UPDATE: Roger Pielke Jr. alerts us to this:
Last summer the San Francisco Chronicle carried a story about research on fog and climate with a different conclusion:
The Bay Area just had its foggiest May in 50 years. And thanks to global warming, it’s about to get even foggier.
That’s the conclusion of several state researchers, whose soon-to-be-published study predicts that even with average temperatures on the rise, the mercury won’t be soaring everywhere.
“There’ll be winners and losers,” says Robert Bornstein, a meteorology professor at San Jose State University. “Global warming is warming the interior part of California, but it leads to a reverse reaction of more fog along the coast.”
The study, which will appear in the journal Climate, is the latest to argue that colder summers are indeed in store for parts of the Bay Area.
More fog is consistent with predictions of climate change. Less fog is consistent with predictions of climate change. I wonder if the same amount of fog is also “consistent with” such predictions? I bet so.
From the University of California – Berkeley via Eurekalert:
Fog has declined in past century along California’s redwood coast
Analysis of hourly airport cloud cover reports leads to surprising finding
California’s coastal fog has decreased significantly over the past 100 years, potentially endangering coast redwood trees dependent on cool, humid summers, according to a new study by University of California, Berkeley, scientists.
It is unclear whether this is part of a natural cycle of the result of human activity, but the change could affect not only the redwoods, but the entire redwood ecosystem, the scientists say.
“Since 1901, the average number of hours of fog along the coast in summer has dropped from 56 percent to 42 percent, which is a loss of about three hours per day,” said study leader James A. Johnstone, who recently received his Ph.D. from UC Berkeley’s Department of Geography before becoming a postdoctoral scholar in the campus’s Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management (ESPM). “A cool coast and warm interior is one of the defining characteristics of California’s coastal climate, but the temperature difference between the coast and interior has declined substantially in the last century, in step with the decline in summer fog.”
The loss of fog and increased temperature mean that “coast redwood and other ecosystems along the U.S. West Coast may be increasingly drought-stressed, with a summer climate of reduced fog frequency and greater evaporative demand,” said coauthor Todd E. Dawson, UC Berkeley professor of integrative biology and of ESPM. “Fog prevents water loss from redwoods in summer, and is really important for both the tree and the forest. If the fog is gone, we might not have the redwood forests we do now.”

The scientists’ report will be posted online during the week of Feb. 15 in advance of publication in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The surprising result came from analysis of new records recently made available by the National Climate Data Center. The U.S. Surface Airways data come from airports around the country, which have recorded for more than 60 years hourly information such as cloud cover (cloud ceiling height), visibility, wind and temperature.
Johnstone evaluated the data from airports along the northern California coast and found two airports – Arcata and Monterey – that had consistent fog records going back to 1951. With these data, he was able to show that frequent coastal fog is almost always associated with a large temperature difference between the coast and inland areas.
Using a network of 114 temperature stations along the Pacific Coast, Johnstone and Dawson demonstrated that the coast-inland contrast has decreased substantially, not just in Northern California, but along the entire U.S. coastline from Seattle to San Diego. This change is particularly noticeable in the difference between Ukiah, a warm Coast Range site in Northern California, and Berkeley on San Francisco Bay. At the beginning of the 20th century, the daytime temperature difference between the two sites was 17 degrees Fahrenheit; today, it is just 11 degrees Fahrenheit.
The relationship between temperature gradient and fog frequency implies a 33 percent drop in fog along the coast during this time.
Greater fog frequency is connected to cooler than normal ocean waters from Alaska to Mexico and warm water from the central North Pacific to Japan. This temperature flip-flop is a well-known phenomenon called Pacific Decadal Oscillation – an El Niño-like pattern of the north Pacific that affects salmon populations along the US West Coast. The new results show that this pattern may also have substantial effects on the coastal forest landscape.
In addition, the data show that the coast gets foggier when winds blow from the north along the coast, which fits with observations that northerly winds push surface waters offshore and allow the upwelling of deep, cold, nutrient-rich water.
“This is the first data actually illustrating that upwelling along the Pacific coast and fog over the land are linked,” Johnstone said.
By pulling in data on temperature variation with elevation, Johnstone and Dawson also related their fog data with a temperature inversion that each summer traps the fog between the coast and the coastal mountains. The inversion is caused by a warm, dry, high-pressure cell that sits over Northern California in late summer, bringing hot temperatures to inland areas, including the Central Valley. If the inversion is strong, its lower boundary at about 1,200 feet keeps a lid on the cool marine layer and prevents fog from penetrating over the Coast Ranges. When it is weak, the ocean air and clouds move upward and inland, resulting in a cooler interior and a warmer, drier coast.
“The data support the idea that Northern California coastal fog has decreased in connection with a decline in the coast-inland temperature gradient and weakening of the summer temperature inversion,” Johnstone said.
“As fog decreases, the mature redwoods along the coast are not likely to die outright, but there may be less recruitment of new trees; they will look elsewhere for water, high humidity and cooler temperatures,” Dawson said. “What does that mean for the current redwood range and that of the plants and animals with them?”
Eventually, Dawson and Johnstone hope to correlate fog frequency with redwood tree ring data in order to estimate climate trends going back hundreds of years.
“While people have used tree ring data from White Mountain bristlecone pines and stumps in Mono Lake to infer climate change in California, redwoods have always been thought problematic,” Dawson said, mainly because it’s hard to determine whether the width of a tree ring reflects winter rain, summer fog, temperature, nutrient supply or other factors. “Stable isotope analyses of wood cellulose allows you to pull this data out of the tree ring.”
Dawson has established that the isotopes of oxygen in a tree reflect whether the water comes in via the leaves from fog, or via the roots from rainwater. “Redwoods live for more than 2,000 years, so they could be a very important indicator of climate patterns and change along the coast,” he said.
The new fog data will allow Dawson and Johnstone to calibrate their tree ring isotope data with actual coastal fog conditions in the past century, and then extrapolate back for 1,000 years or more to estimate climate conditions.
The work was supported by the Save the Redwoods League and the Berkeley Atmospheric Sciences Center.
================================================
Further reading: Fog in California from UCSB
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Should I be laughing or crying – or both?
jorgekafkazar (13:22:08) :
Excellent.
The lifting of the fog is a good thing for it shows us the predetermined propaganda driven agenda of men such as Rajendra Pachauri.
http://pathstoknowledge.net/2010/02/16/the-fog-of-the-predetermined-agenda-begins-to-fade-revealing-unpleasant-facts-and-conflicts-of-interest
Those poor Redwoods. Such a delicate species with no resiliency at all. Just a slight change in the climatic regime (which has been stable for thousands of years-ha!) and poof, they die! Amazing they actually made it as a species in the first place.
Robert (12:41:02) :
“You do realize that half the papers on this site are either out-and-out funded by the energy lobby , written by non-specialists sticking their oar into climate science specifically for the political purpose…”
At the bottom of this page:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history
From the Climate Research Units own web site you will find a partial list of companies that fund the CRU.
It includes:
British Petroleum, ‘Oil, LNG’
Broom’s Barn Sugar Beet Research Centre, ‘Food to Ethanol’
The United States Department of Energy, ‘Nuclear’
Irish Electricity Supply Board. ‘LNG, Nuclear’
UK Nirex Ltd. ‘Nuclear’
Sultanate of Oman, ‘LNG’
Shell Oil, ‘Oil, LNG’
Tate and Lyle. ‘Food to Ethanol’
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, ‘Nuclear’
KFA Germany, ‘Nuclear’
World Wildlife Fund, ‘Political Advocates’
Greenpeace International, ‘Political Advocates’
Robert, you have a point.
We should not trust ANY study funded by an Energy Lobby or by Political Advocates.
Today in Brookings Oregon, it was beautiful and Sunny with out a trace of fog. In Gold Beach its sunny to the south and Foggy just north of the bridge. Its seriously foggy and dark grey in Naseki Beach.
Its just weather…
Excellent videos Richard Wakefield. Keep up the great work.
I’ve used them here: http://pathstoknowledge.net/2010/02/16/for-the-sake-of-scientific-integrity-we-must-abandon-filling-in-missing-data-with-fictitious-invented-data
Rob from BC (14:41:53) :
“Such a delicate species with no resiliency at all”
Rob, it’s not like you can cut a hole through one big enough to drive a car through and have it live.
http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/2043
Never mind…
From the UC Berkeley press release:
So in fact, they have not measured the amount of fog along the coast. Instead, they have looked at two airports (Arcata and Monterrey), and related their two fog records to the “temperature difference between the coast and inland areas” …

Then, from this large sample (N=2), they have extrapolated the amount of fog from the difference between 114 coastal stations and an unknown number of inland stations.
For example, they say that the difference between Ukiah daytime temperatures and Berkeley daytime temperatures has decreased. Maybe so, maybe no. My questions would be:
1. What is the quality of the Ukiah and Berkeley stations?
2. What changes have occurred in the location of the two temperature stations in the last 100 years?
3. What changes in population have occurred around the two stations in the last 100 years?
4. What “adjustments” have been made to the temperature data?
Finally, claiming a decrease in fog based on extrapolation from two stations seems … well … kinda optimistic at best.
The Ukiah site is directly in the middle of the city, as is the Berkeley station. My guess is that Ukiah’s population has gone up much more than Berkeley’s during that time.
Not wanting to screw with this too much, I didn’t go get the maximum temperature data. I have an advantage in that I live near the coast between Berkeley and Ukiah. So I know that the fog (as the press release states) occurs in the summer month when the temperature difference is largest. If their claim is true, there should have been a large increase in the difference between Ukiah and Berkeley in the summer months (June, July, August, September). Here’s that graph …
Since the summer data (when Berkeley gets fog) is more negative than winter, I’d say I have the time periods right. I see no great change over that time, the graph is nearly flat. I see no significant difference between what happened in summer versus winter. Note that there is a three year gap with no data for Berkeley, 1991-1993, and when it comes back the data is different … not a good sign.
So, I fear that until I can see their data, I’ll say that the data I find makes their claim that there was a 6 degree change in daytime temperatures sound bogus.
However, this is all from the press release. I despise science by press release, it is Ravetz’s “post normal science” at its best … Does anyone have a link to the actual study?
w.
Robin Guenier (13:56:26) “Let’s try to be serious about this: it’s very worrying.”
Indeed, natural processes have serious consequences, but fairy tale explanations, such as those based on fortune cookies & AGW computer fantasies, are a counterproductively disrespectful perversion of nature.
I don’t worry about the fog or the trees, it’s all natural variability and nice clean air.
So, fog off.
Evidence of Climate Fraud grows, Media Coverage doesn’t
by Marc sheppard
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/02/evidence_of_climate_fraud_grow.html
Wow, its kinda mad that we are running out of fog… As laughable as it is, the winter months would be horrible without no fog to make you feel alone on them long drives.. dont you think?
“Analysis of hourly AIRPORT cloud cover reports leads to surprising finding”
Now what have we learned about weather stations at airports? Surfacestations.com ring any bells?
This study has supposedly been conducted over the past century. What was a California airport like a century ago when the study started? Has there been any change in the traffic or the types of planes in that 100 year period? What was the UHI effect over those California cities in 1910? What method of measuring fog intervals is still in effect today (and accurate to +/-1% over 100yr interval)?
I blame it all on fluoride in the drinking water.
The airports went from a grass stip to asphalt, more infrastructure, more buildings more and bigger planes, the expansion of poplations, farming and irigation as well as the natural varation in ocean temperatures, this all has to be taken into account.
Let’s do some more measurement for the next thirty years to see what’s really going on.
The fact (if we can trust their findings) that there is less fog does not mean there is no morning dew which has a similar effect to fog.
The report does not make any reference to dew.
With this said I think the report is incomplete and therefore REJECTED.
Richard North’s blog def has the scoop on this one
Make sure you look at the “Denier” petition there too. We are up to over 1000 now so maybe Gordon Brown, UK PM, might take notice.
There’s a great pub in SF called “Mad Dog in the Fog”, run by a brit. Full of Aston Villa pictures I seem to remember. Plenty of Mad Dogs around these days.
I have spent a lot of time recently walking in the redwoods in the coastal range south of San Francisco and they look pretty healthy to me. Lots of young trees as well and a lot of the range has recovered from intensive logging 100 years ago which would have completely screwed up any of these “calibration” efforts.
Woah Nellie, Johnstone uses a 114 temp stations to model California, while real climatologists like Jones uses 1521 to model the whole world; and hourly data points too! Now that’s some raw data, somebody could have a lot of fun doing some comparisons between those two data sets.
Here’s an interesting observation (perhaps this runoff is affecting coral too (in other locations)?):
What about the arrival of the Jet Engine -I gave an example of that the other day on another thread.Also what about the cleaning up of particulates-no nucleus-no fog.
London England is a prime example….
Here in Vancouver we’re having a serious problem providing snow for the Winter Olympics. Our solution, expensive though it be, is to bring in truckloads of snow from a couple of hundred miles away.
Once the Olympics are over, perhaps we could rent you the trucks (at a very attractive rate, of course) to transport the requisite amount of fog to your coast.
Whenever I see the word “study” my first thought is to be skeptical. I am usually correct in being skeptical.
“Since 1901, the average number of hours of fog along the coast in summer has dropped from 56 percent to 42 percent, which is a loss of about three hours per day,” said study leader James A. Johnstone
Now why am I on auto-skeptic?
Please help me.
I’m torn between wanting to say gosh that’s really troubling or saying this is just more BS.
IMO there’s probably some not so reliable methods invoved here.
If they used the Lubchecno Ocean dead zone approach it’s complete BS.
The real margin of error, or accidental adjustament, is probably
4 or 5 %.
With it in error 4 or 5% high on the historical side and 4 or 5% low on the current side.
It’s just too easy to make these unsubstabtaited claims with accuracy and reliablity. And way to easy to adapt them to reveal something interesting, useful and worthy of attention.
But then I am just a naysaying saying things.
I think many comments miss the point of what Dawson and Johnstone propose to do. It is not tree ring widths that they will look at. It is the oxygen isotope ratios in the tree rings. Because water from fog and water from rain have different isotopic ratios, they hope to see whether they can determine when fog was a major water input and when it was rain. From that they presumably will try to infer something about the climate in the various periods.
It is important to remember that fog is not just an impairment to visibility. It is in fact an important water input, particularly in arid regions. I run a charity, FogQuest, that uses the collection of fog droplets as a water source for villages in arid parts of the developing world. In California, it is not just the redwoods that benefit from the fog water. It is many other coastal species. In part what may happen if the temperatures warm or cool over long periods of time is that the bases of the marine cloud decks, which produce the fog on the hills, will rise or lower accordingly and the altitude band where the fog appears will also rise or fall. Plant species can adapt to these changes but only if they persist for extensive time periods.
“A cool coast and warm interior is one of the defining characteristics of California’s coastal climate, but the temperature difference between the coast and interior has declined substantially in the last century, in step with the decline in summer fog.”
With the ocean temperature being very stable in comparison to the inland temperatures. This would indicate that the inland areas have cooled. Hence, less fog intrusion inland.
Does this mean then that there has been no global warming for the period of study? Hmmm.