U.S. surface temperatures drop to the lowest in over 30 years during February

If you thought he cold last month was “unprecedented” and ” worse than we thought” you’d be right. Last month’s polar outbreaks in the United States caused record subzero temperatures, power outages for millions of homeowners in Texas when wind energy failed,  and more than two dozen deaths.

It also the coldest Februarys in over three decades. Two different metrics of temperature measurement from NOAA agree in demonstrating that we really could have used some “global warming” but there was none to be had.

The event was mainly due to the “Polar vortex”, which  blasted the coldest air across central U.S. from the polar region in more than 30 years. At the same time, Alaska experienced its coldest February since 1999. The main driver for the weather across the contiguous U.S. during February was a strongly negative Arctic Oscillation (AO) during the first half of the month. This may have been the result of a sudden stratospheric warming event that occurred in January. The negative AO pattern favors a cold air outbreak over the central U.S., often referred to as the “polar vortex”.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officially reported that during February, the average contiguous U.S. temperature was 30.6°F, 3.2°F below the 20th-century average. This ranked as the 19th-coldest February in the 127-year period of record and was the coldest February since 1989.

Based on preliminary data, 62 all-time daily cold minimum temperature records were broken from February 11-16 and 69 all-time daily cold maximum temperature records on February 15-16.

All time daily minimum temperature records

Several locations across central Texas, including Austin and Waco, broke records for the longest freezing streak with temperatures below freezing between six and nine consecutive days from February 10-19.

At the same time, another metric, the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) reported even colder results than the data from the highly compromised weather station network operated by NOAA. While the USCRN uses state of the art measurement systems and is far removed from Urban Heat Island (UHI) it is seldom used in press releases by NOAA. 

The USCRN shows a -4.32°F negative deviation in the average US temp anomaly for Feb, 2021 which is -1.12°F colder than NOAA’s problematic and biased surface temperature network. A quick scan of the data shows this to be the highest magnitude monthly temperature drop since the start of the USCRN network in 2005.

While this coldest February on record for over 30 years does not disprove the claim of “man-made global warming,” it does show that the warming is so minor that an area the size of the ENTIRE United States can still set a “coldest ever” record for a time period for as long as a full month. 

This event is a strong indicator that nature, not man-made emissions, is still the deciding factor in temperature.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3tlll9j

March 13, 2021 at 10:01AM

Record Breaking Rain Claims Don’t Stand Up To Scrutiny

Reposted from NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

MARCH 12, 2021

By Paul Homewood

Yet another attempt to “prove” that rainfall is becoming more extreme in the UK:

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asl.1033

This is the key graph:

United Kingdom’s wettest day of the year. (a) Timeseries of UK mean Rx01 anomalies relative to 1961–1990 from observational data. The observed anomalies in 2020 and 1986 are marked by a cross

The first thing to note is that they are looking at the UK as a whole. We know that Scotland has become considerably wetter in recent years, but what about the rest of the country?

If we analyse the England & Wales Precipitation Series, we actually get a totally different picture:

https://climexp.knmi.nl/getindices.cgi?WMO=UKMOData/HadEWP_daily_qc&STATION=England-Wales&TYPE=p&id=someone@somewhere&NPERYEAR=366

Note that 3rd October 2020 was a long way from being the record claimed for the UK. (There are concerns with the HADUK dataset, as it now includes many high altitude sites not previously available, which will inevitably bias the results to wetter. The England & Wales dataset, though based on fewer stations, has greater consistency).

Although there is a tiny trend of 0.03C pa, ie 3mm per century, this is well within standard margins of error. The R2 is only 0.024, which is regarded as a very low correlation statistically.

Clearly the trend line is heavily skewed by two outliers in 1986 and 2000, neither of which can be construed as “current climate”.

It is also apparent from the data that there was step change around 1960. Consequently when we begin the series in 1960, there is actually a declining trend. Interestingly, the UK chart also shows this decline, once the 2020 outlier is excluded.

Whatever the reason for that step change, it clearly has no bearing whatsoever on what is happening now, or might in future.

What we can safely say is that there has been nothing unusual at all in the last two decades, which is surely the time when global warming should be impacting heavier rainfall, if the theory is correct. Indeed, it is the 1960s which stand out as being most affected, with four years, 1960, 1967, 1968 and 1969 each seeing daily rainfall totals more then anything seen since 2000.

It may be that Scotland is seeing more extreme rainfall, which the KNMI data seems to suggest:

https://climexp.knmi.nl/getindices.cgi?WMO=UKMOData/HadSP_daily_qc&STATION=Scotland&TYPE=p&id=someone@somewhere&NPERYEAR=366

However, the fact that England & Wales are not seeing the same increases totally discredits the theory that a warmer atmosphere is driving heavier rain. Instead we need to look elsewhere for the factors behind Scotland’s weather.

So often in climate science, we come across shoddy studies like this one, where it is evident that the authors have decided on the conclusions at the outset, and then manipulate the data until it agrees.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/38BQzky

March 13, 2021 at 08:50AM

Climate change: Former UN vice chair calls on UK to review policies on burning wood for energy

As climate obsessives in the UK demand the cancellation of plans for a coal mine in Cumbria, the spotlight falls once more on the far more relevant issue of industrial-scale biomass burning, which produces more ’emissions’ of carbon dioxide than coal but rakes in fortunes in subsidies. The world must wait decades for new trees to grow enough to fully replace the ones burnt. The illogicality of it all won’t go away.
– – –
A former vice chairman of the United Nations’ climate advisory body has called on the British government to review its policies surrounding the burning of wood for energy, reports Sky News.

Jean Pascal van Ypersele, Professor of Environmental Sciences at Université Catholique de Louvain in Belgium, has told Sky News he believes subsidies given to the industry by the UK government are “contradictory” to the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement – signed by countries in 2015 to try to limit global warming.

The Department of Business, Energy and Industrial strategy says subsidies are only given to biomass which complies with strict sustainability criteria and biomass is a “valuable” part of the National Grid.

Trees are a natural way to tackle climate change [Talkshop comment – or so the theory goes] and soak up carbon.

But Mr van Ypersele, who was vice chairman of the IPCC – the body which assesses science on climate change – says burning wood pellets creates a ‘carbon debt’ and accounting rules don’t properly take into consideration the time it takes for replacement trees to grow back.

He said: “We release the CO2 now hoping that future woods will absorb the CO2 in the future. But that’s a very strong assumption. Burning wood doesn’t make much sense if you want to reduce CO2 emissions.”

The UK is the world’s biggest importer of wood pellets. In the move away from coal over recent years there has been a switch towards burning biomass to generate power.

Continued here.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/3qLRLIh

March 13, 2021 at 07:57AM

“Thanks To Global Warming”

Five years ago, USA Today and the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado said that Arctic sea ice was at a record winter low and temperatures in the Arctic were 15F (9C) above normal. And they announced that it was due to global warming.

Arctic sea ice sets wintertime record low thanks to global warming

Five years later, Arctic sea ice is normal, and Antarctic sea ice is near a record high for the date.

Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis

One hundred years ago, Arctic ocean temperatures were 23 degrees above normal, and the ocean around Svalbard never froze over.

03 Dec 1922, Page 63 – The Washington Times at Newspapers.com

And 6,000 years ago, the Arctic might have been ice-free.

Less Ice In Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 Years Ago — ScienceDaily

via Real Climate Science

Posted on March 13, 2021 by tonyheller

https://ift.tt/3bIBVd0

March 13, 2021 at 07:42AM

BBC & Greens celebrate while children go hungry

Greens scent victory in campaign to kill off coal mine jobs while nearly a quarter of children in the affected communities live below the breadline.

We have been following the saga of the proposed Cumbria coal mine near Whitehaven which the BBC’s Roger Harrabin and his green cronies have been fighting hard to stop. Unfortunately it now seems likely that they will succeed in their efforts.

The Sun reports: Robert Jenrick [Housing Secretary] has bowed to pressure in long-running row over a new coal mine in Cumbria – ordering a fresh inquiry into whether it can go ahead.

Cumbria County Council was due to review the decision to open the first new coal mine in Britain for decades, after approving it twice.

‘After an outcry from green campaigners, ministers have u-turned and it will now be subject to a local public inquiry.

But a furious row erupted in Westminster after Tory MPs complained they would miss out on massive investment in their local area

‘An independent head of planning will make the final call on whether it can go ahead, taking the decision out of local chiefs’ hands.’

Naturally Harrabin and others will be delighted. The Sun again: ‘Labour’s shadow business secretary, Ed Miliband, welcomed the news. He said: “The truth is that this mine is terrible for our fight against climate change, won’t help our steel industry and won’t create secure jobs. The Government must now block the mine and focus instead on real solutions to secure the long-term future of UK steel – and create low-carbon jobs in Cumbria and across the country with a proper green stimulus.”

‘Nearby MP Tim Farron added: “It’s fantastic news that the Government have at long last finally woken up to the fact that this mine would be an almighty backwards step in our fight against climate change. In the year that Britain hosts COP26, it is blindingly obvious that we won’t be taken seriously on the world stage with this coal mine hanging round our neck. I hope this public inquiry leads to these plans finally being axed”.’

I just hope they can look at themselves in the mirror, because there are many who will suffer as a result of their actions. As the Whitehaven News has reported: ‘Almost a quarter of children in Copeland [the Whitehaven local authority area] are living in poverty, according to a shock report.

‘Figures from End Child Poverty show that after housing costs more than 3,000 children – 23.12 per cent – are living below the breadline.

‘And the Citizens’ Advice Bureau Copeland has revealed that some families face a stark choice between heating and lighting their homes, and feeding their children.’

Full post

The post BBC & Greens celebrate while children go hungry appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum.

via The Global Warming Policy Forum

https://ift.tt/3lgreSq

March 13, 2021 at 06:36AM