dropout can be clearly seen in the two maps below with the number of station going from over 6000 to just 1079 from April 1978 to April 2008.

April 1978 GISS global plot - click for larger image

April 2008 GISS global plot - click for larger image

April 2008 GISS global plot - click for larger image

See the big gaps in the recent data in Canada, Greenland, Africa, South America, parts of western Asia, parts of Australia.

SEE FOR YOURSELF Read the rest of this entry »





Ooops, Dutch Meteorological Institute caught in weather station siting failure – moved station and told nobody

24 09 2009

KNMI has been measuring the wrong temperature for years

debilt_newspaper

WUWT reader Mike writes with this little bombshell on one of the world’s leading meteorological agencies. It seems they can’t get their thermometer siting correct which resulted in a bias to the record. Hmmm. Where have we heard this before? The newspaper “AD” in the Netherlands has picked up the issue with two separate stories.Mike writes:

Dear Anthony,

I left this on the “tips” thread on WUWT, but since it is also relevant to surface stations, I felt you should hear of it directly.  It probably deserves a whole story on WUWT.

As you probably already know, KNMI De Bilt is the only station in the Netherlands used for GISTEMP. The nearest long-term station is in a suburb of Brussels, hence is undoubtably UHI-polluted. De Bilt is the only long record stn in NL & within 150km in any direction would be a useful correction.

Two stories caught my eye in the Dutch papers today about a 0.5-degree error in the De Bilt record which was miraculously corrected this summer with a station move of 200 m without anyone being told of it. Here are the links to and my translations of the articles.

Mike’s translations of the newspaper stories are below, I’ve added relevant graphics. – Anthony


DE BILT – Weather Institute KNMI has been measuring the years incorrect temperatures on its grounds in De Bilt due to an incorrect setup of a thermometer.

The instrument stood too close to a line of trees, due to which on average half a degree (Celsius) too high was measured.

After discovery of the fault the thermometer was moved to an open spot on the measurement field before last summer, the KNMI has confirmed. Due to the change the average measured temperature fell half a degree. This measurement should be reliable. Read the rest of this entry »





Interesting article on thermometer placement

30 07 2009

How to properly place your outdoor thermometer

04:52 PM PDT on Wednesday, July 29, 2009

By TRAVIS PITTMAN / KING5.com

excerpts:

SEATTLE – With temperatures in the Puget Sound region breaking records this week, many people are playing a watching and waiting game – waiting to see when the thermometer outside their home will reach triple digits.

Below is a photo of a thermometer sent to KING 5 News Tuesday afternoon by a viewer in Oso, east of Arlington. It clearly shows the temperature reading 116 degrees. You can also clearly tell the sun is reflecting off it and it’s mounted right next to a building.

source: KING 5 Viewer Read the rest of this entry »





Out of Africa: A new paper by Christy on surface temperature issues

18 07 2009
Mozal - Aluminium Smelter - Maputo, Mozambique -1998

Weather station, Mozal - Aluminum Smelter - Maputo, Mozambique - installed in 1998

More weather station photos from Africa here.

These stations shown and linked above are not GHCN stations as far as I can tell, but the siting was interesting nonetheless.

This new paper by John Christy, who works with Dr. Roy Spencer on the UAH dataset, points out that Tmin seems to have a signal in Africa where Tmax does not. Land use changes and aersols that affect the boundary layer at night are theorized and possible reasons. – Anthony

Surface Temperature Variations in East Africa and Possible Causes
JOHN R. CHRISTY, WILLIAM B. NORRIS, AND RICHARD T. MCNIDER
Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

ABSTRACT
Surface temperatures have been observed in East Africa for more than 100 yr, but heretofore have not been subject to a rigorous climate analysis. To pursue this goal monthly averages of maximum (TMax), minimum (TMin), and mean (TMean) temperatures were obtained for Kenya and Tanzania from several sources. After the data were organized into time series for specific sites (60 in Kenya and 58 in Tanzania), the series were adjusted for break points and merged into individual gridcell squares of 1.258, 2.58, and 5.08.

Results for the most data-rich 58 cell, which includes Nairobi, Mount Kilimanjaro, and Mount Kenya, indicate that since 1905, and even recently, the trend of TMax is not significantly different from zero. However, TMin results suggest an accelerating temperature rise.

Uncertainty estimates indicate that the trend of the difference time series (TMax2 TMin) is significantly less than zero for 1946–2004, the period with the highest density of observations. This trend difference continues in the most recent period (1979–2004), in contrast with findings in recent periods for global datasets, which
generally have sparse coverage of East Africa. Read the rest of this entry »





Surfacestations.org hits the 1000 mark

16 07 2009

I’m pleased to announce that the surfacestations.org project has now surveyed over 1000 of the 1221 USHCN stations in the USA, putting the percentage of the survey at over 82% now.My sincere thanks to the many volunteers who stepped up recently to survey additional stations in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, and many other states.

Here is what the coverage looks like as of 7-14-09

USHCN surveyed 7-14-09

Here is the breakdown by state. Note that 5 states are now 100% completed. Read the rest of this entry »





GISS: World’s airports continue to run warmer than ROW

15 07 2009

Guest post by John Goetz

AIRLNRAD1As noted in the previous post, GISS has released their monthly global temperature summary for June, 2009. This month’s whopping anomaly of 0.63C is once again much higher than that of RSS, UAH, and even NOAA, which is the source of the GISS temperature data. Not only is the anomaly higher than the other metrics, but it is trending in the opposite direction.

Temperature data from 1079 stations worldwide contributed to the analysis, 134 of them being located in the 50 US states. Data from essentially the same few stations have been used for the past twenty-four months. Many, many hundreds of stations that have historically been included in the record and still collect data today continue to be ignored by GISS in global temperature calculations.

Once again, the bulk of temperatures comprising the present-day worldwide GISS average come from airports – in this case 554 airports, according to the NOAA metadata from the V2 station inventory. In the US, the ratio of airports to total stations continues to run very high, with 121 out of the 134 reporting stations being located at airports.

Why worry about airports? Aside from recent posts on this site documenting problems with airport ASOS equipment in the US, WUWT has also documented a number of equipment siting problems, notably the typical close proximity of the equipment to a tarmac heat sink. Airports can introduce a mini-UHI effect where one would otherwise not be found.

The NOAA metadata is not entirely accurate, and several stations located at airports are not noted as such. Some examples include Londrina and Brasilia in Brazil, Ely / Yelland in Nevada, and Broome in Austrailia. Those stations were easy to find because they had “airport” (or some variant) in the station name. A check of coordinates using Google Earth confirmed the airport locations.

Let’s examine the metadata a little further, shall we? Read the rest of this entry »





Key West, FL sets new subzero “record low” temperature – Update: now snowing!

11 07 2009

KeyWestCurrents_071109

That windchill is vicious, be sure to dress warmly going outside at Key West. Cold kills. Actually the new record low was colder than that shown above. It hit -27F earlier. See the complete NOAA report here (PDF)

OK fun aside, this is obviously another ASOS thermohygrometer malfunction, but one in the opposite direction that we usually see. But, there’s an interesting twist here that will provide a useful test of the integrity of data handling policy within NOAA/NWS. Please read on. Read the rest of this entry »





How not to measure temperature, part 90

11 07 2009

People send me stuff. My Inbox bursts daily with ideas, suggestions, papers, and photos.

Here is a climate monitoring station in Tremonton Utah. Notice anything peculiar about the placement of the temperature sensor? It is the white “bee hive” on the pole on the asphalt.

Tremonton UT COOP-A Climate station looking-south

Tremonton UT COOP-A Climate station looking south - click for larger image

Note the conduit for the cable to the MMTS. This underscores something I’ve been saying about the MMTS installation for some time. The COOP managers that install these aren’t given the tools or time to get past obstructions like asphalt and concrete, thus the MMTS ends up closer to buildings than the “wireless” Stevenson Screen.

Randy Julander writes in:

Randy Julander here, snow survey supervisor, NRCS, USDA. Here are a few pics from the Tremonton Utah MMTS site which is right outside our NRCS field office in Tremonton. Normally there is a large truck parked right next to the sensor. As you can see, next to the building, next to the air conditioner, asphalt everywhere. Nice placement.

I’ll say, right on the pavement, 10 feet from the building. Randy mentions a truck being parked by the sensor. It shows up nicely on the Google aerial view: Read the rest of this entry »





Pielke Sr. responds to NCDC’s “Talking Points” about surfacestations.org

5 07 2009

SurfaceStationsReportCover

Roger A. Pielke Sr. Comments On The NCDC Talking Point Response To The Report “Is The U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?” By Anthony Watts

The National Climate Data Center (NCDC) has responded to the excellent report

Watts, A. 2009: Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable? 28 pages, March 2009 The Heartland Institute [hard copies available from The Heartland Institute 19 South LaSalle Street #903 Chicago Illinois 60603]

which I weblogged on at “Is The U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?” By Anthony Watts.

The NCDC “Talking Points” released on June 9, 2009  are available at

Talking Points related to: Is the U.S. Temperature Record Reliable?

Unfortunately, the author of the NCDC Talking Points cavalierly and poorly responded to Anthony Watts report. They did not even have the courtesy to cite the report! {UPDATE 7/3/09: They have now cited Anthony’s report, but retained the original date of the Talking Points of June 9 2009).

Below, I comment on their response. Read the rest of this entry »





How not to measure temperature, part 89 – “surface temperature”

4 07 2009

Hillsboro_OH_USHCN

The Hillsboro, Ohio USHCN climate station of record, measuring rainfall and the “surface” temperature. Note the MMTS temperature sensor laying flat on the ground. Read the rest of this entry »





Another paper showing evidence of a solar signature in temperature records

1 07 2009

Readers may find the title familiar, that’s because Basil Copeland and I also did a paper looking at solar signatures in climatic data, which has received a lot of criticism because we made an analytical error in our attempt. But errors are useful, teachable moments, even if they are embarrassing, and our second attempt though, titled,

Evidence of a Lunisolar Influence on Decadal and Bidecadal Oscillations In Globally Averaged Temperature Trends

hasn’t been significantly challenged yet that I am aware of. Basil and I welcome any comments or suggestions on that work.

In our work, we used Hodrick-Prescott filtering to extract the solar cycle signal from the HadCRUT temperature dataset. In this paper the data are extracted from the ECA&ECD database (available via http://eca.knmi.nl ).  According to the paper, they are “using a nonlinear technique of analysis developed for time series whose complexity arises from interactions between different sources over different time scales”. Read more about it in the paper. In both our paper, and in this one, a solar signature is evident in the temperature data.  – Anthony

Evidence for a solar signature in 20th-century temperature

By Jean-Louis Le Mouel, Vincent Courtillot, Elena Blanter, Mikhail Shnirman (PDF available here)

J.-L. Le Mouël et al., Evidence for a solar signature in 20th-century temperature data from the USA and Europe, C. R. Geoscience (2008), doi:10.1016/j.crte.2008.06.001

solar-temp-world-regions

Click for a larger image - Comparison of the mean squared interannual variation (left column) and lifetime (right column) of the overall minimum temperature data from the US (153 stations), Australia (preliminary, 5 stations) and Europe (44 stations). Europe (bottom row) is shown for the two types of calculation for quick comparison (green curves), and also the magnetic index representing solar activity (blue curve).

Abstract

Read the rest of this entry »





McIntyre on USHCN2’s “warmer” trend treatment of Orland

30 06 2009

Orland CA and the New Adjustments

by Steve McIntyre on June 29th, 2009

In my last post, I observed that NOAA’s Talking Points applied their new “adjustments” to supposedly prove that NOAA’s negligent administration of the USHCN network did not “matter”.

In order to illustrate the effect of the new methods in this post, I’ll compare the new adjustments (post-TOBS) to the old adjustments (post-TOBS) on a “good” station – Orland CA, a prototype “good” station, discussed at the outset of surfacestations.org, discussed at WUWT here and CA here in early 2007.

The station history for Orland (at CDIAC) says that it has been in its present location for (at least) most of the 20th century and has had minimal changes during that time, other than perhaps time-of-observation (TOBS). The TOBS adjustment is carried forward into USHCN-v2. As I understand it, NOAA’s New Adjustment Method replaces station-history based adjustments for instrumentation changes and station location (the latter formerly done in FILNET).

As a benchmark, here is the difference between FILNET (adjusted) and TOBS for Orland in the “old” USHCN. Adjustments in the 20th century are negligible – in keeping with station history information that indicates no changes in location. Read the rest of this entry »





McIntyre on the NCDC Talking Points Memo

29 06 2009

Foreword: I give thanks to Steve McIntyre for this analysis. Steve came to a conclusion similar to what I alluded to in my initial rebuttal where I said:

For all I know, they could be comparing homogenized data from CRN1 and 2 (best stations) to homogenized data from CRN 345 (the worst stations), which of course would show nearly no difference.

Steve does a superb job of deconstructing the memo’s undocumented results. Perhaps someday Dr. Thomas Peterson of NCDC will tell us how he did his analysis and show supporting data and methods. – Anthony

The Talking Points Memo

by Steve McIntyre reposted from Climate Audit

The NOAA Talking Points memo falls well short of a “full, true and plain disclosure” standard – aside from the failure to appropriately credit Watts (2009).

They presented the following graphic that purported to show that NOAA’s negligent administration of the USHCN station network did not “matter”, describing the stations as follows:

Two national time series were made using the same gridding and area averaging technique. One analysis was for the full data set. The other used only the 70 stations that surfacestations.org classified as good or best… the two time series, shown below as both annual data and smooth data, are remarkably similar. Clearly there is no indication for this analysis that poor current siting is imparting a bias in the U.S. temperature trends.


Figure 1. From Talking Points Memo.

Beyond the above sentence, there was no further information on the provenance of the two data sets. NOAA did not archive either data set nor provide source code for reconciliation.

The red graphic for the “full data set” had, using the preferred terminology of climate science, a “remarkable similarity” to the NOAA 48 data set that I’d previously compared to the corresponding GISS data set here (which showed a strong trend of NOAA relative to GISS). Here’s a replot of that data – there are some key telltales evidencing that this has a common provenance to the red series in the Talking Points graphic.


Figure 2. Plot of US data from www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cirs/drd964x.tmpst.txt

An obvious question is whether the Talking Points starting point of 1950 is relevant. Here’s the corresponding graphic with the 1895 starting point used in USHCN v2. Has the truncation of the graphic start at 1950 “enhanced” the visual impression of an increasing trend? I think so. Read the rest of this entry »





An Australian look at USHCN: 20th century trend is largely if not entirely an artefact arising from the “corrections”

28 06 2009
click for larger image

click for larger image

From environmentalist Jennifer Marohasy’s blog in Australia, please pay her a visit here – Anthony

There has been criticism of the potential for official weather stations in the USA to record artificially high temperatures because of the changing environments in which they exist, for example, new asphalt, new building or new air conditioning outlets.   Meteorologist, Anthony Watts, has documented evidence of the problem and Canadian academic, Ross McKitrick, has attempted to calculate just how artificially elevated temperatures might be as a consequence.

A reader of this blog, Michael Hammer, recently studied the official data from the US official weather stations and in particular how it is adjusted after it has been collected.   Mr Hammer concludes that the temperature rise profile claimed by the US government is largely if not entirely an artefact of the adjustments applied after the raw data is collected from the weather stations.

Does the US Temperature Record Support Global Warming?
By Michael Hammer

IN the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) collects, analyses and publishes temperature data for the United States.   As part of the analysis process, NOAA applies several adjustments to the raw data.

If we consider, the above graph, which shows, their plot of the raw data  (dark pink) and the adjusted data (pale pink), it is obvious that the adjustments have little impact on data from early in the 20th century but adjust later temperature readings upwards by an increasing amount.  This means that the adjustments will create an apparent warming trend over the 20th century.  [Click on the above chart for a better larger view, this chart can also be viewed at http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ndp019.html .]

NOAA state that they adjust the raw data for five factors.  The magnitude of the adjustments are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2.  Form of individual corrections applied by NOAA. The black line is the adjustment for time of observation.  The red line is for a change in maximum/minimum thermometers used.  The yellow line is for changes in station siting. The pale blue line is for filling in missing data from individual station records. The purple line is for UHI effects (this correction is now removed).  [Click on the chart for a better larger view or visit the same website as for Figure 1.] Read the rest of this entry »





Absence makes the chart grow fonder

25 06 2009

For those who love (or hate) GISTEMP’s surface temperature product, we have this from Climate-Skeptic.com, by Warren Meyer. His interesting analysis is timely and appropriate. Surface station coverage in the areas of greatest contention right now are rather poor. – Anthony

Warren writes:

Apropos of my last post, Bob Tisdale is beginning a series analyzing the differences between the warmest surface-based temperature set (GISTEMP) and a leading satellite measurement series (UAH).  As I mentioned, these two sets have been diverging for years.  I estimated the divergence at around 0.1C per decade  (this is a big number, as it is about equal to the measured warming rate in the second half of the 20th century and about half the IPCC predicted warming for the next century).   Tisdale does the math a little more precisely, and gets the divergence at only 0.035C per decade.   This is lower than I would have expected and seems to be driven a lot by the GISS’s under-estimation of the 1998 spike vs. UAH.  I got the higher number with a different approach, by putting the two anamolies on the same basis using 1979-1985 averages and then comparing recent values.

Here are the differences in trendline by area of the world (he covers the whole world by grouping ocean areas with nearby continents).  GISS trend minus UAH trend, degrees C per decade:Arctic:  0.134

North America:  -0.026

South America: -0.013

Europe:  0.05

Africa:  0.104

Asia:  0.077

Australia:  -0.02

Antarctica:  0.139

So, the three highest differences, each about an order of magnitude higher than differences in other areas, are in 1.  Antarctica;  2. Arctic; and 3. Africa.  What do these three have in common?

Well, what the have most in common is the fact that these are also the three areas of the world with the poorest surface temperature coverage.  Here is the GISS coverage showing color only in areas where they have a thermometer record within a 250km box:

ghcn_giss_250km_anom1212_1991_2008_1961_1990

Read the rest of this entry »





Arctic temperature is still not above 0°C – the latest date in fifty years of record keeping

25 06 2009

By Joseph D’Aleo, AMS Fellow, CCM

The average arctic temperature is still not above (take your pick) 32°F 0°C 273.15°K–this the latest date in fifty years of record keeping that this has happened. Usually it is beginning to level off now and if it does so, it will stay near freezing on average in the arctic leading to still less melting than last summer which saw a 9% increase in arctic ice than in 2007.  H/T to FredM and MarcM


image
Data from DMI (Danish Meteorological Institute)

See larger image here. Compare with DMI charts in other years here.

[NOTE: as a second source to Joe’s article I’ve added this weather station data from the “North Pole Cam” operated by NOAA. Link is here: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/gallery_np.html

There is a webcam at the “North Pole” (at least it starts out very near there) that reports via satellite data uplink at regular intervals. They also have a weather station with a once weekly data plot.  Note it is still below zero centigrade there. Read the rest of this entry »





NCDC writes ghost “talking points” rebuttal to surfacestations project

24 06 2009

UPDATE: The “ghost author” has been identified, see the end of the article.

When I first saw it, I laughed.

When I saw the internal memo circulated to top managers at NOAA, I laughed even more.

Why?  Because NOAA and NCDC are rebuking an analysis which I have not even written yet, using old data, and nobody at NOAA or NCDC  had the professionalism to put their name to the document.

First let’s have a look at the National Climatic Data Center’s web page from a week ago:

ncdc_web_page_061209

I was quite surprised to find that my midterm census report on the surfacestations.org project evoked a response from NCDC. I suppose they are getting some heat from the citizenry and some congress critters over lack of quality control. I was even more surprised to see that they couldn’t even get the title right, particularly since the title of my report defines most of what NCDC is all about; Surface Temperature Measurement. Read the rest of this entry »