Over 650 snow records set in USA this week – another wonky surface station located

UPDATE : The NWS responds about the station issue, see below. – Anthony

Almost 60% of the contiguous USA covered in snow.

A volunteer walks along the practice green as snow falls during the Match Play Championship golf tournament, Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, in Marana, Ariz. Play was suspended. Photo: Ross Franklin – click for the story

While pundits spin attempts at linking snowfall in the Northeast USA to AGW, much like they do in the summer during heat waves, we find that Nature is just taunting them with snow as far south as the Mexican border in Arizona. And there is more to come, in the next week, we may see snow into Florida. During the last week, 652 new snow records were set in the CONUS as seen in the map below:

CONUS_Snow_records_2-23-13

The record furthest south, in Paradise, AZ, of 6.3 inches snowfall, beat the old 2 inch record going all the way back to 1896. Paradise, AZ is just 40 miles from the Mexican border. You can see all the snow records yourself here.

And according to the NOAA NOHRSC, 57.5% of the CONUS has snow cover.

nsm_depth_2013022205_National

I also had a look at temperature records this past week, where there were 92 new record low temperatures all the way into Florida, and only 20 new high temperature records set:

CONUS_High-low_records_1-23-13

One record in particular, at Jal, NM piqued my interest, because it was in the middle of a bunch of record low temperatures. Not only that, it beat the old record high in 1953 by quite a margin, besting it by 7 degrees:

Jal-NM_record_high

There are no new high temperature records anywhere close to this station, and it stands out like a sore thumb.The nearest official hourly reporting station in Wink, TX just 26 miles away, shows a high of only 62 on Friday February, 22nd according to this data from Weather Underground sourced from NWS:

Wink_TX_2-22-13

Source: http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KINK/2013/2/22/DailyHistory.html

Another station to the North, Hobbs, NM, 23 miles to the North, another official NOAA airport station, also shows no new record high on that day:

Hobbs_NM_2-22-13

Source: http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KHOB/2013/2/22/DailyHistory.html

The weather in the area that day was sunny, mild, breezy, and dry:

Hobbs_Wink_obs_2-22-13

Source: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/maf/version.php?site=MAF&issuedby=MAF&state=&product=RWR&format=CI&db=1&version=2013-02-23+00%3A02%3A12&go=Select

I had a strong hunch that this station in Jal, NM may have poor siting which contributed to the new record anomalously warm high on Friday, it turns out my hunch was correct.

According the NCDC metadata, the Jal station is a Class A station, meaning it is part of the climate monitoring network. While not part of the USHCN, it does serve as a station used for infill and pairwise comparisons when trying to homogenize the surface temperature record. The NCDC location metadata was a red flag to me: JAL POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHIN AND 2 MILES SE OF POSTOFFICE AT JAL NM

With just a little research, I was able to locate a photo of the station, courtesy of a survey page from New Mexico State University. The photo showed yet another parking lot weather station:

Jal-NM_station_photo1

In the photo above (which I have annotated) the Standard Rain Gauge is clearly visible and what looks like the MMTS temperature sensor shelter on a pole is in the distance near the front of the building. Such placements are typical, they try to get over grass where they can trench a cable back to a window or a wall opening to the display in the office.

A further check of metadata revealed the station is located at 32.1103 -103.1872, within the town according to NCDC metadata, and this Google Earth image:

Jal-NM_station_photo3

While that lat/lon puts the station in the parking lot, I note that typically most GPS readings in NCDC’s metadata are good to only about 100 feet. And sure enough, right where I suspected it was, was the telltale shadow of the MMTS shelter. Some annotation was added to the Google Earth image to help you visualize what I know from years of experience doing aerial station surveys.

Jal-NM_station_photo2

The photo above has an imaging date of 2/7/2011, seen in lower left – winter time, just slightly over a year ago. Click the image to enlarge it for a closer view.

So to summarize:

1. We have a new record high that is anomalously warm, 96 degrees F. No official nearby stations set any comparable high temperatures or  new temperature records in the same time frame. It appears all stations experienced similar warm dry breezy weather that day.

2. We have a NOAA temperature sensor a mere 7 feet from the sidewalk and 16 feet from a  large brick building (according to the ruler function in Google Earth and the photo from the NM State survey page).

3. We have a massive parking lot beyond that, and a major road just beyond the parking lot, plus a semicircular drive. Essentially the temperature sensor is surrounded with heat sinks.

4. We have a low albedo surface, dry brown grass, under the temperature sensor in February as evident in the Google Earth photo from a year ago, there’s no reason to suspect this year would be any different.

5. The station is located within the UHI bubble of the town.

So given the sunny dry weather with a lack of nearby comparable temperatures or new records, heat sinks all around, the parking lot, the building, the low albedo of dry grass under the sensor, it seems entirely likely to me that this is a false high temperature record.

I have sent a note to NWS in Midland Odessa to have them investigate.

Update: The original photo of Snow on cacti provided by Scrape TV stated on the Scrape TV article it was from 2013. Alert reader J Philip Peterson pointed out the photo they used was from 2007. I’ve updated the photo at the head of the story for accuracy. – Anthony

UPDATE2: 2/25/13 7AM PST Here is what the NWS Midland says in an email to me:

Anthony,

I did find that JALN5 COOP did erroneously report 96 degrees.  Unfortunately, the report did make it to a preliminary report OSOMAF.  I checked the database use to compile the record to see if the report was corrected, and the database had updated to show the data as missing.  This means that the official record will not include the bad report.

The last available RERMAF online is the latest one in our AWIPS system as well.  Historically, our site has only issued RER products for the MAF site (also the only site for which daily and monthly climate products are generated), though expansion in the future is possible.

Though the graphic in the article compares observations to the official record and appears to show a new record at Jal, reports gathered from COOP observers in real time should always be considered preliminary.  COOP observations are QC’d daily and at the end of the month before they are submitted as final.  Not all COOP sites are ideally sited, but the overriding problem with the Jal report appears to be sensor malfunction.  The high temperature data has been edited for bad data for several days.

The record should show that a new record has not been set at Jal.

Thanks for the heads-up and seeking clarification on this issue.

Regards,

Greg Jackson

Information Technology Officer

NWS Midland, TX

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

111 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John F. Hultquist
February 23, 2013 8:36 pm

Sad-But-True-Its-You says:
February 23, 2013 at 7:22 pm
“. . . expect a visit from the FBI.

Because the US is broke and the cost of ammunition is high there will be no warning shots.

JDN
February 23, 2013 8:52 pm

F. Hultquist
Thanks. This image appears to be part of a flikr.com photostream by “narfinity” taken in 2007 (see more Sabino canyon snow pictures http://www.flickr.com/photos/narfinity/page4/)

Rhys Jaggar
February 23, 2013 10:25 pm

One day snowfall records are an extremely poor indicator of trends or climate. I”m sure all the editorial team are aware of that.
Let’s see the season-long snowfall totals in April, eh? Let’s see the average winter temperature at the same time.
I think you’ll find that Europe has been cooler and reasonably snowy this winter. I’m less sure what the USA’s report will say.

tobias
February 23, 2013 10:49 pm

In Dutch as well negen en zestig (9+60) and BTW we have registered SOG for 60 days straight in our desert area since Dec. 6, records show this happens roughly every 20-22 years, our average annual rain fall is 18 -25 cm (south-north) in our valley, located between the Coastal and Rockey mountains (rain shadow lovely to watch on satellite pics)

Leg
February 23, 2013 10:52 pm

It fascinates me that something deadly like the cold and snow in a desert can be so visually attractive. That picture is gorgeous. Nature has a habit of packaging attractive but deadly things: the “cuddly” polar bear, the beautiful tiger, the soaring eagle, the hypnotic sway of a cobra, and women. Okay, that last one is going to get me in trouble… 🙂

Manfred
February 24, 2013 12:14 am

Ric Werme says:
February 23, 2013 at 1:44 pm
Manfred says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:27 am
World snow cover from sea ice page
http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/cryo_compare_small.jpg
It’s not global – it’s not even the whole NH given the projection used for the image.
————————————–
There is no snow worth mentioning elsewhere.

AndyG55
February 24, 2013 3:16 am

R. Harwood says:
It isn’t snowing here in Brisbane.
Hey.. I thought it ALWAYS snowed in Brisbane in Febuary… darn… things are getting REALLY bad.
No snow down in Newcastle either. wtf is going on ?????

observa
February 24, 2013 3:56 am

“If all you say about the site is correct, how many high temperature records has it been setting? Not to deny the claim that this is an anomalous reading, but its readings should be out of whack all the time.”
Err, no Mike Barnes as every accountant knows only too well when the books don’t balance. You just don’t go losing any discrepancy in petty cash like Big Climate do, particularly with the sums they’re playing around with. You never know if it’s a sign someone’s fiddling the books big time.

J Philip Peterson
February 24, 2013 4:49 am

Sorry Anthony, but you should change your lead photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/narfinity/367703622/ to an actual photo taken on Feb 21st, 2013 (there must be many). The photo used at the top of the article was taken Jan 21 2007. Scrape-tv.com gave you bad info. Let’s stick to facts here.

REPLY:
Yep, they did, they had this for the lead story date Feb 21 2013. http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/usa/pages-10/Now-the-rest-of-the-country-gets-to-complain-about-a-little-bit-of-snow-Scrape-TV-The-World-on-your-side-2013-02-21.html – Anthony

J Philip Peterson
February 24, 2013 4:53 am

Oops that lead photo was actually taken on Jan 22 2007.

J Philip Peterson
February 24, 2013 5:16 am

Thanks JDN for the pick-up… I did a quick search. Here’s a photo from the recent storm you could use for the lead photo:
http://azstarnet.com/gallery/photos-match-play-after-tucson-snow/collection_3c406640-7c63-11e2-8659-0019bb2963f4.html#0

Editor
February 24, 2013 5:26 am

Rhys Jaggar says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:25 pm
> One day snowfall records are an extremely poor indicator of trends or climate. I’m sure all the editorial team are aware of that.
Nah, the “editorial team” only knows about forbidden topics and excessive trolling. Sometimes they’ll fix a typo or bogus HTML.
> Let’s see the season-long snowfall totals in April, eh? Let’s see the average winter temperature at the same time.
Seasonal snowfall totals are horrible things to compare, at least here in the NE USA. The integral of snow depth over the season (snow depth days) is even worse. I have data for 15 years at http://wermenh.com/sdd/index.html . The most consistent data for me (Penacook) are low snowfall seasons. 7 of 13 years are between 40-51″ of snowfall, but the SDDs for those years range from 170 to 474.

J Philip Peterson
February 24, 2013 5:37 am

Sorry for all these posts but here’s a nicer photo with some saguaro cacti from the same date:
http://azstarnet.com/gallery/photos-match-play-after-tucson-snow/collection_3c406640-7c63-11e2-8659-0019bb2963f4.html#8

February 24, 2013 5:55 am

Steven Mosher says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:06 am
” .so a few months from now folks will complain about raw data being thrown out because of QA.
===============================================================
No, most folks won’t complain because we will know that the data was incorrect.
We will continue to to complain with the other 99 99/100 of data changes that are done without explanation and are very spurious

CE Nolan
February 24, 2013 7:24 am

Leg says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:52 pm
It fascinates me that something deadly like the cold and snow in a desert can be so visually attractive. That picture is gorgeous. Nature has a habit of packaging attractive but deadly things: the “cuddly” polar bear, the beautiful tiger, the soaring eagle, the hypnotic sway of a cobra, and women. Okay, that last one is going to get me in trouble… 🙂
————-
Alright Leg, that made me laugh.
cn

herkimer
February 24, 2013 7:52 am

There will be more winter records broken during the next few decades as the global cooling sets in:
NORTHERN HEMISPHERE
The winter temperature anomaly for the Northern Hemisphere as measured by Hadcrut3gl shows a negative linear trend for 15 years since 1998
EUROPE
The winter temperature departures from 1961-1990 mean normal for land and sea regions of Europe have been flat or even slightly dropping for 22 year or since 1990
UK
The winter temperatures for Central England 9CET) have been declining since 1988 and very noticeably since 2006
UNITED STATES
The annual temperature for Contiguous United States has been dropping since 1998 at -0. 80 F per decade
The winter temperatures for Contiguous United States has been dropping since 1990 or at -0.23 F per decade [per NCDC] or 22 years
The winter temperature for Contiguous United States has been dropping since 1998 at -1.95 F per decade
The summer and spring temperatures have been warming and winter and fall temperatures have been falling giving an overall annual cooling for 15 years
CANADA
The annual temperature departure form 1961-1990 averages has been flat since 1998
The winter temperature anomaly has been rising mostly due to the warming of the far north and Atlantic coast only
8 of the 11 climate regions in other parts of Canada showed declining winter temperature departures since 1998
During the 2011/2012 winter the Canadian Arctic showed declining winter temperature departures
RUSSIA/ ASIA
The winter of 2012 has been extremely cold for Moscow and Russia as a whole. Moscow winters are getting progressively cooler.
December 2012 cold weather hit -30 C in Moscow
Coldest in70 years in Eastern Russia. [Temperatures hit -50C in Siberia]
”At the end of 2012, Russia saw extreme winter not witnessed since 1938. The snow that has been falling since November last year has paralyzed life in Russia’s capital. Moscow . The snow-cover height reached 2.16 m: It was the snowiest winter over last 100 years
1.

Donkey Whisperer Farm
February 24, 2013 8:42 am

Thank GOD western Washington state is having a mild winter spring is on the way. Enjoyed your blog today.

Bruce
February 24, 2013 11:06 am

60% of contiguous US snow-covered. Possibility of freezing weather during spring break in FL. Snow covered cacti in Tuscon. Perfect time to predict alarmists will eventually declare 2013 as the hottest year ever.

Lightrain
February 24, 2013 11:22 am

Someone could have backed into the parking spot and left their car running so it would be warm when they went back out.

February 24, 2013 11:42 am

Looks like a weather station in Mexico is keeping Arizona warm! 🙂 http://twitpic.com/c6k984

February 24, 2013 2:06 pm

Mosher writes “with that large of a difference the raw data for the station would be flagged for “regional inconsistency”
Only when the difference is large can it be effectively dealt with. There are many more ways for a thermometer to experience and record moments of unintended warmth (especially in urban settings) than there are for them to experience and record moments of unintended cold. Its easy to locally add energy but much harder to locally take it away and so there must be a warming bias in the absolute readings, some more and more often than others. Homogenisation must then add warming bias. But how can you account for that?
Does it matter in the trends? Well it might…
Compare this to TOBs where because a solution can be conceptualised, it can be applied.

Gina
February 24, 2013 2:14 pm

Has the Watts, Jones, Mcintyre, Christy paper, “An Area And Distance Weighted Analysis Of The Impacts Of Station Exposure On The U.S. Historical Climatology Network Temperatures And Temperature Trends” been published yet? Is it in process? It needs to be.

DCA
February 24, 2013 2:19 pm

I ve heard many warmists claim that “AGW is altering the jet stream”.
Is there any creditbility to that?

Gina
Reply to  DCA
February 24, 2013 3:16 pm

DCA, A typical maneuver for warmists is to identify existing trends and cycles, then “predict” that trend as a result of carbon dioxide-induced warming. I don’t state this lightly, but from my reading of papers in this “science” for 20 years, scientific method is often loosely employed. There really is a lot of bias. Of course, there are plausible hypotheses that a warming of the atmosphere could affect the jet stream this or that way, but there are myriad plausible (and untestable) hypotheses on how this could play out. Warmists tend to hone in on “what’s been observed” first, then pick the plausible explanation to match.
In my opinion the physics questions are not even appropriately answered, especially when it comes to how much radiative heat GHG can absorb before saturation, and the maximum “direct” effects of an increase. The papers I’ve read seem to start out on the right track to a good calculation (at least some do, with the Beer-Lambert equation and some estimates and assumptions about absorption) , but then they skip over the final calculations of direct effects and approach it from the opposite side (empirically), saying essentially “we’ve observed these trends, which can’t possibly be due to natural variations, and so they must be from the direct and indirect effects of CO2.” I wish we could get more physicists interested. To do this right, we’d need tons of absorption data for various gas mixtures at various temperatures (this is being gathered), and a model that integrates this across time, space, and temperature. I don’t think it’s been properly done.

February 24, 2013 3:11 pm

DCA,
That is just an assertion, and it has no scientific basis. Tell them to give you a verifiable mechanism that directly connects AGW to the jet stream.
For that matter, tell them you want specific, quantifiable measurements of “AGW”. So far, no one has been able to provide any such scientific evidence.
AGW may exist, but there are no measurements of it because its effect is so small. The fact that there are no measurements of AGW is the reason there is still a debate raging over the climate sensitivity number.
If we could quantify AGW with verifiable measurements, we would have an accurate, falsifiable sensitivity number. But we don’t, because AGW is only a conjecture.

Steve Thatcher
February 24, 2013 3:40 pm

Werner Brozek says:
February 23, 2013 at 12:09 pm
The nearest official hourly reporting station in Wink, TX just 26 miles away, shows a high of only 62
Perhaps there is another reason the other reading was 69 and not 96. Did they get a new person who happened to be German? The reason I ask is that in German, the numbers are stated backwards compared to English, so sixty nine would be said as “nine and sixty”. So someone who may not have listened carefully may have wrongly written 96. Is this the case with other languages as well?
*****************************************************************************************
Just as well it wasn’t a French person. Here in France the French would say that 96 is 80 and 16 (more accurately, quatre vingt seize or four twenties and sixteen). Now that is a really high temperature 8016F
Steve T

Verified by MonsterInsights