Tag Archives: climate

Thornton Weather

Part 3: Does it matter if Denver weather and climate records are skewed?

Two airports, two different climates. How Denver's weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)
Two airports, two different climates. How Denver’s weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)

ThorntonWeather.com’s owner and operator used to write for a now-defunct website called Examiner. This was a national site but with locally focused content. As the Denver Weather Examiner, Tony covered a number of topics related to Denver and Colorado weather.

Among them, he was always quick to point out how Denver’s weather records were being skewed by the move of Denver’s official weather station to Denver International Airport. In 2009, he wrote a three-part series explaining why this was an issue and why it mattered.

Fifteen years later, this continues to be a problem and thus we are re-publishing the series here. While the data is not current and some of the images were lost with time, readers can still understand and appreciate the problem.

Part 3: Does it matter if Denver weather and climate records are skewed?
Originally published March 5, 2009, Examiner.

Fourteen years ago Denver opened its new airport and the National Weather Service followed suit and moved Denver’s weather monitoring system 12 miles east further onto the plains.  Since then, weather enthusiasts and meteorologists have said Denver’s climate records were forever being altered inappropriately.

Monday we provided some background on the history of Denver’s weather monitoring and records.  Yesterday we took a look at empirical data that shows that the weather at DIA does not accurately reflect the weather in town where people actually live and showed why it isn’t fair to compare data from the last 14 years to measurements taken in the previous 124.  Today we explain why all this matters and talk to the National Weather Service to see what  they have to say about the problem.

Does it matter?

Public policy decisions are made based on accurate measurements of our environment and the weather.  Consider the debate over global warming or something on a smaller scale closer to home, water management decisions.  Living in a semi-arid environment like we do in Colorado, much depends on water- from Colorado’s largest industry of agriculture to how much water you have for your lawn in the summer.  If measurements taken at DIA claim an abnormally dry or wet year, governments and the public make decisions based on them.  But are those decisions accurate and are they based on valid data?

I spoke to Byron Lewis, Program Manager at the National Weather Service Office in Boulder, and he stated that he felt the comparison of historical records between those taken at DIA and Stapleton should not matter – he says it is no different than when Denver’s official station moved from downtown to Stapleton in 1950.  He also felt that the issue of accuracy between precipitation and snow measurements was not noteworthy.

Others see it differently.  They point to the fact that the move from downtown to Stapleton was 6 miles – half the distance of the move from Stapleton to DIA.  Further, they argue that the area where DIA resides in a much more ‘plains’ type climate and does not accurately reflect Denver weather.

One retired NWS meteorologist told me, “It is climatologically absurd for the NWS to mix the 1872-1994 Denver city records with DIA weather data for the purposes of normals, record extremes, and top ten lists.  Many in the public and science community can recognize this fallacy–and it’s making the Weather Service look foolish.”

The Solution

The National Weather Service does at least partially recognize the problem and seems to have acknowledged that the weather at DIA is not what most folks experience within Denver.  Mr. Lewis said that next month they hope to begin installing a new monitoring station in Denver City Park.  This new station will provide more accurate measurements closer to where people actually live.  However, there is a catch – official Denver records and measurements will continue to be taken at DIA.

There is nothing to prevent the National Weather Service from moving the official measuring site back to Stapleton or some other more central location.  One local news station has a statement on their website claiming that, “because commercial airports are the origin of regular weather observations in the United States. This is mandated by the National Weather Service and the Federal Aviation Administration.”  This is absolutely untrue.

While weather stations must be maintained at major airports for obvious reasons, cities do not need to use those specific stations for their official measurements.  In fact, the United States’ two largest cities – New York and Los Angeles – both take official weather measurements in different locations than their airport.  New York measures its weather in Central Park and Los Angeles takes its measurements downtown.

It is this weather enthusiast’s opinion that by throwing yet another location into the mix, the water simply gets muddled further.  As long as Denver’s “official” weather measurements are taken at DIA, any records should either come with an asterisk denoting that they aren’t comparable to historical records or they should only be based on data collected in the last 14 years.

Unless and until a move is made, we just have to remember to take any announcement of a weather record with a grain of salt.

Two airports, two different climates. Read the series:

Thornton Weather

Part 2: Data shows Denver weather records skewed by move to DIA

Two airports, two different climates. How Denver's weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)
Two airports, two different climates. How Denver’s weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)

ThorntonWeather.com’s owner and operator used to write for a now-defunct website called Examiner. This was a national site but with locally focused content. As the Denver Weather Examiner, Tony covered a number of topics related to Denver and Colorado weather.

Among them, he was always quick to point out how Denver’s weather records were being skewed by the move of Denver’s official weather station to Denver International Airport. In 2009, he wrote a three-part series explaining why this was an issue and why it mattered.

Fifteen years later, this continues to be a problem and thus we are re-publishing the series here. While the data is not current and some of the images were lost with time, readers can still understand and appreciate the problem.

Part 2: Data shows Denver weather records skewed by move to DIA
Originally published March 3, 2009, Examiner.

Did you hear February was Denver’s least snowiest month?  Or was it?  As we discussed yesterday, a growing chorus of voices are objecting to the National Weather Service’s use of measurements at Denver International Airport for official Denver weather record keeping.  They claim that comparing data from DIA to previous records compiled for more than 40 years at Stapleton and more than 75 years before that in downtown isn’t a fair analysis.

In this second of a three part series, we take a look at some of the data to see just how big of a difference the 12 mile move from Stapleton to DIA made.  We also investigate potential issues with accuracy at the automated monitoring station at DIA that could forever be altering our climate records.  Tomorrow we will take a look at why all of this matters and why you should care.

Temperatures

An analysis shows that in just the last eight years DIA registers warmer high temperatures and cooler low temperatures than stations closer to downtown and in areas where people actually live.  For our comparison, we compared the last eight years of data for Denver International Airport versus the measurements taken at Buckley Air Force Base.  We chose Buckley because that is the closest official measuring station to the location of the old Stapleton International Airport.

<insert table>

As you can see, the differences between where measurements have been taken for the last 14 years at DIA and where they were taken previously is significant.  DIA’s highest recorded temperatures each year averages nearly 2 degrees more than those closer to Denver.  Similarly, the station’s low temperatures are more than 2 degrees cooler.  This essentially throws any record high or record low temperatures that were recorded in the last 14 years out the window.  Any comparison of today’s data with historical records taken at Stapleton are invalid because the location move to DIA has clearly impacted the measurements.

Precipitation

This is probably the single most astonishing statistic and helps to show just how much of a difference 12 miles can make.  The National Weather Service has been taking precipitation measurements at both DIA and at the former Stapleton site so we can do a direct comparison between the two sites.  The results are astonishing.

<insert table>

The chart clearly shows that precipitation measurements at DIA consistently underperform as compared to those at Stapleton.  Over the 8 year period, DIA on average measures 13% less precipitation than Stapleton.

One year in particular stands out.  In 2002 Colorado was in a drought by any measurement.  At the end of the year the National Weather Service proclaimed it as Denver’s driest on record.  However, that claim was based on measurements at DIA.  If you use the measurements at Stapleton – where weather records were kept for more than 40 years – the claim doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.  Stapleton’s 8.49 inches of precipitation in 2002, while certainly a dry, below normal year, would actually make it only the 6th driest year.  It can easily be argued that the claim that 2002 was Denver’s driest year should be discarded.

As a more recent example, March 2008 was proclaimed the “third driest March on record” when a mere 0.17 inch of precipitation was recorded at DIA.  However, 0.55 inch was recorded at Stapleton, an amount which would not put the month anywhere near the top 10 driest.

Snowfall

Historical snowfall measurement comparisons between the two locations unfortunately cannot be directly performed as it was only this year that the National Weather Service began measuring snow at DIA.  However, we can infer from the precipitation measurements noted above that there will be a comparable discrepancy in snowfall measurements as well.  This stands to reason as the plains receive less snow than areas closer to the mountains and going 12 miles east can make a big difference.

Issues of accuracy?

The precipitation and snowfall issue gets even further convoluted this year with the move to measuring snowfall at DIA.  While this would seem to solve the problem of inconsistency between taking precipitation measurements at DIA but snowfall at Stapleton, it turns out things aren’t quite that easy.

Weather enthusiasts have noticed problems with recent snowfall and precipitation measurements.  Just recently on Monday, January 12th, when a small snow storm moved through the Front Range the National Weather Service recorded 3 inches of snowfall but only 0.03 inch precipitation.

On average snow has a 10:1 moisture content which means that 1 inch of snow equals 0.1 inch of moisture.  Using the standard, approximately 0.3 inch precipitation should have been recorded – 10 times what was actually reported.

Extending the observation period out to include the two month period from December 1, 2008 to January 31, 2009, similar problems have occurred.  At Stapleton, where measurements are taken manually, 12 inches of snowfall was recorded with a moisture content of 1.08 inches – approximately an 11:1 ratio and one that could be expected.  By contrast, DIA – using automated precipitation measurements – recorded 15 inches of snow but a meager 0.37 inch of precipitation.  That is an unfeasibly dry 40:1 snow to precipitation ratio.

Detractors abhor the use of automated stations for such important climate records and are quick to point out that this is but one of many examples of inconsistent measurements.  One former NWS employee said, “the NWS sold their soul to automation years ago” and as a result we are stuck with inaccurate records.

Two airports, two different climates. Read the series:

Climatology, Thornton Weather

Part 1: Do Denver weather and climate records have an asterisk attached?

Two airports, two different climates. How Denver's weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)
Two airports, two different climates. How Denver’s weather and climate records are skewed by a 12 mile move. (ThorntonWeather.com)

ThorntonWeather.com’s owner and operator used to write for a now-defunct website called Examiner. This was a national site but with locally focused content. As the Denver Weather Examiner, Tony covered a number of topics related to Denver and Colorado weather.

Among them, he was always quick to point out how Denver’s weather records were being skewed by the move of Denver’s official weather station to Denver International Airport. In 2009, he wrote a three-part series explaining why this was an issue and why it mattered.

Fifteen years later, this continues to be a problem and thus we are re-publishing the series here. While the data is not current and some of the images were lost with time, readers can still understand and appreciate the problem.

Part 1: Do Denver weather and climate records have an asterisk attached?
Originally published March 2, 2009, Examiner.

February 2009 is Denver’s least snowiest February on record.  A new record high temperature is recorded on January 21, 2009.  Record low temperatures are recorded on December 14th and 15th of last year.

These announcements are common and we all take notice when we hear them and they make for great water cooler chat topics but are these claims accurate?

In 1995 Denver finally opened its new airport out on the plains east of the city.  This new facility, 12 miles as the crow flies northeast of the old Stapleton International Airport, moved the airport from an urban environment to a rural one and more than 19 miles from the center of Denver.  Following that move, the National Weather Service (NWS) began taking some of its official measurements at the glistening new airport.  In doing so, some say Denver’s climate records have forever been altered and as such any weather record should have an asterisk attached to it.

Official Denver weather statistics were collected from the NWS’ downtown Denver office from November, 1871 to December 1949.  In January 1950 observations were moved to Stapleton International Airport where they remained until February 1995.  From March 1995 forward, Denver’s official weather has been measured at DIA.  With the move, precipitation switched to Automated Surface Observing Systems (ASOS), an automated means of making the measurement.  In a somewhat confusing twist, the measuring of snowfall remained at Stapleton until just this snow season.

Map:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=39.819612,-104.886475&spn=0.337528,0.594635&z=11&msid=118280686911175493835.0004640da10c79cdcdba0

The question many are asking – Does a move of 12 miles make that much of a difference when measuring the weather?  Twelve miles is the same distance as between downtown and Golden, or downtown and Centennial or downtown and the northern edge of Thornton.  How often do we hear about heavy snow falling at I-25 and C-470 and yet downtown remains dry?  If you live in any of the outer metro area suburbs you know that what the news stations report as the weather downtown rarely is what you experience.

Twelve miles, particularly in a topographically and geographically diverse area as the Front Range would appear to make a world of difference.  That is why when you watch the evening news local meteorologists include the conditions at their local station downtown in addition to the official data at DIA.  Most local meteorologists have railed against the move and are quick to point out that the weather as measured at DIA does not reflect what Denver weather truly is.

When new records are announced, detractors point out that it isn’t fair to compare the data compiled at DIA with that which was recorded previously at Stapleton or downtown.  Just yesterday the National Weather Service announced that February 2009 was the least snowiest on record.  But was it really?  The NWS says Denver received only a trace of snow (less than 0.1 inch) but this was at DIA.  The vast majority of the metro area had at least some measurable snow during the month and Stapleton, where official records were kept for more than 40 years, had 0.8 inch of snow – a number that would push it well out of ‘least snowiest’ contention.  Many say we are comparing apples and oranges.

Empirical data shows that every meaningful statistic has been skewed by the move to DIA.  In this three part series we will take a look at how moving Denver’s official weather measurements to DIA have skewed Denver’s climate records and why it matters to you.  Tomorrow we take a look at the empirical data showing just how big of a difference 12 miles makes.  Wednesday we’ll tell you why it matters and learn about some possible solutions to the problem.

Stay tuned!

Two airports, two different climates. Read the series:

Climatology, National Weather

State of the Climate 2014: Warmer, wetter than normal in the U.S.

Leave a comment
Significant U.S. Weather and Climate Events for 2014. Click for larger view. (NOAA / NCDC)
Significant U.S. Weather and Climate Events for 2014. Click for larger view. (NOAA / NCDC)

The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) has released its summary of the nation’s climate and weather for 2014.  Its analysis shows that overall, the United States experienced warmer than normal temperatures and above average precipitation.

From NOAA / NCDC:

2014 U.S. temperature exceeds 20th-century average for the 18th consecutive year

Second warmest December boosted 2014 to 34th warmest year for contiguous U.S; eight weather and climate disasters exceeded $1 billion in damages

The 2014 annual average contiguous U.S. temperature was 52.6°F, 0.5°F above the 20th century average. Very warm conditions dominated the West, with four states having their warmest year on record, while the Midwest and Mississippi Valley were cool. This ranked as the 34th warmest year since we began keeping track in the 1895, while the temperature exceeded the 20th Century average for the 18th consecutive year.

The average contiguous U.S. precipitation was 30.76 inches, 0.82 inch above average, and ranked as the 40th wettest year in the 120-year period of record. The Northern U.S. was wet, and the Southern Plains were dry; the national drought footprint shrank about 2 percent.

In 2014, there were eight weather/climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States. These eight events resulted in the deaths of 53 people. The events include: the western U.S. drought, the Michigan & Northeast flooding event, five severe storm events, and one winter storm event.

U.S. climate highlights: 2014

  • The West was warmer than average for much of 2014. Nine states had a top 10 warm year.Alaska, Arizona, California, and Nevada each had their warmest year on record. Most locations from the Rockies to the East Coast were cooler than average, with the exception of New England and Florida. Seven states across the Midwest and Mississippi River Valley had a top 10 cool year. No state was record cold during 2014.
  • The Pacific Northwest, Northern Rockies, Midwest, and Northeast were all wetter than average. Michigan and Wisconsin each had their seventh wettest year on record. The Southern Plains and parts of the Ohio Valley were drier than average, but no state was top 10 dry. The rest of the contiguous U.S. had near-average annual precipitation totals.
  • The U.S. Climate Extremes Index (USCEI) for 2014 was 35 percent above average, ranking as the 19th highest annual USCEI in the 105-year record. The components of the USCEI that were much above average for the year included warm nighttime temperatures and 1-day precipitation totals. The USCEI is an index that tracks extremes (falling in the upper or lower 10 percent of the record) in temperature, precipitation, drought, and land-falling tropical cyclones across the contiguous U.S.
Statewide Average Temperature Ranks for 2014. (NOAA / NCDC)
Statewide Average Temperature Ranks for 2014. (NOAA / NCDC)
Statewide Average Precipitation Ranks for 2014. (NOAA / NCDC)
Statewide Average Precipitation Ranks for 2014. (NOAA / NCDC)
Climatology, Thornton Weather, World Weather

April 2011 ends as 7th warmest on record for the globe; Denver warmer and drier than normal

Leave a comment
Global surface temperature Anomalies - April 2011. (NOAA)
Not only did Denver and Thornton see warmer than normal temperatures in April, so did the rest of the globe. Click the image for a larger version. (NOAA)

With the effects of La Nina still in full force the globe’s temperatures performed as forecasted during April 2011.  According to NOAA the month ranked as the seventh warmest April on record while Denver saw warmer and drier than normal conditions as well.

Denver saw an average temperature during the month of 48.4 degrees – 0.8 degree above normal.  Temperatures ranged from a record high of 84 degrees on the 2nd down to a low of 19 on the 4th of the month.  Fifteen days saw temperatures dip below the freezing mark which is four more than normal.

Here in Thornton we were slightly cooler with an average of 48.1 degrees for April.  Our high ranged from 86.3 degrees down to a low of 20.6 degrees.

The lack of precipitation and snowfall was one of the biggest stories of the month for the Mile High City.  A mere 1.07 inch of precipitation was recorded in Denver’s rain bucket which was 0.86 inch below the normal of 1.93 inches.

Snowfall was similarly dismal as only 1.2 inches of snow was recorded at Denver International Airport.  This was far below the normal of 9.1 inches for April which is historically our fourth snowiest month.  Through April 30, a mere 21.8 inches of snow has been recorded at Denver’s official monitoring site at Denver International Airport – the second worst snow season to date.

Thornton was a bit wetter than Denver as we recorded 1.54 inches of liquid precipitation.  In terms of snowfall we received only 1.5 inches, most of which (1.3”) fell on the 3rd of the month.

Overall the globe saw warm temperatures as well.  The combined land and ocean temperature average for the month was 57.76° F which was 1.06° above the 20th century average.  Taken separately the land surface temperature was 2.02° above normal and sea temperatures were 0.70° above normal.

April 2011 global climate summary – From NOAA:

The Earth experienced the seventh warmest April since record keeping began in 1880, as the climate phenomenon La Niña continued to be a significant factor. April’s annual Arctic sea ice extent was the fifth smallest since record keeping began in 1979, while the Antarctic sea ice extent was the fourth smallest.

The monthly analysis from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.

Global Temperature Highlights – April

  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for April 2011 was the seventh warmest on record at 57.76 F (14.29 C), which is 1.06 F (0.59 C) above the 20th century average of 56.7 F (13.7 C). The margin of error associated with this temperature is +/- 0.13 F (0.07 C).
  • Separately, the global land surface temperature was 2.02 F (1.12 C) above the 20th century average of 46.5 F (8.1 C), which was the sixth warmest April on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.20 F (0.11 C). Warmer-than-average conditions occurred across most of the southern United States and northern Mexico, much of central South America, Europe and Siberia. Cooler-than-average regions included most of Alaska, western Canada, the northwestern United States, southwestern Greenland and most of Australia.
  • The April global ocean surface temperature was 0.70 F (0.39 C) above the 20th century average of 60.9 F (16.0 C), making it the 11th warmest April on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.07 F (0.04 C). The warmth was most pronounced in the eastern Atlantic Ocean, the northwestern Pacific and across the Southern Hemisphere mid-latitudes.
  • The average temperature was the warmest on record for April across the United Kingdom. Germany reported its second warmest April since records began in 1881.

Global Temperature Highlights – Year-to-date

  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year to date (January – April 2011) was 0.86 F (0.48 C) above the 20th century average of 54.8 F (12.6 C), making it the 14th warmest on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.16 F (0.09 C).
  • The year-to-date worldwide land surface temperature was 1.33 F (0.74 C) above the 20th century average — the 17th warmest such period on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.36 F (0.20 C). Warmer-than-average conditions were particularly felt across the southern half of Greenland, Siberia, northern Mexico, the southern United States and across Africa. Cooler-than-average regions included central Canada, the northern United States, western Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, extreme southeast Asia and most of Australia.
  • The global ocean surface temperature for the year-to-date was 0.68 F (0.38 C) above the 20th century average and was the 11th warmest such period on record. The margin of error is +/-0.07 F (0.04 C). The warmth was most pronounced across parts of the most of the western Pacific Ocean, the tropical Atlantic Ocean, the North Atlantic near Greenland and Canada, and the southern mid-latitude oceans.
  • La Niña conditions continued to weaken in April for the fourth consecutive month, although sea-surface temperatures remained below normal across the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. According to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, La Niña will continue to have global impacts as the event continues to decline, but by late spring neither La Niña nor El Niño conditions are expected to prevail in the region.
  • Effective May 2, 2011, NOAA updated its monthly mean temperature dataset, which is used to calculate global land surface temperature anomalies and trends. The Global Historical Climate Network-Monthly (GHCN-M) version 3 dataset replaced GHCN-M version 2. Beginning with this month’s Global State of the Climate Report, GHCN-M version 3 is used for National Climatic Data Center climate monitoring products.  More information on this transition can be found at:http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcnm.

Polar Sea Ice and Precipitation Highlights

  • The average Arctic sea ice extent during April was 5.7 percent below average, ranking as the fifth smallest April since satellite records began in 1979.
  • The April 2011 Antarctic sea ice extent was 7.7 percent below average and was fourth lowest April extent since records began in 1979.
  • Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent during April ranked as the 15th smallest on record, while the snow cover extent over North America was the 10th largest and Eurasian snow cover was the fifth smallest April snow cover on record.
  • Average rainfall across Australia was 18 percent above average during April. However, for the first month since June 2010, below-average rainfall was reported in the states of Queensland, South Australia and New South Wales. This broke a streak of nine consecutive months with above-normal rainfall in those states.
Climatology

NOAA: 2010 ties as second warmest year on record

Leave a comment
NOAA temperature anomaly map showing warmer than average temperatures across much of the globe in 2010. (NOAA)
NOAA temperature anomaly map showing warmer than average temperatures across much of the globe in 2010. View more images in the slideshow below. (NOAA)

Data released by NOAA puts 2010 into the history books as tying with 2005 as the warmest year globally since 1880.  The newly released report is sure to fuel the ongoing climate change and global warming debate for the year to come. 

The National Climatic Data Center’s information shows that the combined global land and ocean temperatures in 2010 were 1.12° F (0.62° C) above the 20th century average.  This ties the year with 2005 as the warmest on record. 

Land surface temperatures globally were the warmest on record as a temperature anomaly of 1.8° F (1.0° C) was recorded.  The oceans fared better according to the NCDC with temperatures 0.88° F (0.49° C) above the 20th century average putting it in the books typing with as the third warmest on record. 

The United States separately was warm as well although not in record-setting form.  Warmer than average temperatures were recorded across much of the nation with the south being the exception.  NOAA said that temperatures are increasing at a rate of 0.12° F per decade. 

Continue reading NOAA: 2010 ties as second warmest year on record →

Climatology

Globe experiences eighth warmest October on record

Leave a comment

Warm and dry were the key words for Denver’s October weather and that same trend was also seen globally.  According to the National Climatic Data Center, October 2010’s average global temperature was the 8th warmest on record.  With an average temperature of 58 degrees, the month was nearly 1 degree warmer than average. 

The image below shows the areas that were warmer and cooler than the 1971 to 2000 average.

October 2010 global temperatures. (NOAA)
October 2010 global temperatures. (NOAA)

 From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:

Global Temperature Highlights

  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for October 2010 was the eighth warmest on record at 58.07 F (14.54 C), which is 0.97 F (0.54 C) above the 20th century average of 57.1 F (14.0 C). The range associated with the combined temperature is +/- 0.14 F (0.08 C).*
  • The October worldwide land surface temperature was 1.64 F (0.91 C) above the 20th century average of 48.7 F (9.3 C) — the sixth warmest October on record. Warmer-than-average conditions were particularly felt across western Alaska, Canada, northeastern Africa, the Middle East, Kazakhstan and large portions of Russia. Cooler-than-average regions included most of Europe, Mongolia and much of Australia. The range associated with the land surface temperature is +/- 0.20 F (0.11 C).
    • According to the Bureau of Meteorology, Australia had its 10th coolest maximum temperatures on record for October with daytime maximum temperatures 2.12 F (1.18 C) below average. Statewide, both the Northern Territory and Queensland had their third coolest maximum temperatures since national records began in 1950.
  • The October worldwide ocean surface temperature was 0.72 F (0.40 C) above the 20th century average of 60.6 F (15.9 C) and was the 10th warmest October on record. The warmth was most pronounced across the Atlantic, western North Pacific and most of the Indian Ocean. The range associated with the ocean surface temperature is +/- 0.13 F (0.07 C).
  • For the year-to-date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 58.53 F (14.73 C) was tied with 1998 as the warmest January–October period on record. This value is 1.13 F (0.63 C) above the 20th century average.
  • Moderate La Niña conditions continued in October, while sea surface temperatures remained below-normal across the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. According to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, La Niña is expected to strengthen and last at least into the Northern Hemisphere spring of 2011.

Polar Sea Ice and Precipitation Highlights

  • The average Arctic sea ice extent for October was 2.97 million square miles (7.69 million square km), which was 17.2 percent below average. This marks the third lowest October Arctic sea ice extent since records began in 1979 and the 14th consecutive October with below-average Arctic sea ice extent.
  • Antarctic sea ice began its annual retreat during October. October 2010 was the fourth largest sea ice extent on record (2.9 percent above average). The largest October sea ice extent occurred in 2006.
  •  According to Mexico’s National Weather Service (Servicio Meteorolológico Nacional), this October was Mexico’s driest since 1941.
  • North and west Amazonia in Brazil was in the midst of its worst drought in the past 40 years. In October, one of the Amazon River’s most important tributaries, the Black River, dropped to its lowest level of 44.7 feet (13.6 meters) since record keeping began in 1902.
Climatology

Global temperatures on the rise – Second warmest July, warmest year-to-date

Leave a comment

From the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration: The combined global land and ocean surface temperature made this July the second warmest on record, behind 1998, and the warmest averaged January-July on record. The global average land surface temperature for July and January–July was warmest on record. The global ocean surface temperature for July was the fifth warmest, and for January–July 2010 was the second warmest on record, behind 1998.

The monthly analysis from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, which is based on records going back to 1880, is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.

Global temperature anomolies, July 2010. (NOAA)
Global temperature anomolies, July 2010. (NOAA)

Global Temperature Highlights

  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for July 2010 was the second warmest on record at 61.6°F (16.5°C), which is 1.19°F (0.66°C) above the 20th century average of 60.4°F (15.8°C). The averaged temperature for July 1998 was 61.7°F (16.5°C).
  • The July worldwide land surface temperature was 1.85°F (1.03°C) above the 20th century average of 57.8°F (14.3°C) — the warmest July on record. Warmer-than-average conditions dominated land areas of the globe. The most prominent warmth was in Europe, western Russia and eastern Asia. Cooler-than-average regions included central Russia, Alaska and southern South America.
    • According to the Finnish Meteorological Institute, Finland set a new all-time maximum temperature on July 29 when temperatures soared to 99.0°F (37.2°C), surpassing  the previous record set in July 1914 by 2.3°F (1.3°C).
    • Western Russia was engulfed by a severe heat wave during much of July. On July 30, Moscow set a new all-time temperature record when temperatures reached 102°F (39°C), exceeding the previous record of 99.0°F (37.2°C) set four days earlier. Before 2010, the highest maximum temperature recorded in Moscow was 98.2°F (36.8°C), set nine decades ago.
    • According to the Beijing Climate Center, the July 2010 average temperature across China was 73.0°F (22.8°C), which is 2.5°F (1.4°C) above the 1971-2000 average and the warmest July since 1961.
  • The worldwide ocean surface temperature was 0.97°F (0.54°C) above the 20th century average of 61.5°F (16.4°C) and the fifth warmest July on record. The warmth was most pronounced in the Atlantic Ocean.
  • La Niña conditions developed during July 2010, as sea surface temperatures (SST) continued to drop across the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. According to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, La Niña is expected to strengthen and last through the Northern Hemisphere winter 2010-2011.
  • For the year-to-date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 58.1°F (14.5°C) was the warmest January-July period on record. This value is 1.22°F (0.68°C) above the 20th century average.
Global temperature anomolies, January through July, 2010. (NOAA)
Global temperature anomolies, January through July, 2010. (NOAA)

Polar Sea Ice and Precipitation Highlights

  • Arctic sea ice covered an average of 3.2 million square miles (8.4 million square kilometers) during July. This is 16.9 percent below the 1979-2000 average extent and the second lowest July extent since records began in 1979. The record low July was set in 2007. This was the 14th consecutive July with below-average Arctic sea ice extent. July 1996 was the last year that had above-average sea ice extent.
  • Antarctic sea ice extent in July was above average, 4.8 percent above the 1979-2000 average—resulting in the largest July sea ice extent on record.
  • According to Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology, the continent received an average of 34.4 mm (1.35 inches) of precipitation during July 2010—this is 55 percent above the 1961-1990 average and the highest value since 1998.

Scientists, researchers and leaders in government and industry use NOAA’s monthly reports to help track trends and other changes in the world’s climate. This climate service has a wide range of practical uses, from helping farmers know what and when to plant, to guiding resource managers with critical decisions about water, energy and other vital assets.

Climatology, Local News

Next generation weather satellite to be built in Denver

Leave a comment
Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company of Denver will build the next generation of weather satellites. Image courtesy Lockheed Martin Space Systems.
Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company of Denver will build the next generation of weather satellites. Image courtesy Lockheed Martin Space Systems.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has selected Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company of Denver to build their next generation of weather and environment monitoring satellites.  When the GOES-R satellites are launched in 2015, they will provide unprecedented capability to NOAA, the National Weather Service and all weather forecasters through the use of advanced technology. 

These extraordinary satellites will provide everything from lightning mapping and improved hurricane forecasting to monitoring of sea surface temperatures.  The press release from NOAA provides some of the details on this exciting endeavor: 

NOAA, NASA Select Contractor to Build GOES-R Series Spacecraft
New Geostationary Satellites Will Give Forecasters Better Information

December 2, 2008

NOAA and NASA officials announced today Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, of Denver, Colo., has been selected to build two spacecraft for NOAA’s next generation geostationary satellite series, GOES-R. There are two options, each providing for one additional satellite. Scheduled for launch in 2015, the new satellites will provide more data in greater detail which is essential to creating accurate weather forecasts.

The contract has a total value of $1.09 billion for the two satellites. A separate contract to build the GOES-R ground system, which receives, processes and distributes data transmitted from the spacecraft, will be announced later in 2009, officials said.

“GOES-R, with its highly advanced instruments and sensors, will provide about 50 times more weather and climate data than is available with NOAA’s current fleet of geostationary satellites,” said Mary Kicza, assistant administrator for NOAA Satellite and Information Service. “The American public will see real life-saving benefits from this satellite system with more timely forecasts and warnings for severe weather.”

GOES-R will improve the monitoring of sea surface temperatures and also provide more data to hurricane forecasters by giving sharper images of storms every 30 seconds, instead of every 7.5 minutes as the current satellites provide.

Additionally, GOES-R will carry a first-of-its-kind instrument called the Geostationary Lightning Mapper, which will quickly locate all lightning flashes occurring anytime, anywhere in the Western Hemisphere. The lightning mapper will aid in predicting tornadoes, which often spawn from lightning-packed thunderstorms.

Other key benefits expected from GOES-R include: greater monitoring of surface temperatures in metropolitan areas to improve warnings for heat stress, and better data to bolster the forecasts for unhealthy air quality days. GOES-R will feature advanced solar monitoring instruments for space weather forecasts and warnings of solar storms. These storms endanger billions of dollars worth of commercial and government assets in space and cause power surges for the satellite-based electronics and communications industry.

George Morrow, director of Flight Project for NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. said, “NASA Goddard is excited to be NOAA’s partner in this next generation GOES development and we look forward to delivering an outstanding observatory for their operational use.”

NOAA funds, manages and will operate the GOES-R program. NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center oversees the acquisition of the GOES-R spacecraft and instruments for NOAA.

For more information:  NOAA / NASA GOES-R website