Some of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society are losing out on millions of pounds worth of cold weather payments in England and Wales due to official reliance on data from corrupted Met Office temperature measuring stations. In 2022-23, cold weather payments of £130 million were made to around five million households, but it’s possible that the annual figures would be much higher if more accurate local temperatures measurements had been used.
Cold weather payments are automatically paid to those on a number of means-tested benefits and triggered by seven days of average temperatures below 0oC. (A different system is used in Scotland.) Temperature measurements are taken from 63 Met Office stations in England and Wales but over half of these sites have internationally recognised ‘uncertainties’ of between 2°C and 5°C. Payments in the rural areas around Sheffield depend on readings from a City-based site where the station is rated Class 5 by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) with a 5°C margin of error. The site, which is by the A57, is blanketed with urban heat corruption and will record much higher temperatures than those found in the surrounding Peak District.
Estimates of urban heat corruption vary, with the EU weather service Copernicus suggesting it can lead to temperature measurements “up to 10oC higher than in rural areas”. A recent science paper written by 37 scientists from 18 countries found that urban heat accounted for around 40% of the recorded warming since 1850. In startling and detailed research, they found that a rural/urban blend of temperatures showed a long-term warming trend of 0.89°C per century, while a rural-only collection produced a rise of just 0.55°C per century.
The WMO, in which the Met Office plays a significant role, rates temperature stations in five classes. Classes 1 and 2 are judged pristine and come with no uncertainties. Class 3 has a +/- margin of error of 1°C, while junk class 4 has +/- 2°C and super junk class 5 is set at +/- 5°C. As Paul Homewood points out, these negative and positive errors don’t tend to cancel each other out, as they do in other fields due to their random nature. “With temperature recording,” he says, “poor siting nearly always adds to underlying temperatures.”
The Met Office scores very badly on the rating front, with the Daily Sceptic discovering through a recent freedom of information request that nearly eight out of 10 of its stations are in classes 4 and 5. In addition, the Met Office runs its own internal classification. But this seems more forgiving of nearby heat corruptions, with only 27 out of 380 sites said to be “unsatisfactory”.
Cold weather payments, not to be confused with the winter fuel allowance paid to pensioners which the new Labour government has done away with, give £25 for a period of cold weather to those deemed financially or physically vulnerable. Extra consideration is given to families with children under five. During 2022-23, a number of areas made three payments from November to March. But luck of the draw seems to play a part in these disbursements. Four of the weather stations used to record low temperatures across England and Wales are so bad that even the Met Office thinks they’re ‘unsatisfactory’. These include Hawarden Airport, home of Wales’s national temperature ‘record’, Little Rissington, Redesdale and Pembrey Sands.
The payment system works by allocating postcodes from the surrounding areas to specific sites. Heathrow Airport has the largest number of postcodes attached and seems to extend over most of London. Heathrow is a Class 3 site with 1°C uncertainty, but this is regarded as generous by many since it is one of the busiest airports in the world. Not a great deal of frost is likely to settle on most nights of the year with temperatures boosted by the release of warmth collected during the day by miles of concrete and tarmac. In common with most cities, night time temperatures at airports are likely to be higher than surrounding uncorrupted areas. Copernicus notes, for instance, that cities such as London and Paris, “regularly” record temperatures of around 4°C higher than rural surroundings.
It is likely, indeed almost certain, that temperature recordings in cities and airports will reduce the number of seven day 0°C average temperatures periods over wider areas. If so, many of the poorest and most vulnerable in rural locations are missing out on this financial help.
We are obliged to citizen journalist Ray Sanders for drawing our attention to this wholly avoidable scandal. Commenting on the high number of triggering sites found in areas known to be affected by urban heat, he noted: “The Met Office must know of this issue, they surely cannot be that naïve or just maybe they never gave it a thought – just drew some lines on a map. Whatever, the responsibility must lie with them as they are supposed to be the experts in the field and the DWP [Department of Work and Pensions] simply refers to them for advice.”
As we have seen in many past articles, the Met Office is at the forefront of promoting the Net Zero fantasy. But it might be argued that the acquisition of supercomputers and the use of climate modelling have been at the expense of investment in a robust network of stations that can provide an accurate measurement of the natural air temperature. The basics – the day job one might say – have not been given the care they require. The network is littered with unsuitable sites such as airports, solar farms, car parks and electricity sub-stations. Even worse, little thought seems to have been taken when it comes to the placements of new sites, which are often in class 4 and 5 locations. Garbage in means garbage out, regardless of how politically convenient it is for narrative-driven mainstream activists. Producing readings that supposedly measure temperatures down to one hundredth of a degree centigrade, as the Met Offices does with this flawed data, is little more than a scientific joke.
To date, the obvious problems surrounding the Met Office’s temperature measuring abilities have been ignored. To discuss the matter risks opening a pandora’s box since it would subject data that backs Net Zero to greater scrutiny. It will be interesting to see if this position holds following suggestions that its figures could be depriving poor and vulnerable members of society from collecting much needed cold weather payments.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“A different system is used in Scotland”.
Yep, we have a Government which says it knows better than Westminster how to run things.
Aye, right.
The Met Office?: “if more accurate local temperatures measurements had been used.”
That’s not a problem for them. They even “invent” stations and values when they deem it as fit.
What could be more accurate than invented data?
Exactly!
If the “data” you invent is challenged, you just bury that set, and invent some more.
Sweet!
Mikey Mann worked this out ages ago.
The so-called greens have a funny habit of freezing certain mammals to death and bragging about it afterward. This is part of the morally dark realities I investigate in Winter Games.
They are basically mis-stating the probable error.
Class 4 should probably be stated as something like -1/+4
Class 5 possibly as -1/+6 or more
ie, they are much more likely to read HIGH than low.
Climate science doesn’t even recognize the existence of measurement uncertainty let alone *asymmetric” uncertainty!
The class definitions are definitions.
One could have a class 5 that in practice has an error band of +1/-5.
It is the classification system that needs to be updated, not the tolerances applied in the existing system.
I would suspect that a very large proportion of surface stations have a large warmer skewed error margin compared to the surrounding countryside.
Mother nature hasn’t got the memo on ‘global heating’ around these parts; it’s 4C, grey and raining. There isn’t any wind to speak of, either. Perfect conditions for non-renewables you might say. And bear in mind that 4C is in urban London…
This government has unofficially declared war on elders and on agriculture, as well as motorists etc etc. Older people are viewed on the left as one of the main groups of people who voted for and caused Brexit to happen – and destroyed their futures. Indeed, older people were labelled as gammon, racist xenophobes, low information, or as b’stards.
“”This politicisation of demography was highlighted and celebrated by the media at every turn in 2017. Commentators argued that the youth were ‘flexing their muscles’ in an act of revenge against the old codgers who support Brexit. The youth vote for Jeremy Corbyn was frequently portrayed as the beginning of a more radical political turn. This sentiment has been constantly reiterated in recent months, when the so-called climate rebellion has often been framed as an integral feature of a generational conflict.””
https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/12/23/why-age-is-the-new-dividing-line-in-politics/
So taking the Winter Fuel Payment was a no-brainer for them, [notionally] redistribute the wealth from the old to the young. Make those boomers pay. Yet they do and have done through raising families and paying those all important taxes for the education, health etc of, er, future generations.
It’s 6th student form politics and the irony is…
“”‘The adults are back in the room’: Treasury minister promises new approach as Starmer’s government starts work. “”
https://abc-independentnews.co.uk/2024/07/08/the-adults-are-back-in-the-room-treasury-minister-promises-new-approach-as-starmers-government-starts-work/
Our Chancellor claimed [on her CV] to have been an economist when she was in the complaints department…
“”The press is piling pressure on Reeves over the LinkedIn CV fiddling Guido exposed last week. Who else to come to Reeves’ rescue than… The Guardian…
The Guardian is in full spin mode over the story. They say Downing Street has defended Reeves “as someone who’s been ‘straight with the public’ in response to claims she embellished her CV.”””
https://order-order.com/2024/11/18/guardian-deployed-on-emergency-reeves-spin-as-linkedin-edits-scandal-deepens/
During the election campaign their manifesto was fully costed...
NEWS TIP
In another election campaign …
https://t.co/l3S2U0Na20
DNC lays off staff , one days notice , no severance pay …
Er, what did the unions say about it? Did they not just blow 1.5 billion dollars on Kamala?
So much for their social justice approach. For the greater good, no doubt.
New documentary coming out tonight by Sky News Australia about The Real Cost of Net Zero- from an Australian perspective. It will be paywalled. This is a preview:
The Real Cost of Net Zero
The Real Cost of Net Zero
The Real Cost of Net Zero
Sorry I messed the link up in my original comment- I rarely post
What’s a degree or two when your continued job and livelihood depends on them? .
For further details here is my original article raising this issue
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/09/17/sheffield-weston-park-dcnn-4061-implications/comment-page-1/
The follow up article to this point demonstrated the ridiculous and dangerous nature of this postcode lottery
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/09/18/copley-dcnn-2122-snow-business/
These are just the tip of an enormous iceberg of misuse/abuse of dodgy data from the UK Met Office. There are lots more!
Story Tip.
For absurd misuse/abuse of Met Office data, this article below includes an example of how the UK Energy department (DESNZ) manipulates temperature data. How do you get the arithmetic mean of 17 numbers? Easy! Take 4 of the numbers and double them…..add the sum total of the remaining 13…..then divide by 21. And what if you don’t actually have some of those 17 numbers anyway? Even easier…..just make them up!
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/10/30/leconfield-wmo-03382-doubled-dubious-data-despite-a-new-solar-farm/comment-page-1/
Story tip. After TTK ran like a rat out of the back door in Llandudno at the weekend from the farmers…
Clarkson and Farage Arrive as Farming Protest Ramps Up
UPDATE: The Met says there are 10,000 people at the protest. With more coming in…
https://order-order.com/2024/11/19/clarkson-and-farage-arrive-as-farming-protest-ramps-up/
Badenoch Pledges to Repeal Farm Tax at Protest
https://order-order.com/2024/11/19/watch-badenoch-pledges-to-repeal-farm-tax-at-protest/
This one isn’t going to go away.
Just so people understand the uncertainties. They are an ADDITIONAL uncertainty that is added to the other uncertainties. Basically, the siting adjustment is an additional item in an uncertainty budget.
Class 1 – none
Class 2 – none
Class 3 (additional estimated uncertainty added by siting up to 1 °C)
Class 4 (additional estimated uncertainty added by siting up to 2 °C)
Class 5 (additional estimated uncertainty added by siting up to 5 °C)
Class 3 to 5 is cut and paste from the WMO document
ANNEX 1.B. SITING CLASSIFICATIONS FOR SURFACE OBSERVING STATIONS ON LAND
As an example, NOAA indicates ASOS stations have an uncertainty of 1.8°F (1.0°C). A class 5 ASOS would have an uncertainty of up to a ±6°C.
One should remember that an uncertainty interval means the “true value” can occur anywhere in the interval.
It is both funny and sad that climate science (UN IPCC etc.) pays no attention to what the WMO (World Meteorological Organization) publishes.
WMO further define class 5 as
“a site where nearby obstacles create an inappropriate environment for a meteorological measurement that is intended to be representative of a wide area”
Almost 78% of Met Office stations are rated class 4 and5, the two lowest classes, and only 6% are in class 1 and rated ‘pristine’.
So 78% of the stations are producing bullshit?
Aw c’mon Dave – it’s good enough for government work mate.
Or a real boon to government work?
This is simplistic beyond reason, every measurement has uncertainty.
Classes 1 and 2 do have an uncertainty value. USCRN has a base uncertainty of ±0.3°C. Class 1 and 2 would have no additional uncertainty due to siting issues
Class 3 would have an uncertainty of ±1.3°C.
Class 4 would have an uncertainty of ±2.3°C.
Class 5 would have an uncertainty of ±5.3°C.
“… £130 million were made to around five million households,”
£26 per household?
That’s the first thing that caught my attention too.
Here we go again – but where is the current government in all this? Clearly without any considered balance of views that relate to fact. Frightening.
“Not a great deal of frost is likely to settle on most nights of the year with temperatures boosted by the release of warmth collected during the day by miles of concrete and tarmac. In common with most cities, night time temperatures at airports are likely to be higher than surrounding uncorrupted areas. Copernicus notes, for instance, that cities such as London and Paris, “regularly” record temperatures of around 4°C higher than rural surroundings.”
All airfields have large areas of grass within their perimeter. I personally worked at Birmingham airport in December of 1991 when the temp fell to -10.6C (no snow cover) … this within a large conurbation.
In winter any possible UHI effect from solar heating is not a factor (obvs), no nearby asphalt/buildings will be a source of heat contamination.
The following are daily minima for 3 airports during the month of Dec 2010 (coldest Dec UK wide for 100 yrs)
Do you note any particularly over warm readings?
Note: strictly it is the average daily temp (<= 0C) that triggers the CW payment …. Was to wearisome to calculate.
Dec 2010
Birmingham a/p Heathrow Gatwick a/p
1 -2 -1 -3
2 -5 -2 -4
3 -8 -5 -11
4 1 -4 2
5 -4 -2 -2
6 -9 -3 -2
7 -12 -2 -2
8 -5 -2 -3
9 -5 -2 -5
10 3 0 0
11 2 5 4
12 -5 0 -3
13 0 -1 -4
14 2 0 -4
15 1 -1 -5
16 -5 -2 -2
17 -5 -5 -10
18 -12 -7 -11
19 -15 -7 -9
20 -15 -9 -11
21 -8 0 0
22 -3 0 0
23 -3 -1 -1
24 -9 -1 -1
25 -12 -4 -6
26 -12 -7 -8
27 1 0 3
28 1 3 2
29 4 7 5
30 4 6 4
31 4 5 4
Here are the averaged minimum temps for the CET stations during the month of Dec 2010 (Radcliffe, Rothamsted, Ross_on_Wye, Squires_Gate, Ringway Pershore_College)
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/data/mintemp_daily_totals.txt
2010-12-01 -3.6
2010-12-02 -3.1
2010-12-03 -7.5
2010-12-04 -6.7
2010-12-05 -2.4
2010-12-06 -5.8
2010-12-07 -6.5
2010-12-08 -6.8
2010-12-09 -4.7
2010-12-10 0.5
2010-12-11 4.5
2010-12-12 -1.8
2010-12-13 -1.5
2010-12-14 -0.7
2010-12-15 -0.2
2010-12-16 1.5
2010-12-17 -4.2
2010-12-18 -4.9
2010-12-19 -10.3
2010-12-20 -12.4
2010-12-21 -10.6
2010-12-22 -4.5
2010-12-23 -5.5
2010-12-24 -5.3
2010-12-25 -9.2
2010-12-26 -9.7
2010-12-27 -6.7
2010-12-28 1.3
2010-12-29 2.1
2010-12-30 4.1
2010-12-31 3.7
Do those minima differ significantly from the a/p stations?
Rhetorical …. They don’t.
Also the MetO can forecast a period of cold weather to initiate the payment scheme. So it does not depend on any observation site’s data alone.
Full details of the scheme …….
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/637630d5e90e0728516749d0/adml4.pdf
As for the myth that UK Temps site are not fit for purpose ….
”WMO Siting Classifications were designed with reference to a wide range of global environments and the higher classes can be difficult to achieve in the more-densely populated and higher latitude UK. For example, the criteria for a Class 1 rating for temperature suits wide open flat areas with little or no human influenced land use and high amounts of continuous sunshine reaching the screen all year around, however, these conditions are relatively rare in the UK. Mid and higher latitude sites will, additionally, receive more shading from low sun angles than some other stations globally, so shading will most commonly result in a higher CIMO classification – most Stevenson Screens in the UK are class 3 or 4 for temperature as a result but continue to produce valid high-quality data. WMO guidance does, in fact, not preclude use of Class 5 temperature sites – the WMO classification simply informs the data user of the geographical scale of a site’s representativity of the surrounding environment – the smaller the siting class, the higher the representativeness of the measurement for a wide area. Indeed, it should be noted that WMO Class 5 is not the same as a Met Office ‘Unsatisfactory’ inspection assessment, which ultimately determines the ongoing use of a site. We use the Met Office grading system to determine record verification because; it has historical relevance, covering a wide range of long-standing criteria at UK observation sites, the equipment, and the exposure in a holistic manner and has clear meaning to what is acceptable or not. It tells us how much confidence we have in the data and permits comparisons. “
Perhaps you should have read more.
If it is inappropriate to use for a wide area, it is also inappropriate to use in an average for a region. Up to ten’s of km2.
You are also ignoring the uncertainty which is the issue.
A ±5.3°C or higher is not appropriate for determining an actual measurement at all. For payments for heating, something at the bottom of the uncertainty level should be used.in other words. If the value for payment is 10°C, then a reading of 15 – 16°C would be appropriate.
Being in the US, observations here may be irrelevant to observations there but something real here, or at used to be heal here, is that winter weather forecast as broadcast on TV and radio so often as to be reasonably labeled “normally” were for the overnight rural temperatures expected to be 10 to 12 degrees F lower than the city temperatures.
I don’t know if that is still common here as I have not watched or listened to a medial news or weather forecast for decades. Perhaps I can find someone who does pay attention to those sources.
Do you work for the Met Office? the UK Met Office is using some truly farcical sites. Try this one which they claim is Class 4.
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/09/01/dyce-wmo-03091-exhaustive-research/
Alternatively try this one
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2024/10/01/st-athan-wmo-03716-taxiway-temperature-taking-but-not-by-the-runway/
Anthony did you actually think to check the CIMO ratings of the current Met Office controlled CET stations? Oxford Radcliffe (a truly crap heavily shaded site) Class 4(s), Pershore College Class 4, Blackpool Squires Gate Airport Class 4, Ross on Wye Class 5, Ringway is not even CIMO assessed. Only Rothamsted at Class 1 is any good. The Met Office is manipulating all credibility out of the CET.
Your lengthy analysis actually demonstrates the entire opposite of what you think it does.
It is clear the MET is not doing its job. It is past time to clean house, by that I mean get rid of the top ten percent of managers. If their replacements continue to use class 3,4 and 5 sites for the record they will all be fired. At the least tax payers should be advised of the locations of all class 4 and 5 sites and the tax payers can dismantle them if they choose to.
Rightfully speaking, dismantling by individuals or groups thereof, is most likely criminal according to established law. It is on the same level as actions by such organizations as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil and would rightfully suffer the same consequences as seems to be finally coming to some of their activities. Certainly there should be some means to seek redress but not outside the law or attempting to have an organized social system of many individuals isn’t going to work.
You are right, the difference is we know the class 4 and 5 stations are not fit for purpose. We don’t destroy these stations we remove them so honest MET officials can place them where they will be classified number one.
“Temperatures today, a warm 21 degrees Celsius with a 90% chance of snow. Beware the ice on the roads, as the electric gritters can’t operate at these temperatures. Next up, how to properly greet the police next time you say something mean about the government on X.” – the BBC next year, probably.
What happened to the related story recently on WUWT that said FOI requests have revealed that 30% of the weather stations in the UK do not even exist? Has it been removed for some reason?