Somerset Floods – February Update

By Paul Homewood

I have been waiting to update the situation with regard to the flooding of the Somerset Levels. I had hoped to include the rainfall data for the local station at Yeovilton, but the Met Office still have not issued them yet. I have chased, but they say, understandably, they are too busy at the moment.

However, we can look at the numbers for the region, SW England & S Wales.

image

Let’s just recap the background. The problems started with heavy rainfall in the 2nd week of December, after a much drier than normal November. (The Levels are marked on the map below in red – to the best that my limited artistic talents allow!)

At the local station of Yeovilton, about 20 miles south, Met Office figures show that rainfall in November was 23% lower than normal. Given this, and the dry summer, river levels should have pretty low as December started.

2013_11_Rainfall_Anomaly_1981-2010

During December and January, rainfall over the region amounted to 450mm, which is 165mm above the 1981-2010 average.

At Yeovilton, in December, rainfall was 43mm above normal. Although, as I say, January data is not yet available, rainfall maps don’t suggest that Somerset has been wetter than the rest of the region and indicate between 150mm and 200mm, against a normal of 67mm.

This would imply that December and January’s rainfall combined was probably about 120mm and 170mm above normal. This is all a long way round way of saying that the regional pattern looks pretty representative of Somerset.

January 2014 Rainfall Actual

If we look at 2-month precipitation numbers during autumn and winter in the region, we find that this latest period of December/January has been exceeded on eight occasions since 1910. (There are multiple events in two years, 1929/30 and 2001/01, which means that these eight occasions are spread over five years).

In other words, it is, on average, an event that happens pretty much every decade or so.

The graphs below show the three combinations – Oct/Nov, Nov/Dec and Dec/Jan. These are typically the wettest months of the year. Note that on all three graphs, I have shown the latest Dec/Jan plots in red, for comparison purposes. I would also point out that the year shown on the X-Axis is the “January year”. So, Dec 2013 to January 2014 is shown as 2014. This also applies to October to December – October 2013 to November 2013 is labelled as 2014. (A bit confusing, I know,but it keeps things consistent).

A couple of points stand out:

  • 1929/30 stands well above the rest, and on all three graphs. More on this later.
  • There is no evidence that recent years have been unusually wet, compared to earlier decades.

image

image

image

Comparisons with 1929/30

It already looks as if February will end up being another very wet month in the South West, so we may very well find that the 3-month total, for Dec-Feb, exceeds most other years since 1910.

Whatever the outcome, though, it does not look likely that the latest Dec-Feb figures will come any where close to the Nov-Jan period in 1929/30. If current trends remain, my guess would be for another 200mm this month, which would leave a total for the three months of about 650mm. This is well below the 812mm recorded from Nov 1929 to Jan 1930.

It would also come in lower than Oct – Dec 2000.

image

Summing up

So what should we learn from all of this?

1) While it has been an exceptionally wet winter in the South West of England, it is far too early to be talking about it being unprecedented, or to be looking for links to “climate change”.

2) As the graph below shows, precipitation during the “six winter months” has actually been at historically normal levels in recent years, and the trend looks to be a declining one. If nothing else, this rather makes a nonsense of the theory that global warming is leading to wetter winters.

image

3) Whilst the continuing wet weather is prolonging the agony for the Levels, the situation in December and January was not an unusual one. I will leave others to judge what effect the lack of dredging and other maintenance work has had on the floods.

4) If any year was “unprecedented”, it was 1929/30. (And as I have shown previously, the wet winter of that year affected the whole country.) I find it incredible that the Met Office have not carried out a detailed analysis of that winter, and indeed some of the other wet years, to see what they have in common with this winter.

There is little doubt that scientists such as HH Lamb would have done precisely that. Instead, we see a desperate attempt to find a link to “climate change”.

Surely, to do science properly, you should first look for natural causes for events such as these. And to do that, you have to learn from the past. Only then can we hope to understand the present and the future.

5) We have been bombarded with claims of record rainfall months, and forecasts of record winters. Meanwhile, David Cameron describes the Somerset floods as “biblical”. Am I the only one that cannot remember being told that 1929/30, or other years, were much wetter?

At least the media have an excuse – they are trying to sell newspapers. The Met Office have no excuse at all.

We deserve better.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

94 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Espen
February 14, 2014 12:11 am

So what is the “wettest winter in 250 years” mantra we hear on the news every day based on?

mickgreenhough
February 14, 2014 12:19 am

The flooding was a consequence of an EU directive that ‘non human’ environments must be given precedence over people. It is part of a much larger aim of the EU namely the EU Coudenhove Kalergi Plan see http://www.theeuroprobe.org 2013 – 043.
Mick G

February 14, 2014 12:42 am

Good post Paul, the UKMO have a ‘News’ blog http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/uks-exceptional-weather-in-context/ that rapidly responds to News articles that are conflicting to ‘known’ science but it seems that selective data can be used to back or oppose a message.
‘Looking at the England and Wales Precipitation series, which dates back to 1766, it has been the wettest December to January since 1876/1877 and the 2nd wettest overall in the series.’
No wonder that the general public get confused.

Ljh
February 14, 2014 12:43 am

I was househunting in Somerset in the very wet autumn of 2000. The neglect of drainage by the Environmental Agency had not yet reached its present critical point so that all roads were navigable, no villages were flooded and wet fields were not lakes. Somerset’s problems are entirely due to lack of maintenance of the centuries old drainage system.

February 14, 2014 12:48 am

Espen says at February 14, 2014 at 12:11 am

So what is the “wettest winter in 250 years” mantra we hear on the news every day based on?

Good question. Is it down to rainfall inland (away from the levels) that is flowing down the River Parrett?

ren
February 14, 2014 12:56 am

This does not change the fact that now a few days in February will be dangerous.
http://oi60.tinypic.com/f4mkn4.jpg

February 14, 2014 1:19 am

Dr Marohasy’s new peer reviewed paper is out covering forecasts of rainfall inaccuracies: http://pindanpost.com/2014/02/14/biblical-failure-of-forecasting/

maccassar
February 14, 2014 1:22 am

Unprecedented is a powerful word. A word that has lots of implications. Unfortunately the media use it at every chance they get and completely dilutes its meaning. It is also nearly impossible to prove but that does not keep the warmists and their acolytes in the MSM from using it in their propaganda wars.

GeeJam
February 14, 2014 1:25 am

Thanks Paul Homewood for this excellent and sympathic update. From the UK political spectrum, so far we only appear to have Lord Nigel Lawson and UKIP’s Nigel Farage on our side – both stressing that the current flooding has absolutely nothing whatsover to do with warming or climate change. Perhaps you could post your helpful update to them. Meanwhile, every other politician (especially Labour’s Ed Milliband) are convinced CAGW/CC is to blame.

February 14, 2014 1:36 am

GeeJam says at February 14, 2014 at 1:25 am

Meanwhile, every other politician (especially Labour’s Ed Milliband) are convinced CAGW/CC is to blame.

Every other politician is convinced that taking the blalme off climate change at this moment is detrimental to their career.
After all, if it isn’t cliamte change people might ask the politician “Why didn’t you do something about this?”.

SandyInLimousin
February 14, 2014 1:40 am

I see David Cameron is asking the EU for financial assistance (BFMTV France). He’ll have to hope that the EU doesn’t do what insurance companies do and take off a percentage of the pay out if you haven’t maintained the property to a reasonable level. If they do he’ll be lucky to get 10%.

SuffolkBoy
February 14, 2014 1:41 am

I provisionally make Yeovilton Somerset rainfall in January 2014 to be 164mm. (I have lost track of the source: I think it was http://www.weatheronline.co.uk) . At twice the monthly average for Jan the highest “on record” since 1965 but given the usual month-on-month variablity not exactly way down the tail of the distribution: perhaps 3-sigma by eye-ball. http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=3ebd2&s=8#.Uv3gBM4oPGA

SandyInLimousin
February 14, 2014 1:47 am

M Courtney
Hopefully more perceptive members of the press will ask the question, if you’ve known about climate change doing this for 20 years you’ve had time to prepare.
I think that if that happens then politicians and the MO will be caught on a Knight Fork.

Greg Goodman
February 14, 2014 1:50 am

A very informative article Paul. It definitely helps put things in perspective.
One, possibly important, criticism is the adoption of the word “normal” for the average over some arbitrary period.
“This would imply that December and January’s rainfall combined was probably about 120mm and 170mm above normal.”
There is nothing “normal” about the period 1981-2010. In a longer perspective it may have been drier that “normal”. There is no such thing as normal in a constantly changing system like climate and to use such a term (whatever period is taken) just implies that anything different to that arbitrary reference value is , by definition, ABNORMAL.
This just plays to current propaganda that presents every notable meteorological event as “extreme weather”.
If you need shorthand term to refer to “then average of the period 1981-2010” , I would suggest “recent average” rather than “normal”.
Well researched article. Thanks for the effort.

cd
February 14, 2014 1:55 am

Paul
As you state the rainfall is not – at least for the available records – unprecedented. We get periods like this. I think what is unprecedented is the flooding, which I’m sure as you know is a function of land use as well as weather (as does any school kid). In the case of the Levels Michael Portillo, a politician summed it up pretty well. On the subject of draining he said (paraphrasing):
…it is hardly surprising that a region that is only farmable and habitable because of human intervention, becomes unmanageable when that human interaction stops.

cd
February 14, 2014 1:59 am

SandyInLimousin
I think what should be welcomed is that people are now talking about adaptation rather than emission targets anymore. At least, even when the shrill predictions don’t happen, we’ll have constructed defences that serve a purpose.

ren
February 14, 2014 2:01 am

maccassar says:
Unprecedented is a powerful word. A word that has lots of implications. Unfortunately the media use it at every chance they get and completely dilutes its meaning. It is also nearly impossible to prove but that does not keep the warmists and their acolytes in the MSM from using it in their propaganda wars.
Is sufficient tell the truth. The reason is the shift of the polar vortex as a result of solar activity in the zone of the ozone.
Jetsream is formed on edge of the polar vortex, which is strongest in the of 20 -25 km in winter.

Rich
February 14, 2014 2:01 am
John Moore
February 14, 2014 2:04 am

Writing from SW England — I am intrigued by the rainfall figures of 1930 which was the year when there was a similar breach of the sea wall carrying the railway line at Dawlish in South Devon. This is not reported in our news reports except when I have published it on newspaper websites. That stretch of railway connects the city of Plymouth, the seaside town of Torquay and the county of Cornwall with the rest of England. In 1930 there were two other lines which have since been lifted.

SandyInLimousin
February 14, 2014 2:05 am

cd
I agree, although for the UK this will have to cover everything from floods to drought with exceptional cold and heat thrown in. For the UK this is a no change situation as we’ve seen them all in the past. Unfortunately in normal politicians regard this sort of work as not winning enough votes.

Sean OConnor
February 14, 2014 2:07 am

On the “Precipitation 2-month totals graph Dec & Jan” is the final red bar drawn slightly too far to the right? It looks like a whole bar is missed out for the year before the way it is. I’d love to use this image to show my friends (who have convinced themselves the floods are all proof of climate change) but the way the graph looks at the moment makes it look a bit like the graph might be hiding something, or the red bar has been drawn on by hand.

Pete Smith
February 14, 2014 2:12 am

Interesting URL I came across yesterday.
I can’t remember where I got it from, but I found it interesting.
http://insidetheenvironmentagency.co.uk/index.php?controller=post&action=view&id_post=55
“I can give you the evidence you need showing senior managers in the South West conspiring with Labour MPs to discredit this government over the past two to three years, which I believe have made the floods far worse than they otherwise would have been. The MPs involved are: xxxxx (edited out for legal reasons – Labour MPs based in South West towns and cities)”
Our Environment Agency is a huge monolithic organisation chock-full of left wingers who have spent more on PR than they have on dredging rivers.
The guys on the ground/in the field are working their backsides off while the managers sit in their comfy offices, ticking boxes.
From memory, our EA is as big as the EA equivalents in most of the rest of Europe combined, and is only 2nd to the US EPA, despite the US being 80x larger than the UK with 5x the population.

euanmearns
February 14, 2014 2:21 am

Huge snow fall in Scottish mountains attributed by Met office to global warming 🙂
Ski Scotland: another global warming paradox

ren
February 14, 2014 2:24 am

Lock polar vortex over eastern Siberia began in October as a result of temperature anomalies in the zone ozone and continues today. It is the cause of the severe winter in the U.S. and rainy, but warm in Europe.

George Lawson
February 14, 2014 2:25 am

It’s clear that all the stats. show that the current run of wet and windy weather is not ‘unprecedented’ as the gloom mongers from prime ministers to royal princes and the once reliable Met. Office try to imply.

1 2 3 4
Verified by MonsterInsights