May 2017 Projected Temperature Anomalies from NCEP/NCAR Data

May 2017 Projected Temperature Anomalies from NCEP/NCAR Data

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

Guest Post By Walter Dnes

In continuation of my Temperature Anomaly projections, the following are my May projections, as well as last month’s projections for April, to see how well they fared.

Data Set Projected Actual Delta
HadCRUT4 2017/04 +0.606 (incomplete data) +0.740 +0.134
HadCRUT4 2017/05 +0.770
GISS 2017/04 +0.77 +0.88 +0.11
GISS 2017/05 +0.93
UAHv6 2017/04 +0.044 +0.265 +0.221
UAHv6 2017/05 +0.264
RSS v3.3 2017/04 +0.115 +0.392 +0.277
RSS v3.3 2017/05 +0.402
RSS v4.0 2017/04 +0.329 +0.480 +0.151
RSS v4.0 2017/05 +0.497
NCEI 2017/04 +0.7709 +0.90 +0.13
NCEI 2017/05 +0.92

The Data Sources

The latest data can be obtained from the following sources

The Latest 12 Months

People are already talking about whether or not 2017 will be “the hottest year ever”. The 2016 mean anomaly can be characterized as the “12-month running mean ending in December 2016”. To get an apples-to-apples comparison, May 2016 to April 2017 is used for a 12-month running mean to compare against the year 2016.

The latest 12-month running mean (pseudo-year “9999”, highlighted in blue in the tables below) ranks anywhere from 2nd to 4th, depending on the data set. The May 2017 NCEP/NCAR anomaly is down slightly from May 2016, implying that the 6 May 2017 anomalies will be slightly lower, further cementing the decline of the 12-month running mean. This will make it even harder for 2017 to beat 2016 as the warmest year ever. May marks the 8th consecutive month with NCEP/NCAR global anomaly lower than 12 months ago. However, that could change in June unless the June 2017 value drops below current daily values near the end of May.

The following table ranks the top 10 warmest years for earch surface data set, as well as a pseudo “year 9999” consisting of the latest available 12-month running mean of anomaly data.

HadCRUT4 GISS NCEI
Year Anomaly Year Anomaly Year Anomaly
2016 +0.775 2016 +0.977 2016 +0.939
2015 +0.761 9999 +0.909 2015 +0.903
9999 +0.711 2015 +0.858 9999 +0.875
2014 +0.576 2014 +0.743 2014 +0.743
2010 +0.558 2010 +0.714 2010 +0.703
2005 +0.545 2005 +0.692 2013 +0.671
1998 +0.537 2007 +0.657 2005 +0.663
2013 +0.513 2013 +0.656 2009 +0.641
2003 +0.509 2009 +0.643 1998 +0.638
2009 +0.506 2012 +0.635 2012 +0.628
2006 +0.505 1998 +0.634 2006 +0.618

Similarly, for the satellite data sets…

UAH RSS v3.3 RSS v4.0
Year Anomaly Year Anomaly Year Anomaly
2016 +0.503 2016 +0.574 2016 +0.781
1998 +0.484 1998 +0.550 9999 +0.640
9999 +0.360 2010 +0.474 1998 +0.611
2010 +0.332 9999 +0.429 2010 +0.558
2015 +0.258 2015 +0.383 2015 +0.515
2002 +0.217 2005 +0.336 2002 +0.422
2005 +0.199 2003 +0.320 2014 +0.414
2003 +0.186 2002 +0.316 2005 +0.402
2014 +0.176 2014 +0.273 2013 +0.397
2007 +0.160 2007 +0.253 2003 +0.386
2013 +0.130 2001 +0.247 2007 +0.335

The Graphs

The graph immediately below is a plot of recent NCEP/NCAR daily anomalies, versus 1994-2013 base, similar to Nick Stokes’ web page. The second graph is a monthly version, going back to 1997. The trendlines are as follows…

  • Black – The longest line with a negative slope in the daily graph goes back to early July, 2015, as noted in the graph legend. On the monthly graph, it’s August 2015. This is near the start of the El Nino, and nothing to write home about. Reaching back to 2005 or earlier would be a good start.
  • Green – This is the trendline from a local minimum in the slope around late 2004, early 2005. To even BEGIN to work on a “pause back to 2005”, the anomaly has to drop below the green line.
  • Pink – This is the trendline from a local minimum in the slope from mid-2001. Again, the anomaly needs to drop below this line to start working back to a pause to that date.
  • Red – The trendline back to a local minimum in the slope from late 1997. Again, the anomaly needs to drop below this line to start working back to a pause to that date.

NCEP/NCAR Daily Anomalies:

NCEP/NCAR Monthly Anomalies:

Miscellaneous Notes
At the time of posting, the 6 monthly data sets were available through April 2017. The NCEP/NCAR re-analysis data runs 2 days behind real-time. Therefore, real daily data from April 30th through May 29th is used, and the 30th is assumed to have the same anomaly as the 29th. For RSS and UAH, subsets of global NCEP/NCAR data are used, to match the latitude coverage provided by the satellites.

This month, I’ve switched the land data set projections to use the same algorithm as the satellite data set projection. I.e. the monthly anomaly difference (current month minus previous month) in the NCEP/NCAR subset anomalies is multiplied by the slope() of the data set (versus NCEP/NCAR) for the previous 12 months, and added to the previous month’s anomaly. April actual anomalies for the land sets were more than 0.1 C° above the projections. My previous method was projecting lower May than April values for the land sets, even though NCEP/NCAR anomaly for May is higher than for April. To quote many bad 1950’s B-grade science fiction movies…”That does not compute”.

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

June 1, 2017 at 03:14AM

Leave a comment