Via experiment, NOAA establishes a fact about station siting: 'nighttime temperatures are indeed higher closer to the laboratory'

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.

NOAA’s ‘Janus moment’ – while claiming ‘The American public can be confident in NOAA’s long-standing surface temperature record’, they fund an experiment to investigate the effects of station siting and heat sinks/sources on temperature data

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.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
181 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gcsherwood
January 21, 2013 8:49 pm

Theo misunderstands a tenant of hockey. Unlike most sports, all of the discipline is not left up to the capriciousness of the officials. Often, all can see when some flagrant infraction (often involving injury) is done, and the players have the chance to settle it — in some fashion — themselves. Why is this wrong?

gcsherwood
January 21, 2013 8:51 pm

And just as an aside to my previous comment, everyone knows that such retribution might be in the offing. As the old saying goes, “an armed society is a polite society”.

January 21, 2013 8:53 pm

Possible crazy-talk? Reference is to the 9:30 point in the video and con-trails (not ‘ship trails; MWG thinks we can be easily conned late in the day with light moderation taking place.)
The post: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/20/noaa-establishes-a-fact-about-station-siting-nighttime-temperatures-are-indeed-higher-closer-to-the-laboratory/#comment-1204679

michaelwiseguy says January 20, 2013 at 10:58 pm
These are some of the craziest ship trails I have ever seen off the NW Pacific coast in new NASA image. See at 0:30 [sic, 9:30 he means .. _Jim] in this video;

[Yes, we (the mods) saw that ship-trails comments, and – you are right – we did assume he really meant “ship trails” (wakes) and not contrails. Mod]
.

January 21, 2013 9:04 pm

carlbrannen says January 21, 2013 at 6:07 pm

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.)

All this is well and good and if you are dealing effectively with a point source; the rather large, broad side of a building takes rather quite some distance to render it a point source (otherwise the relationship is more like inversely proportional to the distance to the building. There will also be a transition zone from 1/D to 1/Dsquared.)
.

1 6 7 8