UPDATE: 7/12/13 1045 PDT DMI concedes the record may not be valid, see here
I’ve been working on this one for a week, and I finally confirmed my hunch about where the weather station is located. The story begins with Jason Samenow at the Washington Post, who made a big deal out of a new temperature record in Maniitsoq, Greenland:
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/08/01/greenland-soars-to-highest-temperature-ever-recorded/
Any time I read about new record temperatures in the Arctic or Antarctic, I tend to think of this simple truth: In near polar settlements, temperature is measured close to that small human island of warmth , and since most such towns are completely dependent on aviation, the measurement is often done at the airport, since weather there is a go/no go factor of primary importance.
It turns out I was correct. What was surprising was just how correct my hunch turned out to be.
First, the Maniitsoq, Greenland data for July 30th, courtesy of Weather Underground:
Source: http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/BGMQ/2013/7/30/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA&MR=1
Note the yellow highlights for the Tmax. This confirms Samenow’s story, though I find it curious that Weather Underground didn’t round up to 79F based on Samenow’s reported value of 78.6F (which he likes to say is nearly 80F). No matter, there are other issues that I was suspicious of.
First, this is a weather event, it doesn’t have anything to do with climate, as DMI indicated on their weather map for the day, strong warm winds behind a warm front washed over southwest Greenland, where Maniitsoq is located:
Weather pattern responsible for record warmth in southwest Greenland (Danish Meteorological Institute)
Samenow was correct in noting:
It adds the warmth may have been enhanced by a phenomenon known as the Foehn Effect, in which air flows over nearby elevated terrain and compresses and heats on its way down. In this case, DMI believes the air may have passed over the elevated Sugar Loaf ice cap and then dried and warmed up as it descended (or downsloped) on its leeward side into Maniitsoq.
But then falls back into the “it must somehow be related to global warming” position saying:
The DMI says the warmth was not “unnatural”, but explains it fits into a long-term pattern of climate warming.
“[T]here is an indisputable gradual increase in temperature in Greenland,” DMI writes. “Along the way, any ‘warm event’ thus have a higher probability of being slightly warmer than the previous one.”
As I pointed out at the beginning of this article, the temperature was measured at the airport. But how good is that weather station location? Is it biased by its placement at the airport? It took me a week to find it, but find it I did.
First, an overview from Google Earth of the town and the airport. You can clearly see the “nearby elevated terrain” near the airport.
The winds were out of the Northeast at the time of the high reading after 5PM, note yellow highlights:
Next, from aerial closeup and my experience with spotting hundreds of weather stations for the SurfaceStations project, this is where I thought the Stevenson Screen might be at the airport. try as I might though, I couldn’t find a photo of it.
It turned out that a video shot by a tourist (Bart Rietveld) confirmed my suspicion, I found it this morning during a bout of insomnia. Here’s the screencap from the video, looking Northwest from the tarmac at BGMQ aka Maniitsoq airport.
Source: @ 0:15 into this video:
Here is what I conclude about the station placement:
- Maniitsoq airport is a recent development in the history of the area, it has been settled for almost 4000 years. It is an anomaly carved out of the landscape (see first Google Earth image).
- The weather station is surrounded by the airport runway and tarmac, which is unnatural ground cover. Note how dark it is in the tourist video.
- The dark albedo there is enough to melt snow in the winter, in fact they count on it to help keep the airport open. Just like I showed in Svalbard, they have to keep the runway open even after snowfall, and it becomes an albedo anomaly surrounded by snow.
- The local siting effects likely added to the temperature record on July 30th because the easterly wind would also have picked up some of the heat from the terminal building and tarmac and transported it to the weather station.
- For these reasons, it isn’t a good place to measure temperature for climate, but it is the best place to measure weather/temperature for aviation purposes: right next to the runway.
It seems that DMI agrees that this temperature is artificially elevated at the Maniitsoq airport, because according to this story in Nunatsiaq Online, DMI has discarded the record in favor of one in the town. They added this footnote to their story about record heat in Greenland:
[Note: the DMI later rescinded the claim that the July 30 temperature was a record-breaker, saying that the lower temperature recorded at another station in the community — 24 C — stands for that day. That’s 1.9 C lower than the record, which is still to be broken]
Note also that DMI had this to say in the original report on the event:
Whether the 25.9 ° C later elevated to a new record for Greenland will first be decided after further climatological study of the situation.
While I could not find the rescinding announcement at DMI, likely due to me being unable to effectively interpret the language on the DMI website, I can confirm that as of today, 11 days after the event, the old record still stands:
Source: http://www.dmi.dk/groenland/arkiver/vejrekstremer/
It looks like Mr. Samenow at the Washington Post will need to issue a retraction. Ditto for Dr. Jason Box and who also bought into the event without questioning it or following up on it.
And these news articles need corrections (readers can help by sending notes to them):
Related articles
- Greenland soars to its highest temperature ever recorded, almost 80 degrees F. (washingtonpost.com)
- Greenland Hits Highest Temperature Ever Recorded (thesterlingroad.com)
- Global weirding 2013: same temp in Ojai as in Greenland (achangeinthewind.com)
- Record high temperature recorded in Greenland (summitcountyvoice.com)
- Greenland hottest ever (blogs.redding.com)
- Greenland experiences ‘record high’ temperatures (blueandgreentomorrow.com)
===================================================================
UPDATE Dr. Richard Keen adds in comments:
All this discussion of a degree or two is a moot point, since even the “nearly 80 degrees”, i.e. 79F, is still 7 degrees short of the record high for Greenland.
That honor belongs to Ivigtut, down on the southern tip of Greenland (probably not far from Maniitsoq), where it was 86F (30.1C) sometime before 1940. This record is published in:
Climates of the World, in Climate and Man – Yearbook of Agriculture, US Dept of Agriculture, 1941
reprinted in:
Climates of the World, US Dept. Commerce, 1969
and even in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivittuut
So you know it’s valid.
I don’t know the exact date of the record, but suffice it to say it’s before 1940, which explains why the DMI chose to use records starting in 1958. After all, Greenland weather records go back to 1784 (Vinther et al., Extending Greenland temperature records into the late eighteenth century, JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 111, D11105, doi:10.1029/2005JD006810, 2006). It’s a common ploy for the Warmers to act as though climate started in 1958, when Keeling starting recording CO2 on Mauna Loa, or 1947, when the PDO went cool, or 1970, when Arctic temperatures bottomed out, to get their upward trends.








Anthony, I think you’re putting a bit too much emphasis on albedo. First, it’s not really a problem for catching trends if the surroundings stay pretty much the same. In the Svalbard case, the weather station was established when the airport was built. I don’t know the weather station specifically, but I’ve been to that airport a couple of dozen times. One can perhaps argue that the runway is free of snow and ice more often with increased traffic, but again, I find it hard to believe that it’s measurable. The weather station is on turf (or snow most of the year), measurements are done 2 meters above it, the tarmac is several meters away, and the sun never rises high in the sky at 78N. During winter there is no sun at all for 4 months, in reality probably more than 5 months because of the mountainside rising 500m to the south of the runway.
The real problem with temperature records, in particular for Svalbard airport, is homogenisation when the station has been moved. Most of the Svalbard airport record has been reconstructed from stations many km away, even 10’s or 100’s of km away with very different microclimate, so the reconstruction is only an educated guess. Whether the all time high in Greenland is exceptional depends on how long the station has been in service in its current location.
“mogamboguru says:
August 10, 2013 at 7:03 am
Slightly off-topic, but in the Google-Earth picture which Anthony shows of Maniitsoq, I find the huge glacier-scratchmarks in the bedrock surrounding the village very interesting.
One most-interesting feature to me, that these scratches don’t all run parallel, but some are angled roughly at 90 degrees in relation to others.”
Mogamboguru, I think (not sure, since I’ve never been there) what you are looking at what geologists refer to as joint patterns… these are not the result of glaciation. They often occur in igneous rock, and are often seen in orthogonal patterns. They are generally considered to be the result of decompression of rock as overburden is eroded away. If you look at central and northern Ontario on Google Earth you will see many such examples.
REPLY: to Sedron L Happy to provide an update. We’ve retooled it entirely, and to deal with the TOBs issue, it required going over the metadata and paper records of over 1200 stations, all done in free time, with no funding. If this was a University enterprise, a grant could have been applied for and a handful of grad students put on the job.
We have redone the dataset and the analysis, and have been rewriting the paper. Such things take time. My reality, is one far different from funded institutional science – Anthony
ANTHONY I know this is off thread, but need to get the message to you that here in the UK the site is plagued by pop up video ads from people like Tesco and it is virtually unreadable. I have grabbed a rare gap in the mayhem to get this message in.
REPLY to Old’un
WUWT doesn’t have popup video ads, the problem is some adware/malware that has installed itself on your computer. Consider also using a modern/updated browser with a popup blocker.
Let us be charitable to Sedron L.
He was curious.
He asked a question.
He has a reply.
Next we will see the thank you for the reply and we can get back to the relevant issue of weather monitoring at airports being anomalous for the local area.
Is this more of a problem in cold (polar) regions as the article suggests? Perhaps we can find greater and growing divergence between: Airport weather stations and Nearest Other weather stations, at High latitudes compared to Lower latitudes?
Would this help ascertain if there is or is not a problem with airport weather stations?
Where Sedron is heard, a discouraging word,
But the skies are not cloudy all day.
======================
ANTHONY Thanks for the advice. ‘Pop ups’ were already blocked on Safari (I use an IPad), but I have ‘cleared cookies’ whatever that means and the ads have stopped.
Keep up the good work with WUWT!
To Old’un, Had the same problem. Have just installed “Admuncher” software (trial version). Now the problem [seems to] have gone – touch wood!
To Old’un and others:
I’m pretty ancient myself, but I have learned (by bitter experience) to clear cookies every week or two and I would recommend installing “Ghostery” which gives more protection and is free. Best wishes, Dave.
False, you’ve fallen victim to the Gambler’s Fallacy yourself.
At the very beginning of a long series, it is true that you can expect unusual event X sometime during it. But the further you get into it without seeing one, the odds do not thereby increase. In fact they fall, in proportion to the ratio of the series remaining to be sampled.
Another retraction candidate
Manitsoq appears to be included in Berkeley Earth Greenland
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/station-list/region/greenland
Is the warming then only due to AMO and the little warming since the 1940s peak just due to UHI?
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/regions/greenland
And it gets even “worse”, Arctic sea ice in recent years not different from 70 years ago !
http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/arctic-sea-ice-data-collected-by-dmi-1893-1961-259.php
-> Climate sensitivity near zero ?
I think the real Q is, if the airport regularly hits 15C in WINTER, and without the sun (15 being Sydney winter temps) why doesn’t it knock off Kangaroosaq’s fairly modest summer records??
Hello,
An interesting post and comments.
Now; when a ‘temperature’ is ‘measured’ does the ‘temperature’ ‘measured’ have the same probability of occurring as the ‘temperature’ ‘measured’ before said ‘temperature’ measured’ occurring and the same probability as the ‘temperature’ ‘measured’ after the ‘temperature’ ‘measured’ occurring?
The question asks: does any ‘temperature’ measured have the same and equal probability as any other ‘temperature’ that might or could or would be measured anywhere ?.
Is the Keeling ‘curve’ a sampling artifact ?
Much of Greenland has had a colder than normal Summer. The CWG is typical of those with an AGW bend and is notorious for things like this.
Wonder why there is nothing on how cold interior Greenland has been
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/data/composites/comp.day.pl?var=Air+Temperature&level=Surface&iy%5B1%5D=&im%5B1%5D=&id%5B1%5D=&iy%5B2%5D=&im%5B2%5D=&id%5B2%5D=&iy%5B3%5D=&im%5B3%5D=&id%5B3%5D=&iy%5B4%5D=&im%5B4%5D=&id%5B4%5D=&iy%5B5%5D=&im%5B5%5D=&id%5B5%5D=&iy%5B6%5D=&im%5B6%5D=&id%5B6%5D=&iy%5B7%5D=&im%5B7%5D=&id%5B7%5D=&iy%5B8%5D=&im%5B8%5D=&id%5B8%5D=&iy%5B9%5D=&im%5B9%5D=&id%5B9%5D=&iy%5B10%5D=&im%5B10%5D=&id%5B10%5D=&iy%5B11%5D=&im%5B11%5D=&id%5B11%5D=&iy%5B12%5D=&im%5B12%5D=&id%5B12%5D=&iy%5B13%5D=&im%5B13%5D=&id%5B13%5D=&iy%5B14%5D=&im%5B14%5D=&id%5B14%5D=&iy%5B15%5D=&im%5B15%5D=&id%5B15%5D=&iy%5B16%5D=&im%5B16%5D=&id%5B16%5D=&iy%5B17%5D=&im%5B17%5D=&id%5B17%5D=&iy%5B18%5D=&im%5B18%5D=&id%5B18%5D=&iy%5B19%5D=&im%5B19%5D=&id%5B19%5D=&iy%5B20%5D=&im%5B20%5D=&id%5B20%5D=&monr1=6&dayr1=1&monr2=8&dayr2=8&iyr%5B1%5D=2013&filenamein=&plotlabel=&lag=0&labelc=Color&labels=Shaded&type=2&scale=&label=0&cint=.25++&lowr=-2&highr=2&istate=0&proj=Custom&xlat1=40&xlat2=90&xlon1=-60&xlon2=-10&custproj=Cylindrical+Equidistant&level1=1000mb&level2=10mb&Submit=Create+Plot
richardscourtney says: August 10, 2013 at 11:15 am
Re Sedron L:
Richard, with all due respect, Sedron’s question is related to the issue of weather station siting, and is pretty closely related to the topic here.
I think some dissenting opinion in here adds to the debate (and I do wish authors of dissenting opinions were not all labelled ‘trolls’). Disagreeing with other’s opinions is not necessarily trolling.
And sometimes the ‘off topic’ diversions are informative.
WUWT could very quickly end up following the SKS method of slicing and dicing discussions at the whim of every disgruntled moderator if that issue got taken too seriously.
ferdberple says: “…Observation shows that Climate has memory. A hot year this year makes it more likely you will see a hot year next year. Thus one should not be surprised by long periods of warming (or cooling) that appear to defy the odds. It is this appearance of “defying the odds” that gives rise to The Gambler’s Fallacy of Climate Change.”
AKA autocorrelation.
Anthony Watts says:
August 10, 2013 at 12:04 pm
“My reality, is one far different from funded institutional science”
——-
“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite. ”
Dwight D. Eisenhower
================
I’m careful by nature, this is a whole other level now.
Eventually.
markx:
Your post addressed to me at August 10, 2013 at 8:44 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/10/how-not-to-measure-temperature-part-94-maniitsoq-greenland-all-time-high-temperature-rescinded/#comment-1386734
misleads by selectively quoting from my post at August 10, 2013 at 11:15 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/10/how-not-to-measure-temperature-part-94-maniitsoq-greenland-all-time-high-temperature-rescinded/#comment-1386401
I take umbrage at your suggestion that I do not want to engage with differing opinions.
On the contrary, I like to debate with those who disagree because then I learn.
And that is WHY I abhor trolls
Trolls intend to prevent learning about a subject by deflecting a thread from its subject.
As my post which you have misrepresented showed, Sedron L was a troll.
And subsequent events have confirmed that Sedron L was a troll. He obtained an answer to his original question from Anthony Watts but did not acknowledge that answer in any way.
If a variety of views are to be heard then trolls need to be ‘slapped down’.
Richard
Joe Bastardi says:
August 10, 2013 at 8:27 pm
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Ahem:
http://tiny.cc/
http://www.shorturl.com/
http://goo.gl/
😉
intersting…
Anthony Watts says:
August 10, 2013 at 12:04 pm
REPLY: to Sedron L Happy to provide an update. We’ve retooled it entirely, and to deal with the TOBs issue, it required going over the metadata and paper records of over 1200 stations, all done in free time, with no funding. If this was a University enterprise, a grant could have been applied for and a handful of grad students put on the job.
We have redone the dataset and the analysis, and have been rewriting the paper. Such things take time. My reality, is one far different from funded institutional science – Anthony
Garethman says, well done Anthony for giving an update. I’m looking forward to this paper and also wondered how long it may be before I could see the finished study.
By the way, I also have huge problems with advertising pop ups on WUWT in the UK , I use Apple software OS X 10.8.4 (12E55) and have a background check continually running from MacScan which detects any malware or tracking. What happens is that I click on a WUWT link only to be directed to an advertising banner which is usually just a small window on the homepage but becomes a large copy on a new page. No problems with any other site, any advice from posters would be very welcome!
By the way the other link I commonly end up on after following the usual sea ice data link is this one. ( It has only started in the last week.)
“Not Found
Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found. Perhaps searching will help.
Search for: “
markx says:
August 10, 2013 at 8:44 pm
//////////////////////////////////
I usually find myself agreeing with much of what richardcourtney has to say and I always find his comments of interest, and therefore always look out for his appearance on a thread. But I agree with you that we should not classify all disenting commentators as trolls, and I for one like to see all sides of the debate.
There are some commentators who I consider are properly classified as trolls, but even so, I like to read what they say and would not support a policy that bars their appearance..
We are all adults of independent mind and we should be free to make up our own minds as to the quality, relevance and materialiy of any comment, and we should embrace debate, not seek to shut it down.
The AGW crowd is desperate and will grab at any isolated anomaly in light of the recent warming plateau, which is destroying the rationale for economically destructive and freedom killing green policies.
@ur momisugly Gareth Philips, look for an email in your inbox