GISS, NOAA, GHCN and the odd Russian temperature anomaly – "It's all pipes!"

UPDATE: A good photo of one of the Russian stations has been found, see below after the “read more” link.

As most readers know by now, the problematic GISTEMP global temperature anomaly plot for October is heavily weighted by temperatures from weather stations in Russia.

gistemp_after_october_correction

GISTEMP 11-12-08 – Click for larger image

Like in the USA, weather stations tend to be distributed according to population density, with the more populated western portion of Russia having more weather stations than the less populated eastern areas such as Siberia. To illustrate this, here is a plot of Russian Weather Station locations from the University of Melbourne:

russian_met_stations

Click picture for larger image, source image is here

Interestingly, the greatest magnitude of the GISTEMP anomaly plot for October is in these mostly unpopulated areas where the weather station density is the lowest. While I was pondering this curiosity, one of the WUWT readers, Corky Boyd, did a little research and passed this along in email:

…Posters at Watts Up have commented on the ongoing consistently high anomalous temperatures from Russia. I have noticed this too.  In light of the erroneously posted data for October, I took a look at the monthly NCDC climate reports back to January 2007.  By my eyeball estimate the results from Russia are almost all on the high side. .  Some I classified as very highs are massively high.  Of the 21 months reported, only 2 appeared to be below average.

Category 2007 2008 (9 months)

Very high                     6                        4

High                            3                        1

Average                      2                        3

Low                            0                        1

Very Low                    1                        0

Is there a way to validate or invalidate GISS data  by comparing it to RISS?   Does it strike you as odd that the verifiably erroneous data has shown up in the same area that was suspect in the first place?  Could there be a pattern?

Corky also sent along a series of images depicting global near surface and ocean temperature anomalies from NOAA. Here is the most recent one from September 2008:

anomaly-map-blended-mntp-200809-pg

I was curious if indeed there was any pattern to the Russian anomaly, so I decided to animate the last year and a half worth of images. You can see this animation below. It is about 1 megabyte in size, so please be patient while it downloads.

noaa_world_temperature_anomaly_animation

Click for full sized animation

What I found interesting was that the January 2007 anomaly (the last time we had a “global heat wave”) was primarily in the northern Russian and Asian. According to January 2007 UAH satellite anomaly data, the Northern Hemisphere had a whopping anomaly of +1.08°C and the “northern extent” was even greater at +1.27°C, the largest anomaly ever in the Northern Extent dataset

Curiously though, the very next month, the Russian anomaly virtually disappears and is replacing with cooling, though a sharp boundary to warming now exists in Asia. It was as if somebody threw a switch in Russia.

anomaly-map_blended_mntp_01_2007_pganomaly-map_blended_mntp_02_2007_pg

Click for larger images

In March 2008, a very large positive anomaly returned in Russia, and again in April evaporated with the same abruptness as the Jan-Feb 2007 transition. Again almost as if a switch was thrown.

anomaly-map-blended-mntp-200803-pganomaly-map-blended-mntp-200804-pg

Click for larger images

Such abrupt repeated changes don’t seem fully natural to me, particularly when they occur over the same geographic location twice. I realize that two events don’t make a trend, but it is curious, given that we now have had a problem with Russian weather data again that caused GISS to announce the “hottest October on record”.

I also noticed that in the animation from the anomaly maps, there does not seem to be much of an anomaly in the summer months.

This made me wonder what some of those weather stations in Russia might be like. So I went to the Russian Meteorological Institute website at http://www.meteo.ru/english/

I know from John Goetz work as well as this artcle in Nature that Russian weather stations had been closing with regularity due to the trickle down effects of collapse in the former Soviet Union. Though some new ones are being built by outside agencies, such as this one sponsored by NOAA in Tiksi, Russia.

Click for a larger image

What I found interesting in the NOAA press release on Tiksi, was this image, showing weather stations clustered around the Arctic:

Click for a larger image

The interesting thing is that all these stations are manned and heated. The instruments appear to be “on” the buildings themselves, though it is hard to tell. One wonders how much of the building heat in this tiny island of humanity makes it to the sensors. The need for a manned weather station in the Arctic always comes with a need for heat.

I was hoping my visit to the Russian Meteorological institute website might have some particulars on the remaining weather stations that have not been closed. I didn’t find that, but what I did find was a study they posted that seems to point to a significant warm temperature anomaly in Russia during winters between 1961 to 1998:

ru_temp_anomaly

Fig. 1. Linear trend coefficient (days/10 years) in the series of days with abnormally high air temperatures in winter (December-February), 1961-1998.

From the Russian study they write:

For the winter period 1961-1998, most of the stations under considerations exhibit a tendency for fewer minimum temperature extremes. Maximum (in absolute value) coefficients of the linear trend were obtained in the south of the country and in eastern Yakutia.

Whenever I read about elevated minimum temperatures, I tend to suspect some sort of human influences such as UHI, station siting, or irrigation (humidity) which tend to affect Tmin more than Tmax.

In Northern Russia Siberia, I wouldn’t expect much in the way of irrigation. So that leaves station siting and UHI as possible biases. UHI seemed doubtful, given that many of these Russian Stations in Siberia are in remote areas and small towns.

So I decided to put Google Earth to work to see what I could see. One of the stations mentioned in a recent post at Climate Audit cited the station of Verhojansk, Russia, which has  temperatures conveniently online here at Weather Underground.

From the Navy Meteorological exercise I found that Verhojansk has a wide variance in temperature:

Verkhojansk is located in a treeless shallow valley. There is snow on the ground during winter months; it melts in the spring. Verhojansk experiences the coldest winter temperatures of any official weather station outside of Antarctica. Verhojansk has Earth’s most extreme temperature contrast (65oC) between summer and winter. Which of the following indirect factors contribute to this extreme seasonal variation?

From the GHCN station inventory file at NCDC I found that Verhojansk, Russia had a lat/lon of 67.55 133.38 which when I put it in Google Earth, ended up in a mud flat. The Google Maps link from Weather Underground was no better, also off in a field.

Looking in NCDC’s MMS station database yeilded better luck, and I found a more precise lat/lon of 67.55,133.38333 There was very little other helpful information there on the station.

The station appeared to be located in town, though I have no way of verifying the exact location. The lat/lon may be imprecise. But something curious popped out at me as I was scanning the Google Earth image of Verhojansk looking for what might be a weather station – it looks like pipes running across the surface:

verhojansk_station1-520

Click for larger image

These “pipes” appear to go all over town. Here is a closer view, note the arrow to what I think might be the weather station location based on the fencing, objects on the ground that could be rain gauges or shelters, and what looks like an instrument tower:

verhojansk_station2-520

Click for larger image

I was curious about what these pipes could be, it certainly didn’t look like oil pipelines, and why where they so close to houses and building and seem to network all over town. Doing a little research on Russian history, I found my answer in the pervasive “central planning” thinking that characterized Russian government and infrastructure. It’s called “District Heating

From Wikipedia:

District heating (less commonly called teleheating) is a system for distributing heat generated in a centralized location for residential and commercial heating requirements such as space heating and water heating.

But for Russia there was this caveat:

Russia

In most Russian cities, district-level combined heat and power plants (Russian: ТЭЦ, Тепло-электро централь) produce more than 50 % of the nation’s electricity and simultaneously provide hot water for neighbouring city blocks. They mostly use coal and oil-powered steam turbines for cogeneration of heat. Now, gas turbines and combined cycle designs are beginning to be widely used as well. A Soviet-era approach of using very large central stations to heat large districts of a big city or entire small cities is fading away as due to inefficiency, much heat is lost in the piping network because of leakages and lack of proper thermal insulation [10].

I should also point out that district heating is not limited to Russia, but is in many northern European countries. It seems quite prevalent in cold Euro-climates, and even extends into Great Britain.

So I searched a bit more, and found some pictures of what Russian district heating looks like from the ground. Here is one from Picasaweb from somebody’s trip to Russia:

russian_heating_pipes1
The caption was telling: Smaller Russian era dwelling - blue is typical colour. Pipes outside are for the steam heat that is distributed to all buildings.

Click for source image.

Note the pipes in the photo above are not insulated.

I also found a very interesting picture of steam pipes, also uninsulated, from a trip report to the “hot zone” of Chernobyl:

127chernobylpipes
Caption: Driving through Chernobyl. Steam pipes carry heat through the city

And finally a picture of Krasnoyarsk thermal power station Number 1 that has recently been in the news, according to Reuters due to a burst steam pipe:

Caption: A general view shows the Krasnoyarsk thermal power station Number 1 where a main pipeline burst depriving some ten thousand people of central heating, January 5, 2008. The flats of tens of thousands of people in Siberia's Krasnoyarsk and some of its suburbs continue to stay cold for the second day at temperatures of about -20 degrees Celsius (minus 4 Fahrenheit) after a pipeline rupture in a thermal power station that supplies the central heating system, the Emergencies Ministry told local media. Source: REUTERS/Ilya Naymushin (RUSSIA)

Click for larger image – Note the pipes coming out to the left of the power station. You can see steam pipes around the city in this Google Maps view here.

So all this begs the question:

If Russian weather stations are located in cities that have this district heating plan, and a good percentage of the pipes are uninsulated, how much of the waste heat from the pipes ends up creating a local micro-climate of warmth?

Remember when I said that the NOAA map anomalies centered over Russia seemed to be prevalent in winter but not summer? It stands to reason that as winter temperature gets colder, more waste heat is dumped out of these inefficient systems to meet the demand. Basically, we have an active UHI situation in the city that increases in output as temperatures drop.

In the areal photos above of Verhojansk, it appears that some pipes are insulated (white, what appears to be main lines) while others are rust brown, and appear near buildings and dwellings.

I got to thinking about why these pipes might be uninsulated. First there is the classic inefficiency and carelessness of Soviet workmanship, but another thought occurred to me: Russian people might like it that way. Why? Well imagine a place where you walk to the market every day, even in subzero temperatures. Since many of these pipes seem to follow streets and sidewalks, wouldn’t it be a more pleasant walk in winter next to a nice toasty steam pipe?

Steve Mcintyre wrote about this station at Climate Audit, citing a puzzle in the data, here is an excerpt of his post:

Verhojansk

Now there are many puzzles in GHCN adjustments, to say the least, and these adjustments are inhaled into GISS. Verhojansk is in the heart of the Siberian “hot spot”, presently a balmy minus 22 deg C. The graphics below compare GISS dset0 in the most recent scribal version to GISS dset 2 (showing identity other than small discrepancies at the start of the segment); the right compares GISS dset0 to the GHCN-Daily Average.

Over the past 20 years, the GISS version (presumably obtained from GHCN monthly) has risen 1.7 deg C (!) relative to the average taken from GHCN Daily results.

Left- GISS dset 2 minus Giss dset0 [[7]]; fight – Giss minus GHCN Daily

What causes this? I have no idea.

Maybe it’s the steam pipes. We need to send somebody to Russia to find out. Of the many station lat/lons I looked at, Verhojansk was the only one I found with enough Google Earth resolution to see the steam pipes. Maybe the heart of our Russian temperature anomaly lies in central heating.

George Costanza could be right.

UPDATE: The photo below shows the Verhojansk Meteorological station and it’s instruments.  Hat tip to Jeff C. for the photo below:

Direct URL to the photo above here

Note the cable going to the Stevenson Screen suggesting automated readings. Also note the vertical plume at left.

The station can be seen from Google Earth here


Sponsored IT training links:

We offer guaranteed success in 1z0-050 exam with JN0-304 online training. Also get free download link for HP0-S26 exam.


5 1 vote
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

304 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jeff C.
November 16, 2008 10:39 am

The Verhojansk, Russia photo (in the link below) is interesting, but I’m virtually certain that the building marked in the Google Earth shot is incorrect.
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/8225894
Note that the meteo station has a rectangular shaped tower that extends above the gabled roof by 10 to 20 feet. Due to the low sun angle at high latitudes, you should be able to see the shadow of the tower extending beyond the shadow of the building itself. It isn’t there.
Maybe this building here?
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=67%C2%B0+32'+40.65%22+N+133%C2%B0+23'+46.82%22+E&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=32.885543,56.25&ie=UTF8&ll=67.541781,133.393035&spn=0.001935,0.010943&t=h&z=17

hunter
November 16, 2008 10:58 am

Will those who are proposing radical policies based on bad advice have the ability to redirect the momentum of this concern over climate and environment into productive efforts?
Or will those who have profited so much off of selling this bad advice continue their domination of the public square?

Retired Engineer
November 16, 2008 11:07 am

There has to be some UHI effect on satellite data, perhaps very small as the heat source is a smaller part of the cell measured from space. My concern is the calibration of the satellite. They have to do it based on land data, which can have substantial errors.
When something is cheap and plentiful, there is no need to conserve. Vast amounts of heat dumped into the environment can spread over a large area. Efficiency was not a priority in Soviet Russia.

Michael
November 16, 2008 11:13 am

Hi Anthony
Not on topic but didn’t know how to contact you re: news articles. here is one with a two liner near the end I found interesting as it is in my suburb in Sydney.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/a-ritual-written-in-sand/2008/11/16/1226770256778.html
Regards
Michael

Pierre Gosselin
November 16, 2008 11:21 am

The drive appears not to be to collect good data, but rather to collect just the data that will confirm the climate models. The surface data collection system overall is a hopeless mess.

EW
November 16, 2008 11:23 am

http://www.rozov.ru/section28/item231/part3/
Another partial photo of the Verchojansk station with radiosonde.

Pierre Gosselin
November 16, 2008 11:24 am


Ocean temperatures of fluctuate in cycles.
A 100 year record of these water temps would be indeed interesting.

Ed Scott
November 16, 2008 11:25 am

Better late than never, I suppose. Ed Morrissey of Hot Air has picked up on the GISS gaffe. In the mean-time, the politicians will use the cap-and-trade proceeds to bail-out everyone and everything except the productive tax-payers.
GISS’s computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.
The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs – run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious “hockey stick” graph – GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new “hotspot” in the Arctic – in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/16/hottest-october-on-record-was-really-a-september/

Richard
November 16, 2008 11:38 am

Off topic: from new scientist today.
Concealed floods drive flow of Antarctic ice
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16044-concealed-floods-drive-flow-of-antarctic-ice.html

Jerry Alexander
November 16, 2008 12:04 pm

Problem with GISTEMP is their complex algorithm to convert actual temperatures. Criticism of the temperature recordings is poor geographic distribution and sampling.
Since NASA is divided into four divisions, GISS being second, James Hansen as director, NASA satellite division by far is the best temperatrure readings through weather satellites that cover the Earth totally. Hansen and GISS are bias!

Peter
November 16, 2008 12:18 pm

“John (09:19:10) :
If this turns out to be true that “it’s the pipes” and the temperature difference is as significant as the Pt. Barrow study indicates (~2 degrees C) and it extends back in time to when the central heating was installed by the soviets (WWII era?) and it affects the huge portion of the earth’s surface covered by Siberia and points north, then what will that do to the world global temperature record over that time? Is this as big of a deal as I’m beginning to think?

If it is I think Al Gore should hand over his Nobel Peace Prize to the group of folks who have gone out of their way and placed themselves in the direct line of fire to not only call into question the validity of supporting AGW arguments, but provided a forum for others to be heard as well. Anthonty W. and Steve M. come to mind.

Jerry Alexander
November 16, 2008 12:21 pm

James Hansen is bias! This comment is based on an analysis made by two mathematicians, David Henderson Ian Castle (et. Mathematical analysis of GISS temp.).
Their reseach found that temperature adjustments were made in the algorithm conversions. These adjustments were found to be in favor of higher temperatures. These adjustments were supposely made due to satellite calibrations.
Dr. Lindzen, MIT Atmospheric Studies, has stated that there is no accurate temperature readings. This is due to the failings to sufficiently controlling the conditions where temperature measurements are located and their accuracy.

Jeff C.
November 16, 2008 12:40 pm

EW (11:23:33)
Good find! I have been searching Cyrillic web pages and have not had much luck. The translation of the photo you linked says:
“Starting of radiosonde on The [verkhoyanskoy] meteorological station”
Verhoyanskoy appears to be a trasliteration variation of Verkhojansk. The Cyrillic for the town of Verkhojansk is “Верхоянске”.
It is clear this is the same building shown in http://www.panoramio.com/photo/8225894
Although I’m convinced they have the wrong buiding marked on the map on the panoramio page. I have been scouring the Google Earth photo trying to find the correct buiding but nothing conclusive yet.

Olimpus Mons
November 16, 2008 12:46 pm

Off topic: I’ve been reading, trough out the last 15 years ou global warming in Mars, most obvious was the melting of Mars “Artic”. Since sun as gone weaker and quieter has anyone been tracking how mars “artic” is doing?
Thanks

UK John
November 16, 2008 12:49 pm

In UK the climate is wet and cool, it seems like that all year round! So the temps in these places in Siberia are beyond my expeirience
What instruments and technology are they using to measure these low temperatures in the frozen wastes of Siberia , when it gets this low do you have to use different technology?

Jeff C.
November 16, 2008 12:50 pm

More Photos of the Verhojansk meteorlogical station here (bottom of page):
http://www.roshydromet.ru/txt/photo010405.htm
With an English translation here:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?tt=url&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.roshydromet.ru%2Ftxt%2Fphoto010405.htm&lp=ru_en&.intl=us&fr=yfp-t-501
Doesn’t look like the same building. Perhaps it moved?

Pamela Gray
November 16, 2008 12:59 pm

There was also a downward trend in ice during October near the Russian northern coast. I believe that October was a bit warmer there compared to September. However, as of November, it has trended back up.
The issue I have isn’t whether or not October was a bit warmer than expected, it’s the “if a little is good, more is better” mentality to looking at data. The human mind is prone towards substantiating itself (and the more politically entrenched you are, the more prone you are). You will see what you expect to see, and more of it, even if it’s not there, or is potentially suspect due to it being more than what you expected. If it agrees with your theory, you generally jump up and down shouting, “See? See? I was right!” instead of continuing with the null hypothesis and acting accordingly. A skepticism towards oneself should stick with one’s pet theories till the bitter end, even when it comes to one’s political theories outside of climate. It is why studies must be duplicated, again with the null hypothesis in mind, before theory takes hold. Since records began in tree rings, climate has cycled. The bulk of the entire prevailing data set thus says that climate cycles, even when circumstances now and then tries to force climate to do otherwise.
Before we can say that this is not a cycle, we need take data on the NEXT decades to the same degree that the previous decades were sampled. Otherwise, we end up jumping on bandwagons that are, as often as not, headed towards a cliff.

Patrick Henry
November 16, 2008 1:00 pm

Flanagan,
A few days ago you were flaunting the “record October warmth” as reported by GISS. Now you are trying to make the case that Arctic cities can’t have UHI effects.
Heat flow is driven by differences in temperature, so the amount of excess heat pumped into the surroundings is much greater when the outside temperature is cold. Thus a calm day in a Siberian city would be expected to have a very large UHI effect. Dirty snow and bare pavement in cities can be itself have a major effect on temperature.
Another thing to be considered is that under Soviet rule, cities received heating oil rations based on their reported temperatures. This caused cities to compete by under-reporting the temperature, so the older database is corrupt.
GISS likes to show regions at -30C in hot red, but I’m guessing that the IPCC meets in places like Bali and Honolulu with good reason.

Pops
November 16, 2008 1:37 pm

You’re getting more famous by the day. Keep spreading the word.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml

Jon Jewett
November 16, 2008 2:11 pm

WUWT mentioned in the international media: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml
Congratulations!
Steamboat Jack

Larrison
November 16, 2008 2:11 pm

I’ll confirm that centralized heating systems for ex-Soviet cities are the standard mode. If you go to a Russian city, there are these big pipes everywhere (from 1-3 feet in diameter) snaking over the roads and up the sides of building. That’s the steam heating system from the centralized heating plant.
But, they are insulated. I’ve watched crews repairing them which have included replacing the insulation around them. No insulation is perfect — the snow melts off of them, but its not like they’re room temperature either.
As an amusing side note — in one side I was in, they wouldn’t turn on the heat until snow fell, and stayed on the ground in some amount for at least 24 hours. Then they would turn on the heat *in the city*!!. It was so cold when I was there (up near Archangel…) that I turned all the lights on in my hotel room (the only heat sources…) and went to bed clothed, until it warmed up enough I could dart out in the cold room and get ready for bed.

November 16, 2008 2:14 pm

Why bother with surface temperatures anyway ?
We have satellites, don’t we.

Chris D.
November 16, 2008 2:48 pm

Superb job, Anthony. I’ve long suspected something like this. Thing is, aren’t there supposed to be a bunch of folks who are paid to figure this sort of thing out? You’d think they’d have caught something this glaringly obvious a long time ago.

Flanagan
November 16, 2008 3:02 pm

Using irony has nothing to do with being juvenile. If that were true the average age in here should be 3 years old. Sarcasm is not the property of skeptics, so let’s all use it!
And yes, since we have satellite measurements, let’s forget about these surface temperatures for a while. Why is it then that RMS shows similar hot spots on top of Russia, Canada and Australia?
REPLY: No it was juvenile. RMS? What is that? – Anthony

David Ball
November 16, 2008 3:08 pm

I believe we are beginning to see the shift of belief systems. History will show the significance of this blog and others like it. I hope that those who steadfastly maintained their positions will be acknowledged. I will tell this tale to my grandchildren, not leaving out any detail as to who what where when and why. That death threats had been issued to those who “deny”, and funding cut from legitimate scientist who had every right to research money. The Suzuki Foundation in Canada is funded by some of the world’s biggest polluters, and yet Suzuki himself claims my father is in the oil companies pockets. Ridiculous. Let the shift happen, and those theories that do not stand up to verification, fall to the wayside. I, for one, have been waiting for 45 years for the truth to be revealed. Giant thank you to Anthony ( and all monitors) and those who are natural born skeptics. Never give up (questioning) the faith. Brother, can you paradigm?

1 4 5 6 7 8 13
Verified by MonsterInsights