Shoreham WMO 03876 – Ask a question, you will NOT get an answer.

50.83609 -0.29348 Met Office CIMO Assessed Class 5S – {yes Class 5S.} Installed 1983 Temperature records from 1998.

The above aerial image includes a 100 metre radius circle centred on the screen. There are no apparent items to cause any shading. The surrounding area, though an airfield, is all grass. Think of Heathrow at Class 3 or Dyce at Class 4 and is it obvious that Shoreham should be Class 5S? Surely that must be a mistake, a human error . So I started an investigation……..a long time ago.

Tim Channon reviewed Shoreham in 2012 initially concluding Class 1 (exactly as I would) at first glance. But looking deeper perhaps there were some oddities that required closer inspection.

With assistance from photography by Adrian Taylor, Tim was able to clarify that the site was severely downgraded by equipment within the unusual enclosure.

Given the extreme levels of corruption at some sites, this one clearly is not good but there are far worse out there – or are there? Examining any changes over time from aerial images shows some quite strange things going on since the above image.

Quite what the carousel bottom left in the enclosure is I have no idea. The peculiar enclosure shape and indeterminate ground cover within seems to no longer be grass other than the immediate footprint of the screen itself. This is obviously not solely a Met office enclosure and rather similar, in may ways, to the Gravesend site.

I decided to contact the Met Office directly for definitive guidance – two months ago. I got the usual immediate acknowledgement followed by silence.

Servicedesk <enquires@metoffice.gov.uk> Unsubscribe Sat 8 Feb, 18:21
to me

Thank you Ray for contacting the Met Office concerning Public – Shoreham Weather Station WMO 03876 – listed as Class 5S should be class 1 which has been logged under our reference of: CS0090221.

A member of our Customer Service Team has already received your request and will be in touch shortly, with a response. “

Three weeks later I contacted again politely enquiring if they had an answer. More silence ensued. another 3 weeks later I contacted again – still no answer. Now after two months I shall put in a Freedom of Information request. This is totally inappropriate to FOI procedures to get an answer to simple basic questions but if the absence of any response, it is the only option available.

The gist of my enquiry is simply that, if the present screen is so compromised in its present enclosure, then why not simply install an additional new one as the location for the site sensitive equipment leaving everything else unaffected. A simple solar panel and mobile connection (as demonstrated by the Met Office observer at Cardiff Bute Park) would surely suffice as there are no shortage of unobstructed places for a new screen. For a relatively modest outlay, the Class 5S (effectively useless readings for historic temperature recording purposes) could become Class 1 excellence for the future. Why is all this basic stuff regarded almost as a “State secret”?

it is hard to apportion blame be it incompetence or intention, but quite why the Met Office is persisting in using readings from such a known poor site when it could so easily be improved is a question that they seem unwilling to even discuss.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/Df7l4qh

April 9, 2025 at 08:33AM

Green Policies, Not Trump Tariffs, Killing British Steel

By Vijay Jayarj

British Steel, the U.K.’s last bastion of primary steelmaking, announced plans to shutter its two blast furnaces at Scunthorpe, effectively ending 150 years of virgin steel production in Britain. Media outlets have rushed to pin the blame on U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent 25% tariffs on steel imports.

But this narrative is a convenient distraction from a far more insidious culprit: the U.K. government’s relentless pursuit of self-destructive green policies that have crippled British manufacturing for nearly a decade.

During the Industrial Revolution, Britain’s steel industry forged the island’s ascent as a global superpower. Steel was the sinew of progress, enabling the nation to outpace rivals and cement its economic and military supremacy well into the 20th century. Once the backbone of its industrial might, steel manufacturing has been suffocated by exorbitant energy costs and uncompetitive pricing – both direct consequences of a cult’s dogma that prioritizes reducing emissions of harmless carbon dioxide over economic survival.

Having produced over 20 million metric tons annually in the 1970s, output dwindled to a paltry 4 million tons by 2024. Meanwhile, imports have surged to 68% of domestic consumption, up from 55% in 2022, as cheaper foreign steel floods the market. The government’s pledge to “rebuild” the sector rings hollow when its own policies paved the way for this collapse.

British Steel’s owner, Chinese-owned Jingye, cited “highly challenging market conditions, the imposition of tariffs, and higher environmental costs” as reasons for the Scunthorpe closure, which threatens up to 2,700 jobs and could commence as early as June.

This shutdown is not a sudden reaction to external trade pressures but rather the inevitable outcome of a self-inflicted death spiral. While China and India make cheaper, carbon-intensive steel with no apparent “climate guilt,” the U.K.’s obsession with net-zero “virtue” turns its producers into sacrificial offerings at the green altar.

Green Policies: The Silent Assassin

Let’s dispense with the pleasantries: Britain’s green policies are more a national suicide than a noble crusade. For nearly a decade, successive governments have chased emissions targets with a zeal that ignores the realities of industrial survival. The Climate Change Act of 2008 set the stage, committing the U.K. to slash carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050 – a hideous impossibility that was later tightened to the holy grail of the even more stringent “net zero.”

This ambition birthed a web of regulations, taxes, and subsidies that have jacked up energy costs to levels unmatched among Britain’s peers and made steel manufacturing impossible without incurring heavy losses.

One proposed solution was a shift to electric arc furnaces, which recycle scrap steel rather than producing it from raw materials with more carbon-intensive blast furnaces. However British Steel’s Chinese owner reportedly sought a $1.3 billion subsidy to fund the $2.6 billion change.

In addition, the U.K.’s industrial electricity prices are approximately 40% higher than France’s and about four times more than those of the U.S. For energy-guzzling steelmakers, such price differentials – a product of “green” energy choices – are a death sentence.

Adding to the pain of British Steel is the U.K. Emissions Trading Scheme that adds costs to the company’s emissions of carbon dioxide, a penalty largely evaded by Chinese and Indian rivals.

The world’s steel leader, China produces more than 1 billion metric tons annually – exceeding the U.K.’s total output over the past 47 years. India follows closely, churning out the metal at prices Britain can’t match.

The steel industries of China and India are fueled by cheap coal and minimal constraints on carbon dioxide emissions. Neither faces the punitive energy costs or emissions taxes that hobble British Steel. While the U.K. levies up to $103 on each ton of carbon dioxide emitted, China charges its manufacturers but a fraction of that. India has no national charge at all. The result? British Steel, saddled with green compliance costs, is priced out of the global market.

China and India didn’t need to lift a finger as Westminster policymakers chased a utopian vision that delivered industrial ruin. The media can spin its tariff tales, but the truth is plainer: Britain’s steel industry was slowly bled dry by a government too enamored with green dogma to see the carnage it wrought.

The demise of British Steel serves as a stark warning to manufacturing giants in Western Europe and the U.S. Trading cost-effectiveness for climate compliance is a Faustian bargain to be resisted by corporate executives and lobbyists.

This commentary was first published at RealClearWorld on April 4th, 2025.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.


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/0UotxpB

April 9, 2025 at 08:02AM

The Green Agenda is Collapsing

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Richard Eldred

Is Net Zero dead? In this Sceptic Short, host Laurie Wastell is joined by Dr Tilak Doshi, economist, former contributor to Forbes and now the Daily Sceptic’s Energy Editor, to discuss how Donald Trump’s “Drill, baby, drill!” energy revolution is upending the global green agenda, why the climate censorship regime is collapsing and whether the writing is on the wall for Ed Miliband.

NOTE: Premium subscribers will notice that this is an extract from the premium section of Episode 30. We’re sorry that there is no new episode today. This is due to circumstances beyond our control. The Sceptic will return next week as usual.

Donate to the Daily Sceptic to access our premium content. Follow Laurie on X.

Read Tilak’s piece on the Daily Sceptic. And follow him on X.

Subscribe to the Daily Sceptic YouTube Channel. Produced by Richard Eldred. Filmed at the Westminster Podcast Studio.


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/I37ltfb

April 9, 2025 at 04:05AM

Hurricane forecast update

The 2025 Hurricane Season should have fewer impacts than 2024, but they will still be above normal.

via CFACT

https://ift.tt/Wt5rJbX

April 9, 2025 at 03:23AM