I had hoped to have this ready in time for heat wave season, as it would have been quite useful in July. Pursuant to my post about July average temperatures being lower with the new Climate Reference Network -vs- the old surface network, let me show you a sneak peak of what will be coming online in a few days.
This is just one of many graphics and data files that will be coming online representing data from the new Climate Reference Network.
Critics will of course say: “So what? Anybody can plot temperatures on a map and do averages”. True, but getting this all programmed, automated, polished, and running without any human intervention producing hourly maps from an obscure NOAA satellite feed is a whole different animal. If it was easy, somebody would have already done what I’m doing in a project that has been in development since Feb 2012.
The goal is to make the pristine “platinum standard” CRN temperature data more accessible, more palatable for the average person, and ready for use in websites and TV broadcasts. Right now it mostly sits in a corner at NCDC, and seldom gets cited in any of the news reports on national or regional temperatures in the USA. It will be a free and open public resource when it is completed. Both °C and °F displays will be provided along with analysis maps, graphs, and data.
While the above single map doesn’t look like much now, the full extent and value of this effort will become clearer later when I post the official announcement in the next week or two.
Thanks for your work. Keep at it.
Well done that man!
Is there an app for that? 😉
Thanks, Anthony,
This will be a good thing, best of luck!
hot damn…………Thank you!!!!!
Yes, a huge thank you!!!!
sure to be interesting, anthony.
some extraordinary “denier” “in denial” attacks on americans on BBC Business Daily yesterday. seems there are deniers in the US who don’t even believe the climate changes at all!
12 Oct: BBC Business Daily: Justin Rowlatt: USA’s climate change
We go deep into the mighty Hoover Dam to explore the challenges of the United States’ changing climate…
In one of the US’s driest regions, the Hoover Dam is part of a network of reservoirs which traps the waters of the Colorado river.
Justin Rowlatt talks to:
Dr Terry Fulp, regional director of lower Colorado region of the Bureau of Reclamation, who is responsible for the water supply to millions of Americans.
Pat Mulroy, the head of the South Nevada Water Authority which serves Las Vegas.
And Professor Henry Jacoby, who works on the science and policy of Global Climate Change at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00ywhjd
Professor Henry D. Jacoby
Position:
Professor of Management, Sloan School of Management
Co-Director Emeritus, Joint Program
Director Emeritus, CEEPR
http://globalchange.mit.edu/about/our-people/personnel/all_id/39
Clearly the first thing that will be available is the diurnal variation, what simple max/mins mean, and how these simple metrics differ from rural to urban, urban to airport . Within one year we will know how what Hansen has created for the contiguous US compares with simple observations simply done.
And behind the curtain stands a man (men) who is (are) suspicious that the data they pull won’t match the data presented by Hansen et al.
This will drive Romm and Connolly wild: Apples and Oranges! they will cry.
Maybe not.
Unlike the warmists, the serious skeptics like you are getting real, additional data.
This is amazing! Sounds like a “peer-reviewed” paper of original research that Jones, Mann et al always say the skeptics should do … Now what will they say? Right, A’s and O’s.
Is there a Nobel prize for showing a Nobel prize was inappropriately awarded? Perhaps a Darwin Award could be added to Gore’s collection.
Good stuff, Anthony. A platinum presentation of the platinum standard.
I look forward to seeing it on TV.
Thank God.
Can we glean any historical info from this database?
Trenberth won’t like it.
Doug Proctor says:
October 12, 2012 at 3:24 pm
“Is there a Nobel prize for showing a Nobel prize was inappropriately awarded? ”
The one(s) behind Climategate are the one(s) deserving a Nobel prize.
TV Broadcasts? Hmm, you could do more to bring the CRN to the attention of the general public than anyone in gov’t circles. That would be neat. (I’ve long since given up on on the gov’t doing anything like that. Except for JPL and the various Mars rovers.)
Warmists will tell you it was funded by the Koch Bros so it must be tainted. Yet Muller et al’s study which was funded by the Koch Bros is OK.
(Apologies if this was not funded by Koch as I am just going on memory about the weather project you were doing)
REPLY: No, Koch brothers not involved. Even if they were, all the data presented is traceable back to NOAA and the averages etc can easily be replicated, so there isn’t any bias claims that would hold water on the data I’m presenting. – Anthony
could it be possible to include the net departure from a baseline average? Lets say that the average temp for a given day is 67 but the current day is 66.2, this would give a net departure from average of -.8
REPLY: Sure, anything is possible, there’s only so much time and resources I have available and I don’t even have the website finished yet…so this really isn’t the time to be asking. – Anthony
Assume funds came from Heartland Institute?
REPLY: No, not from their coffers directly. They pitched the idea to some private donors and one responded. Gleick with his document theft tried to make a big deal out of all this to turn it into some evil plot…and all it is is just programming and plotting numbers and a user friendly open access way. – Anthony
Well good for you Anthony. I hope it is a commercial success as well as a personal triumph.
I hope I live to see observations and forecasts that include Alaska, and maybe even the western Canadian provinces. A lot of the Northwest winter weather is driven by systems in southern Alaska and Canada.
It would be interesting if you had an archive of data, and if you could somehow backfill dates back as far as practicable.
To paraphrase one of my favorite authors, “more open objective, publicly accessable information good, hidden, mysterious data bad.” Good luck with the new site, Anthony. 😉
Brad says:
October 12, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Assume funds came from Heartland Institute?
====================
You gonna cast the first stone ?
“…getting this all programmed, automated, polished, and running without any human intervention producing hourly maps from an obscure NOAA satellite feed is a whole different animal…”
Another problem will be to ensure the raw data received is “locked down” and stored – we all know how existing data is “adjusted” later on.
Hoser says:
October 12, 2012 at 5:52 pm
Umm, the goal of the CRN is to provide a new, well sited, and well maintained climate record. Pretty much by definition any other archive will dilute the data quality of CRN. Good climate data takes decades to obtain. Patience….
henrythethird says:
October 12, 2012 at 6:17 pm
The siting is designed to not suffer from urban encroachment for quite a while. While it’s certainly worthwhile keeping a separate archive, I don’t believe there is a current mission of chaning old data. However, “eternal vigilance” is warranted.
Is this what Heartland paid for?
If these United States could be called a body, Kentucky can be called it’s heart.
Gobsmacking stuff. Luvya, man!
What about Alaska and Hawaii?
Wow! Stuff I can understand!
Maybe even stuff the warmists can understand!
But certainly the general public will.
Now this I call “outreach”!
Who? Ha! Who? Ha! Anthony! Anthony! Yea!!!!!!
Eugene WR Gallun
noaaprogrammer says:
October 12, 2012 at 7:18 pm
What about Alaska and Hawaii?
===================
Indeed, what do you want to know ?
It is all readily available, all you need to do is ask.
Have you ?
Let’s proceed.
Congratulations on your new baby Anthony!
Accuracy is the key, no?
Thank you, Anthony. Much appreciated.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100184632/radio-free-delingpole-xxii-fighting-windmills/
Apologies for the change of topic but have a listen to James Dellingpole talking to the Author of a book who makes the claim that James Hansen et al, use private computers to email each other and are programmed to automatically erase any data used on those units. Hiding any traceable information when contacting warmist scientists, companies into that farce and EPA, also other Windmill promoters. A very interesting audio program and free to listen to, well worth a listen.
I’m still unsure what use an average temperature is.
Let’s hope someone doesn’t mess with this “obscure NOAA satellite feed” just to be mean. I wouldn’t put it past some climate scientists to be spiteful if they’re in a position to block or alter the feed.
Absolute accuracy sure never hurts, this is going to be a one good addtion Anthony.
Way to go!
I like the cold blue in the text and number.
It will be entertaining to see Warmism and the MSM endeavor to ignore this. Which they will.
Anthony,
Can you include a small write up on the guts behind this for us geeks. Since this is the platinum standard, what technologies did you use such as programming language, frame works, and other stuff. Thanks for this new service. Incredible.
That’s a very good display of temperatures, much better than that given by the Davis WeatherLink maps.
as this is an “extremely smart paper”, although “there are uncertainties inherent in extrapolating from birds to all species”, i feel i must post it on WUWT asap:
11 Oct: Nature: Daniel Cressey: Global biodiversity priced at $76 billion
Researchers hope estimates of conservation cost will spur government action
Protecting all the world’s threatened species will cost around US$4 billion a year, according to an estimate published today in Science1. If that number is not staggering enough, the scientists behind the work also report that effectively conserving the significant areas these species live in could rack up a bill of more than $76 billion a year.
Study leader Stuart Butchart, a conservation scientist at BirdLife International in Cambridge, UK, admits that the numbers seem very large. But “in terms of government budgets, they’re quite trivial”, he says, adding that governments have already committed to taking this action in international treaties — they just did not know how much it would cost…
Under the internationally agreed Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), governments have committed to meeting 20 conservation targets by 2020, including improving the conservation status of threatened species. To come up with numbers for how much this might cost, Butchart and his team asked experts on 211 threatened bird species to estimate the cost of lowering the extinction risk for each species by one category on the Red List of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature…
The researchers concluded that improving the status of all the world’s 1,115 threatened bird species would cost between $875 million and $1.23 billion a year for the next decade. Adding in other animals raises the number to between $3.41 billion and $4.76 billion a year.
Another target of the CBD is to protect 17% of the Earth’s land surface. Estimates for this are harder to make, but by extrapolating from known land prices and management costs Butchart and his team put the number at $76.1 billion a year.
Exactly how much is now being spent to meet the convention’s targets is unclear, but spending will need to increase by “at least an order of magnitude”, Butchart says…
Henrique Pereira, who works on international conservation issues at the University of Lisbon in Portugal, says that although there are uncertainties inherent in extrapolating from birds to all species, the work is an “extremely smart paper”…
But Pereira also points out that the figure is for just two of the 20 targets agreed by the CBD. “If you look at the range of targets for 2020, the total bill will be higher,” he says.
http://www.nature.com/news/global-biodiversity-priced-at-76-billion-1.11582
Well done Ant. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you of the potential this has ! Wish I could help but my programming days are long gone.
What’s with the comments about funding? I know there appears to be no malice, but it really bugs me because whether it’s funded by the Kochs, Shell oil, Heartland or Big Government is utterly irrelevant as long as everything is open and honest (which it clearly is) and nothing is hidden (which clearly nothing is). Therefore the only motive here is a desire to expose the truth, and all that is relevant is the data itself.
One should only consider the funding or the individuals involved when there are other motives at play, evident by such practices as hiding data, refusing to release data and code (lest someone finds something wrong with it), the vilification of those who request source data, the refusal to acknowledge when errors are pointed out, etc, etc. That’s when you need to follow the money.
Love a good automation.
Many thanks to the unknown donor!
Anthony,
this is much needed. As you say NCDC went only part of the way (albeit the major part) in establishing the CRN sites. They did so to see if siting made a major difference. I assume you regularly keep an eye on this data and from your other work you know that it does. In the meantime the data from badly sited sensors is still used, while the CRN data is unknown to the public and broadcast media.
What some people seem to be missing is that one of great benefits of this will be that, when the MSM headlines are talking about ‘record hot’, it will be possible to have broadcast standard data accessible to show what the nearest CRN sites are reading in comparison. I suspect many broadcast meteorologists will want to use it, and the lower CRN site temperatures will educate the media and general public as to the effect of poor siting and growth of UHI at local airports and other sites showing ‘record hot’. Expect also that CRN sites may show ‘record cold’.
This will be an example of a small extra effort (that NCDC missed) being able to make a huge impact.
Anthony, you are a doggedly patient man, first you shamed them into sorting out the siting problems. Then you use the good sites to show the real temperature using their own technology, genius. You are proving to be a huge burr under their saddle, well done sir.
Anthony, excellent job – and one that the NCDC should have done themselves with all the funding they have had. I rather fancy that their enthusiasm waned a little when they realized quite how much siting affects the sensors and that they would have egg on their face for using the badly sited ones for so long.
A suggestion – perhaps somewhere relatively obvious show that this network is the only climate/weather network where all observation sites meet the WMO ISO standard. (a hint to those that use the other site networks that they are non-standard and should not be trusted
A question – will the other data from the observations be available also? Humidity, wind, sun etc?
more corporate land than public land?
12 Oct: Las Vegas Desert Sun: K. Kaufmann/AP: Streamlined solar plan approved
Federal officials Friday approved a national plan largely consisting of Riverside County that they say “will lead to faster, smarter utility-scale solar development on public lands.”
Most of the 445 square miles of public land zoned for such large-scale solar projects resides off Interstate 10 east of the Coachella Valley in Riverside County. Two of the projects have begun construction while several others still await final approval…
The Riverside East solar zone has two projects under construction — GE and NextEra’s 550-megawatt Desert Sunlight plant in Desert Center and NextEra’s 250-megawatt Genesis farm near Blythe — and another four projects either on hold or awaiting approval…
Among the companies that stand to benefit from the power generated in the Riverside East zone is Southern California Edison, the large utility that serves the western Coachella Valley.
There are at least 70 pending applications for solar projects in the 17 designated zones, which would be grandfathered under the plan…
Environmental groups like the Nature Conservancy that had been critical of the federal government’s previous approach to solar development in the desert applauded the new plan…
http://www.mydesert.com/article/20121013/BUSINESS0302/310130021/Streamlined-solar-plan-approved?odyssey=nav%7Chead
Tom is not going to be very happy with you again Anthony:-)
13 Oct: LA Times: Julie Cart: Federal plan designed to create large solar energy plants
Incentives to cluster projects on 285,000 acres of U.S. land in the West will be offered and an additional 19 million acres of the Mojave Desert opened for new facilities
The Obama administration has formally adopted a plan to help create large-scale solar energy plants, offering incentives for solar developers to cluster projects on 285,000 acres of federal land in the western U.S and opening an additional 19 million acres of the Mojave Desert for new power plants.
The plan places 445 square miles of public land in play for utility-scale solar facilities…
But developers can sidestep the zones under certain conditions. Companies may construct plants on 19 million acres designated as “variance” zones, but the government offers fewer incentives to build there…
Some conservation groups fought to prevent approval of utility-scale projects in the region, contending that the desert — home to scores of endangered plants and animals — was not capable of absorbing industrial-scale projects…
Critics contend that the policies are too late, coming after years of free-for-all leasing that encouraged rampant speculation. Since leasing began, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has been working to process more than 300 solar applications.
Many of those are for land in California’s Mojave Desert, where counties have seen the cost of private land soar and the desert given over to thousands of acres of mirrors…
Janine Blaeloch of the group Solar Done Right supports renewable energy but said wholesale development of the desert is a mistake.
“This should all be happening on rooftops and in cities,” Blaeloch said. “But that wouldn’t profit the big utilities, and industry wouldn’t be able to get tax breaks, so we wreck the desert instead. We aren’t getting that public land back. Once it’s industrialized, everything that lives there and everything we enjoy about it will be gone.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1013-solar-zones-20121013,0,2819109.story
It does beg the question as to why Noaa haven’t done this. I’m not trying to make more work for you Anthony but it would be nice to be able to compare any uscrn metric to the ushcn equivelant. Perhaps another day.
“seems there are deniers in the US who don’t even believe the climate changes at all!”
The issue for me always has been: since the dynamic climate always and everywhere at all times is changing, to what extent is that change harmful to the ecosystem and to humanity, to what extent does human activity induce change, and to what extent is human-induced change harmful? For me, the more data the better, the more I can know about how the data were compiled the better and the more I can review how the data were analyzed, the better.
Lastly, given that on average, the climate has been far colder, who gets to declare what the optimum temperature should be? Nobody questions the climate baselines used to evaluate the biosphere and honesty demands they are just as much up for analysis as any other aspect of the climate.
I would not push back on those who call me a “denier” except I get the impression from the emails that we had to pry from their clutches behind ivory towers that to them climate change is a horse to ride to greater glories of social justice. Let us call a spade a spade. Telling peer-reviewed lies, or programming climate models to lie is symptomatic of an evil corruption of science, media and government. This is the only conclusion I can come to when the solutions consistently proposed and demanded by advocates of global warming always involve destroying liberty and making government bigger and more powerful.
Perhaps it will finally show that Trenberth’s missing heat is actually located in Hansens’s NOAA-GISS temperature adjustments?
Mr Watts, That looks pretty impressive to me. We’re talking unadjusted, pristine data.
The truth is out there. Good work.
Jeff Alberts says:
October 12, 2012 at 9:34 pm
“I’m still unsure what use an average temperature is.”
What is global climate but an averaging of local climates. What is local climate but an averaging of local weather; over time.
We’re looking for trends after all.
Do you ever sleep? I wouldn’t think you have time to…
Great work!
Here’s some new data for the temperature database. We just broke the old low temperature record for October 13 here in western New Hampshire: this morning we got down to 22F (old record 25F). Thank goodness I have a pellet stove!
Any more record cold temps out there?
Brad says:
October 12, 2012 at 4:44 pm
“Assume funds came from Heartland Institute?”
So when Mann, Trenberth, Hansen, et al. produce some “research”, I am sure Brad will comment “Assume funds came from the American taxpayer?”
But I agree with Brad – let’s make ALL CAGW climate “research” privately funded (Greenpeace, WWF, Earth First, Al Gore etc. certainly have the resources).
Jeff Alberts says:
October 12, 2012 at 9:34 pm
I’m still unsure what use an average temperature is.
Unfairly jumping on Jeff too…:) Perhaps he’s missed the flow of phenomenal amounts of capital in recent years, predicated on the belief that average temeratures are rising… unprecedentedly, catastrophically…. etc.etc… I know I missed it – none of it flowed to me…(given the left’s propensity to fund “social justice”, I would have thought I’d have gotten some, to enable me to rise above my “denier” spiral of doom…) /sarc, for the politically impaired.
RobRoy @ October 13, 2012 at 5:32 am
“We’re talking unadjusted, pristine data.”
We’re finally talking about DATA. After adjustment, we no longer are talking about DATA. We apparently now have DATA which does not “need” to be adjusted (adulterated?). Anthony is in the process of getting it to “come out of the closet”. It should then be obvious that , like the “emperor”, the adjusted “data” has no clothes.
Ha ha ha! You are are WAY too humble, buddy.
‘… just programming and plotting numbers and a user friendly open access way.’
Whata crackup. Like it is easy or something ha ha ha! ;-D
I really appreciate this effort – it will be a credible real-time dataset that NOAA can’t refute when they trot out their latest ‘hottest (day / month / year) ever!’. Even the PRESS will have to acknowledge.
You’re the man.
Thanks and congratulations. This is another good step toward open-source science, converting key data into useful form.
If I believed that heaven actually existed I would suggest a prime location in the place for Anthony. As second best, can we nominate him for the next Nobel?
There has been criticism of the present system of calculating average daily temperature by averaging the max and min temperatures. Can your system be used to average the hourly readings (or even shorter time periods) for each location to give us a more-exact average temperature?
IanM
Minor typo:
let me show you a sneak peak > let me show you a sneak peek
IanM
REPLY: Voice recognition software sometimes chooses the wrong word -A
RobRoy says:
October 13, 2012 at 5:37 am
Jeff Alberts says:
October 12, 2012 at 9:34 pm
“I’m still unsure what use an average temperature is.”
What is global climate but an averaging of local climates. What is local climate but an averaging of local weather; over time.
We’re looking for trends after all.
The Earth, in keeping with ever planet in the universe, has no “climate”. Astronomers never refer to a planet’s “climate”, only to their general atmospheric make up: i.e. composition, turbulence and ground level pressure and temperature. “Climate” is merely a general expression of the type of weather to be found in a particular region: e.g. “Mediterranean”, “Tropical”, “Temperate”, etc. If “climate” had any scientific meaning, the Earth’s “climate” could be scientifically defined. I know of no such definition, but am willing to entertain any proposals.
Finally, no one is “averaging local weather”, that would be ludicrous. It is temperatures that are averaged and WUWT has clearly demonstrated what a mess the climate “scientists” have made of this task.
Anthony says
NOAA never mentions this new pristine USCRN network in any press releases on climate records or trends, nor do they calculate and display a CONUS value for it. Now we know why. The new “pristine” data it produces is just way too cool for them.
Henry says
we are cool!! we already fell about -0.2 degrees K since 2000
I predict in total we will fall by about -0.5 K from 2000-2020
but everybody is (or will be) lying about it…
Thanks for this effort of independent stations reporting to us;
better that we get our own station for measuring the CO2 as well…
Easy for me to say, but it would be good to have the same for the legacy network for comparison.
[Resubmit – this seems to have been lost in the Ether. I didn’t see in the rejects pile….]
Wikipedia’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Climate_Reference_Network starts with one of its “improvement needed” boxes which says:
I love the “The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guideline.” note. Perhaps Wiki wants 30 years of data before calling the network notable. 🙂
Certainly looks like a page that needs to be adopted by some warm hearted editor. Who can put up with the cold hearted CAGW editors there.
Anthony, did you create the page? The first entry dates from when you visited NCDC, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/04/23/road-trip-update-day-1-at-ncdc/
WMC has been there. At least he added stuff:
REPLY: yes I did create that page, from the hotel that evening after meeting with NCDC – Anthony
Does the satellite collect from around the world. If so, we have another volunteer project.
Thanks Bob Mount. I have never seen a well put definition of Global Climate. Indeed there are local(regional) climates. It used to be all about temperature. Now we are constantly hit with AGW weather. Rain, wind, snow, drought, all included in the big scare. The warmistas consider all aspects of weather. Every storm or drought is man-made
That’s why I used the term weather as opposed to temperature in my makeshift definition. Not so “ludicrous”
The topic of this new resource is just temperature though. The true root of the original discussion, before “climate change, climate disruption” and other obfuscations.
Can your data be accessed from a windows application, I mean, If I wrote an interactive program, would the data be Updated regularly? just a thought!
REPLY: Not “my data” but NOAA’s data, and yes – Anthony
I note the NOAA N hemisphere temp map shows the coldest category at -1.5C when it is now down to -20C in places and -10 over a broad swath of the Arctic. Also, the “zero” C contour now stretches from the Great Lakes to northern China.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/fnl/sfctmp_01.fnl.html
Also note that the Norwegian ice area and extent have already steeply penetrated the 2007 curves and look to be headed to intersect all the years in the plot – oh this recent spate of frost all the way down to Texas is no one-off. It’s going to be a cold winter. I trust the Norwegians the most about arctic and antarctic temps and ice – they’ve owned these territories for a few hundred years!!
http://bing.search.sympatico.ca/?q=Nansen%20Roos%20arctic%20ice%20extent&mkt=en-ca&setLang=en-CA
Anthony, your presentation is going to be very very valuable this winter.
Gary Pearse says
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/12/new-national-temperature-resource-almost-ready/#comment-1108564
Henry says
Be assured of a few very cold winters coming up – especially in Europe. I predict an elfstedentocht in Holland for next year and/or any of the 2 following years
I am most disturbed now, since on checking my tables again I found that although warming of the globe (in the past) was more biased towards the NH – i.e. the landmasses in the SH did not really warm up much.- I was hoping we in the SH would be OK against the coming cold. But it appears we are cooling on both hemispheres at the same rates now. How can that be? It is not fair./
…..I hate the cold….
Hi from New Zealand,
1 Will this be available for the rest of the world.
2 It would be good if Christy and Co did a review for you
3 Great work looking forward to seeing final result
REPLY: 1 – no, this is a US system and dataset only, I can’t get the same data for elsewhere – Anthony
HenryP says:
October 13, 2012 at 11:23 am
Be assured of a few very cold winters coming up – especially in Europe. I predict an elfstedentocht in Holland for next year and/or any of the 2 following years
I am most disturbed now, since on checking my tables again I found that although warming of the globe (in the past) was more biased towards the NH – i.e. the landmasses in the SH did not really warm up much.- I was hoping we in the SH would be OK against the coming cold. But it appears we are cooling on both hemispheres at the same rates now. How can that be? It is not fair.
The increasing Antarctic ice (with its edge between 61 degrees and 62 degrees south latitude) is reflecting more and more of the solar radiation from the southern hemisphere.
Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words —
Anthony Watts, Montford and McIntyre,
Mosher and Nelson, McKittrick and Tallbloke —
Be in their flowing cups freshly remembered.
This story shall the good man teach his son,
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered,
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
RaCook1978PE says
The increasing Antarctic ice (with its edge between 61 degrees and 62 degrees south latitude) is reflecting more and more of the solar radiation from the southern hemisphere.
Henry says
I am afraid it could be a bit more complicated than that
i.e. chemical reactions happening on top of the atmosphere
://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
Well, this should be interesting to observe going forward, contrasting the reported results/the measurements of the new network (showing the data the light of day!) with the results of the ‘old’ network … looking forward to seeing it in action, Anthony! Thank you for your hard work on this.
.
Well done Anthony, congratulations on this great new venture. I hope that it becomes a great commercial success as well. It should certainly be seen as a personal triumph of intelligent labour. They should have a lot of explaining to do when they fudge their figures.
I like how you display the New Hampshire “pair” of CRN stations (14 stations are installed in pairs NH’s, at least are in similar settings and should display similar data. In looking how the other pairs are presented, I noticed some flaws in the map.
I’m also somewhat confused by the CRN web pages.
According to http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/stationmap.html OK has one pair (west) and one single (east). However, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/isis/stationlist?networkid=1 lists two pairs:
# OK Goodwell 2 E (OK Panhandle Research & Extn. Center (Native Grassland Site))
# OK Goodwell 2 SE (Oklahoma Panhandle State Univ., School of Agriculture (Permanent Pasture))
# OK Stillwater 2 W (Oklahoma State Univ. (Ag. Research Farm Site))
# OK Stillwater 5 WNW (Oklahoma State University (Efaw Farm Site))
Your map shows the west pair well, but shows the eastern one as a single.
Both NCDC pages say there’s a station in Santa Barbara, but I don’t see it on your map.
You show a station in Ontario, Canada (58.1) but the NCDC doesn’t list it, I assume it’s one of the CRN stations, just displayed in the wrong place. BTW, the dots on the NCDC map and temps on yours are very much not in the same place. I hope you’ll be making another pass to refine the map location coordinates.
Nice base map!
Anthony, this information has to be put out to every climate blog (pro or con) all the main stream media including ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, FOX, NYT, etc. When you are complete in the next 2 weeks as you stated, this must be disseminated everywhere that we can think of. Thanks for all your work, I don’t know how you do it!!!
We need to be ‘clued in’ if there are any papers published that address ‘issues’ with this new network, too.
Issues such as, any changes in sensors, upgrade of equipment, proposed protocol or procedures (test plan) for running the ‘new gear’ (external meteorological sensors esp.) along side the ‘old’ gear, site moves or site changes (site grading, changes in drainage, change in landscaping including changes in grass composition, addition of ‘shielding’ shrubbery -often for view-blocking from the road- and the like), new construction in the vicinity including road-upgrades (2-lane to multi-lane etc), ‘TOBS’-style computation adjustments (cue Moshpit Jaws-movie theme music) and the like.
Best to stay on top of this from the start.
.
The fundamental issue is that the best you can get from it is a hint of what the energy fluxes are really doing.
TEMPERATURES CANNOT BE AVERAGED. That’s because they are not quantities, nor do they measure quantities. It’s OK to average rainfall, because it is the same stuff here and over there. But 90° in Tampa is not the same “stuff” as 90° in Tripoli. It’s mostly water’s fault; damp air at a given temp has much more energy than dry air.