WUWT readers may recall that I wrote about this experiment being performed at Oak Ridge national Laboratory to test the issues related to station siting that I have long written about.
This effort promises to be greatly useful to understanding climate quality temperature measurements and how they can be influenced by the station site environment.
From the USCRN Annual Report: http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/uscrn/publications/annual_reports/FY11_USCRN_Annual_Report.pdf
Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon writes about the the first results of this experiment presented at the recent AMS meeting in Austin, TX. The early results confirm what we have learned from the Surface Stations project. Nighttime temperatures are affected the most.
Two talks that caught my eye were on the land surface temperature record. They attacked the problem of land surface temperature accuracy in two completely different, but complementary ways.
One, by John Kochendorfer of NOAA at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, is a direct test of the importance of siting. They’ve installed four temperature sensors at varying distances across a field from the laboratory complex. The experiment has only been running since October, but already they’ve found out a couple of interesting things. First, the nighttime temperatures are indeed higher closer to the laboratory. Second, this is true whether the wind is blowing toward or away from the laboratory.
It’ll take a lot more data to sort out the various temperature effects. One way the buildings might affect the nighttime temperature even when the sensor is upwind of the buildings is infrared radiation: the heated buildings emit radiation that’s stronger than what would be emitted by the open sky or nearby hills.
More here: http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2013/01/dispatch-from-ams-looking-at-land-surface-temperatures/
Biases Associated with Air Temperature Measurements near Roadways and Buildings
Wednesday, 9 January 2013: 9:15 AM Room 15 (Austin Convention Center)
John Kochendorfer, NOAA, Oak Ridge, TN; and C. B. Baker, E. J. Dumas Jr., D. L. Senn, M. Heuer, M. E. Hall, and T. P. Meyers
Abstract
Proximity to buildings and paved surfaces can affect the measured air temperature. When buildings and roadways are constructed near an existing meteorological site, this can affect the long-term temperature trend. Homogenization of the national temperature records is required to account for the effects of urbanization and changes in sensor technology. Homogenization is largely based on statistical techniques, however, and contributes to uncertainty in the measured U.S. surface-temperature record. To provide some physical basis for the ongoing controversy focused on the U.S. surface temperature record, an experiment is being performed to evaluate the effects of artificial heat sources such as buildings and parking lots on air temperature. Air temperature measurements within a grassy field, located at varying distances from artificial heat sources at the edge of the field, are being recorded using both the NOAA US Climate Reference Network methodology and the National Weather Service Maximum Minimum Temperature Sensor system. The effects of the roadways and buildings are quantified by comparing the air temperature measured close to the artificial heat sources to the air temperature measured well-within the grassy field, over 200 m downwind of the artificial heat sources.
==============================================================
Early results of what has been learned in the surface stations project can be seen here:
New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial
h/t to Dr. Roger Pielke Sr.
Our well respected newspaper [sarc ] deleted this post as it offened their community standards.
HOW? or don’t they like the truth?
So how accurate are our temperature records?
In a recent experiment by the NOAA at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, they installed four temperature sensors at varying distances across a field from the laboratory complex. The experiment has only been running since October, but already they’ve found out a couple of interesting things. First, the night time temperatures are indeed higher closer to the laboratory. Second, this is true whether the wind is blowing toward or away from the laboratory. For more info see WUWT
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/20/noaa-establishes-a-fact-about-station-siting-nighttime-temperatures-are-indeed-higher-closer-to-the-laboratory/
Latitude says:
January 21, 2013 at 5:38 am
I always wondered why we planted early and late season crops next to the barn……………..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes! When you fly over the Cdn prairie in spring, you can look down at that broad expanse of white, punctuated by large circles of bare earth, a cluster of farm buildings in the centre of each one.
Anyone with a garden could tell you this. The tomato plants that are right next to the house always survive the early frosts that wipe the other ones out. How and why does anyone listen to or respect people who don’t understand such very basic facts?
Well, Goll-l-l-ly … Su-prise … su-prise … su-prise.
NOAA has a Gomer Pyle moment.
@ur momisugly Anthony
“@ur momisuglyAnto I drove Highway 48 (Bruce Rd) tonight from the entrance all the way up to to Whakapapa, and dind’t see it. Can you help me locate it?”
Would that I was in the area – I’d give you a hand!
I hope you get the opportunity to see the South Island, and if you do, and are in the Nelson region, I’d love to say “G’day”.
Cheers
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rustyblackbird/4360009397/
Here is a great example using just a tree. Anything that sticks up through the snow creates a heat island…no need for buildings with internal heat sources for the effect to be observable. Just something sticking up through the snow what isn’t white.
@richard M 6:07, Yes part two is interesting, if the model is useful, it would run high when compared with the “corrected” temperatures of the 1940s . Sort of like the tree ring thickness of hide the (1960 on) decline. Would that be 3 indications that the land surface temperature database is FUBAR beyond all help?
Standard procedure in vineyards is to till (alternate rows) in the spring, so that the frost risk is reduced, by providing a better surface to absorb daytime sun and to reduce the nucleation of frost from moisture & vegetation growth. Alternate rows are usually sufficient, though in local “pockets” where cold air pools, its often better to till all rows. Even the UC knows this http://www.sarep.ucdavis.edu/covercrop/files-images/Pres1wCreds.pdf though it’s Davis not Berkely..
davidmhoffer says:
January 20, 2013 at 9:52 pm
Your eloquent response is totally convincing. How could I have been so blind to the march of civilization?
Kev-in-Uk says:
January 20, 2013 at 11:16 pm
I agree wholeheartedly. Also, I share your experience, though mine was in the US. In our “information age” few can imagine that most Americans heated their houses with coal as late as 1950. I guess we are roughly the same age.
By the way, London is no place to do a UHI study. That is because London gets so little sunlight. If one wants to do a UHI study, good locations include Atlanta, St.Louis, Dallas, and Phoenix.
Steve C says:
January 21, 2013 at 3:42 am
‘Even the BBC (!) are beginning to acknowledge the existence of UHI. For the last few months, we’ve been getting weather forecasts, some of which have included something like this:
“Temperatures tonight will dip to around minus five degrees … that’s if you live in a city. In country areas you may experience temperatures four or five degrees lower than this.“’
Amazing. In the US, meteorologists have reported in this fashion since TV became popular in the Fifties.
The point is that a thermometer is a instrument that measures something at a specific location. Move it and the the measurement changes. So, we have measurements based on a specific location that is assumed to be close to the temperature of a broader area. As an example, the summer mid day temperature under a canopy of cedars can be much cooler than the temperature measured at the local airport one mile away. While in winter, the same measurement may show the opposite, where the temperature under the cedars is warmer than the temperature at the airport. As we change the landscape, we change the specific temperature of that location. Thus, to make an effort to measure a trend is difficult as there are too many moving targets.
What a farce. Temperature data should be taken from satellites PERIOD.
What’s NOAA up to? They recently applied downward adjustments the the long-standing 1934 temperature record (making 1934 cooler), and applied upward adjustments to the 2012 record, making 2012 warmer than the adjusted 1934 record. Having done that, NOAA then proudly announced that 2012 was the hottest year ever in the U.S. Does NOAA expect the station siting experiment to give scientists new insights for further gerrymander recent temperature data… and if it doesn’t, will we ever hear the outcome of this experiment?
Theo Goodwin:
I do not consider professional hockey a real sport because the game is often interrupted so that players can fight on the ice……..
==================================================
“Sir, …… Pistols at dawn!.
TB
/joking
There should have been a (slaps face) right after the “Sir”. I’m sure you all get the idea.
😉
evanmjones says:
January 21, 2013 at 3:30 am
I think you guys are missing the big picture.
The difference between well and poorly sited stations is greater in rural areas where there has been no environmental change than in urbanized areas.
I wouldn’t assume no environmental changes in rural areas.
Take the UK over the last 60 years.
Removal of hedgerows and small copses. At one point 2% of all hedge rows were being removed every year. Result – decreased boundary layer mixing.
Large increases in field drainage. Result – reduced evaporation and humidity, and earlier planting of crops = albedo changes.
Irrigation which was rare 60 years ago is now widespread. Result – Increased humidity and night time warming near storage reservoirs.
IMO what is needed is separation into urban, agricultural and undisturbed natural stations. The last being the one of interest.
I wonder just how much infra-red radiation is emitted by a Boeing 747 or an Airbus 380 at take-off? And is it more than a Boeing Dreamliner when its batteries are on fire?
TomR,Worc,MA says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:51 pm
Professional ice hockey is very similar to climate science. In ice hockey, all that would be necessary is introducing the rule that a fight on the ice carries an automatic ten game suspension without pay. The matter is totally in control of the powers that be. But they refuse to address the matter. All that the honest observer can conclude is that the powers that be believe that players fighting on the ice contributes to the game. Insanity.
In the case of climate science, the powers that be could insist on strict conformity to scientific method. That would have stopped Michael Mann and friends prior to publication. They did no empirical investigation of the various causes of growth in proxies studied and how those causes vary from location to location. They simply assumed that all measurements of proxies are comparable. Insanity. All that one can conclude is that the powers that be believe that deviation from scientific method contributes to paleoclimatology. Insanity.
I cannot apologize for criticizing professional ice hockey. If fans did not like the fights they would have stopped them long ago. If Obama and his minions did not like deviations from scientific method they would have stopped them long ago.
@ur momisugly Philip Bradley says:
January 21, 2013 at 2:57 pm
The data shows that well sited rural stations using modern sensors show nearly two thirds less warming than the full set of stations. The better sited stations, on the whole, have not seen a lot of change around them. After all, those that have are no longer well sited. As for stations that have been poorly sited, even those with little change in their microsite environment, show a much greater degree of warming than the well sited stations.
As for adjustment, the poorly sited stations show little adjustment and the well sited station trends are adjusted upwards to match the poorly sited stations.
That is not to gainsay your observations, however.
The infrared radiation emitted by buildings or ground is not directed “upwards” or “horizontal”. With the usual materials, it’s directed isotropically, equally in all directions. So what matters, as far as heating the temperature sensor, is how many ster-radians the building takes up. When it’s closer the building covers up a larger fraction of the sky.
From this you can predict that in the far field the effect will be inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the building. (I.e. at distances greater than say twice the square root of the area of the building facing the sensor.)
Might be nice to do a post on the theoretical changes.
Global what?
===========================================
@Brad Hoffman I drove Highway 48 (Bruce Rd) tonight from the entrance all the way up to to Whakapapa, and dind’t see it. Can you help me locate it?
===========================================
Anthony,
No, sorry I can’t help any further. We were in a campervan (I thought about stopping to take a picture, but didn’t). We stayed in Wakapapa, so it would have been on the main road into there (coming from the North). I’m pretty sure it was Highway 47. (There is a junction where 48 meets 47. Turn right there, if you’re coming from Tongariro). It was on the western side (right-hand side as you approach it).
Ha.
Validation of this can be performed INDOORS, in your living as a matter of fact … any of the earlier wide-screen LCD television ‘sets’ used a CCFL (cold-cathode fluorescent lamp) for back lighting the LCD display panel to the tune of 200 to over 300 Watts distributed over the surface of the screen … walking within a foot (after the set has been operating for awhile) will readily familiarize one with the kind of IR ‘heat’ energy coming off these buildings … I had an opportunity to encounter a high-end 2006 46″ Samsung just this last weekend; I previously had _no_ idea the amount of energy consumed by these sets in order top overcome the losses through the LCD panel itself …
BTW, energy (power) consumed by this set was measured with one of those “Kill-A-Watt” power/energy measurement devices; power factor was shown as unity and power consumed around 290 Watts … most of that for the CCFL backlight, not the electronics.
.
‘scuze please?
You’re spinning tales and lore that is simply NOT ENTIRELY TRUE … many meteorological RADARs were in use prior to the fielding of the NWS WSR-88D, such as the WSR-57 and WSR-74 S and C models, those coupled with meteorological field study and knowledgeable observation over decades contributed greatly to the knowledge thunderstorms including Tornadic thunderstorms.
Several research activities, that eventually LEAD to the development of the WSR-88D series were also ongoing on the plains of Oklahoma at the National Severe Storms Laboratory, where specifications for the WSR-88D were eventually drawn up, given their experience with research and operating several research meteorological RADARs data back to the 1960’s! … all this has been well documented, and isn’t lore ….
From: http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/about/history/
http://www.magazine.noaa.gov/stories/mag151.htm
“WEATHER RADAR DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHT OF NATIONAL SEVERE STORMS LABORATORY’S FIRST 40 YEARS”
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEXRAD
.