From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
Spring this year was by far the sunniest on record in the UK. Given that last year was one of the least sunniest, we need to accept that natural variability plays the major role in all of this,
But question marks remain about the longer term trends, which are clearly increasing.
Which brings us to the question of aerosols and air pollution.
There is absolutely no question that aerosols reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the surface or that they act as cloud condensation nuclei. This is what the Met Office say:
However, human activities are also responsible for increasing the atmospheric concentrations of microscopic particles, such as sulphate from industrial sulphur dioxide emissions; smoke from burning of agricultural waste, and pollution particles from traffic emissions.
These atmospheric particles scatter and absorb sunlight and terrestrial radiation and also act as cloud condensation nuclei and modify the microphysical and optical properties of clouds.
The net effect of the impacts on radiation and cloud properties is to induce a net cooling of the climate system which acts to oppose the warming due to increases in greenhouse gases.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/earth-system-science/aerosols
And NASA established that reduced air pollution during the pandemic caused measurable warming in some areas:
The COVID-19 pandemic showed what can happen if the humans reduce their aerosol pollution. Fossil-fueled air travel, driving, electricity use, and industrial activity all decreased sharply in the spring of 2020. This led to cleaner, clearer air, which caused a slight warming — up to 0.2 to 0.5° F (0.1 to 0.3° C) — in some places.
So how much of that extra sunlight we have been experiencing in the UK since the 1970s is the result of cleaner air?
The Met Office produced the graph below, which shows just how remarkable the decline in pollution has been.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/blog/2024/how-is-uk-air-quality-landscape-changing
While cities like Birmingham were obviously badly affected by dirty air in the past, this pollution was inevitably spread more widely across the country by winds. And in the last few years we have had reduced sulphur emissions from shipping to add to the mix.
And the Met Office’s State of the UK Climate Report last year admitted that cleaner air was a factor in increased sunshine:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/about/state-of-climate
A 2006 study by the Met Office found a strong correlation between sunshine and temperatures in spring, summer and autumn:
Which all begs the question – what impact has cleaner air had on the rise in UK temperatures since the 1960s?
And why is the Met Office so reticent to mention it?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
_____________________________________________________________________________
There seems to be several aspects of “The Climate Crisis” that “Climate Science” and the so called and newly self dubbed “Legacy Press” gloss over, ignore, pencil whip, dry lab, & gun deck or just plain lie about. Such as GISTEMP records back to January 1880, tide gauge data, Satellite sea level data, effects of methane, effects of glacier gains and loss, percentage of ice cap gains & loss, up to date polar bear population stats, effects of zealous forest management & forest fires, and finally and for God’s sake are they ever going to step up to the plate and mention all the positive aspects of a warmer greener world courtesy of ever increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide?
(/rant)
In the first instance, I take whatever the MO has to say with a very, very large grain of salt.
There is no disputing how much things have changed for the better since the 1960s and the clean air acts that followed on the tail of the pea-souper fogs that plagued London in the previous decade.
Then later in the 1980s leaded petrol [**, *** and ****] was phased out. Engines have become cleaner burning, they have catalytic converters and are far more efficient.
But none of this has happened in Guardianland
“Air pollution in the UK is costing more than £500m a week in ill health, NHS care and productivity losses, with 99% of the population breathing in “toxic air”, doctors have said.”
…
“Air pollution in the UK now kills 30,000 people and costs £27bn a year, according to the research, which also said there was no safe level of air pollutants. “
…
“air pollution had become a public health emergency and was “the biggest environmental threat to human health”.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/19/uk-toxic-air-killing-people-doctors-warn
Nonsense I say.
The great smog of 1952
“Though the fog lasted five days, finally lifting on December 9, its severity was not fully appreciated until the registrar general published the number of fatalities a few weeks later, which amounted to about 4,000. The effects of the smog were long-lasting, however, and present-day estimates rank the number of deaths to have been about 12,000.’
https://www.britannica.com/event/Great-Smog-of-London
The population in London at the time was ~8.5 million. Were they a tougher breed?
My violin-playing friend, I have written about the Great Smog, here: https://libertarianism.uk/2024/04/07/the-back-story-behind-anti-car-policies-in-the-uk-part-one-air-pollution-episodes/.
It must be something else about London then because the Grauniad has gone down hill ever since it moved from Manchester to London. 🙂
Not heating their homes with open coal fires had a lot to do with it.
Indeed that was the main cause. Sheffield used to have fog frequently forming in the hills and flowing into the city in the evenings. A survey showed that most of the pollution in the city centre was due to houses burning coal (not from the steel industry as was assumed). Since the prevailing winds came from the SW the policy was to replace the domestic coal burning with ‘clean’ heating systems (clean coal and gas),starting from the SW of the city. It worked extremely well and the pollution in the city was dramatically reduced and the fogs stopped rolling in during the evenings.
He tilts at the windmill yet again…
Begs the question
does NOT mean the same thing as
Raises the question
‘Begs the question’ is the logical fallacy of petitio principii (assuming the premise).
To beg the question is to make an argument that assumes the truth of the hypothesis in question without providing any other evidence of it being true.
In the specific case, if Paul Homewood had been in fact begging the question, he would have said something like:
Cleaner air raised temperatures in the UK since the 1960s. This can be seen by the higher temperatures since air pollution has been abated.
What he meant to say was:
Colloquially, he said what he meant.
Colloquial ain’t what it used to be.
But I did say that I was tilting at windmills again, didn’t I? I’m well aware that given the state of public education, idiocracy prevails.
“To beg the question is to make an argument that assumes the truth of the hypothesis in question without providing any other evidence of it being true.”
That would apply to the entire body of today’s Alarmist Climate Science. It is made up entirely of speculation, assumptions, and unsubstantiated assertions. They operate on a False Premise. It’s Pseudoscience.
The same amount of warming and the same high temperatures as today also took place during the period from the 1910’s to the 1940’s, under very different atmospheric conditions: more SO2, according to that chart above.
So the Early Twentieth Century Warming took place during a period of high SO2 content, and the current, similar warming is taking place during a period of lower SO2 content, so where’s the connection? More or less SO2 seems to make no difference to the temperatures over decades.
I think it’s time for Tmax:
And a couple of more to show the high heat of the Early Twentieth Century is Global:
Tom Abbott:
Take a look at the chart again.
I do not see more SO2 between 1910 and and the 1940’s, as you state
The rise in sunshine in the UK is quite impressive, but it has been most noticeable during Spring. I’m wondering how that fits in with the idea that it is mainly caused by cleaner air.
Yes, very impressive indeed. I’ve been to the UK only 4 times and once, I saw sunshine.
See my post above…
the 60s and 70s and into the 80s were cold. People complained about it, but they didn’t blame the weather gods. They went on holiday abroad. And then it got warmer and a new class of angst merchant arrived.
Hello there.
The rise in sunshine amounts during the Spring, is in my view strongly linked to a change in weather patterning over recent years.
Where the extending of the Azores highs over towards Europe as often happens during the Summer, has over recent years been happening earlier in the year.
Which has allowed a increase in fine summer like weather cropping up during the Spring. Causing both a increase in sunshine amounts and temperatures during the Spring. But this natural trend has been having a greater impact on the temperature record then really is the case. Due to the switch over to the electronic recording of temperatures over the last 40 years. Where the high sensitivity of these thermometers and there more frequent temperature readings. Has caused them to overstate daytime temperatures during sunny weather, due to having the sunshine warming up the Stevenson screen during these weather conditions.
Spring 2024/2025 extremes of dull/sunshine, yet the same mean temperature 10.7C in the CET. Ain’t the weather statistics fascinating!
Indeed, it’s a remarkable coincidence. Not surprisingly the maximum and minum temperatures were very different.
TMin
2024: 6.9
2025: 5.3
TMax
2024: 14.4
2025: 16.0
I once rolled Yahtzee back to back.
The banning of atmospheric nuke bomb tests probably helped as well. I remember back around 1960, living in Thurso, Scotland you would see vivid sunsets every time the Russians set off an atmospheric nuke bomb test. Roughly 250 atmospheric bomb tests were carried out around the world in the 1950’s and 60’s, until they stopped in 1963.
“A 2006 study by the Met Office found a strong correlation between sunshine and temperatures in spring, summer and autumn:”
I’m surprised they show a strong correlation in autumn. My own analysis for the UK as a whole shows only a week correlation in autumn and the strongest in summer.
So, cleaning the atmosphere has a deleterious effect on temperatures. Hello, Unintended, meet Consequences. I think y’all are going to get along famously!
How exactly is slightly warmer slightly more frequent sunshine in soggy old England deleterious?
I see it as great news, myself. Environistas, on the gripping hand, see it as bad news. They got exactly what they have been claiming they wanted and now they are crying about it. Can’t get much more disconnected from reality than that, yet they work hard everyday to become further disconnected.
Strangely the current highest June temperature for the UK is 35.6C set in Camden, London, on June 28th 1957 and Southampton on June 29th1976.
The warm phase of the AMO increases the Autumn, Winter and Spring sunshine hours.
Several England maximum daily temperatures have been broken during very high levels of low altitude air pollution, e.g. Easter 2011, late February 2019. July 1783 was one of the warmest in record, when the UK was heavily engulfed in dust and fumes from the Laki eruption in Iceland.
“Which all begs the question”
Raises the question.
Jeff, thank you so much.
I logged in to make exactly the same point then scrolled down to find the comment link and there was your comment, spot on.
I don’t know what smart people cannot seem to learn that “begs the question” does not mean what they think it means. (Apologies to Inigo Montoya)
“Begs the question” is often used with good effect during debates in the House of Lords, and The House of Commons. In rebuttal, one side points out the other side did not make a conclusive argument, but instead their argument assumed the truth of the conclusion. Copilot Search uses the example, “we should trust him because he is trustworthy.”
“Raising the question” is the phrase that is so often meant. It means further inquiry or consideration is needed.
Next please take on “The Lion’s Share.”
I get it wrong sometimes, and I own that when I do. But some folks double down, like using “could care less” when they mean “couldn’t care less”. Some even defend their position by saying “it’s an evolving language”.
I’ve been known to hire a hall a time or two on “could care less.” That one has bothered me for decades. 0)
And don’t get me started on “literally”.
If those folks want revenge, they can point out I am not all that accurate about
where the period goes when using quotes or parenthesis. I have read the rule
many times, but I guess I just don’t like it.
Keep up the good work.
Please don’t forget “moving forward” with “actually”.
I don’t like it either. The punctuation goes outside the quotes or parens as far as I’m concerned, unless it’s part of the quote.
From the article:”These atmospheric particles scatter and absorb sunlight and terrestrial radiation…”.
So the aerosols act like gigantic CO2 molecules absorbing radiation and cooling the planet.
How were the PM 2.5 measurements obtained for the 19th and early-20th centuries?
Models is the obvious answer.
I just checked the hottest day ever recorded in France. It turns out it was exactly six years ago today. 28 june 2019, they recorded an astounding 45.9 deg C at small town in southern France between Montpellier and Nimes , called Gallargues-le-Montueux. It was a low quality site so the dispatched some Meteo France officials to check the installation. It was noted down in site quality because a small irrigation canal ran past a few meters to the south. Having inspected the location and noted the wind was blowing from the NE that day they validated the reading as the official national record for France, to much fanfare in the press. (It was even covered here at the time.)
What our highly professional and objective meteorological experts failed to notice was the massive, tarmac truck park and several thousand sqr metres of metal roofed warehouse situated to the …. NE, not so far away.
They even took the care to note that since the only problem noted on the site’s QA paper was the canal, and that was not a problem that day, it must be a valid reading. They clearly KNEW they were lying by omission and carefully crafted their excuse for being blind in one eye.
Dr Bjorn Samset has published papers on air pollution/aerosols and temperatures for more than a decade. In a nutshell, cleaner air = higher temperatures.