Month: February 2020

The Rise and Fall of Central England Temperatures; Part 3 2000-2019

Guest post by Tony Brown

This is the third examination of Central England Temperatures (CET) in a series that commenced in 2015 and which has charted the recent decline in temperatures from their highest values. The two previous articles in this series are referenced here;

The Rise and Fall of Central England Temperatures; Part 1 covering 2000 to 2015

https://judithcurry.com/2015/11/25/the-rise-and-fall-of-central-england-temperature/

The Rise and Fall of Central England Temperatures; Part 2 covering 2000 to 2017

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/03/04/the-rise-and-fall-of-central-england-temperatures-help-needed-to-find-missing-data/

When referencing any ‘decline’ we need to put that into context against CET’s overall substantial rise in recent decades. The official CET dataset used in this article, which is compiled by the UK Met office is linked here and shown in Figure A);

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/

It should be noted that the values between 1538 and 1658 are my own reconstruction and are not used at all in this current paper.

Note: Weather comprises the day to day events that we all experience. Climate is officially the trend of the weather (often temperature and rainfall) taken over a continuous thirty year period. The two terms have sometimes been used in an interchangeable manner here, when a period of more than a year is being examined.

clip_image002clip_image002

Figure A

According to the Met office; ‘Since 1974 the data have been adjusted to allow for urban warming: currently a correction of -0.2 °C is applied to mean temperatures.’

Over the last couple of years an exercise has been carried out within the Met Office to re-evaluate urban warming values affecting England, bearing in mind the 25% increase in population and many additional buildings and infrastructure since 1974. I understand the results are now in the public domain so have summarised and paraphrased a series of email conversations conducted with the Met office over the last few weeks.

The new version of HadCET will be fully documented in a scientific journal paper to appear in due course. Meanwhile, the existing CET software (has been used) to include ‘official’ values for January 2020. (You may need to refresh your browser to see them)

Although the current CET revisions are not yet finalised, I do have enough data put together to be able to examine the likely urbanisation corrections. In principle, the urbanisation corrections are applied from 1974 onwards but, because our daily and monthly CET values are only provided to one decimal place, it must take until 1980 for any of them to exceed 0.05 degC and hence make a difference when just one decimal place is quoted. (Accordingly) 1980 appears to be the earliest year for which a correction will be applied. 

The corrections vary by calendar month, but by 2000 some of them are as large as 0.3 degC for mean temperature; they do not continue to get larger after that.  Note also that the adjustments for minimum temperature are one-and-a-half times as large as those for mean temperature, and for maximum temperature the adjustments are only half those for mean temperature – this is because the urban fabric tends to hold on to daytime heat through the night, especially in summer, so urban minimum temperatures remain further above the rural equivalent than is the case for maximum temperature.”

CET uses three weather stations to record temperatures, contained in a triangle roughly in the centre of England, bounded by London, Bristol and Lancashire. As far as possible stations are placed away from urban areas but the country as a whole is small and crowded and as the Met office has recognised for many years, has been affected by urbanisation. No doubt there will be much discussion over the changes to HadCET once the scientific paper has been published, so no further reference will be made to it in this article.

‘Climate’ over the last 30 years;

The evolution of the CET temperatures over the last three decades can be seen in the series of graphics below. Figure 1 represents a scientifically derived 30 year climate period. In this respect it can be seen that the data during this period shows an upwards trend of 0.7c per century. This is a snapshot, and over a century temperatures don’t generally adhere to the relatively short term trends used to calculate them. This can be seen in the other graphics, where the shorter periods used will result in exaggerated periods of rise or fall.

When does the modern decline in temperatures commence?

The graphs shown in Figures 2-8 were compiled in order to see where the inflexion point came, when the overall annual temperature stopped rising and instead went into reverse. As can be seen it was becoming close to that state in the mid 90’s but the inflexion point seems to have been 1998 (Figure 6). This was the year of the large El Nino, described here, although that year was by no means the warmest in the recent CET record.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/11/el-nino-and-the-record-years-1998-and-2016/

The remaining two graphics after 1998, (Figures 7 and 8) were compiled to ascertain whether the trend continues, if calculated from dates later than 1998.

There are several features we can observe in order to provide context, by stepping back and looking at the longer record shown in Figure A). The first is that the UK decadal weather through the centuries is highly variable, with numerous peaks and troughs and this has an impact on the full 30 years that represent a climate period.

When there has been a peak there has eventually been a decline and this can mean a 30 year ‘climate’ period can include a sharp decadal rise, a considerable decadal fall and a relatively static decade, which is then averaged out, and the nuances of the shorter periods of more extreme weather become less apparent.

The second feature is that the current modest decline since 1998 (Figure 6) is from a historically high plateau and covering only 22 years does not represent a 30 year period that can be scientifically termed ‘climate’. Rather it falls into the category of ‘interesting,’ as this observed decline does not correspond with the volume of scientific and media attention that has led to the UK Parliament and numerous local councils declaring a ‘climate emergency.’ Intriguingly it can be seen that no one living in England during the 21st century has experienced an overall warming trend.

The long term upwards trend

There has been a generally upwards trend in temperature since 1690, typified by notable jumps, then a fall back to some extent, with the period since around 1880 being generally more warmly benign and less extreme, as the trend continues upwards. At this stage it is impossible to predict if Figure 6) from 1998 represents merely a hiatus in the longer term warming or is part of a genuine trend to cooler values.

Does CET have a wider significance?

England is a geographically small area, but because three sets of records are used to compile CET and due to the UK’s geographical location, it is said to be representative of a much wider area. See the ‘Long Slow Thaw’ Section 6, a study by the author in 2011. The section was headed “Can CET represent a wider geographic area and establish the existence of a Hemispherically significant cooling period?”

https://judithcurry.com/2011/12/01/the-long-slow-thaw/

As Mike Hulme remarks

“ (CET) is also quite well correlated with land temperatures over the entire Northern Hemisphere. At an annual level this correlation is about 0.4, but when average values over 10-year periods are compared this correlation rises to about 0.75.”

A variety of other science luminaries including the UK and Dutch Met office also see a reasonable correlation with the Northern Hemisphere. CET does therefore appear to have some broader relevance for ascertaining broad modern and historic trends in areas outside of England.

Seasonality

Looking at Figures 1 to 8, it was intriguing to note the manner in which changes in the character of one or two seasons (warmer to colder or vice versa) impacted on overall annual trends. Nowhere is this better illustrated than Figure 1, whereby Autumn suggests a sharp upwards trend of well over 2 degrees Centigrade per century. By 1995 (Figure 3) this had become a negative figure and at the turn of the 21st century (Figure 7) it had become minus 1.71C per century.

The Autumn figures from 2004 (Figure 8) show an even steeper decline, but whilst again it is ‘interesting’, it can be recognised that it has no scientific basis as in any 15 year period a couple of exceptionally cold or mild autumns will have a considerable impact and the century trend is highly unlikely to continue.

CET topics for future article

In the second part of this article we intend to examine the evolution of CET since 2004 (Figure 8) and also examine the past 350 years of CET records in order to put the current period into historical context. A detailed examination will be made of previous peaks and troughs and also of the apparent ever changing nature of the seasons, from warm to cold and back again,which appears to be a feature of the extended temperature record.

These variations last for varying amounts of time but appear frequent enough to warrant querying the view that the UK has an equitable and rather unchanging climate, with a certain constancy to the seasons.

Indeed at first sight, what can be considered as a ‘normal’ Spring, Summer, Autum or Winter appears to depend on which decades and which century you are looking from, and the more variable they are, the more impact individual seasons may have on overall annual trends.

clip_image004clip_image004

Figure 1

clip_image006clip_image006

Figure 2

clip_image008clip_image008

Figure 3

clip_image010clip_image010

Figure 4

clip_image012clip_image012

Figure 5

clip_image014clip_image014

Figure 6

clip_image016clip_image016

Figure 7

clip_image018clip_image018

Figure 8

Consequences of continued temperature decline

England has a large and growing population dependent on ever increasing amounts of food from its farmers and who need to keep warm, consequently a short term decadal decline of even half to one degree would have serious consequences for this country, as could adverse changes in seasonality.

Tony Brown February 2020

Acknowledgements; With grateful thanks to Ed Hoskins for compiling the many graphics used in this article. Ed has a great site which covers numerous aspects of Climate, Co2 emissions, Energy and much more. https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/

All data used in this article is derived from statistics maintained by the Met Office and available here;  https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/

Figure A) comes directly from it.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/2OXIe0N

February 15, 2020 at 04:02AM

Cheap Gas Imperils Net Zero & Undercuts Wind And Solar

Natural gas prices may stay low for years, making it tough for states, cities and utilities to achieve zero-carbon in power production by 2050 or earlier.

This will almost certainly be a record-breaking year for the advance of solar and wind power across the U.S. The additions that are in progress or planned are significant enough to boost hopes for emissions-free electrical grids within a generation—if natural gas doesn’t get in the way.

It just may. Gas is such a bargain that it’s being viewed less as a bridge fossil fuel, driving the world away from dirtier coal toward a clean-energy future, and more as a hurdle that could slow the trip down. Some forecasters are predicting prices will stay low for years, making it tough for states, cities and utilities to achieve their goals of being zero-carbon in power production by 2050 or earlier.

“The fact that there’s an abundance of it makes the move to complete decarbonizaton much harder,” says Ravina Advani, head of energy, natural resources and renewables at BNP Paribas SA. Gas is a tough competitor. “It’s reliable and it’s cheap.”

The flood of inexpensive gas does have a big environmental upside, because it’s putting increased pressure on struggling coal plants that contribute significantly to global warming. But it’s also squeezing margins for nuclear reactors, which are the U.S.’s biggest source of carbon-free power. And it’s driving utilities to lay down infrastructure that could ensure gas remains central to the power mix for decades.

Solar and wind are certainly winning in many markets on price alone. Without cheap gas, though, the renewables build-out would be faster, says Cody Moore, head of gas and power trading at Mercuria Energy America LLC. “Absolutely, 100%.”

Just look at the largest grid in the U.S., which stretches from Washington to Chicago and serves more than 65 million people: It has been boosting the amount of power generated with gas and drawing in renewables at a slower rate.

That grid happens to crisscross a section of the U.S. that’s home to some of the world’s most abundant natural gas reserves. A drilling boom there and in the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico is a reason why the U.S. benchmark price for gas is less than $2 per million British thermal units.

That’s the least for this time of year since the late 1990s. In Asia, prices fell to a record low of less than $3 this month amid a global supply glut and as the coronavirus began slowing demand from China. In Europe, the benchmark Dutch price hit a decade low. 

“That’s not good for the new-energy market,” says Jonathan Bell, a business development manager at the risk assessment and quality assurance company DNV GL. “It puts a lot of pressure on renewable energy.”

Rising exports of liquefied natural gas from the U.S. Gulf Coast to Siberia will probably keep prices down and expand developing economies’ reliance on the fuel. The International Energy Agency expects global gas consumption to climb through 2040.

Full story

The post Cheap Gas Imperils Net Zero & Undercuts Wind And Solar appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

https://ift.tt/2OWGdBO

February 15, 2020 at 03:25AM

Money For Nothing: Scotland’s Wind Farms Earn More Revenue When They’re Turned Off!!

The fact that Scotland’s wind farms have pocketed £650m for not generating power has attracted more than just a little attention. STT has run several stories over the last few months about wind power outfits being paid very handsomely to NOT generate electricity. Perhaps it’s the sense of outrage that comes with knowing a group […]

via STOP THESE THINGS

https://ift.tt/39CldIG

February 15, 2020 at 12:31AM

Hawaiian residents will suffer greatly from new ‘climate saving’ carbon taxes

A proposed $80 per ton Carbon-Dioxide and Gas Tax Would Be a Big Burden for Hawaii Families and Businesses

Guest analysis by Tim Benson

Companion legislation introduced in the Hawaii State Legislature would establish a carbon-dioxide tax on all fossil fuels emitted or sold by distributors in the Aloha State. The tax would begin at $40 per ton in 2021, incrementally rising to $80 per ton in 2030.

The legislation also includes a “state environmental response, energy, carbon emissions, and food security tax” that would be charged “on each barrel or fractional part of a barrel of petroleum product sold by a distributor to any retail dealer or end user of petroleum product, other than a refiner.” This tax would also incrementally increase through 2030. For example, the tax on gasoline would begin at $8.22 per barrel in 2021 and top out at $23.16 in 2030, while diesel fuel would begin at $10.35 per barrel in 2021 and run to $26.34 in 2030. (Propane and butane would go from $10.47 to $20.94, kerosene from $16.38 to $32.76, jet fuel from $16.07 to $32.15, and aviation gas from $14.03 to $28.07, respectively.)

Included in the carbon-dioxide tax portion of the bill is a tax credit intended to “mitigate the effect of a … tax on lower income taxpayers.” Single tax filers making less than $20,000 a year would receive a $250 tax credit while married filers in the same bracket would receive $500. These credits would gradually decrease the further up you go on the income ladder. The smallest credit would be $50 for single filers earning $50,000 to $60,000 a year and $100 for married filers making $60,000 to $75,000.

These credits are necessary because carbon-dioxide taxes are inherently regressive and disproportionally harm low-income families. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found a $28-per-ton carbon tax would result in energy costs being 250 percent higher for the poorest one-fifth of households than the richest one-fifth of households.

CBO reports the reason for cost discrepancy is “a carbon tax would increase the prices of fossil fuels in direct proportion to their carbon content. Higher fuel prices, in turn, would raise production costs and ultimately drive up prices for goods and services throughout the economy … Low-income households spend a larger share of their income on goods and services whose prices would increase the most, such as electricity and transportation.”

2013 report by the National Association of Manufacturers estimates a $20-per-ton carbon-dioxide tax in Hawaii would result in a 5.3 percent increase in household electricity rates. Additionally, the tax would raise gasoline prices by more than 20 cents per gallon in just the first year alone. In July 2012, Australia established a nation-wide carbon-dioxide tax set at $23 (Australian dollars) per ton and repealed it just two years later after it produced the highest quarterly increase in household electricity prices in the country’s history.

One other substantial problem with the carbon-dioxide tax is that it would produce an insignificant environmental benefit, as a country-wide carbon tax that completely reduces U.S. emissions to zero by 2050 would only avert global temperature by just 0.2 degrees Celsius by 2100. A state-based carbon dioxide tax would have even less impact on global temperature. As Oren Cass, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, noted in National Affairs, “The effectiveness of a carbon tax as a matter of environmental policy [depends] not only on how it would directly alter the trajectory of [local] emissions but also on its ability to affect global emissions by driving globally applicable technological innovation or by influencing the behavior of foreign governments,” wrote Cass. “On each of these dimensions, the carbon tax fails.”

At 29.18 cents per kilowatt hour, retail electricity prices in Hawaii are already 178 percent higher than the national average and are by far the highest of any state in the country. Therefore, Hawaii legislators should refrain from taking any action that would increase these costs, especially when Hawaii’s overall tax climate is already relative heavy. A carbon-dioxide tax would make everything more expensive for working families in Hawaii, drive up costs for businesses, and have an insignificant effect on global carbon dioxide emissions.


Tim Benson is a policy analyst in the Government Relations Department at The Heartland Institute based in Chicago.

Nothing in this Research & Commentary is intended to influence the passage of legislation, and it does not necessarily represent the views of The Heartland Institute. For further information on this subject, visit Environment & Climate News, The Heartland Institute’s website, and PolicyBot, Heartland’s free online research database.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/31WuAA9

February 15, 2020 at 12:07AM