"Hurricane forecasters expect below-normal cyclone activity through September’s season peak….The period of tropical activity from Aug. 12 through Sept. 3 has marked the quietest period in tropical weather development in 56 years. CSU said through Sept. 16, the basin favors either below or near-normal activity with only a 10% chance of above-normal formation."
via Watts Up With That?
September 8, 2024 at 08:00AM
VW teeters on disaster. Germany’s socialists, greens propose solving the problem that they themselves have caused.
AI generated image.
By Klimanachrichten here.
(Translated/edited by P. Gosselin)
======================================
The bad news about Volkswagen never ends, but neither do the clever tips from politicians. The strangest things come to light. Lower Saxony’s Economics Minister, of the SPD socialists, Mr. Olaf Lies, (the state has a 12% stake in VW) had no idea about the events and problems at the manufacturer until the press release.
He was not on the supervisory board. The state’s Minister of Economic Affairs once sat on the board, but he was replaced by a Green Minister of Culture. Not for reasons of competence, but rather because she is a member of the Green Party and Lower Saxony Vice Prime Minister. Do they talk to each other? Hard to say.
So Mr. Lies was caught unprepared and also stated in the media that energy prices in Germany were causing Volkswagen problems. It’s hard to imagine what would have happened if the country had allowed the two nuclear power plants there to continue operating, though this is a federal decision. It is also somewhat crazy that energy prices are rising due to the green energies transition and grid restructuring. A self-fulfilling prophecy, except for Mr. Lies, who proposes solving the problem with new subsidies.
So the consumer is failing, and is buying too few electric cars, for whatever reason. The slump in registration figures is not only affecting Volkswagen, but are also falling for combustion cars, which says a lot about the economic situation in Germany. According to the Federal Motor Transport Authority, the number of registrations fell by 28% compared to the same month last year. The number of e-car registrations even fell by almost 70%. Yet Volkswagen has been told quite clearly that there is only one way forward and that is e-mobility.
Surprisingly, the plants that still produce combustion cars are doing very well.
We are increasingly reading that the current Federal Minister of Economics, Robert Habeck (Greens Party), stated back in 2019 that VW would only survive if it produced an e-car model for under 20,000 euros. The biggest proportionate cost factor for an e-car is likely to be the car’s battery. In a small car, it has a greater impact on the price than in a mid-range car. The battery can account for between 30-40% of a vehicle’s price. If even a small car like a Fiat 500 in the e-version is 30% more expensive than the combustion version, then the dilemma becomes clear. Battery prices will only fall with mass production and manufacturers are still a long way from achieving this. So it’s the chicken and egg problem. The manufacturer Volvo, which has Chinese owners, has put aside its plans for 100% electric by 2030, according to T-Online.
=====================================
Donate – choose an amount
via NoTricksZone
September 8, 2024 at 06:27AM
52.71439 1.47151 Met Office Assessed CIMO Class 4 Installed 19/12/2022 Data from May 2023
Neatishead is a very recently installed installation at Remote Radar Head Neatishead (formerly RAF Neatishead).The weather station is fully visible from the adjacent Royal Air Defence Radar Museum, a tourist attraction and military archive. This is an image of the recently constructed large Radar dome – the weather station is now to the right and acknowledged by the Met Office to suffer from the effects of shading by the dome.
Whatever the operational requirements may or may not be for the MOD to have weather reporting in the immediate vicinity of the Radar Station, it seems odd that the very new weather station should be sited in such a meteorologically compromised location from inception. There does not appear to be any site constraints in the area with plenty of free space further away. If there are imperatives (not for public notification) for the proximity of the weather readings to the dome, then surely the site would not need CIMO assessment for climate reporting purposes and data solely used for site specific purposes. There are already several other Met Office stations in the area.
{n.b. there are numerous Met Office weather stations around the country where data is purely for site specific purposes and not deemed to require any form of CIMO assessment. Such sites’ readings are not added to the historic temperature record. A future post will cover such sites.}
In early May this year Neatishead recorded the national daily high temperature. The station did not appear on my recently obtained (under Freedom of Information Request) list of climate reporting stations by CIMO classification and I was unable to ascertain its exact location. With the assistance of Paul Homewood and his excellent Not A Lot Of People Know That blog, Dave Ward located the site and top quality photographer Trevor Shurmer visited the site and kindly supplied images such as this below. Trevor did not have his “collar felt” taking these and there was no obvious significant security or prohibition of photography.
In the meantime, I contacted the Met Office enquiry desk to confirm the CIMO rating. Their long delayed response was somewhat surprising:
“Hello Ray,
Thank you for your continued patience with this matter.
We’ve heard back from the support team involved, and can confirm the following:
Neatishead was first opened on 19th December 2022.
Whilst we look up what CIMO rating the site is, we will need to know why you are enquiring and what are you doing with the information?
We look forward to hearing back from you.
Kind regards,
Thomas
Weather Desk”
Astonishingly the Met Office was not prepared to tell me their assessment (a requirement jointly stipulated by the International Standards Organisation and the World Meteorological Organisation for all reporting stations ) unless I divulged why I wanted to know and what I would be “doing” with this information!
Leaving aside that such information is hardly likely to compromise national security, it is held under “Environmental Information” for which even supplying your name is not required under Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Despite advising the Enquiries desk staff of this, they declined to supply this information, hence yet another FOI. The subsequent reply was a revelation in a most unexpected way.
“The Met Office holds this information. Please see the information below.
The site was inspected on the 13 May 2024. The Screen Temperatures and Wind were both classed
as a CIMO 4S.
In order to provide advice and assistance, the Screen Temperatures have been classed as a CIMO 4S
due to shading.
All Met Office weather stations are inspected by trained expert Met Office Regional Network Officers at
a set interval. Each weather station is assessed against both the World Meteorological Organization
inspection standards and Met Office inspection standards. It is the Met Office inspection standard
which is used as the official benchmark for assessing the suitability of a site to record temperatures to
be archived in the long-term climate record.”
Why such a revelation?………Had the Met Office NOT assessed the site until 13th May 2024 i.e. 18 months from installation, and seemingly only AFTER I originally raised the query? Was this the possible cause of their tardy responses to me? Would it still not be CIMO assessed had I not raised the issue? Why was it not assessed on installation or, more sensibly, prior? Does the Met Office really just pick a spot at random, fit instrumentation and then think “oh dear this isn’t very good”?
Furthermore, yet another confirmation that the Met Office do NOT limit themselves to the internationally agreed standards and use their own unique standard determinations – so much for international comparison and the “Global” temperature record.
Is all of this really “Best Practice” and does it represent “Value for taxpayer’s money”? I, for one, think not.
Any views?
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
September 8, 2024 at 05:37AM
51.806588 -0.360175 Met Office Assessed CIMO Class 1 Installed 1853
Quite possibly the Met Office’s finest station against which others should be judged. Rothamsted Research runs this and other Met Office weather stations at North Wyke, Brooms Barn and Woburn.
“In 2018, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) officially designated Rothamsted as a Centennial Station, joining a global network of sites recognised by the WMO for recording reliable observations for over 100 years.”
Needless to say that if the Met Office had national coverage of stations as well sited and maintained as Rothamsted there would still be those who would argue that it would not be good enough. However, given there are no significant buildings, roadways or problematic extraneous heat sources in the immediate vicinity, the only possible queries could be the changing vegetation – not a failure issue in my humble opinion. A wider area map really does not indicate any more Urban Heat Island Effect than anywhere else that could likely be found in south east England.
To demonstrate just how much difference good sites make, Rothamsted is included in the world’s longest continually running weather dataset – the Central England Temperature series. It took over from Cambridge Botanic Gardens currently rated CIMO Class 5.
” We replaced the Cambridge station by Rothamsted Observatory in 1931 because of evidence of urban warming at the former by that time”
Way back in 1931 the Cambridge Botanical Gardens site was deemed unacceptable for the temperature record due to Urban Heat Island effect with a population of just over 69,000. In 2019, with the population having more than doubled to over 146,000, the same Class 5 site was deemed by the modern day Met Office as acceptable to record the all time national highest temperature of 38.7°C. Meanwhile over at Class 1 Rothamsted a maximum of only 36.2°C was being recorded that day.
On 10th august 2003 whilst CIMO Class 4 Faversham allegedly recorded (disputed by Royal Meteorological Society) 38.5°C, Rothamsted only reached 36°C.
On 19th July 2022 whilst aviation site RAF Coningsby ( highly debatable CIMO Class 3 site with major extraneous heat sources officially identified) was recording a further record breaking 40.3°C, Rothamsted only registered a lower 38.5°C.
On 4th August 1990 when Montpelier Gardens Weather Station, Cheltenham (by the bandstand whilst a fair was on) recorded the record of 37.1°C, Rothamstead only reached 33.8°C.
The above examples are not 100% definitive of problems elsewhere but it is quite obvious that there are significant differences in temperatures being recorded between different classes of stations with poorer sites regularly exaggerating records.
My personal contention is that the temperature record should (like the original CET aspirations) only include well sited and maintained stations. Rothamsted is the benchmark of such quality against which others should be measured. Perfection should not be the enemy of the good…..but please feel free to disagree
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
September 8, 2024 at 05:30AM
