Daily News 15 Jan 2025

Bradford:Lister Park DCNN 4045 – A Venerable beauty in contrast with an ugly sister.

53.81362 -1.77385 Met Office Assesed CIMO Class 5 Archived Temperature record from 1/1/1908

It is often quite difficult to precisely locate Met Office weather stations and even harder to get close up images. Not so with Bradford – this is an immaculately well cared for site that is a front and centre display of civic pride. All the instrumentation may largely be the same as even some of the most modest sites but this one is no shrinking violet. It does, however offer stark contrasts with its near neighbour and ugly sister, Bingley

For uniformity this is the aerial locator view of the site within Lister Park.

Unusually for a weather station there are numerous archived online news items regarding Bradford going back a long time – this featuring the 1970’s.

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/23811794.know-bradford-weather-recording-station/

The nostalgia was bought up to date by the BBC themselves.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bradford/content/articles/2008/11/17/lister_park_weather_feature.shtml

Although the station is now automated, it still appears to be cared for meticulously and regularly maintained. Bradford seems to be proud of its venerable weather station.

How does this site compare in terms of supplying data to the historic climate record? Obviously it is in anything but a natural environment with an artificial body of water, manicured gardens, astroturf sports surfaces and botanical gardens. Since the site’s original installation the population of Bradford has more than doubled. This increase actually hides the much denser home occupancy numbers over 100 years ago, with the subsequent urban sprawl bringing this once northern outskirts park into a more urban setting.

The Met Office rates this site as the lowest possible standard Class 5 which warrants their tape measure style judgment system to compare with nearby Bingley. Below is a 30 metre circled area from the exact screen location.

Leaving aside the footpath there are no other extraneous heat sources. Shading from large trees, though possible, lies outside the circle. There certainly are no massive electricity transformers as compared in this similarly sized circled area of nearby Bingley as below.

Bingley (with its attendant massive heat sources) is rated Class 4 (additional inaccuracy due to siting of up to 2°C) BUT Bradford with no such distorting features is rated Class 5 (additional inaccuracy due to siting of up to 5°C) This rather seems the wrong way around, indeed it is hard to see how Bingley is acceptable at all.

Furthermore looking at how the Met Office themselves justified their Bingley rating, they resolved down the influenced area to just 3 Metres as per their supplied area circling. (n.b. not mine)

What does this 3 Metre circled area from the Stevenson Screen at Bradford show? The 3 metre area does not even exceed the confines of the Bradford enclosure.

The Met Office is operating one set of rules to justify their bizarre rating of a weather station located hard alongside Bradford West Electricity Sub-Station and known as Bingley No 2 with a completely different regulation interpretation of the reasonably good station Bradford:Lister Park.

I do not anticipate any response from the Met Office though they really do have a case to answer.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/4UdBWA0

January 15, 2025 at 07:49AM

Daily News 15 Jan 2025

EV Trucking

By Paul Homewood

h/t Ian Magness

It takes a truck driver to demolish the EV truck argument:

https://www.unitedaustraliaparty.org.au/video/the-reality-of-powering-electric-vehicles/#fvp_241,1m49s

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/hxYIbNP

January 15, 2025 at 05:44AM

Daily News 15 Jan 2025

Why the LA Wildfires Have Little to With Drought or Climate Change

From the Cliff Mass Weather Blog

Cliff Mass

Some climate activists and media outlets are claiming the drought or climate change were major contributors to the recent wildfires around Los Angeles (see sample below)

These claims can easily be shown to be false.

Drought had little impact on the LA fires.

Climate Change had little impact.

Let me provide the facts below.

The Fuels

The vegetative fuels for the fires were predominantly light fuels such as grasses and range vegetation. To illustrate, consider the area where the Palisades fire started (below).

Most of these fuels are 1-10 hr fuels, which means they typically dry out after 1-10 hours of drying conditions.

So even if the previous period had been wetter than normal, then a half-day of drying conditions would make them ready to burn. The meteorological conditions immediately preceding the fires were so drying (very strong winds with very low humidities) that even if it had rained the week before, the fire still would have occurred.

Consider a plot of the ten-hour fuel moisture at the nearby Topanga Canyon site over the past year (below). Keep in mind that when the moisture level gets below 15% rapid fire spread is possible.

Interestingly, even during every wet periods (such as the first part of 2024), fuel moisture levels return to burning-level fuel moisture between showers.

But grasses and bushes were not the only thing that burned. Once the wildfires got to the homes or burning embers reaches the homes, the homes THEMSELVES supplied the fuels.

One house ignited the next.

This is very similar to the situations of others major urban wildfires, such as the Camp Fire (Paradise, CA), Lahaina (Maui), and the Marshal Fire (Superior, CO). Homes flammability has little to do with weather conditions. But poorly constructed homes (e.g., flammable roofs, no screens to stop embers moving into home spaces) are major problems.

There is No Trend of Less Precipitation in Southern California

Several media and other outlets suggested climate change associated dry conditions was a contributor to the LA wildfires. First, as noted above, the light fuels that brought the fires to the homes did not need a drought period to be sufficiently dried to burn.

But even if drought had been important, there is no evidence than climate change could have contributed. How can I be be so sure? Because there is no long-term trend for less precipitation over the region.

Consider the trends of October 1 to January 6 precipitation at Los Angeles from 1950 through this year (see below). The trend line is UPWARDS (brown line). More rain, not less. Yes, the past autumn was dry, but that is not climate but normal weather variability.

Not convinced? Below is the annual precipitation of the region since the late 1940s.

No downward trend. And the last several years have been wetter than normal, which would contribute to more bountiful vegetative growth and thus more fire potential.

The LA Fires Were Associated with Strong-Dry Santa Ana Winds. Such winds are predicted to WEAKEN, NOT Strengthen under global warming.

The LA wildfires were associated with very strong (up to 100 mph) and dry Santa Ana winds, which were generally from the northeast.

There is an extensive peer-reviewed science literature indicating that global warming will reduce the strength, intensity, and frequency of such Santa Ana winds.

It makes complete sense that global warming would weaken the Santa Ana winds.

Such winds are driven by difference in pressure between inland high pressure and lower pressure to the south and west. This high pressure is associated with low-level cool air (cool air is denser and heavier than warm air), which will be warmed due to global warming, thus reducing the pressure difference that drives the Santa Ana winds.

_____________________________________________

Very strong video and photographic evidence indicated the Los Angeles Eaton fire, which resulted in the most deaths was due to a faulty power line. Clearly, this transmission line was not de-energized even with the forecast of severe Santa Ana winds.

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/XiST2KH

January 15, 2025 at 04:03AM

Daily News 15 Jan 2025

INEOS closes last remaining synthetic ethanol plant in the UK

By Paul Homewood

h/t Jack Broughton

Ineos have just issued this press release:

INEOS closes last remaining synthetic ethanol plant in the UK

Lack of energy strategy and high carbon taxes continue to de-industrialise Britain
INEOS closes last remaining synthetic ethanol plant in the UK with the loss of several hundred jobs.

High energy prices and high carbon taxes have forced the closure of this strategic UK asset.

The UK, which used to be a major force in chemicals, employing a large and highly skilled workforce, has seen the closure of 10 large chemical complexes in the last 5 years alone and, in complete contrast to the USA, has not had one new chemical plant built for a generation.

Energy prices have doubled in the UK in the last 5 years and now stand five times higher than those in the USA. The UK cannot compete with such a huge disadvantage.

The synthetic alcohol, which is essential for the manufacture of many pharmaceutical drugs, is necessary for many of the new blockbuster drugs. It will now be imported.

The Scottish ethanol plant in Grangemouth is one of only 2 in Europe and since the start of production over 40 years ago, has produced the equivalent of 25 billion bottles of Scottish whisky.

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, Chairman of INEOS says, “De-industrialising Britain achieves nothing for the environment. It merely shifts production and emissions elsewhere. The UK, and particularly the North, needs high quality manufacturing and the associated manufacturing jobs. We are witnessing the extinction of one of our major industries as chemical manufacture has the life squeezed out of it.”

Notes to Editors

Synthetic ethanol was produced on the Grangemouth plant predominantly for use in healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors. The plant capacity of 180,000 tonne per year is equivalent to:
- 226 million litres per year
- Equivalent to filling 90 Olympic sized swimming pools per year
- The ethanol content of more than 600 million bottles of hand sanitizer per year.
Over the course of its operational lifespan, the plant made the equivalent of 25 billion bottles of Scottish Whisky.

The UK chemicals sector, like many other energy intensive industries, is fighting to be competitive in global markets:
- Energy costs can be between 5 and 10 times cheaper in some regions
- Many countries outside of the UK / EU have no carbon reduction trading scheme or taxes
Combined, this can result in a differential in the costs of distilling and purifying ethanol equivalent to around 10% of the sales price of ethanol.

Over the last two decades, carbon emissions from our operations at Grangemouth have fallen by almost 50%; we are on a journey towards net zero, but the next steps require significant investment and Governmental support/ action

INEOS is calling upon the UK Government to take urgent action and act in the interests of UK manufacturing. Specifically in three key areas:
1. An energy policy that provides globally competitive pricing of natural gas, and hydrogen, as we move towards net zero.
2. An Emissions Trading Scheme that supports industry and decarbonisation equally; the current scheme acts as a tax on UK operators and favours importers who pay nothing.
3. A trade policy that supports UK manufacturing in its own domestic markets and does not incentivise imports.
All affected direct employees associated with the ethanol plant operations will be redeployed across the chemicals business at Grangemouth. This still results in a net job loss of 80 roles at Grangemouth, with a further impact of more than 500 indirect roles in the wider economy.

https://www.ineos.com/news/ineos-group/chemicals-coming-to-an-end-in-the-uk/