Month: October 2024

Leconfield WMO 03382 – Doubled Dubious Data despite a new solar farm.

53.87458 -0.44178 Met Office Assessed CIMO Class 3 Installed 1/1/1959

There are multiple issues with this site. There are even bigger problems with the way in which its temperature readings are subsequently manipulated by government departments that is almost unbelievable.

Firstly to evaluate the site there is obviously one major problem…….

The Met office claims this is a CIMO Class 3 site. This classification has the following requirements.

Using the google satellite images measuring indicator, it is quite apparent that not only is the former taxi way well under 10 metres from the screen, the area of tarmac @ 380 square metres with a 10 metre radius exceeds the 10% maximum for artificial heat sources. This site should be at best Class 4.

Then there is the obvious issue with the newly built solar farm, a part of Project Prometheus. As detailed in reviews of both Chertsey and Wallington, solar farms have been shown to create their own heat island effect that artificially raises local temperatures. The 4,248 panels start at just 80 metres from the screen. Construction of solar farms in the vicinity of weather stations is a growing issue that the Met Office seems to avoid discussing.

Another highly relevant concern is the site history. Archives show an initial installation date of 1959. This may indicate a long term temperature record but closer inspection reveals multiple site re-locations. The original station (WMO 03383) was located over 700 metres away at 502600E , 443800N from 1959 to 1969 as shown below.

Between 1969 to 1991 there were no records archived at all from any station at Leconfield. From 1991 to 2002 a separate station (WMO 03384) was at an unspecified location, however, unique WMO numbering indicates it was at a site that was subject to significantly different meteorological conditions. As a result the only representative and comparative record runs from 2002 to 2021 when the solar panels then corrupted the site from its prior low ranking.

Thus the Leconfield site is a low grade site with no genuinely comparative long term archived data.

So why is my headline about “Doubled Dubious Data”

The Met Office has an interesting web page on CIMO ratings detailing how grading indicates wider area representation. N.B. this is a complete misrepresentation of the CIMO guidance – using terminology such as “holistic” is highly indicative.

“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.”  

I interpret the above as the Met Office accepts that a Class 1 represents a wide area whilst a Class 5 only represents its immediate surroundings though they notably fail to mention the WMO inaccuracy by siting statements.

This is all very relevant to producing area and historic comparisons. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology is responsible for the Met Office and provides data to the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero to assist in decisions the latter makes on energy information and policy.

This below is the government’s weather station statistics page.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/weather-statistics

The Met office supplies representative data from 21 sites…….only it doesn’t. It uses 17 sites and doubles 4 of them!

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/maps-of-uk-weather-stations

There are over 380 Met Office CIMO assessed weather stations in the UK. For some truly bizarre reason just 17 were chosen with a totally unrepresentative geographic spread, and 4 of those sites simply had their data “doubled” to “produce the national averages for temperature correction”. Leconfield was one of those select 4.

From the above perversely selected site data “Climate Averages” are somehow produced running specifically for the period 1981 to 2020 as here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62457adad3bf7f32afeba036/Long-term_mean_temperatures_1991-2020.pdf

What are the rankings of the chosen stations? These quite clearly should be representative of both their wider area (i.e. Class 1 or 2 ) and the historic period for which their data was accumulated (i.e. from before 1981 to present).

Leuchars, CIMO Class 5 and data from 1921, Durham Class 5 from 1851, St Athan Class 5 from 1997, Boscombe Down Class 5 from 1930, Glasgow Bishopton Class 4 from 1998, Bingley (by a substation) Class 4 from 1972, Crosby Class 4 from 1983, Nottingham:Watnall (doubled) Class 4 from 1941, Coleshill Class 4 from 1997, Aberporth Class 4 from 1941, Hurn (doubled) Class 4 from 1951 , Plymouth:Mountbatten Class 4 from 1920, Heathrow (falsely claimed to be Class 3) from 1947, Leconfield (falsely claimed to be Class 3 and doubled) from 2002, Leeming Class 2 from 1944, Weybourne Class 1 from 1991 and Rostherne No 2 (doubled) Class 1 from 2012.

So of 17 (which should really be 21) there are just 2 Class 1 sites neither of which existed in 1981. Just 1 Class 2 site. 2 sites are alleged to be Class 3 (inaccuracy by siting of up to 1°C) but clearly are not, 1 being doubled and not reporting from 1981. 8 are Class 4 (inaccuracy by siting up to 2°C) with 2 doubled and 3 non existent in 1981. 4 are Class 5 (inaccuracy by siting of up to 5°C) with one none existent in 1981.

This concoction of historic averages is reminiscent of Dungeness and Lowestoft where stations that do not actually exist are attributed averages by what are no better than mathematical conjuring tricks. The unrepresentative nature of these sites for their area is reminiscent of the absurdities demonstrated by Sheffield and Copley. The DSIT, DESNZ as well as the DWP are all using what can only be described as worthless number concoctions manipulated from unreliable prime data.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/jfDh6rN

October 30, 2024 at 03:02PM

The G7 virtue signals while China and India burn 70% of the world’s coal

Standing up to energy hypocrisy.

via CFACT

https://ift.tt/qSFmY4e

October 30, 2024 at 01:09PM

Harris Wins Pennsylvania

ABC News has reported final results in next week’s election.

About Tony Heller

Just having fun

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/vkBm1RO

October 30, 2024 at 12:25PM

Affordable electricity can resolve worldwide poverty.

Electricity is needed for all infrastructures, starting with water filtration and sanitation.

Ronald Stein, P.E. is an engineer, columnist on energy literacy at America Out Loud NEWS, and advisor on energy literacy for the Heartland Institute and CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”

Oliver Hemmers has aDoctorate in Physics from the Institute of Radiation and Nuclear Physics at the Technical University of Berlin, Germany. He was a Researcher in Physics, the Executive Director of UNLV’s Harry Reid Center and C- level executive.

Steve Curtis has a Master’s degree in Health Physics from UNLV.  He has spent decades studying spent fuel issues in Nevada and worked as a technical field team leader for nuclear search and characterization missions for the Department of Energy.  He is currently engaged in education, speaking, and writing in favor of nuclear power returning to the United States, especially from recycling spent nuclear fuel in fast reactors.

Co-authored by Ronald Stein,  Oliver Hemmers, andSteve Curtis

Published October 29, 2024, in America Out Loud NEWS

https://www.americaoutloud.news/affordable-electricity-can-resolve-worldwide-poverty/

The poorest American is richer than 75 percent of humanity, and about 4.56 billion people on this planet are living on less  than $10 a day, and billions are living with little to no access to electricity.

Most everyone in the United States has access to electric power that is required by water filtration, sanitation, airports, hospitals, medical equipment, appliances, electronics, communications systems, heating and ventilating, space programs, and militaries.

However, several billion people in the rest of the world do not have any access to the infrastructures being enjoyed in wealthier developed countries.  This is something most Americans find hard to believe. 

Yet, the solution is simple.  Getting Government to quit “helping”, as it is the job of the American people and free enterprise to innovate products people like, not the Government. Again, the basic solution is anchored in the basic economic principle of free enterprise, unencumbered by Government “help”. 

The most pronounced factor in poverty, or basic quality of life, is affordable electricity in our modern world.  We find it difficult to operate any of our machines without it.  Yet 120 years ago, almost nobody had electricity.  Such is the magic of modern innovation.  Access, however, is not enough.  Electricity must be dirt cheap or almost free.  Don’t laugh.  Thanks to free enterprise, we can now make all the long-distance phone calls we want for one low monthly cell phone fee.

The solution to affordable electricity is within the grasp of “we the people” more than you think.  Technology exists, now all we need is political will.  Two factors have accentuated the need for more clean electricity in the last few years: More concern about clean air, and a massive increase in electricity demand projected to double or triple in the coming decades, driven by the sudden popularity of Artificial Intelligence, Datacenters, and EV charging.

Sitting on the sites of all our nuclear power plants are already-mined, already formed pellets, for future affordable electricity.  There are 90,000 tons of energy worth its weight in gold (at 1 cent/kWh) just sitting there.  Some call this “nuclear waste” and are trying to spend tax dollars to bury it forever.  Fortunately, the anti-nuclear lobbying has prevented this from happening.  It turns out that recycling this material in fast reactors can extract all the hidden energy in uranium, not just 3% of it as is common in today’s reactors.

The major impediment, ironically, is that the United States has not defined a disposition plan for this “waste” material and a great many people, with good reason, regard this as detrimental to placing trust in a nuclear power industry.  If this problem cannot be solved, how can nuclear power be good?  It turns out that the nuclear power industry had the solution decades ago and, through the “magic” of Government “help”, that solution was legally stopped. 

So, the Slightly Used Nuclear Fuel (SUNF) piled up.  Being called “waste” has poisoned the public perception. However, with the new name, SUNF, there may be a way to see a bright new world ahead in plentiful, safe, clean, reliable, robust, and, best of all, cheap electricity.  All we must do is get the Government to stop regulating it out of affordability. 

To put this so-called “waste” into perspective, the amount of electricity contained in just the so-called “waste” material, we have is the equivalent of 270 years of our current electricity consumption in the US by itself, and we are creating 2,000 tons of additional SUNF per year.  There is enough to power for our ramping demands for Artificial Intelligence, datacenters, and EV chargers and still have enough to export to those in adjoining states who do not have sufficient electricity. 

If we could see our way of transitioning this production of electricity to private enterprise and allow companies to compete for your electricity business, it is not difficult to see the possibilities.  Consider that, if disposition of this material is, indeed, a top priority, then the faster we dispose of it, the better, right?  So, people would be encouraged to use electricity as fast as they can. 

With affordable electricity, unlimited clean water, unlimited hydrogen, unlimited electricity for billions around the world would be realized.  In fact, using proven nuclear generated electricity technology, power at one cent per kWh (it is well more than ten cents now) would be profitable.  So, one low monthly price for electricity could not be far behind. 

In fact, the US military is looking to power their bases with their own individual nuclear power plants as “micro-grids”, all owned by the individual base and not needing any power from external sources.  As the competition ramps up for better and better reactors and the availability of power skyrockets, the American people finally get the advantage in the marketplace.  Best of all, technology exists today to make all this possible.  So, what are we waiting for?

It looks like we will need a Governor of a state to see the vision and develop this idea for their own state.  The lucky state that seizes this opportunity could be the nucleus of the next electricity production revolution.  Leveraging the existing Congressional Nuclear Waste fund for start-up costs in return for reduced regulations and some initial facilities, the state would benefit, the US Government would benefit, and, best of all, electricity customers would benefit.  However, the overwhelming support of the public is needed for this to happen.  Our US Government works for you, so you can make your desires known to a State Governor who can make the proposal to the US Government.

Since the nuclear power industry has proven to be the safest industry in the world for over 7 decades, regulations could easily be reduced to allow such a beneficial industry to thrive in free enterprise nirvana. 

It would not take a lot of imagination to see free enterprise vs. government regulations spreading to the world. Running water, sanitation, and modern appliances would find their way into the poverty centers in South Asia, Africa, and the Pacific and East Asia.  It just takes leadership.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table. 

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/xTep7QO

October 30, 2024 at 12:09PM