The surfacestations project has now surveyed over 70% of the USHCN. I keep telling myself that there probably aren’t many surprises left. We’ve seen climate monitoring stations in parking lots, next to parked cars, next to burn barrels, near air conditioners, at airports, at sewage treatment plants, at industrial facilities, in people’s front yards, back yards, side yards, near BBQ grills, on top of telephone poles, on main street, next to houses, attached to houses, next to buildings, and yes even on the rooftops. One was painted blue, one brown, some hardly at all. Some were even found out of compliance in the Alaskan white north. We’ve seen them in the desert, on the DEW line and down under.
In all of those, it was either a Stevenson Screen or an MMTS type shelter, or the occasional Davis Vantage Pro weather station when the observer put in their own equipment. It was all within expectations, equipment-wise.
A couple of days ago, I had an IM conversation with Evan Jones, who has been surveying stations in New York state. A lot of them are hard to pin down. The one on Cortland NY particularly so, since it’s NCDC provided lat lon put in a residential area, but it is actually on top of a building downtown, which just happened to be the local newspaper office: the Cortland Standard. It looks like a place where weird things might happen.
The building has been there awhile, so has the weather station. NCDC gives this as the location:
Location Description: ROOF OF BLDG AT MAIN STREET & TOMPKINS ST WITHIN & 150 FEET S OF PO
Evan had called the newspaper editor and confirmed that indeed, it was on the rooftop.The NCDC equipment list was puzzling, because, well, why would they need a “Data Collection Platform – Other”? if they already had the standard MMTS and rain gauge?
| 2000-04-01 | 2006-09-11 | PRCP | SRG | PRIMARY | STANDARD RAIN GAGE | PRECIPITATION | — | — | COOP SOD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RIVR | ADR | — | ANALOG DIGITAL RECORDER | — | — | ||||
| TEL | DCPO | DATA COLLECTION PLATFORM-OTHER | |||||||
| TEMP | MMTS | PRIMARY | MMTS ELECTRONIC SENSOR | TEMPERATURE | COOP SOD |
I had a hunch about this station, so I asked him: “Is there any possible way you could get a photo of it?”. Being a “can do” sort of guy, Evan hopped a Greyhound bus there from NYC today.
I figured, well, he’ll just get a picture of the MMTS on the rooftop of the newspaper office, nothing we have not seen before.
Then, this evening, I saw this in my email:
and this:
and this:
Umm, its, ah its, uh…another “high quality” member of the US Historical Climatological Network on the roof of the Cortland Standard newspaper office.
Ok here are a few issues:
- On the roof, near chimneys
- Some sort of Amityville Horror shutters turned sorta Stevenson Screen
- Half painted
- Half open, half enclosed
- The MMTS shield is missing some plates, about half
- It is not a standard MMTS screen, it is something else
- Dirty darkened plates on the interior sensor housing
And I’m sure there is more. Here is the aerial view:
Click here for a live interactive view.
The tar roof makes for a nice albedo.
Oddly, NASA GISS modifies the temperatures circa the year 1900:
What we don’t know is what the plot above would look like if this station was properly sited and sheltered. I wonder how many high temperature records for Cortland are actually real or “roofed”? How many warmest overnight low temperature “highest minimum” records were set there because of this siting? We’ll never know.
In defense of the newspaper editor, Mr. Howe, who was kind enough to grant access for photography and reportedly was “puzzled” by the keen interest shown by Evan Jones in this station, he says that he “inherited it when he came to work there 37 years ago”.
37 Years? And in all this time nobody from NOAA/NWS spots this monstrosity of science and does something about it? Oh the shame. The NWS lack of responsibility makes a mockery out of the hard work these dedicated volunteers put in towards maintaining records.
My heart goes out to the volunteers who manned this station, they had no idea. As for the COOP manager of the National Weather Service Office in Binghamton, NY, who is responsible for this station. I’d like to shake your hand, then give you a well deserved smack upside the head and ask: “what were you thinking’?
The only positive thing I can say about this station is that the station stopped reporting to NCDC in December of 2000. The last B91 form from NCDC’s database is here (PDF). Maybe the decision was made to close the station, but the NCDC database didn’t catch up with that until a 9/11 of 2006.
| [ 2006-09-11 ] | 9999-12-31 | 2006-09-11 | NWS | CSSA | 9 | — | INACTIVATE A STATION |
|---|
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Roger Pielke, Sr.’s belief is that the ocean temperature is the best measure of global temperature. In this recent comment he notes that after Willis’s adjustment to the earlier measurements by the 3,000 Argo buoys, there is still no increase in temperature/sea level since the buoys went in the water.
http://climatesci.org/2009/02/13/article-by-josh-willis-is-it-me-or-did-the-oceans-cool-a-lesson-on-global-warming-from-my-favorite-denier/
@Sylvia (23:25:57) :
“[…} If I ever move back to the mountains I’m setting up a station in the lower pasture. How do you keep moose from scratching against the things and wrecking them?”
I use ‘Moose-B-Gone’. Comes in a 16oz can. I spray some in my garden every year and I’ve never seen a moose. It seems pretty effective here in Ohio. My aunt in Florida swears by it, too.
Anthony: It makes sense to me that there were probably a lot (a lot!) of weather stations on top of or next to newspapr buildings. Every town of any size had at least a weekly newspaper until the 60’s or 70’s. Those slightly larger towns that had dailies probably wanted quick access to temperatures to print in their papers.
The problem with finding out if my speculation is true is in the description above; “Located 150′ from the Post Office.” I’ve noticed in the other “How not to” posts that location descriptions are often more suitable for Easter Egg hunts than for locating weather stations.
Love the big shadow on the station.
Oddly, NASA GISS modifies the temperatures circa the year 1900:
They still had a lot of horses around 1900. The GISS adjustment probably accounts for the “UHI” effect.
Don B (04:06:46) :
“Roger Pielke, Sr.’s belief is that the ocean temperature is the best measure of global temperature. In this recent comment he notes that after Willis’s adjustment to the earlier measurements by the 3,000 Argo buoys, there is still no increase in temperature/sea level since the buoys went in the water.
http://climatesci.org/2009/02/13/article-by-josh-willis-is-it-me-or-did-the-oceans-cool-a-lesson-on-global-warming-from-my-favorite-denier/”
Don, thanks for the link.
It would be nice to have the graph data for 2007, 2008 and 2009 as well.
Head for the hills!
Appears seas levels are rising again!
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_ib_global.jpg
Oh my!
wow a site with no bs about global warming only accurate facts. this is great stuff.
Anthony, I lve in Portugal and your blog is one of my daily reads. Thank you for your effort. I think you are doing a great job. Keep up the good work. I know it is hard, but we need some lights to guide us in the dark.
REPLY: Thank you for the kind words. – Anthony
I agree in terms of proper setup the site is inadequate. However, could we not assume (aside from the nearby chimney issue) that this device at least gives adequate trends over time, since all the listed shortcomings do not change the possible error between dates of measurments? For example, if temperature on July 30 is compared over 20 years, some conclusions can be drawn? thanks.
Urban HEAP Island???
Anthony,
Great Blog. One of the many issues that concerns me about the global warming hysteria is the accuracy of the measurements. Given the magnitude of the change claimed, 1/10th of a degree ought to be the minimum degree of accuracy for each reading, and technically, that should require thermometers calibrated in 100ths of a degree. Weather stations in my very limited experience have thermometers calibrated in degrees, which technically means each reading is +/- one degree, by convention. This would put the change “observed” within the margin of error. It is definitely not scientifically acceptable to increase the accuracy of data (number of significant figures) by generating means with more decimal places than the original data.
A question?
Here’ in Portland, Oregon eco roofs are a big thing with government agencies. They spend large sums on them and proudly tout the green and sustainable advantages they are leading.
Would a weather station on an eco roof be the same as having it in a field or empty lot?
Evan, what are those ducts running across the rooftop, that the platform straddles? Wouldn’t be heating ducts?
Syvia, we had a solar heating reseach project in a S. TX oil field (separating the brine from the oil). The land was also used for cattle grazing. The dumb sh*ts ate the high tech insulation off the piping. The solution was a barbed wire fence.
Tom in Texas,
I don’t think they are ducts, but sheet metal flashing caps on structural wall boundaries, which tend to poke up through the roof in constructions of that era. See the aerial photo.
Yesterday my 88 year old, completely computer savy, Mother saw the picture with the temperature sensor on the roof surrounded by the numerous A/C units.
She’s not an engineer. She’s not a “technically trained” person. She asked, “Is that where they get those ‘bank thermometer’ type readings from? They are ALWAYS wrong in the summer..”
When I explained that that’s where some of the “official” NOAA (National Weather Service) numbers come from, her off the cuff comment was: “Well then, the summer readings must be worthless.”
Now if a bright, able to read.. 1930’s High School graduate can figure that out..
WHY CAN’T ALL THE DEGREED, CERTIFIED, WELL PAID folks using these numbers as “Gospel” figure it out?
Mark H.
And here in Washington State I always use “Camel-Off” and “No-Anaconda”, otherwise we’d be right infested with the things.
Danimals (07:53:10) :
I agree in terms of proper setup the site is inadequate. However, could we not assume (aside from the nearby chimney issue) that this device at least gives adequate trends over time, since all the listed shortcomings do not change the possible error between dates of measurments? For example, if temperature on July 30 is compared over 20 years, some conclusions can be drawn? thanks.
Enormous changes have likely occured in the immediate environment of the station over more than a century. The area is now entirely paved or built up. I doubt it was so before 1900. How would you know the trend reflected climate rather than changes in structures and land use around the station?
John H. asks:
“Would a weather station on an eco roof be the same as having it in a field or empty lot?”
The building itself is most likely heated. So that waste heat has to go somewhere, usually up. It’s not just the roof and solar insolation, it is also proximity to a heat source, the building itself. – Anthony
Anthony,
You keep asking: “What were they thinking”? One possible answer is: “The AGW alarmists, knowing they needed something to sell their hogwash, used their superior intellect to teleconnect back in time to offer advice to the people who set up the temperature monitoring equipment.”
Maybe other readers of your blog would like to provide an answer to THE question.
BTW, since we want the documentation of sites to continue and since site access will likely require permission, is there any way for me (and others, if they’re so inclined) to thank the people who have to date not only given permission, but actively cooperated?
your Batman suit to get that?
Yes, and I would have been more comfortable with a set of spiked track shoes on that darn roof. (And a batarang.)
AKD (10:15:12) : “Enormous changes have likely occured in the immediate environment of the station over more than a century. The area is now entirely paved or built up. I doubt it was so before 1900. How would you know the trend reflected climate rather than changes in structures and land use around the station?”
I agree. However, I think the heart of the blog was the actual rooftoop immediate enviornment and not the neighborhood. I think several prior blogs go into your arguement, with which I agree with. My only question was, for the puposes of year to year or decade to decade trends, would the factors listed in this article really change any conclusions regarding climate trend/change? Only exception I can see is the chimney in the winter.
I’ve noticed in the other “How not to” posts that location descriptions are often more suitable for Easter Egg hunts than for locating weather stations.
Ugh! Tell me about it! (Given coordinates are usually worse. Though sometimes they are on the money. I think a lot of those coordinates are not measured directly but they key in the address and take whatever coordinates get spit out. To wit, Lawrenceville, NY (I’ll be hunting that one Real Soon Now).
I agree in terms of proper setup the site is inadequate. However, could we not assume (aside from the nearby chimney issue) that this device at least gives adequate trends over time, since all the listed shortcomings do not change the possible error between dates of measurments? For example, if temperature on July 30 is compared over 20 years, some conclusions can be drawn? thanks.
An interesting point and one that crops up from time to time. There are two issues:
1.) Even if the siting has not changed, the urban environment around the station has. On the surfacestations.org gallery, you’ll notice construction going on in the ground-level shot facing south. If a large building goes up there, that will probably have a measurable effect on the readings going forward.
2.) A heat sink tends to increase real trends. If it’s warming, the trend will be exaggerated. If it cools, the cooling will be exaggerated 9as the effect “undoes” itself. Since there was a real warming trend from the mid ’70s to 1998, it’s likely that was exaggerated, esp the 1998 el Nino. Probably the 1999-2000 la Nina cooling, as well (see the graph).
I should also mention that with buildings either putting in heating and increasing output or even restricting heat output (for green reasons–growing green and folding green, both) can affect the trend. And these effects are likely far in excess of the longterm trend they are trying to measure. Therefore the data is rally not a very useful, considering he MoE.
Evan, what are those ducts running across the rooftop, that the platform straddles? Wouldn’t be heating ducts?
Gosh, I’m not sure. Maybe: it’s an old building. But I was more concerned about not falling off, and also poor Mr. Howe was standing there freezing in his sweater, so I opted for the better part of valor and made it as quick as I could.
My thanks again to Mr. Howe. He was a very kind gentleman and went to considerable trouble to let me get what I needed (including the data recording instruments inside the office).
Danimials,
I would say that the station maybe could be counted on for consistent readings if the condition of was unchanged over the years. But the list above makes me think that the condition has deteriorated over the years (half painted, dirty, shutters half open (when were they half closed?)…), and maybe even gone through cycles of repair and decay. It appears that is wasn’t kept to any type of specification and the data cannot be considered reliable.
The other thing that strikes me is the graph. Can anyone explain the reason for the GISS lowering of temperatures around 1900? I am new to this and would genuinely be curious about the reasoning.
Reed Coray (10:32:06). Yours is an excellent idea. Anthony, would you like your readers to help with thank you notes? The Cortland Standard has a website with contact information. It looks like a charming local paper.
Love the ideas about my moose problem, but electric fence and barbed wire won’t stand up to the darlings. I’ll ponder this. We have trouble just with the horses moving telephone poles enough that arcing occurs between the lines, let alone the larger visitors who like to attend to their grooming with a good scratch. I have a nice bit of creek and tall grass and pretty woods for napping, so get a lot of traffic… Do we have any readers in the north who know of stations on game trails? What do they do?
I’m pretty sure the local USFS station collects weather data, but they’re heavily wooded and next to a lake… I have a lower pasture that isn’t hayed, only used for light grazing and might work. I’ll ask around the next time I’m up there, unfortunately not any time soon.
It seems obvious to me that they don’t want to do anything about it.