ACORN-SAT 2.0: New South Wales- What a mess

April 10, 2019

This is the seventh in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.  The Bureau has published a new station catalogue with more detailed information, the adjustment summary for each station, plus lists of comparative stations for adjustments and all comparison stations for each site, with explanations of adjustment terminology.  Well worth a look.

See my previous posts for Western Australia, the Northern TerritoryQueensland,  South Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria for a general introduction.  It is important to highlight this paragraph on the new ACORN-SAT home page:

The purpose of updating datasets like ACORN-SAT is principally to incorporate data that has been recorded since the last analysis was released, as well as historical paper records that have been recently digitised. ACORN-SAT version 2 also incorporates the findings and recommendations of the Technical Advisory Forum, applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies. The overall aim of the update to ACORN-SAT is to provide improved estimates of historical changes in climate.

As well, in the ACORN-SAT FAQs, the Bureau says:

“… The important question is not which one (version) represents the absolute truth, but whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

Therefore, the Bureau has set their own criterion for whether Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are at all useful and valuable.  To repeat:

“whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

The Context – New South Wales

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  New South Wales is the oldest and most populous state with climates varying from semi-desert to montaine.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

NSW map all

There are 25 Acorn stations in the NSW BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Additional data

An extra 27 years of data have been digitised for Canberra, and 45 years for Moree, which has had an enormous effect on annual temperature trends (see below).  Some locations had changes to new sites, with Acorn 1 data merged to Acorn 2 data, including Tibooburra and Wilcannia.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data ranged from +8.3 ℃ at Scone in 1996 to -9.6 ℃ at Cabramurra in 1998 applied to individual daily figures.

Remarkably, there were NO changes from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Gunnedah.

Figure 2:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Cabramurra

Cabramurra max adj

Minima adjustments ranged from -13.4 ℃ at Wagga Wagga in 1946 to +9.6 ℃ at Scone in 1996 on individual days but with many days adjusted by -2 ℃ or greater.

Figure 3:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Wagga Wagga:

Wagga min diffs

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did the Bureau get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

New record maxima were established at nine stations, with the highest at Bourke (48.9 ℃) while other stations’ record highs were unchanged or reduced.  There were two notable changes.  Figure 4 shows maxima at Sydney in 1939, where the record was increased by 2.5 ℃ to 47.9 ℃.

Figure 4:  Three versions of maxima at Sydney in 1939

Sydney record max

(The temperature was below 20 ℃ on 16th and 17th.)

Figure 5 shows Port Macquarie, whose record maximum was reduced by -4.1 ℃ from 48.1 ℃ to 44 ℃ in 1944.

Figure 5:  Two versions of maxima at Port Macquarie in 1944

PtMcquarie record max

There is NO daily raw data for any Port Macquarie site from 1921 to 1956 at Climate Data Online, so there is no way of replicating these adjustments.

Such “wildly different results” are beyond rational explanation.

New record low temperatures were established at 15 stations, and a new record low for Acorn stations was set, not at Cabramurra in the Snowy Mountains, but at Inverell in the north: -13 ℃.  Canberra’s minimum was reduced by 2.9 ℃ to -11.5 ℃.

Figure 6:  Three versions of minima at Inverell

Inverell record min

Raw minimum of -10 ℃ is cold enough.  Acorn version 1 had cooled this further by 1.4 ℃, but version 2 cools version 1 by another 1.6 ℃, making it three degrees cooler than the raw figure.  Strange things happen in the past!

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, 15 out of the 25 stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum- including 12 times at Bourke and Sydney, 15 at Tibooburra, and 212 times at Cabramurra.  The worst example was minimum 2.2 ℃ above maximum in October 1913 at Tibooburra.  Blair Trewin claims he has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

That is almost how he “corrected” the worst NSW example in Acorn 1 (minimum 2.2 ℃ above maximum at Tibooburra).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Tibooburra in 1913.

Figure 7:  Tibooburra temperatures October-November 1913

Tibooburra DTR 1913

Acorn 1 maxima (orange line) were reduced too far below Raw (brown). Acorn 1 minima (grey) were too far above raw minima (light blue).  Result: garbage. Acorn 2 has changed maxima (dark red) back to 0.1 ℃ below the raw value, and reduced minima (dark blue) from 17 ℃ to 16 ℃.  This is not the “mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum”- but at least the DTR is not negative.

The problem was caused by far too large adjustments to both maxima and minima, and was fixed by more arbitrary adjustments.

Not all Acorn 2 adjustments resulted in an increase in warming- in several, the warming trend was reduced.  For example, Figure 8 shows annual temperature trends at Sydney.

Figure 8:  Maxima Trends in Sydney 1910-2017

Sydney max ann trends

The warming rate of +1 ℃ per 100 years in Acorn 1 has been reduced to +0.79 ℃ in Acorn 2.

However, at Coffs Harbour the warming trend in minima was more than doubled, from +1.47 ℃ to +3.17 ℃ per 100 years.

Figure 9:  Minima trends at Coffs Harbour 1952-2017

CoffsHbr min ann trends

Figure 10 shows the effect of including an extra 27 years of data on annual trends at Canberra, with Acorn 1 adjusted downwards from 2011.

Figure 10:  Trends in Canberra minima 1914-2017

Canberra min ann trends

Acorn 1 starts in 1940.  Canberra’s warming trend has been increased from +1.48 ℃ to +2.18 ℃ per 100 years.

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, but additional digitised data at several stations has a large impact on annual trends.  As well, several Acorn 1 stations closed and their data merged with data from new sites in Acorn 2.

Large differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of many degrees Celsius are found at several stations.  Interestingly, no changes were made to Version 1 in Gunnedah maxima, and only a few in minima.

New record maxima were established at nine stations, with the remaining stations’ records being reduced or unchanged.  The largest increase was of +2.5 ℃ at Sydney, and the largest decrease was at Port Macquarie where the record high was reduced by -4.1 ℃.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments at 15 stations (including 12 times at Bourke and Sydney, 15 at Tibooburra, and 212 times at Cabramurra) has been “fixed”- only seven years after the problem was pointed out.

Not all Acorn 2 adjustments resulted in an increase in warming- in several, the warming trend was reduced.  However, excessive adjustments have resulted in Coffs Harbour’s Acorn 1 minima trend of +1.47 ℃ per 100 years being more than doubled to +3.17 ℃ in Acorn 2.

The size of the adjustments only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.  The explanation that Acorn Version 2 “applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies”, is beyond belief, as most datasets so far examined are vastly different from Acorn Version 1.  This is not incremental improvement.

In the ACORN-SAT FAQs, in the answer to:

“Why should the adjustments change, weren’t they correct the first time?”

the Bureau says:

“… The important question is not which one (version) represents the absolute truth, but whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

By their own words they have condemned themselves- “wildly different results” is exactly what has been produced.  Adjustments made in Version 1 were apparently made in error as they have been “corrected” by adjustments in version 2.  Will these adjustments be in error and corrected in version 3?

The Bureau officers responsible for Acorn version 2 appear to be blissfully unaware that they have made adjustments of up to 13.4 ℃ to temperatures in the dataset they proudly claimed to be world’s best practice just seven years ago.

What a mess.

I will next show a summary of Version 2 changes across the whole network, and then look at annual trends at all stations.

Advertisements

ACORN-SAT 2.0: Victoria- A comedy of errors

April 5, 2019

This is the sixth in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.  The Bureau has published a new station catalogue with more detailed information, the adjustment summary for each station, plus lists of comparative stations for adjustments and all comparison stations for each site, with explanations of adjustment terminology.  Well worth a look.

See my previous posts for Western Australia, the Northern TerritoryQueensland,  South Australia, and Tasmania for a general introduction.  It is important to highlight this paragraph on the new ACORN-SAT home page:

The purpose of updating datasets like ACORN-SAT is principally to incorporate data that has been recorded since the last analysis was released, as well as historical paper records that have been recently digitised. ACORN-SAT version 2 also incorporates the findings and recommendations of the Technical Advisory Forum, applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies. The overall aim of the update to ACORN-SAT is to provide improved estimates of historical changes in climate.

As well, in the ACORN-SAT FAQs, the Bureau says:

“… The important question is not which one (version) represents the absolute truth, but whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

Therefore, the Bureau has set their own criterion for whether Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are at all useful and valuable.  To repeat:

“whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

The Context – Victoria

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  Victoria is a small state with climates varying from semi-desert to montaine.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

Vic map

There are eleven Acorn stations in the Victorian BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Additional data

An extra 36 years of data have been digitised for Sale, which has had an enormous effect on annual temperature trends (see below).  Melbourne Regional Office observations ceased on 6 January 2015, but Acorn 2 continues the series with Olympic Park, with an overlap of 19 months.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data ranged from +14.6 ℃ at Orbost in 2012 to -4.4 ℃ at Sale in 2013 applied to individual daily figures.

Figure 2:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Orbost

Orbost max adj

Minima adjustments ranged from -7.4 ℃ at Orbost to +6.2 ℃ at Rutherglen in 1926 on individual days but with many days adjusted by -2℃ or greater.   Most changes were small but numerous, for example at Rutherglen where the changes to Acorn 1 ranged between -1 ℃ and +2 ℃ for many years.

Figure 3:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Rutherglen:

Rutherglen min diffs

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did the Bureau get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

New record maxima were established at Cape Otway, Gabo Island, and Mildura, while other stations’ record highs were unchanged or reduced.

Figure 4:  Three versions of maxima at Mildura in 1960

Mildura record max

That eclipses Mildura’s record in raw temperatures of 46.9 ℃.

New record low temperatures were established at Cape Otway, Laverton, Melbourne R.O., Nhill, Rutherglen, and Wilson’s Promontory.  Melbourne’s minima was reduced by 1.1 ℃ to -1.5 ℃.

Figure 5:  Three versions of minima at Melbourne Regional Office

Melbourne record min

Acorn version 1 had warmed the minima by 0.5 ℃, but version 2 cools version 1 by 1.2 ℃, making it 0.7 ℃ cooler than the raw figure.  Strange things happen in the past!

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, eight out of the eleven stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum- including 48 times at Orbost, 63 at Cape Otway, and 79 times at Wilson’s Promontory.  The worst example was minimum 1.8 ℃ above maximum in February 1946 at Orbost.  Blair Trewin claims he has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

That is not how he “corrected” the worst Victoria example in Acorn 1 (minimum 1.8 ℃ above maximum at Orbost).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Orbost in 1946.

Figure 6:  Orbost temperatures January – February 1946

Orbost DTR

Acorn 1 maxima (orange line) were reduced below Raw (brown). Acorn 1 minima (grey) were too far above raw minima (light blue).  Result: garbage. Acorn 2 has changed maxima (dark red) back to approximately raw values, and reduced minima (dark blue) markedly.  This is not the “mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum”.

The problem was caused by far too large adjustments to both maxima and minima, and was fixed by reducing the minimum, and raising the maximum, on all days to almost the same as the raw figures.

Figure 7 shows the effect Acorn version 2 tinkering adjustments have on annual temperature trends at Nhill.

Figure 7:  Trends in Nhill minima 1944-2017

Nhill min ann trends

Acorn 1 had this series cooling very slightly at -0.13 ℃ per 100 years but Acorn 2 has reversed the Acorn 1 trend to +0.67 ℃ per 100 years.  (This is restored to about 0.13 ℃ above what the “raw” trend showed.)

Figure 8 shows the effect of including an extra 36 years of data on annual trends at Sale.

Figure 8:  Trends in Sale maxima 1910-2017

Sale max ann trends

The arrow shows where Acorn 1 starts in 1946.

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, but an extra 36 years of data at Sale has a large impact on annual trends.  Melbourne Regional Office is now amalgamated with Olympic Park, despite having only 19 months of overlap.

Large differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of several degrees Celsius are found at Orbost, Sale, and Rutherglen.

New record maxima were established at Cape Otway, Gabo Island, and Mildura. New record low temperatures were established Cape Otway, Laverton, Melbourne R.O., Nhill, Rutherglen, and Wilson’s Promontory.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments at eight stations (including 48 instances at Orbost, 63 at Cape Otway, and 79 at Wilson’s Promontory) has been “fixed”- only seven years after the problem was pointed out.

Excessive adjustments have resulted in Nhill’s Acorn 1 minima trend of -0.13℃ per 100 years being changed to +0.67 ℃ in Acorn 2.

The size of the adjustments only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.  The explanation that Acorn Version 2 “applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies”, is beyond belief, as nearly every dataset so far examined is vastly different from Acorn Version 1.  This is not incremental improvement.

In the ACORN-SAT FAQs, in the answer to:

“Why should the adjustments change, weren’t they correct the first time?”

the Bureau says:

“… The important question is not which one (version) represents the absolute truth, but whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

By their own words they have condemned themselves- “wildly different results” is exactly what has been produced.  Adjustments made in Version 1 were apparently made in error as they have been “corrected” by adjustments in version 2.  Will these adjustments be in error and corrected in version 3?

It’s a joke, a continuing comedy of errors.

I have so far looked at 87 of the 112 Acorn stations.  Next up: New South Wales.

ACORN-SAT 2.0: Tasmania- May the Farce be with you

April 1, 2019

This is the fifth in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.  The Bureau has published a new station catalogue with more detailed information, the adjustment summary for each station, plus lists of comparative stations for adjustments and all comparison stations for each site, with explanations of adjustment terminology.  Well worth a look.

See my previous posts for Western Australia, the Northern Territory, Queensland, and South Australia for a general introduction.  An important addition to this general introduction is this paragraph on the ACORN-SAT home page:

The purpose of updating datasets like ACORN-SAT is principally to incorporate data that has been recorded since the last analysis was released, as well as historical paper records that have been recently digitised. ACORN-SAT version 2 also incorporates the findings and recommendations of the Technical Advisory Forum, applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies. The overall aim of the update to ACORN-SAT is to provide improved estimates of historical changes in climate.

The Context – Tasmania

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  Tasmania is an island state with a cool marine climate.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

Tas map

There are seven Acorn stations in the Tasmanian BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data ranged from +5.4 ℃ at Larapuna (Eddystone Point) to -7.3 ℃ in 1946 at Butlers Gorge applied to individual daily figures.

Figure 2:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Butlers Gorge

ButlersGorge max adj

Minima adjustments ranged from -9.7 ℃ to +11.3 ℃ at Butlers Gorge on individual days but with many days adjusted by -2℃ or greater.   Most changes were small but numerous, for example at Launceston where the changes to Acorn 1 ranged between -1 ℃ and +2 ℃ for many years.

Figure 3:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Launceston:

Launceston min diffs

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did the Bureau get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

New record maxima were established at Butlers Gorge, Cape Bruny Lighthouse, Larapuna (Eddystone Point), and Low Head.

Figure 4:  Three versions of maximum at Low Head 3 February 1912

LowHd record max

New record low temperatures were established at all stations except Butlers Gorge.  Low Head’s minima was reduced by 0.7 ℃ to -2.9 ℃.

Figure 5:  Three versions of minima at Low Head July 1944

LowHd record min

Acorn version 1 had warmed the minima by 0.6 ℃, but version 2 cools version 1 by 0.7 ℃, making it 0.1 ℃ cooler than the raw figure.  Strange things happen in the past!

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, five out of the seven stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum- including 37 times at Butlers Gorge and 39 times at Low Head (again), where the worst example was minimum 2.1 ℃ above maximum in December 1926.  Blair Trewin claims he has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

That is not how he “corrected” the worst Tasmanian example in Acorn 1 (minimum 2.1 ℃ above maximum at Low Head).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Low Head in December 1926.

Figure 6:  Low Head temperatures December 1926

LowHd DTR

Acorn 1 maxima (orange line) were reduced too far below Raw (brown). Acorn 1 minima (grey) were too far above raw minima (light blue).  Result: garbage. Acorn 2 has changed maxima (dark red) back above raw, and reduced minima (dark blue) almost to the same value as raw, except on the 17th when it has been made the same as the Acorn 2 maximum.  This is not the “mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum”.

The problem was caused by far too large adjustments to maxima, and was fixed by arbitrarily making the minimum on the 17th the same as the maximum, unusually higher than other minima adjustments.

Figure 7 shows the effect Acorn tinkering adjustments have on annual temperature trends at Butlers Gorge.

Figure 7:  Trends in Butlers Gorge minima 1944-2017

ButlersGorge min ann trends

Acorn 1 had this series cooling very slightly at -0.12 ℃ per 100 years but Acorn 2 has reversed the Acorn 1 trend to +0.54 ℃ per 100 years.  (This is restored to what the “raw” trend showed, from a messy record with huge data gaps.)

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, so Tasmania has only seven stations.

There is no more additional digitized data, except for the period 2012 to 2017.

Large differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of several degrees Celsius are found at Larapuna and Butlers Gorge.

New record maxima were set at Butlers Gorge, Cape Bruny, Larapuna, and Low Head.  New record low temperatures were established at all stations except Butlers Gorge.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments (37 times at Butlers Gorge and 39 times at Low Head has been “fixed” by arbitrary adjustments.

Excessive adjustments have resulted in Butler Gorge’s Acorn 1 minima trend of -0.12℃ per 100 years being changed to +0.54 ℃ in Acorn 2.

The size of the adjustments only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.  The explanation that Acorn Version 2 “applies the latest scientific research and understanding and, where applicable, introduces new methodologies”, is beyond belief, as nearly every dataset so far examined is vastly different from Acorn Version 1.  This not incremental improvement.

In the ACORN-SAT FAQs, in the answer to:

“Why should the adjustments change, weren’t they correct the first time?”

the Bureau spokesman says:

“… The important question is not which one (version) represents the absolute truth, but whether those estimates produce wildly different results, and whether the range of estimates provides a reasonable guide to what has actually occurred.”

By their own words they have condemned themselves- “wildly different results”  is exactly what has been produced.

 

What a farce.

I have so far looked at 76 of the 112 Acorn stations.  Next up: Victoria.

ACORN-SAT 2.0: South Australia- Science Fiction

March 28, 2019

This is the fourth in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.

See my previous posts for Western Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland for a general introduction.

The Context – South Australia

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  South Australia has a narrow band of arable country in the south with cool wet winters and hot dry summers, but most of the state is desert.  South Australia achieved notoriety 18 months ago when the whole state endured an electricity blackout- but of course large scale adoption of renewable energy was blameless.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

SA map

There are thirteen Acorn stations in the South Australian BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data ranged from +9.7 ℃ in 1996 to -7.6 ℃ in 1993 at Port Lincoln, with changes of +8.5 ℃ on many occasions, applied to individual daily figures.

Figure 2:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Port Lincoln

PortLincoln diffs max

Minima adjustments ranged from -5.5 ℃ again at Port Lincoln to +9.1 ℃ at Snowtown, and there were many other large adjustments at other stations as well.  Most changes were small but numerous, for example at Mount Gambier where the changes to Acorn 1 ranged between -2.2 ℃ and +0.5 ℃ for many years.

Figure 3:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Mount Gambier:

MtGambier diffs min

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did the Bureau get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

Most stations had their record highs actually reduced.  New record maxima were established at two stations, Port Lincoln increased from 46.7 ℃ to 47.9 ℃, and Oodnadatta set a new record of 51.1 degrees Celsius, which is a new record for all of Australia, pipping Carnarvon in WA by 0.1 ℃.

Figure 4:  New version of maxima at Oodnadatta December 1959 – January 1960

Oodnadatta record max

New record low temperatures were established at Cape Borda, Nuriootpa, and Mount Gambier.  Mount Gambier shows the Bureau at its silliest:

Figure 5:  Three versions of minima at Mt Gambier June 1950

MtGambier record min

Acorn version 1 had warmed the minima by 0.4 ℃, but version 2 cools version 1 by 0.6 ℃, making it cooler than the raw figures.

Up, down- what was the ‘correct’ temperature?.

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, eight out of the thirteen stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum.  Blair Trewin claims he has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

That is how he “corrected” the worst South Australian example in Acorn 1 (minimum 2.4 ℃ above maximum at Tarcoola).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Tarcoola from 26 April to 5 May 1923.

Figure 6:  Tarcoola temperatures 26 April – 5 May 1923

Tarcoola DTR

Acorn 1 maxima (orange line) were slightly reduced below Raw (brown). Acorn 1 minima (grey) were far above raw minima (light blue).  Result: garbage.  Acorn 2 has made minima (dark blue) about two degrees less than Acorn 1.

The problem was caused by far too large adjustments, as Figure 7 shows:

Figure 7:  Adjustments to raw Tarcoola minima 26 April – 5 May 1923

Tarcoola adjustments

Acorn 1 adjustments to raw minima were as much as 4.4 degrees; Acorn 2 has introduced variety- sometimes lower, sometimes higher.

Figure 8 shows the effect Acorn adjustments have on annual temperature trends.

Figure 8:  Trends in Tarcoola minima 1922-2017

Tarcoola min ann trends

I spliced the old Tarcoola record with Tarcoola Aero which overlapped  from 1998 to 2000 to create a “minimally adjusted” series, shown in blue.  This series is cooling at -0.46 ℃ per 100 years.  Acorn 1 reversed this trend, showing warming at 0.67 ℃ per 100 years, but Acorn 2 has increased the Acorn 1 trend more than three times to +2.43 ℃ per 100 years.

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, so the network is still extremely sparse.

There is no more additional digitized data.

Large differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of several degrees Celsius are found at Port Lincoln, Snowtown, Tarcoola, and Mount Gambier.

A new Australian record maximum temperature has been set at 51.1 ℃ at Oodnadatta, Port Lincoln also has a new record, but other locations had record maxima reduced.  New record low temperatures were established at Cape Borda, Nuriootpa, and Mount Gambier.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments has been “fixed” by arbitrary adjustments.

Excessive adjustments have resulted in Tarcoola’s raw minima trend of -0.46℃ per 100 years being changed to +0.67 ℃ in Acorn 1 and an incredible +2.43 ℃ in Acorn 2, an increase of 262% over Acorn 1.

The size of the adjustments only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.

Acorn 2’s adjustments are science fiction.

Next up: Tasmania.

 

ACORN-SAT 2.0: Queensland: Welcome to Dreamworld

February 28, 2019

This is the third in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.

See my previous posts for Western Australia and the Northern Territory for a general introduction.

The Context – Queensland

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  Queensland is in the north-east from monsoonal tropics to mountain temperate to savannah and desert.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

Qld map

There are 26 Acorn stations in the Queensland BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data ranged from +7.2C at Burketown in 2003 to -5.2C at Georgetown on many occasions, applied to individual daily figures.

Figure 2:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Georgetown

Georgetown diffs

Minima adjustments ranged from -9.1C at Thargomindah to +6.3C at Charleville, and there were many other large adjustments at other stations as well.  Most changes were small but there were many still substantial changes, for example at Longreach where there were some very large changes to Acorn 1, with large numbers between -4C and +2C.

Figure 3:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Longreach:

Longreach diffs

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did the Bureau get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

New record maxima were established at 10 stations.  These were +0.8C higher than the previous record in Acorn 1 at Burketown (previous record 44.7C to 45.5C).

Figure 4:  Three versions of maxima at Burketown December 1934

Burketown max 1934

A new record low temperature was established at Palmerville, way up north in tropical Cape Yorke Peninsula, where the ridiculous Acorn 1 temperature of -2.4C was reduced even further to -3.1C.  Unbelievable- the record low at Charters Towers, 500km south, is 1.1C.  The record low at Rockhampton, 1,000 km south, is -1C.

Figure 5:  Three versions of minima at Palmerville June 1913

Palmerville min 1913

New lows were also established at 10 other stations.

Apparently the adjustments made to raw data in Acorn 1 weren’t big enough.

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, 15 out of the 26 stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum.  Blair Trewin has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

That is how he “corrected” the worst Queensland example in Acorn 1 (minimum 2.8C above maximum at tropical Mackay).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Mackay from 25 to 31 August 1953.

Figure 6:  Mackay Aerodrome data 25-31 August 1953

Mackay August 1953

Acorn 1 maxima (brown line) were slightly reduced below Raw (bright green) until 27 August but had a major adjustment on the 28th, far below Raw minima (olive) and Acorn 1 minima (blue).  Result: garbage.  Acorn 2 has made minima (purple) less than Acorn 1.  Acorn 2 maxima (red) are slightly less than Acorn 1 except on the 28th when the maximum has been made the same as minimum.

The problem was caused by far too large adjustments.

The problem has been “fixed” by making more arbitrary adjustments, but large adjustments remain.

Amberley:

Amberley came under scrutiny after Acorn 1 because of a major adjustment to minima to account for a discontinuity in the 1980s.  I compare before and after annual data.

Figure 7:  Amberley Minima

Amberley min annual

There is a discontinuity in the raw data, so the negative trend is probably too steep.  However, the adjustments in Acorn 1 were far too great.  Acorn 2 is a slight improvement: the trend is now +2.11C per 100 years instead of +2.62C.

Barcaldine:

Barcaldine’s raw data was not supposed to be adjusted in Acorn 1- at least that was claimed in the Table guidance notes of the Table of Adjustments released in 2014.  However, there were some small one-off adjustments to maxima in Acorn 1: +0.1C in 1962, 1995, and 1996, and -0.1C in 2011. However, both maxima and minima have been strongly adjusted in Acorn 2.  Here is Barcaldine’s Tmax:

Figure 8:  Barcaldine Maxima

Barcaldine max annual

That’s a 52% increase in annual trends!

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, so the network is still extremely sparse.

There is a very small amount of additional digitized data.

Burketown, Georgetown, Longreach, Normanton, and Richmond all had large differences in maxima between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of over five degrees Celsius.  Charters Towers, Longreach, Normanton, Palmerville, and Thargomindah had greater than five degree differences in minima.

New record maximum and minimum temperatures have been set.  Palmerville’s new recod low is especially preposterous.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments has been “fixed” by arbitrary adjustments.

Amberley’s minima adjustments have been reduced.

Barcaldine’s raw data was not adjusted in Acorn 1, but both maxima and minima have been  adjusted in Acorn 2.

The size of the adjustments only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.

You don’t have to go to the Gold Coast to see Dreamworld- it’s in the Acorn 2 adjustments.

I will be concentrating on another project for a few weeks so may not post for a while, but when I do, next will be South Australia.

ACORN 2: Rutherglen-Digging a Deeper Hole

February 26, 2019

Rutherglen is back in the news again, so here’s my two bob’s worth.

Acorn 2 has increased the warming trend in annual minima from +1.71C per 100 years to +1.8C per 100 years:

Figure 1:  Rutherglen annual minima

Rutherglen annuals min

Rutherglen’s lowest minimum has been reduced from -7.9C to -8C.

The “corrections” to Acorn 1 are now from 31 December 2010:

Figure 2: Acorn 2 minus Acorn 1 daily values

Rutherglen Tmin diffs

Who knew thermometers were reading a much as 1.2 degrees too warm in 2010?  (The annual mean differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 for the years before 2011 are from 0.5C to 0.7C).

So, is the new version of Acorn an improvement on the homogenization in Acorn 1 from seven years ago?

As a result of the media interest in Rutherglen, in 2014 the Bureau published this plot, showing Rutherglen’s raw data compared with the homogenized data from Wagga Wagga, Deniliquin, and Kerang.

Figure 3:  BOM justification for adjustments

Rutherglen BOM comparison chart

Comparing raw data from one station with adjusted data from other stations is hardly a valid argument.

Back in 2014, I posited a test for the validity of adjustments.  The aim of homogenizing is to adjust the temperature record to make a “best estimate” of what the temperature should have been.  This is achieved by pairwise comparison between the candidate site and 10 reference sites.

By comparing Rutherglen’s raw and adjusted data with that of each of the stations used in the homogenizing process, we can see how the Rutherglen record compares with its neighbours before and after homogenising.

Subtracting the mean of neighbours’ temperature anomalies from those of Rutherglen, we can tell how well the raw data compare, and how well the adjusted data compare.

Figure 4:  2014 comparison of differences

2014 plot

Back then, it was obvious that Rutherglen minima were cooling at about the same rate as the neighbours, and that the Acorn 1 adjustments were much too great.

Applying exactly the same methodology now, with complete dataset extended to 2017, we see that Rutherglen is cooling very slightly more than neighbours, while Acorn 2 is even more out of touch with the regional reality.

Figure 5:  Rutherglen differences 2019

Rutherglen tmin avg comps

The Acorn 2 adjustments are much too large, and have created an even stronger warming trend.

FAIL.

ACORN-SAT 2: Eucla: The Devil in the detail

February 18, 2019

I’m having a break from looking at Acorn 2 data from Queensland.  I’ve been wondering:  what’s going on?  What’s beneath these changes?  In particular, I was struck by statements in the accompanying Research Paper that

In total, there were 966 adjustments applied in version 2 of the ACORN-SAT dataset, 463 for maximum temperature and 503 for minimum temperature.”

The Bureau is referring to breakpoints in the data where adjustments are applied to all previous years.  In the daily data, there are tens of thousands of adjustments at each station.

For example, in Eucla’s Tmax record, there are 34,145 daily datapoints; 34,144 in Acorn 1; and 33,858 in Acorn 2.  There are  10,190 instances where Acorn 1 makes no change to raw data, and 9,312 in Acorn 2.  Most of the instances of no adjustments are since 1995.  Before then almost every day has been adjusted.

And the devil is in the detail.

The following plots show how adjustments are applied to the range of raw maxima.  First Acorn 1.

Figure 1:  Acorn 1 adjustments as applied to raw maxima at Eucla

Ac1 raw adj

Figure 2:  Acorn 2 adjustments as applied to raw maxima

Ac2 raw adj

Acorn 2 removes the large negative adjustments for temperatures in the high 30s, and the spread is wider for very high temperatures.  So far so good.

Figure 3 shows where many of these adjustments are made.

Figure 3:  Acorn 2 and  raw maxima

Eucla 1913-2017

Between 1930 and 1995 many high temperature spikes are reduced by 5 degrees and more.

For example, here is November 1960.

Figure 4:  Raw, Acorn 1, and Acorn 2 in November 1960

Eucla Nov 1960

The Bureau can truthfully claim that there is a balance between positive and negative adjustments.

However, note how all temperatures over 35C have been reduced by five degrees.  This is common across these years.

Perhaps temperatures on very hot days at Eucla in the 1960s were exaggerated?  Perhaps they were not read accurately?

If this pattern of hot day reductions is generally followed at stations across large regions, e.g. southern Australia, the effect will be that climate analysis based on Acorn 2 will show that past extremes were generally not as high as nowadays.

And that can’t be a bad thing for the meme.

ACORN-SAT 2.0: The Northern Territory- Alice in Wonderland

February 15, 2019

(UPDATE 17/02/2019:

I have corrected a glitch in trend calculations which are now as shown.  I have deleted all Diurnal Temperature Range plots and discussion as well.)

This is the second in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.

See my previous post for Western Australia for a general introduction.

The Context – The Northern Territory

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  The Northern Territory is right in the Outback, from the monsoonal north to the desert centre. Most of it is savannah or desert, and there are vast distances between settlements and thermometers.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

map NT

There are five Acorn stations in the Northern Territory BOM database.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Trend changes

Trends in maximum temperature have changed a lot at individual stations, but on average there has been little change  (+1.29C to +1.27C per 100 years).  (Even though an average of such wildly different stations across such vast territory is meaningless.)

Figure 2:  Maxima trend changes from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2

NT max trend

The “average” change in minima is -33.3%  (+0.55C to +0.37C per 100 years).    This however is mainly due to Rabbit Flat’s short history with much missing data.

Figure 3:  Minima trend changes from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2

NT min trend

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data were mostly small, except at Alice Springs which had adjustments ranging from -9.2C to +10.1C applied to individual daily figures, but only on a few days.  The +10.1C adjustment was to correct what could only have been a typographical error in Acorn 1, which recorded 26.8C instead of 36.8C on 28 January 1944.  The -9.2C is less easily explained and may be the opposite, Acorn 2 recording 24.1C instead perhaps of 34.1C on 6 March 1943.  Acorn 2 made many other large corrections around these dates, as Figure 4 shows.

Figure 4:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Alice Springs

max diff alice

Minima adjustments ranged from -11.5C to +11C also at Alice, and there were many other large adjustments as well.  At the other stations the range was much less, though still substantial changes (-3.6C to +4.6C) to Acorn 1.  Here is Alice Springs again:

Figure 5:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Alice Springs

min diff alice

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did Blair Trewin get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

A new record maximum was established at Darwin, whose record on 18 October 1982 (unchanged from raw to Acorn 1) increased from 38.9C to 39.5C in Acorn 2.

Figure 6:  Three versions of maxima at Darwin 18 October 1982

Darwin max 1982

A slightly higher record was also set at Victoria River Downs.

A new record low temperature on 21 June 1925 was also established at Alice Springs, where the Acorn 1 temperature of -6.7C was reduced to -9.4C.   (The temperature in the Post Office raw data was -5.6C.)  New lows were established at Darwin and Tennant Creek as well, but on nothing like the same scale.

Apparently the adjustments made to raw data in Acorn 1 weren’t big enough.

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, 3 out of the 5 stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum.  Blair Trewin claims he has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

But that is not how he “corrected” the worst NT examples in Acorn 1 (minimum 4.8C above maximum at Alice Springs, and a 3.9C difference at Tennant Creek).  Here is a plot of the raw data and changes made by Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 at Alice Springs for 11 to 21 June 1932.

Figure 7:  Alice Springs Post Office data for 11-21 June 1932

Alice june 32 min2

Acorn 1 made no change to raw maxima, but was supposed to cool raw minima (the purple line) substantially  (the blue line).  Unfortunately, it is likely that instead of 8.1C, 18.1C was entered, human error resulting in garbage.  Acorn 2 has fixed this, but not by making minima and maxima equal to the Acorn 1 mean (15.7C), and neither is the DTR zero.  Instead there were more arbitrary adjustments.

(At Tennant Creek, to correct negative DTR of -3.9C,  minimum and maximum were both set to 22.9C, which is one degree less than the Acorn 1 mean of 23.9C).

 “Square wave” pattern in adjustments

The peculiar repeating pattern of adjustments to Perth in Acorn 1 also occurs at Darwin, but the pattern is even more bizarre.

Figure 8:  Darwin Acorn 1 daily maxima differences (pre-World War 2)

sq wave Darwin acorn 1

In every month, every day of the month was adjusted in Acorn 1 by exactly the same amount, which is the reason only 1917 is visible- the others are exactly the same.  Blair Trewin has taken notice of the criticism, and adjusted Acorn 2 with a little more intelligence, but the monthly pattern is still visible.  Adjustments are still applied month by month, especially in the Dry months.

Figure 9:  Darwin Acorn 2 daily maxima differences 

sq wave Darwin acorn 2

Conclusion:

There are no additional stations, so the network is still extremely sparse.

There is a very small amount of additional digitized data.

The average trend in maxima for NT has not changed very much, even though there is a large range across individual stations.  There was a reduction in the minima trend of -33.3%, mainly from the large impact of Rabbit Flat’s poor data.

Alice Springs had large differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data of over 11 degrees Celsius.

New record maximum and minimum temperatures have been set.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments or human error has been “fixed” by arbitrary adjustments, and not as described in the research paper.

The bizarre “square wave” pattern in adjustments in Darwin has been largely rectified, at least in the Wet months.

With only five Acorn stations in the Territory, each one has a large impact on the climate record.  Alice Springs, which is said to contribute 7 to 10 percent of the national climate signal, has had extremely large adjustments made to Acorn 1.  VRD and Rabbit Flat, stations with short histories and incomplete data, also have a large impact on the national climate signal.

The size of the adjustments (made by comparison with stations up to 1,300 km away) only seven years after the “world’s best practice” dataset was launched, is incredible, and demands explanation.

Otherwise, it would appear that the temperature record of the Northern Territory, especially at The Alice,but also at other stations, has fallen down a rabbit hole, and appears to be out of a chapter from Alice in Wonderland.

Next: Queensland.

 

ACORN-SAT 2.0: Western Australia- A State of Confusion

February 14, 2019

(UPDATE 17/02/2019:

I have corrected a glitch in trend calculations which are now as shown.  I have deleted all Diurnal Temperature Range plots and discussion as well.)

This is the first in a series of posts in which I directly compare the most recent version of Australia’s temperature record, ACORN-SAT 2, with that of the previous version, ACORN-SAT 1.  Daily data are directly downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology. I do not analyse against raw data (available at Climate Data Online), except for particular examples, as I am interested in how different Acorn 2 is from Acorn 1.  The basis for the new version is in the Research Report.

I start with Western Australia, and must thank Chris Gillham for his outstanding work and for allowing me to use data from stations he has used for his annual analysis.

Introduction:

The Bureau of Meteorology has released its latest revision of the Australian temperature record back to 1910.  Previous versions of our historic temperatures included “High Quality”, which I revealed in 2010 to have major flaws, not least being the strong warming bias; and ACORN-SAT 1, released in March 2012, proudly touted as being “World’s Best Practice”, which I (along with others) found to have very many severe problems.  (If you like, check these posts, here, here, here, and here.  There are many others.)

Stung by the public and media criticism which this generated, the Bureau set up a supposedly independent Technical Advisory Forum, which met on one day per year for three years and basically rubber-stamped Acorn.  They did, however, make some recommendations, particularly about transparency.  In the light of this recommendation, this latest release without any publicity at all is perplexing.

Nearly all of Australia’s climate analysis and modelling is based on the previous version, Acorn 1, including monthly, seasonal, and annual means, extremes, and trends.  Sometime in the near future, this will be based on Acorn 2 data.

As this an upgrade to an existing dataset, we might expect there would be a few small tweaks of maybe a few tenths of a degree in some records and any changes to temperature trends would be fairly small.  Perhaps there might be some extra stations in remote areas to improve the density of the sparse network, perhaps some records starting earlier because of newly digitized data, hopefully a sensible fix for the dreadful situation of many daily minimum temperatures being higher than the maximum.

Not so.

No wonder the Bureau has released Acorn 2 so quietly- it is a confusing mess, and completely alters Acorn 1.  Trends are vastly different, some temperatures altered by more than 10 degrees Celsius, and new records established.

The Context – Western Australia

Figure 1 is a map of Australia showing all of the Bureau’s ACORN-SAT climate monitoring stations.  Western Australia occupies the western third of the continent.  Most of it is desert, and there are vast distances between settlements and thermometers.

Figure 1:  Australian ACORN-SAT stations

Acorn map WA

There are 25 Acorn stations in the Western Australian BOM database.  One (Kalumburu 001019) has the latest version data for minima but not for maxima, so complete analysis is not possible.  Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 are summarized in the following sections.

Trend changes

Trends in maximum temperature have increased by an average of +0.25 degrees Celsius per 100 years (from +1.17C to 1.42C), which is an increase of 21.7% over the trend produced by Acorn 1.  (Click on each graphic to enlarge.)

Figure 2:  Maxima trend changes from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2

WA Max trend chart

The largest increase in trend is at Wittenoom.

Trends in minimum temperature have increased by an average of nearly +0.22 degrees Celsius per 100 years (from +1.04C to +1.27C), which is an increase of 21.53%.

Figure 3:  Minima trend changes from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2

WA Min trend chart

The largest increase  (+1.06C per 100 years- from +0.55C to +1.61C).  The largest decrease in trend was at Halls Creek: -1.31C per 100 years.

Largest temperature differences

In maxima, changes to Acorn 1 daily data were often very large.  Wandering gets the gong for greatest adjustments, ranging from -10.9C to +10.9C applied to individual daily figures, but only on a few days.  Eucla has many large changes made to Acorn 1 data.

Figure 4:  Daily changes in maxima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Eucla

Diff Tmax Eucla

Minima adjustments ranged from -10.8C at Esperance to +7.8C at Halls Creek for a few adjustments, but at most stations the range was much less, though still substantial changes to Acorn 1.  Here is Perth:

Figure 5:  Daily changes in minima from Acorn 1 to Acorn 2 at Perth

Diff Tmin Perth

(Remember, these are adjustments to Acorn 1, which was supposed to be “world’s best practice” seven years ago.  How did Blair Trewin get it so wrong the first time?  Has world’s best practice changed so much in seven years?)

Record temperatures

A new record maximum was established at Carnarvon, whose already homogenized record increased from 48.5C to 51C.  This is now the record for all of Australia, apparently (although I have 87 more stations to check).   Additional large adjustments are the cause:

Figure 6:  Three versions of maxima at Carnarvon 23 January 1953

Carnarvon Max

The previous “record”, held by Albany in the cool south, after much ridicule was reduced from 51.2C to 49.5C.  New records were also established at Bridgetown, Dalwallinu, Eucla, Kalgoorlie, Katanning, Marble Bar, Merredin, Perth, and Port Hedland.

New record low temperatures were established at Bridgetown, Cape Leeuwin, Cunderdin, Dalwallinu, Esperance, Eucla, Forrest, Geraldton, Halls Creek, Kalgoorlie, Learmonth, Marble Bar, Meekatharra, Perth, and Wittenoom.

Apparently the adjustments made to raw data in Acorn 1 weren’t good enough.

Quality Control: especially minimum temperatures higher than maximum.

In Acorn 1, 16 out of 25 stations had at least one example of minimum higher than maximum.  Blair Trewin has “fixed” this problem (which he concedes was “physically unrealistic”) by adjusting temperatures in Acorn 2 so that the maximum and minimum are the same, so that DTR for the day is zero.  In his words:

A procedure was therefore adopted under which, if a day had a negative diurnal range in the adjusted data, the maximum and minimum temperatures were each corrected to the mean of the original adjusted maximum and adjusted minimum, creating no change in the daily mean.

But that is not how he “corrected” the worst Western Australian example in Acorn 1 (minimum 2.1C above maximum) at Kalgoorlie.  Here is a plot of the raw data for 14th to 18th November 1914.

Figure 7:  Kalgoorlie Post Office data for 14-18 November 1914

Kalgoorlie raw

The 16th was a cold rainy day, with only 0.1C separating minimum (15.5C) and maximum (15.6C).  But temperatures in 1914 were read from a Fahrenheit thermometer.  Both 60F and 60.1F convert to 15.6C; 15.5C is 59.9F.  It is likely the temperature ranged from just under 60F to just over 60F.

Acorn 1 adjustments were made with brute force rather than finesse.  The maximum was reduced by 1.3C to 14.3C, and the minimum was raised by 0.9C to 16.4C, resulting in nonsense.

Figure 8:  Kalgoorlie Post Office and Acorn 1 data for 14-18 November 1914

Kalgoorlie Ac1

In Fahrenheit, 57.7F maximum and 61.5F minimum.

The solution in Acorn 2?  Even more brutal adjustments- and not to the mean of the Acorn 1 adjustments (which would have been 15.35C):

Figure 9:  Kalgoorlie Post Office and Acorn 2 data for 14-18 November 1914

Kalgoorlie Ac2

The Acorn 1 minima is decreased (by 3.4C) to 13C, and Acorn 1 maxima decreased by another 1.3C to 13C (or 55.4F), making it 2.6C below the raw temperature as read in 1914.  Now there is no problem with minimum exceeding maximum, but at the cost of raw data tortured beyond recognition.

“Square wave” pattern in adjustments

Bob Fernley-Jones first noticed a peculiar repeating pattern of adjustments to Perth in Acorn 1 monthly data.  I can replicate this in dailies.

Figure 10:  Perth Acorn 1 daily maxima differences 1983-1986

sq wave perth acorn 1

This pattern is still visible in Acorn 2, but is much reduced.  Adjustments are still applied month by month, but they are not as rigid.

Figure 11:  Perth Acorn 2 daily maxima differences 1983-1986

sq wave perth acorn 2

This is how it was changed:

Figure 12:  Perth Acorn 2 minus Acorn 1 daily maxima differences 1983-1986

sq wave perth acorn 2- acorn1

A new square wave- almost a mirror image of Figure 11.  It is good to see that the Bureau has taken notice of criticisms!

Conclusion:

Comparison of Acorn2 versus Acorn 1 data for Western Australia does not encourage confidence in the Bureau’s methods:-

There are no additional stations, so the network is still extremely sparse.

There is a very small amount of additional digitized data.

The average trend in maxima for WA has been increased by 21.7%, and in minima by 21.5%.

Differences between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2 daily data can be up to nearly 11 degrees Celsius.

New record maximum temperatures have been set.

The issue of instances of minima being higher than maxima caused by too vigorous adjustments has been “fixed” by further vigorous adjustments.

The “square wave” pattern in adjustments in Perth has been largely rectified.  The square wave is now in the difference between Acorn 1 and Acorn 2.

It beggars belief that a dataset that was proudly described as “world’s best practice” just seven years ago has needed to be adjusted by so much.  Has “best practice” changed so much?  How was Acorn 1 so wrong?  How can we be sure that the new version is better, and will itself not be changed again in a few years?

There are now four versions of WA temperature:  Raw; High Quality (no longer available); Acorn 1; and Acorn 2.  All are different.

The record for Western Australia reveals a state, not of excitement, but of confusion.

 

Next: the Northern Territory.

Townsville Rainfall In Context

February 11, 2019

The rain event which caused massive floods in Townsville (and fearful stock losses in the north-west) has now ended.  There have been some who have made further political capital out of this disaster by linking it to climate change.

According to Independent Australia, a “progressive journal”,

The City of Townsville, with some 20% of its suburban zones under water today (6 February 2019), might now be a model for the world — for possible climate change impacts and handling them. 

These days, the very heavy falls have been happening more frequently — for example, in 2007, 2009 and then in 2010.

Time for a reality check.

This has indeed been a record breaking event for Townsville.  A few graphs will illustrate.  Townsville airport has had its wettest 14 day period since 1941, averaging over 100mm per day.

Fig. 1:  14 day rainfall

Tville 14d rainfall

It has also broken the record for rainfall over 31 days:

Fig. 2:  31 day rainfall

Tville 31d rainfall

And with the wet season far from over, it is very likely to break the 121 day rainfall record.

Fig. 3:  121 day rainfall

Tville 121d rainfall

Townsville’s rain is very seasonal.  Annual rainfall averages about 1127mm, and half of that falls in January and February, with another quarter in December and March, so a plot of 121 day rainfall captures the relative strength of wet seasons over the years.  There doesn’t appear to be any recent increase in wet season strength.  What is interesting is there are periods of wetter and drier years, which is more plainly seen in a plot of decadal rainfall.

 Fig. 4:  Decadal rainfall at Townsville

Tville decadal rainfall

Rainfall appears to be in a decreasing trend.

But what about the claim for greater frequency of very heavy rain events?  Heavy rain events are usually short and intense, so three day rainfall will also show relative frequency and intensity.

Fig. 5:  Three day rainfall

Tville 3d rainfall

The “Night of Noah” in 1998 is obvious, and there was another intense event in 1953.  But there is NO trend.  (The calculated trend is zero.)  Intense events are not more frequent.  Similarly, the number of days per year recording 100mm of rain shows zero trend, even though there have been eight already this year.

Fig. 6:  Count of days per year with over 100mm of rain

Tville days over 100mm

There is no climate change signal in Townsville’s rain record.

Now, to show how different locations can lead to completely different interpretations of trends in climate, I turn to two locations in wetter parts of the tropics that I have some knowledge of.  I lived for many years not far from Pleystowe and Sarina Sugar Mills near Mackay, which are about 30 km apart.  Sarina appears to have an increasing trend in rainfall:

Fig. 7:  Decadal rainfall at Sarina

Sarina decadal rainfall

While Pleystowe shows no trend.

Fig. 8:  Decadal rainfall at Pleystowe

Pleystowe decadal rainfall

Notice the similar patterns of wetter and drier periods in Townsville, Pleystowe, and Sarina.

And incidentally, the most intense and highest rainfall events in these locations occurred many years ago, in 1990-91, the 1970s, the 1950s, and 1918.  As with the recent Townsville flood, these occurred when the monsoon trough, with embedded decaying cyclones, lingered overhead for many days or even weeks.

The Townsville flood was not due to climate change, but to a frequent North Queensland phenomenon- an intense monsoon trough stuck in one place for too long.  This was an unusually intense and long lasting example, but such events are not more frequent or more intense.

How Reliable is the Bureau’s Heatwave Service?

January 24, 2019

The Bureau of Meteorology presents heatwave assessments and forecasts in the interest of public health and safety.  Their heatwave definition is not based on any arbitrary absolute temperature, but uses a straightforward algorithm to calculate “excess heat factors”.  From their FAQs:

“Heatwaves are calculated using the forecast maximum and minimum temperatures over the next three days, comparing this to actual temperatures over the previous thirty days, and then comparing these same three days to the ‘normal’ temperatures expected for that particular location. Using this calculation takes into account people’s ability to adapt to the heat. For example, the same high temperature will be felt differently by residents in Perth compared to those in Hobart, who are not used to the higher range of temperatures experienced in Perth.

This means that in any one location, temperatures that meet the criteria for a heatwave at the end of summer will generally be hotter, than the temperatures that meet the criteria for a heatwave at the beginning of summer.

……

The bulk of heatwaves at each location are of low intensity, with most people expected to have adequate capacity to cope with this level of heat.”

Back in 2015 I showed how this algorithm works perfectly for Melbourne, but fails to detect heatwaves in Marble Bar and instead finds heatwaves at Mawson in the Antarctic.  In light of the long period of very hot weather across most of western Queensland, what does the Heatwave Service show?

Here is their assessment of conditions in Queensland over the last three days….

Fig. 1: Heatwave assessment for 21-23 January 2019

heatwave assessment

Most of inland Queensland has been in a “Low-Intensity Heatwave”, with a couple of small areas near the southern border of “Severe Heatwave”.

And here is their forecast for the next three days..

Fig. 2:  Heatwave forecast for 24-26 January 2019

heatwave forecast

Much the same, with a bit more Severe Heatwave coming.

So what were temperatures really like in the previous three days? Here’s the map for the middle of that period, Tuesday 22nd:

Fig. 3:  Maximum temperatures for 22 January

max 22 jan 1 day

About half the state was above 39 degrees C, a large area was above 42C, and there were smaller areas of above 45C.

And in the past week:

Fig. 4:  Maximum temperatures for 7 days to 23 January

max 22 jan 1 week

Average maxima for roughly the same areas were the same, except there was a larger area averaging over 45C!

This follows December when a large slab of the state averaged from 39C to 42C for the month.

Fig. 5:  Maximum temperatures for December 2018

max 22 jan 1 month

I’m focusing on Birdsville, circled on the map below (and indicated on the maps above.)

Fig. 6:  Queensland forecast towns- Birdsville indicated

qld map

Here are the maxima for Birdsville for January:

Fig. 7:  Birdsville Maxima for January

birdsville jan max

And here’s the forecast for the next 7 days:

Fig. 7:  Birdsville 7 Day Forecast

birdsville forecast

Apart from the 6th, when it was a cool 38.8C, since Christmas Eve the temperature has been above 40C every day, and is forecast to stay above 40C until next Tuesday (and above 45C until Sunday).  Minima have been above 25C on all but three days since Christmas.

And that’s a “Low Intensity” heatwave, with “most people expected to have adequate capacity to cope with this level of heat.”

The Bureau’s unspoken message?  It might be a bit hot, but you’re supposed to be used to it.  Harden up!

Western Queensland residents are pretty tough, but surely a month of such heat deserves a higher level of description than “Low Intensity”- especially for the vulnerable like babies, old people, and visitors.

This is worse than laughable.  The Bureau’s heatwave service is a crock.  As I said in my 2015 post, a methodology that fails to detect heatwaves at Marble Bar (or Birdsville!), and creates them in Antarctica, is worse than useless- it is dangerous.

Another Inconvenient Pause

January 15, 2019

The Pause in global temperatures may be past, but here is another, longer Pause, and one that is much more difficult to explain: at ideal Australian sites, increasing greenhouse gas concentrations have led to a decrease in downwelling longwave radiation- the very opposite of expectations.

Basically, the theory behind the enhanced greenhouse effect is that the increase in concentrations of anthropogenic greenhouse gases leads to an increase in downwelling infra-red (IR) radiation, which causes surface warming.

Is there evidence for increasing downwelling IR in recent years, as atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has been rapidly rising?

The authors of Skeptical Science think so:

Surface measurements of downward longwave radiation

A compilation of surface measurements of downward longwave radiation from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of more longwave radiation returning to earth, attributed to increases in air temperature, humidity and atmospheric carbon dioxide (Wang 2009). More regional studies such as an examination of downward longwave radiation over the central Alps find that downward longwave radiation is increasing due to an enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004).

Time for a reality check.

The links in the above quote do not work for me, so I use data available for Australia.

Greenhouse gas concentrations are measured at Cape Grim in north-west Tasmania.  According to the CSIRO,

The Cape Grim station is positioned just south of the isolated north-west tip (Woolnorth Point) of Tasmania. It is in an important site, as the air sampled arrives at Cape Grim after long trajectories over the Southern Ocean, under conditions described as ‘baseline’. This baseline air is representative of a large area of the Southern Hemisphere, unaffected by regional pollution sources (there are no nearby cities or industry that would contaminate the air quality).

Fig. 1:  Cape Grim Baseline Air Pollution Station (looking almost directly south)

c grim photo

Fig. 2:  CO2 concentration, Cape Grim.

co2 c grim

Fig. 3:  Methane concentration, Cape Grim.

ch4 graph

Fig. 4:  Nitrous oxide concentration, Cape Grim.

n2o graph

There is no doubt that concentrations of greenhouse gases have been increasing.  We should therefore expect to see some increase in downwelling longwave radiation.

Downwelling IR data are available from the Bureau of Meteorology which maintains a database of monthly 1 minute solar data from a network of stations around Australia, including Cape Grim.

What better location than Cape Grim to study the effects of greenhouse gas concentrations from month to month on readings of downwelling IR.  The instruments are within metres of each other under “baseline” conditions at a pristine site.

The data include 1 minute terrestrial irradiance (i.e. downwelling IR striking a horizontal surface) from which I calculated mean daily IR for each month.  To remove the seasonal signal, I calculate anomalies from monthly means.

Fig. 5:  Downwelling longwave radiation anomalies, Cape Grim.

ir over time capegrim

Oops! IR has been decreasing for the full length of the record, 20 years (May 1998 to June 2018).   And monthly IR anomalies plotted against monthly CO2 anomalies show a similar story:

Fig. 6:  Downwelling longwave radiation anomalies, Cape Grim.

ir vs co2 cgrim

In the most suitable location in Australia, from May 1998 to June 2018 there has been no increase in downwelling infra-red radiation, despite an increase of 41.556 ppm atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, 104.15 ppb of methane, and 14.472 ppb of nitrous oxide.

So what factors do influence downwelling IR and thus surface warming or cooling?  Together with solar radiation, that other greenhouse gas, H2O.  Gaseous H2O (humidity) and clouds formed of liquid and ice H2O are by far the major players in returning heat to the surface.

We see this in a plot of downwelling IR against cloudiness (from nearby Marrawa).

Fig. 7:  Downwelling IR anomalies vs Cloudiness, Cape Grim.

ir vs cloud capegrim

Daytime cloudiness (an average of observations at 9.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m.) increases downwelling IR.  We have no data for night time cloudiness unfortunately.

To illustrate the irrelevance of carbon dioxide, here is a plot of anomalies of solar radiation (global irradiance), downwelling infra-red radiation, daytime cloudiness, and carbon dioxide concentration at Cape Grim over the past 20 years.

Fig. 8:  Anomalies of IR, Global Irradiance, CO2, and Daytime Cloud at Cape Grim 1998-2018

98 to 18 full range capegrim ir global co2 cloud anoms

And zooming in on 2008 to 2010:

Fig. 9:  Anomalies of IR, Global Irradiance, CO2, and Daytime Cloud at Cape Grim 2008-2010

98 to 18 2008 2010 capegrim ir global co2 cloud anoms

There is a feedback mechanism: cloudiness inhibits daytime temperature and increases IR and nighttime temperature; decreased cloudiness means decreased IR; but less cloud and higher daytime temperature will increase IR as well if sustained; and higher IR also increases daytime temperature.  Further, sustained decrease in global radiation due to increased cloud cools the surface, thus decreasing IR.

Carbon dioxide concentration changes have no detectable effect.

A desert location, where humidity is typically very low and rain and cloudiness very infrequent, would also be ideal for checking on downwelling IR from carbon dioxide.  Alice Springs in the central desert is such a location with available irradiance data.

At Alice Springs as well, since March 1995 downwelling IR has been decreasing.

Fig. 10:  Downwelling longwave radiation anomalies, Alice Springs.

ir over time alice

The relationship between cloud and IR is even more evident.

Fig. 11:  Anomalies of IR, Global Irradiance, CO2, and Daytime Cloud at Alice Springs 2008-2010

2008 2010 alice ir global co2 cloud anoms

Fig. 12:  Downwelling IR anomalies vs Cloudiness, Alice Springs.

alice ir v cloud

Cloudiness has an even greater influence on IR in desert than maritime locations.

TAKE AWAY FACT:-  For over 20 years, at what are arguably the most suitable sites in Australia, increasing greenhouse gas concentrations have had no detectable effect on downwelling longwave radiation.  Natural factors including cloudiness changes have vastly overwhelmed any such effect and have instead led to a decrease in downwelling longwave radiation.

That is indeed a most inconvenient pause.

*

*

*

*

To replicate these findings:

Go to http://reg.bom.gov.au/climate/reg/oneminsolar/index.shtml

You will need to register with a username and password.  Then click on an irradiance observation station.  Select year and month.  Download the zip file, and open in your preferred application.  (I use Excel).  IR data are in Column W- the values are wattminutes of IR striking a horizontal surface of area one square metre.

My method:  Order the data in ascending order to remove null values.  Count the minutes of valid data and calculate the percentage valid of all possible minutes in that month.  (I discard months with less than 80% valid data.)   Divide the total minutes by 1,440 to convert to days.  Sum the valid data and divide by 60,000 to find kilowatthours; divide by the number of days to find the mean daily value; then multiply by 3.6 to convert to Megajoules.  Plot monthly values against time or carbon dioxide concentration.

One Example of Domestic Electricity Costs

October 25, 2018

During a clean up I found a package of old electricity bills, going back to 2006.  I entered the data into Excel to see what has happened to our costs over the last 13 years.

We live in regional Queensland where the sole provider is Ergon Energy.  Ergon provides on each bill a handy comparison chart showing our electricity usage is very similar to that of other households like ours.  In 2012 we moved to Rockhampton, which is hotter and drier than Mackay, and the house has a different energy use pattern, but electricity prices are the same in both areas.

While our usage has actually declined by about 5.8 kWhrs per quarter over 13 years as we have become more careful, our annual electricity bill has increased by 138%.  We are being good global citizens, so why are we being punished?  The reasons are as shown in the following figures.

Figure 1:  Nett cost per kWhr of electricity

Nett price

The average annual price of electricity delivered (free of other charges) has increased by about 129%.  This was achieved mainly by a series of ever larger increases on an annual basis to 2014 (113% over 8 years), followed by a drop of about 16% over two years, then another increase of 22% over three years.

However the total cost of electricity supply (all charges divided by kWhrs consumed) has increased by 170%.

Figure 2:  Cost of electricity plus other charges per kWhr

Total price

Note the quarterly costs are very close to the trend line, with larger variation from about 2014.  How can this be achieved?  By increasing daily service fees and quarterly metre reading charges.

Figure 3:  Daily service fees and quarterly metre reading charges

Other costs

The average annual costs of these other charges has increased by 544%!

The unintended consequence is that if we use more electricity, the average price per kWhr decreases.  This is actually a disincentive to decrease carbon dioxide emissions, and an incentive to consume more electricity, and in effect, consumers who use less electricity are subsidising those who use more.

So what is driving these steep increases?

According to the Queensland Times on 20 February 2018,

“Energy Queensland – Energex and Ergon – returned a profit of $881 million in 2017, a decrease of $61 million, due to increased borrowings and transmission charges.”

However, “Queensland’s government-owned energy corporations posted a massive $1.9 billion profit last year.

That was a 45 per cent increase on the $1.3 billion in profits recorded in 2016.”

This was mainly from the power generating corporations CS Energy and Stanwell selling to the National Energy Market.

This embarrassment of riches has led the Queensland government to return $50 each to consumers this year, with another $50 next year- taking with one hand and giving back with the other.  This is very little help to business, industry, and agriculture.

So our retail supplier Ergon buys electricity from the wholesalers on the National Energy Market, with our local generator Stanwell selling to this market at the highest price they can get.  Ergon has to return dividends to the state government.  Their only way to ease the squeeze is to increase the return from consumers.

What is happening in capital cities and other states?  How do others compare?  I have no idea.

I will be interested to see whether the Federal government’s promise of lower power prices really eventuates.

Why are Australian Sea Levels Rising?

October 22, 2018

The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind…. literally.

In brief…

  • At Sydney, the long term sea level rise is about 1 mm per year, with short periods of rapid increase and a long plateau of very small or zero trend in the second half of last century.  As Australia is geologically stable, it is likely that a similar pattern occurred all around the coast.
  • This gradual sea level rise is consistent with oceanic warming since the Little Ice Age, with fluctuations resulting from El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) changes.
  • Tide gauge data since 1990 from different locations show rises varying from 2.4 mm to 7.2 mm per year.  A significant proportion of this is due to ENSO wind circulation changes.
  • There is no sign of any unusual acceleration in Australian tide gauge data.

The Bureau of Meteorology maintains the Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project, with a number of tide gauges around the coastline, shown here:

Fig. 1:  Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project

MSL map

These sites have monthly data only from 1990, mostly later, and two (Thursday Island and Port Stanvac) have very limited data and were not used in this study.   I have used data for Mean Sea Level for all sites on the Australian coastline to find the current situation with sea level rise, and use the much longer dataset from Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour as well for a longer term perspective.  Figure 2 is a plot of all monthly data from all sites.

Fig. 2: Australian Mean Sea Levels

MSL plot abs

Points to note:

  • The mean is a measure of central tendency: the full tidal range is at least twice the values shown for each site.  Broome’s range is well over 11 metres.  Portland has a very small range.
  • An Australian average of these means is meaningless.
  • Each site has a seasonal signal which is not regular.
  • It is difficult to make any meaningful comparison.

However if we look at sites individually, we can at least compare any trends.  Figures 3 and 4 show MSL at sites with the greatest and least trends.

Fig. 3:  MSL at Hillarys

MSL plot abs Hillarys

Fig. 4:  MSL at Stony Point

MSL plot abs StonyPt

According to this very short record, the rate of Australian sea level rise varies in different locations, from a low of 2.4 mm per year in Bass Strait to 7.2 mm per year at Hillarys in Western Australia.  Why is this?

Australia is very stable geologically, and these tide gauges are carefully checked with levelling connections between them and Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) sites maintained by State land and survey departments.  Therefore differing rates of land movement are unlikely to be responsible.

We need to compare all sites, and as well remove the seasonal signal.  To do this I calculate monthly anomalies for each site, then plot the results in Figure 5.

Fig. 5:  Monthly anomalies for all Australian sites:

MSL plot all anoms

With the seasonal signal removed, the data show some roughly similar patterns for all sites.  I now plot the mean of these anomalies, to find an “average” Australian sea level trend.

Fig. 6:  Average of all MSL anomalies

MSL anoms trend

All sites show marked dips in 1997-98 and 2015-16, clearly shown in the average.  The influence of El Nino perhaps?  Figure 7 shows the mean of all MSL anomalies with the scaled Southern Oscillation Index (SOI).

Fig. 7:  Average of all MSL anomalies and SOI/200

Aust MSL and soi

My first response was “Wow!”  Next, sea level plotted against SOI:

Fig. 8: MSL as a function of SOI

MSL scatterplot all v soi

For every one point increase in the SOI, Australian sea level rises an average of 3.2 mm, and SOI change can account for more than a third of sea level rise.  Now we check how the SOI has behaved over the last 27 years.

Fig. 9:  Trend in SOI, 1991-2018

SOI plot trend

In this short record, the SOI has increased by about 8 points.

From this, we can deduce that a portion of the perceived sea level rise since 1991 is due to the influence of the El Nino- Southern Oscillation (ENSO), of which SOI is a strong indicator.

What mechanism could there be for this?  The SOI is calculated from the difference in atmospheric pressure between Tahiti and Darwin.  Darwin’s sea level is compared with the SOI in Figure 10.

Fig. 10:  Darwin MSL anomalies and SOI/100

MSL plot Darwin SOI

The match is very close, as the plot of MSL vs SOI shows:

Fig. 11:  Darwin MSL as a function of SOI

MSL plot Darwin vs SOI

SOI has about twice the effect on MSL at Darwin as it has on the Australian average, and more than half sea level rise can be accounted for by change in SOI.  Here’s my explanation:

During La Nina, when SOI is high, the northwest monsoon is strengthened, the monsoon trough penetrates further into northern Australia in summer with lower atmospheric pressure and stronger northwest winds.  This combination pushes the sea up against the northwest coast, raising the sea level.  In winter, the monsoon disappears and winds are predominantly from the east.  During El Nino, the monsoon is weakened and may fail completely.  Thus northwest winds are weaker and the sea level is markedly lower.

That’s all very well for Darwin and other sites in northern Australia, but take a look at Figure 12, which compares seal level at Darwin with Spring Bay, in southern Tasmania, and about as far from Darwin as you can get without a passport.

Fig. 12: MSL at Darwin and Spring Bay

MSL plot Darwin Springbay all

Note that in some (but not all) El Ninos (marked) Spring Bay sea level is also strongly affected.  Note also that sea level at Spring Bay appears to start rising again several months before Darwin, in other words before the SOI starts rising.

The 2015-16 comparison of anomalies shows the Spring Bay sea level at its lowest in September 2015, rising strongly and four months before Darwin’s.

Fig. 13: MSL at Darwin and Spring Bay 2015-16

Darwin SpringBay anoms 20152016

To understand this we need to consider circulation patterns as they change through the year and with ENSO events, and their effect on local sea levels.  The following plots show the absolute 2015-2016 monthly mean sea levels and the long term average for each month.

Fig. 14: MSL at Darwin 2015-16 compared with average monthly levels

Darwin abs 20152016

Darwin’s long term average sea level is highest at the peak of the Wet season (February – March) and lowest in the Dry (July – August).  In 2015, the high was reached in January and the low in July- both one month earlier- and the 2016 high was in March- one month later.  Below normal sea levels lasted from April 2015 to April 2016.

In contrast, Spring Bay’s average sea level is highest in the southern wet season (Winter-July) and lowest in the summer dry season (November to February).  In 2015 the high was reached in May and the low in September, and the 2016 high in May.

Fig. 15: MSL at Spring Bay 2015-16 compared with average monthly levels

Spring Bay abs 20152016

This happens at other sites in the southeast of Australia (from Portland to Port Kembla including Tasmania).

Fig. 16:  Australian sea level at sites in the north and southeast.

MSL plot Nth SE

Note that the same pattern applies: sea level is lower in strong El Ninos and rises before the north (in 1997-98 and 2015-16 but not so clearly in 2006-07).

A possible explanation is that circulation changes associated with the ENSO are not restricted to the tropics, although that is where the effects are largest and most visible. In normal (non-El Nino) years, the sub-tropical ridge moves north over the continent in winter, and the winter storms around the lows to its south bring rain and winds from the south-west quarter to the southern coast, particularly South Australia, Victoria, and Tasmania.  These winds cause the sea to pile up (by a few centimetres) against the southern coast.  In summer, the sub-tropical ridge moves south, rain bearing storms mostly pass to the south of the Australian region, and blocking highs in the Tasman Sea bring strong north-west winds across the south-east of Australia.  This causes sea level to fall.

In a strong El Nino, these conditions occur earlier, with a rapid retreat south of the sub-tropical ridge so that winter storms with south-westerly winds are fewer and weaker and sea level is lower in winter and spring.  Summer sea levels (November to January) are close to normal.

Figure 17 tests the response of sea level to barometric pressure at Spring Bay.

Fig. 17:  Spring Bay MSL anomalies as a function of barometric pressure anomalies

SpringBay MSL vs Press.jpg

The result is clear.  More than half of sea level change is due to pressure variation, which causes winds to change.

The effect is much greater at Darwin.

Fig. 18:  Darwin MSL anomalies as a function of barometric pressure anomalies

Darwin MSL vs Press

By the way, how much does increase in sea temperature affect sea level?

Fig. 19:  Spring Bay MSL anomalies as a function of temperature anomalies

SpringBay MSL vs SST

At Spring Bay, very little.  An increase of one degree could raise sea level by 17 mm, but R-squared of 0.033 is tiny compared with 0.527 for air pressure.

Whatever causes El Nino also causes the southern seasonal weather cycle to occur earlier, and sea levels rebound several months before they do in the tropics.

What of the longer term?

The Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project data are limited to sea levels since 1990, so the record is too short to make assumptions about long term sea level rise, and certainly not about the future.  There are longer datasets available however.  Sydney Harbour (Fort Denison) has data from 1914.

Fig. 20: MSL anomalies at Fort Denison (Sydney)

Sydney 1914 to 2018

That’s a long term sea level rise of 1 mm per year, or 104 mm in 100 years- a bit over 4 inches.  Now there has been an apparent “acceleration” since 1991, matching the data at nearby Port Kembla:

Fig. 21: MSL anomalies at Fort Denison (Sydney) 1991-2018

Sydney 19912018

But once again note the correspondence with the SOI:

Fig. 22: MSL anomalies and scaled SOI Sydney 1991-2018

Sydney 19912018 soi

A significant portion of the recent sea level rise at Sydney can be attributed to a short term rise in the SOI.

So is this recent rapid rise unique?  By calculating the trend in sea level over 10 year periods, we can see periods when sea level rise has accelerated or slowed in the past:

Fig. 23:  10 year running trend in MSL at Sydney

10yr trends MSLSydney

The most recent rise in sea level of 7 to 8 mm per year over 10 years is less than that of the rise to 1953, when sea level rose by 10 mm per year.

If you think 10 year trends are too short, Figure 21 shows 30 year trends at Sydney:

Fig. 24:  30 year running trend in MSL at Sydney

30yr trends MSL Sydney

The current 30 year trend is exactly the same as the trend to 1965:  2.4 mm per year.  For the 30 year period to the mid-1990s the trend was zero.

Conclusion:

Across all tide gauges of the Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project, a significant proportion of sea level rise since 1990 is due to circulation changes associated with the El Nino- Southern Oscillation.  The effect is much greater in the north and west, where sea level rise is highest, but also is evident in the south-east.

Sydney’s long term record tells us that sea level has been rising at an average rate of about 1 mm per year.  There have been short periods of rapid increase and a long plateau of very small or zero trend in the second half of last century.  As Australia is geologically stable, it is likely that a similar pattern occurred all around the coast.

This gradual sea level rise is consistent with oceanic warming since the Little Ice Age, with fluctuations resulting from ENSO changes.

There is no sign of any unusual acceleration in Australian tide gauge data.  In 100 years from now sea level could be expected to be 100 mm to 200 mm higher.  A sea level rise of 5 to 10 times this amount is purely speculative and not based on empirical data, but instead is based on the worst case scenario of computer models.

Tropical Cyclones and Global Warming: A Reality Check

September 15, 2018

Recently there was widespread media reporting of Queensland Emergency Services Minister Craig Crawford’s release of “a plan designed to help first responders get ready for future weather extremes.”

In the ABC Online report, these quotes from Mr Crawford are emphasised:

“There are plenty of people out there who are climate change sceptics… but the consensus is our fire seasons are getting hotter and longer and our flood and cyclone seasons are certainly getting stronger and more frequent.”

“If we’re going to have cyclones happening in parts of Queensland that they don’t normally happen right now it means that we’re going to have to expand all the areas where we have response training, capability and everything like that,” Mr Crawford said.

Cyclone seasons getting stronger and more frequent?  Cyclones happening in parts of Queensland that they don’t normally happen right now?  Time for a reality check.

The Bureau of Meteorology has a useful resource in its Southern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Data Portal  which shows the tracks of all cyclones since the 1969-1970 season.  By clicking on each track you find details of each.   This is the 2017/18 season:

Fig. 1:  Cyclones of the 2017/18 season

Cyclone portal

I have used it to look at all cyclones that have crossed the coast of Australia (and I have included TC Nancy which came very close and whose impact was strongly felt without actually crossing the coast.)  I have counted the cyclones that crossed the coast in every month from October 1969 to now, allocating them to those parts of the northern coastline that they predominantly affected- the north-west, Northern Territory, Gulf of Carpentaria and northern Cape York, north-east Queensland, south-east Queensland (south of the Tropic of Capricorn), and New South Wales.

So here are some facts to annoy our Global Warming Enthusiast friends, and to demonstrate how ill-informed our Emergency Services Minister is.

Fig. 2: Total number of cyclones per season

All cyclones Aust

There has been a decrease in the number of cyclones over the past 48 years, a rate of five less in 100 years.  There has been little change in Western Australian cyclones:

Fig. 3: Total number of cyclones per season hitting North-West Australia

All cyclones NW

Whereas there has been a very noticeable decrease on the east coast (Queensland and NSW):

Fig. 4: Total number of cyclones per season hitting the east coast

All cyclones East coast

which is well illustrated by this plot of cyclones crossing the Queensland coast south of the Tropic of Capricorn:

Fig. 5: Total number of cyclones per season hitting south-east Queensland

All cyclones SEQ

And these images of cyclone tracks are instructive:

Fig. 6: Cyclones of south-east Queensland 1969-1992

SEQ cyclones to 92

Fig. 7: Cyclones of south-east Queensland 1992-2018

SEQ cyclones since 92

Oswald, Marcia and Debbie crossed the coast north of the Tropic of Capricorn and were rain depressions by the time they reached the south-east.

The difference is obvious.  No cyclone has crossed the coast south of Yeppoon since TC Fran in 1992.  26 years without a cyclone- people (and Mr Crawford) forget we had three in 1971.  If we do get another one no doubt it will be blamed on climate change.

So what connection is there between temperature and cyclones?

Fig. 8:  Australian tropical cyclones as a function of sea surface temperature

All cyclones Aust vs sst trop

As temperatures go up, cyclones go down!

Fig. 9:  Australian tropical cyclones as a function of Southern Oscillation Index

All cyclones Aust vs soi

The SOI is an indicator of El Nino, La Nina, or neutral conditions.  According to the BOM, consistently below -7 indicates El Nino, and above +7 indicates La Nina.  It is obvious that there have been very few cyclones in seasons with El Nino conditions, with the vast majority in neutral or La Nina conditions, and higher SOI indicates greater likelihood of cyclones crossing the coast.  This is not new, and the Bureau makes this clear.

Fig. 10:  Tropical cyclones in La Nina years

BOM map la Nina

Fig. 11:  Tropical cyclones in El Nino years

BOM map el nino

Future trends:

The Bureau discusses future trends at length at http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/climatology/trends.shtml

but seems to base its conclusions entirely on climate models:

There remains uncertainty in the future change in tropical cyclone frequency (the number of tropical cyclones in a given period) projected by climate models, with a general tendency for models to project fewer tropical cyclones in the Australia region in the future climate and a greater proportion of the high intensity storms (stronger wind speeds and heavier rainfall).

This is the BOM plot of severe and non-severe cyclones, which includes all tropical cyclones from 90E to 160E south of the Equator, many of which remained well offshore.

Fig. 12: Severe and non-severe tropical cyclones

BOM graph

Is there any evidence for cyclones becoming stronger, if fewer?  According to the BOM’s history of cyclones, no.  This graph plots the number of cyclones rated as severe by the Bureau (<970 hPa central pressure at peak intensity- low pressure is a good predictor of wind speed).  Interestingly, Marcia and Debbie are not listed as severe, but are described as severe in their reports, and definitely were, so I have included them in the tally.

Fig. 13: Severe land-falling tropical cyclones

Severe cyclones Aust

And showing how the proportion of severe tropical cyclones as a percentage of all land-falling cyclones has changed:

Fig. 14: Proportion of land-falling tropical cyclones rated as severe

Severe cyclones Aust %

Tropical cyclones in the past 48 years have decreased in number and intensity, and the proportion of severe tropical cyclones has also decreased, although it is entirely likely that this situation could reverse due to natural variability.

The Government’s Response

The Queensland Government is concerned cyclones may strike further south than they currently do.  They have records of cyclones going back 150 years.  Many, many of them have affected south-east Queensland and NSW.

The worst natural disaster in recorded Australian history was in March 1899 when TC Mahina (the Bathurst Bay cyclone) killed 307 people.

Here are some other significant tropical cyclones recorded by the Bureau:

February 1893 a cyclone crossed near Yeppoon.  This led to the Brisbane River floods.

January 1918. The Mackay cyclone, which caused many deaths.  There was a large storm surge and a barometric pressure reading of 932.6 hPa in a private barometer, and less than 944.8 hPa at the Post Office as the flange on the instrument prevented the needle from going lower.  Inland rainfall caused the highest recorded flood in the Fitzroy River.

March 1918. The Innisfail cyclone.  The pressure dropped to 926 hPa at Mourilyan Sugar Mill.  There was a large storm surge.  Almost all buildings in the town were destroyed or badly damaged.

March 1949.  A cyclone struck Rockhampton and Gladstone.

1967 TC Dinah affected southern Queensland and NSW.  The pressure dropped to 944.8 hPa at Sandy Cape.

In Queensland, counting only those cyclones that have actually crossed the coast, not just approached, here is a list of tropical cyclones since 1970 (see Figure 6) that have struck south of the Tropic of Capricorn (Rockhampton or Yeppoon.)

February 1971 TC Dora

February 1972 TC Daisy

March 1972 TC Emily

January 1974 TC Wanda

March 1974 TC Zoe

February 1976 TC Beth

March 1976 TC Dawn

February 1981 TC Cliff

March 1992 TC Fran

TC Nancy (January 1990) came close but did not actually cross the coast.

TC Marcia in February 2015 crossed the coast near Shoalwater Bay before moving south over Rockhampton.

There is also an impressive list of cyclones which have caused deaths and wind, wave, and flooding damage in NSW.   These include cyclones from 1892.  Included are:

March 1939, TC crossed the coast at Cape Byron.

January 1950   The Sydney cyclone of 1950, when the pressure dropped to 988 hPa in Sydney.

February 1954, TC crossed the coast at Tweed Heads, where the pressure dropped to 973 hPa.

February 1957 TC crossed the coast south of Port Macquarie.

January 1967 TC Dinah caused a large storm surge in the Tweed River.

February 1967 TC Barbara crossed the coast near Lismore.

March 1974 TC Zoe crossed the coast just north of the border and travelled through northern NSW.

January 1990  TC Nancy did not cross the coast but passed about 50km east of Cape Byron.

The Reality

Contrary to Minister Crawford’s claim, and the media’s breathless and uncritical reporting, tropical cyclones in the past 48 years have decreased in number and intensity, and the proportion of severe tropical cyclones has also decreased.  Predictions of future trends are purely speculative.  The current 26 year lull in tropical cyclones hitting the south of Queensland and northern NSW is unusual.  In the past it was normal for cyclones to strike much further south than they do now.  We should not become complacent.

Drought and Climate Change Part 2: Rainfall deficiency

September 7, 2018

In my last post, I looked at long term rainfall trends across Southern, South Eastern, and South Western Australia, and found no cause for alarm at recent rainfall decline.  Droughts can occur at any time and cause much hardship across wide parts of the country.  Global Warming Enthusiasts are gnashing their teeth, believing man-made climate change is making droughts worse.  Greg Jericho in the Guardian wrote last Thursday 30th August, “If you are a prime minister going out to the rural areas and you’re not talking about climate change, and you’re not suggesting that droughts are more likely to occur and thus farmers need to take greater responsibility, then you are failing in your job.”

Are droughts really “more likely to occur” with climate change, and is there any evidence they are becoming more frequent, more intense, and more widespread with global warming?

The Bureau of Meteorology says:

Drought in general means acute water shortage.

The Bureau’s drought maps highlight areas considered to be suffering from a serious or severe rainfall deficiency…. for three months or more….

……

  • Serious rainfall deficiency: rainfall lies above the lowest five per cent of recorded rainfall but below the lowest ten per cent (decile range 1) for the period in question,
  • Severe rainfall deficiency: rainfall is among the lowest five per cent for the period in question.”

This map of meteorological drought (areas in the lowest ten and five percent of 12 months rainfall to 31 August) shows the extent across Australia:

Fig. 1:  Recent 12 month Rainfall Deficiency Australia

12m drought map

Parts of central and southern inland Queensland, parts of eastern South Australia, many parts of New South Wales, and small areas of Victoria are in drought.  Notice that the droughted areas are separated by areas that are not in drought.

But, but… all of NSW is in drought, isn’t it?

100% of NSW has been drought declared, and 54.7% of Queensland, and indeed some parts are in a very bad way.   But “drought declaration” is the term the media, politicians, and general public don’t understand.  They assume that because 100% of NSW is drought declared, this means all of NSW is in drought.  Not so.  Drought declaration is a political or at best administrative instrument for giving drought assistance to farmers and communities.  Some areas of Queensland that have not yet been drought declared really are in the grip of drought; some “drought declared” areas of NSW are not in drought, as this map of NSW (6 months March to August) shows:

Fig. 2: 6 month Rainfall deficiency NSW

NSW map 6m

Of course the blank areas have had below average rainfall, which may turn into full blown drought, so the NSW government is being proactive.  However, they are not at this time in meteorological drought with serious or severe rainfall deficiency.

Trends in Drought Incidence

In the bigger picture, how widespread, how intense, how long lasting, and how frequent are droughts becoming in Australia?  For this analysis I use monthly rainfall data from 1900 to July 2018 from the Bureau of Meteorology at their Climate Change page, and calculate the number of months where the rainfall total of the previous 12, 18, 24, or 36 months shows severe deficiency (in the lowest 5 percent of all months since 1900) or serious deficiency (in the lowest 10 percent).  (I am looking at droughts that last at least 12 months, not just short dry spells, and 12 months total rainfall includes rain in all seasons.)

I do this for various regions, as shown on the map below.

Fig. 3:  Australian Regions

Climate regions

I have plotted the number of consecutive months where the 12, 18, 24, and 36 month totals are in the lowest 5% and 10% of their respective values since 1900, and calculated the trend in months per century of increase or decrease. There are 96 plots, so I will only show a couple of examples, and summarise the results in Table 1 below.

Table 1:  Trends in Drought Incidence (Months per 100 Years) for various Australian Regions

Trend table

A negative trend indicates decreasing drought incidence, shaded green; a positive trend indicates increasing incidence, shaded pink.

Australia wide, and in the regions of Northern and Southern Australia and the Murray Darling Basin, and South Australia as a whole, since 1900 droughts of all lengths have become less frequent, and because these are broad regions, less widespread.  There is no evidence that climate change is making droughts more likely to occur, except for smaller areas (Victoria, Tasmania, and SW Australia) which have an increasing frequency of droughts of all lengths.

36 month dry periods are more frequent in SW Australia, SE Australia, Eastern Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, (and interestingly Queensland, but only for <10% deficiency).

Some examples will illustrate the complexity of the picture.

Fig. 4:  Number of consecutive months per calendar year of 12 months severe rain deficiency: Australia

12m 5% Aust

Fig. 5:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: Australia

36m 10% Aust

In the past droughts of all lengths and severity were more widespread across Australia.

Fig. 6:  Periods of 36 months severe rain deficiency: Southern Australia

36m 5% Sthn Aust

Similarly, multi-year periods of severe rain deficiency were much more frequent and widespread across Southern Australia before 1950.  In the last 50 years there has been only one month where the 36 month total was in the lowest 5th percentile.

Fig. 7:  Periods of 12 months severe rain deficiency: New South Wales

12m 5% NSW

Fig. 8:  Periods of 36 months severe rain deficiency: New South Wales

36m 5% NSW

Fig. 9:  Periods of 12 months serious rain deficiency: New South Wales

12m 10% MDB

Fig. 10:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: New South Wales

36m 10% NSW

Across NSW, 4 months of 2018 had 12 month totals in the serious deficiency range, but none in the severe range.  Droughts of all severity and duration have become less frequent and widespread.  The Millennium Drought lasted longer but was less severe than the Federation Drought.

The Murray-Darling Basin lies across four states including most of NSW, and is Australia’s premier food and fibre producing region.  The current drought is affecting many areas in this region.

Fig. 10:  Periods of 12 months severe rain deficiency: Murray-Darling Basin

12m 5% MDB

Fig. 11:  Periods of 12 months serious rain deficiency: Murray-Darling Basin

12m 10% MDB

Fig. 12:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: Murray-Darling Basin

36m 10% MDB

We can conclude from these plots of the Murray-Darling Basin that this drought is patchy, and while nasty, is not the most intense or long lasting even in living memory, let alone on record, and that droughts are becoming less frequent and less widespread.

Fig. 13:  Periods of 36 months severe rain deficiency: Queensland

36m 5% Qld

Fig. 14:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: Queensland

36m 10% Qld

Queensland has little trend in frequency of drought with severe deficiency over three years but less severe droughts have been more frequent- due to the droughts of the 1990s and the Millennium drought.

Fig. 15:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: Victoria

36m 10% Vic

The Millennium Drought stands out as the longest period of widespread serious rain deficiency.

Fig. 16:  Periods of 36 months serious rain deficiency: South-West Australia

36m 10% SW Oz

Here we see that all but one month of all the 36 month periods of serious rain deficiency have occurred since 1970, reflecting the marked drying trend.  This really is an example of climate changing.

Winter rainfall

Fig. 17:  Winter Rainfall Deciles across Australia, 2018

winter rain 2018

According to the Climate Council, “Climate change has contributed to a southward shift in weather systems that typically bring cool season rainfall to southern Australia.”  However the usual areas affected by this southwards shift, Tasmania, south-west Victoria, southern South Australia, and most of the south-west of Western Australia, have had an average to above average winter.  Droughted areas are to the north.   The southwards shift of weather systems caused by Climate Change cannot be claimed to have any part in this drought.

Drought is a dreadful calamity wherever and whenever it occurs.  And on top of other difficulties in Queensland is the bureaucratic approval process under Vegetation Management regulations before graziers can push mulga to feed starving stock.

This drought may get worse if a full El Nino develops.  It is unlikely to break before six months or even 18 months.  By then it will be much more severe and widespread.  However, climate change has not caused this drought.  While there is evidence for increasing drought frequency and thus likelihood of more drought in the future in Tasmania, southern Victoria, southern South Australia, and the south-west of Western Australia, across the rest of Australia there is strong evidence that droughts have become less frequent, less severe, less widespread, and shorter.  If climate change is claimed as the cause of increasing droughts in the far southern regions, then climate change must also be causing less frequent droughts across the vast bulk of Australia, where droughts are always “likely to occur”, but not “more likely”.

Drought and Climate Change Part 1: Long Term Rainfall

September 1, 2018

The current drought conditions in New South Wales and large parts of Queensland are getting a lot of media attention, and of course the usual suspects are linking it to climate change and our apparently “unambitious” emissions targets in the NEG.  But are droughts really becoming “the new normal”, and are they becoming more frequent, more intense, and more widespread with global warming?

There are two aspects to consider: long term rainfall trends in various regions, and periods of rainfall deficiency.  In this post I will look at long term rainfall, and Part 2 will look at rainfall deficiency i.e. drought incidence.

Long term rainfall trends

Everyone “knows” southern Australia is getting drier.  Paul West in Feeding Australia Pt 2 on the ABC says there has been a 28% decrease in rainfall over the past 30 years.  The Climate Council says “Over the past 30 years, there has been a discernible decrease in rainfall across southern Australia.” That’s their headline; in the details the Climate Council’s June 2018 Fact Sheet says:

“Climate change has contributed to a southward shift in weather systems that typically bring cool season rainfall to southern Australia. Since the 1970s late autumn and early winter rainfall has decreased by 15 percent in southeast Australia, and Western Australia’s southwest region has experienced a 15 percent decline in cool season rainfall.”

Both are true, but both are only half true, and in fact the ABC and the Climate Council as usual lie by omission.

The whole story is more complex but shows a completely different, and much less dramatic picture.  Using data for cool season (April- September) rainfall from the Bureau of Meteorology we can check on different time periods.

Fig. 1:  Cool season rainfall, Southern Australia, 1988-2017

Cool rain Sth Oz 19882017

Yes, if this is what Paul West based his statement on, 2017 had about 28% less rain than in 1988.  I hope he didn’t- comparing single years would be pretty bad science.  However there has been a marked decrease in cool season rainfall over this period, so the Climate Council is quite correct.

However, Figure 2 shows the big picture- since 1900.

Fig. 2: Cool season rainfall, Southern Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain Sth Oz 19002017

Oops! Rainfall has in fact increased over southern Australia.

The reason for the current gnashing of teeth is that “living memory” only goes back about 70 years, and we are comparing current conditions with those of a few decades ago.  Figure 3 shows the average rainfall for the 10 year periods up to 2017.

Fig. 3: 10 year average Cool season rainfall, Southern Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain Sth Oz 19002017 10yrs

As you can see, the average rainfall of the 10 years 2008 to 2017 was about 7% less than in the 1950s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, but more than the 1920s and 1930s, and nearly 10% more than the 10 years to 1947.  Of the 10 decades before this one, five had less rain and five had more.  Southern Australian cool season rainfall is not “the new normal”, it is in fact “the old normal”.

Let’s now look at South-East Australia, below 33 degrees South and east of 135 degrees East.

Fig. 4: Cool season rainfall, South-Eastern Australia, 1988-2017

Cool rain SE Oz 19882017

Again there is an obvious decrease in rain over the last 30 years.

Fig. 5: Cool season rainfall, South-Eastern Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain SE Oz 19002017

There has been a small decrease in cool season rainfall over the whole 118 years.  Again there was a marked step up in rainfall from the mid-1940s.  The plot of 10 year averages shows this more clearly:

Fig. 6: 10 year average cool season rainfall, South-Eastern Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain SE Oz 19002017 10yrs

There was a decreasing trend up to the 1940s, and a decreasing trend from the 1950s to now.  The current 30 to 40 year decrease is nothing new.

However, rainfall records for individual sites go back much longer.  What do these show?  Here is a plot of monthly rainfall for all months at Penola, in South Australia, starting in 1863:

Fig. 7: Monthly rainfall (all months January 1863 – December 2017) at Penola, S.A.

Penola rain monthly

A very long term decreasing trend.  Running 12 month totals show wetter and drier periods:

Fig. 8: 12 month running total rainfall (all months January 1863 – December 2017) at Penola, S.A.

Penola rain 12m

There were very severe droughts around World War 1 and the late 1960s, but a big step up in the 1950s.  This is more obvious in a plot of 10 year totals:

Fig. 8: 120 month running total rainfall (all months January 1863 – December 2017) at Penola, S.A.

Penola rain 120m

This site shows a very long term rainfall decrease, complicated by droughts and strings of wetter years, and a huge step up in the middle of last century.  This site is one of many of varying lengths in the High Quality Rainfall dataset.  Nearly all show the mid-century step up, some show a small long term increase, some show a small long term decrease.

I amalgamated all 84 stations, and here are the plots for all months. Firstly, the number of stations reporting:

Fig. 9: Count of all stations in S.E. Australia reporting, all months

All SE sites Count

There are a number of long term sites.  There were 50 sites in 1898, as in 2017 (several had not yet reported January 2018).

Note: the following plots are of naïve means: there is no area averaging.

Fig. 10: S.E. Australia monthly rainfall (all months)

SE Oz all months

Note a small increase.  Now 12 month running totals of these means:

Fig. 11:  S.E. Australia 12 month rainfall (all months)

SE Oz 12 months

Now the 10 year running total of monthly means, but since 1898 when the number of stations was the same as now:

Fig. 12:  S.E. Australia 120 month rainfall (all months)

SE Oz 120 months 1898

The mid-century step up is obvious, with a decline since then.  The 10 year rainfall to December 2017 is about what it was a century ago.

I now turn to South West Australia.

Fig. 13: Cool season rainfall, South-Western Australia, 1988-2017

Cool rain SW Oz 19882017

A very serious decline since 1988.

Fig. 14: Cool season rainfall, South-Western Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain Sw Oz 19002017

As you can see, the decline has been around since 1900, but with a marked step down starting in 1968, with a steep but uneven decline since then.  10 year averages show this clearly.

Fig. 14: 10 year average cool season rainfall, South-Western Australia, 1900-2017

Cool rain SW Oz 19002017 10yrs

Conclusion:

The long term data show a complex picture of long term cool season rainfall decline in south-west and some parts of south-east Australia, while southern Australia as a whole shows a very small increase.  It is true that rainfall has declined, as the Climate Council and ABC claim, over the past 30 and 40 years in many parts, but that is only half the story.  The whole story is much less dramatic.  Rainfall has been declining for a long time in WA, and in south-east Australia has been declining in two stages, separated by a large step up in rainfall in the middle of last century.

The current low rainfall is not “the new normal” but entirely consistent with “the old normal” and should be seen as just plain “normal”.  This is Australia.  Get used to it.

Solar Exposure

June 6, 2018

The Bureau of Meteorology publishes many useful datasets on its Climate Data Online portal, including one minute solar exposure data for selected sites around Australia.  You have to register to receive monthly data here.

(In contrast with their one minute temperature data which are not available at CDO but must be requested and purchased, and are really “final second of each minute”, their solar exposure data are (a) free, and (b) include for each minute, maximum 1 second irradiance, minimum 1 second irradiance, and THE MEAN IRRADIANCE FOR THE PREVIOUS 60 SECONDS.  Why not temperature?  We can only wonder.  But I digress.)

I am naturally curious and enjoy finding out new stuff, so in this post I’ll show a number of plots for the months of July 2017, December 2017, and February 2018 to illustrate some things I’ve found about summer and winter solar exposure for Rockhampton.  Why Rocky?  It’s where I live, and is just a few kilometres north of the Tropic of Capricorn.  At the end of December the sun is directly overhead, so December shows interesting information.  February is typically the wettest and cloudiest month, and July usually the coldest and driest.

One minute solar exposure data have several components:  direct (normal) irradiance (rate of energy from the direct beam of the sun tracked throughout the day); direct horizontal irradiance (the amount striking a horizontal surface); diffuse irradiance (radiation scattered from the atmosphere including dust and clouds striking a horizontal surface); and “global” irradiance which is the sum of the horizontal and diffuse components.  Also measured is “terrestrial” irradiance, which is downwards infra-red radiation on a horizontal surface, and related to the temperature of the atmosphere, including from clouds and humidity (not just at ground level, but throughout the troposphere).

Figure 1:  Irradiance for February 2018

rocky all feb 18

Note that terrestrial (infra-red) irradiance is fairly constant at around 350-450 watts per square metre, while direct irradiance on a horizontal surface fluctuates from zero to ~1000 W/sq.m., and diffuse irradiance fluctuates from zero to ~900 W/sq.m.  For a closer look here are the same data for one day, 1st February:

Figure 2:  Irradiance for 1 February 2018

rocky all 1 feb 18

Mean horizontal irradiance (the direct beam from the sun on a horizontal surface) is zero in the absence of direct sunlight- at night, but also when clouds are thick enough, and also is greatly reduced even by thinner cloud; at other times, it rises rapidly to ~900 W/sq.m. at noon.

Diffuse irradiance is zero until a few minutes before sunrise, with radiation reflecting from clouds, dust, and other atmospheric particles; similarly just after sundown.  It is much higher in cloudy conditions.

IR irradiance, relatively constant before sunrise at ~400 W/sq.m., rises during the day as the atmosphere warms.  It also fluctuates with cloudy conditions, more noticeably at night.  Clouds are composed of water droplets and emit IR radiation- a natural greenhouse effect.

The next plot shows how irradiance varies over four days as clouds and rain increase.

Figure 3:  Irradiance for 1 – 4 February 2018

rocky all 1 to 4 feb 18

The effect of cloud on horizontal irradiance is obvious.  Diffuse irradiance is maximised on the 3rd; on the 4th, clouds reflect most solar radiation, the surface is cool, and IR irradiance which had increased due to cloudiness on the 2nd and 3rd, returns to ~400 W/sq.m.

By contrast, Figure 4 shows irradiance during the hottest week of February with maxima above 39.1C (41.1C on the 12th).

Figure 4:  Irradiance for 11 – 15 February 2018

rocky all 11 to 15 feb 18

Note the smooth curves of horizontal and diffuse irradiance on 11th and 12th; early morning cloud on 13th – 15th with diffuse and IR increasing; and IR increases with surface temperature, peaking in the late afternoon- with little surges as clouds pass overhead.

Figure 5 shows the variation of IR irradiance during February.

Figure 5:  IR Irradiance for February 2018

rocky IR feb 18

The diurnal fluctuation typically of 60-70 W/sq.m. is obvious, as is the change over time.  The bottom of the daily fluctuation occurs in the early morning.  Notice the effect on the minimum temperature:

Figure 6:  Minima for February 2018

Tmin Feb 18

The last plot for February shows the irradiance from the direct beam of the sun tracked throughout the day:

Figure 7:  Direct Irradiance for February 2018

rocky direct feb 18

It’s interesting that the irradiance of the direct beam is not constant, even on clear sunny days.  It is possible that the rain of the first four days removed suspended particles; from 5th to 9th the wind was from the east or south-east (from the sea); from the 11th to 15th it was from the north west to north, blowing dust and smoke from the land, resulting in slightly dimmer conditions.

I now turn to July 2017.  July is usually the coolest and driest month in Rockhampton.

Figure 8:  Irradiance for July 2017

rocky all july 17

Due to the much lower solar angle, horizontal irradiance is much lower than February, mostly from 600 to 700 W/sq.m.  IR irradiance is more variable, so needs a closer look.

Figure 9:  Irradiance for 6 – 10 July 2017

rocky all 6 to 10 july 17

These were cloudy days, with wind from the north-west on the 6th to 8th, with a south-east change on the 9th with light rain on 9th and 10th.

19th to 22nd shows more of this atypical winter weather.

Figure 10:  Irradiance for 19 – 22 July 2017

rocky all 19 to 22 july 17

Overcast and 90% Relative Humidity in the morning of the 19th, then RH fell rapidly, with the lowest 3:00 p.m. reading for the month (16%) and 9:00 a.m. (36%) on the afternoon of the 21st and the morning of the 22nd– when IR, and minimum temperature, were lowest for the month.  The 20th and 21st were clear sunny days.   Some cloud arrived on the afternoon of the 22nd.

Figure 11:  Irradiance for 25 – 28 July 2017

rocky all 25 to 28 july 17

This is typical winter weather- clear skies, cool nights followed by warm sunny days.  Note the smooth curves for horizontal and diffuse irradiance, both much less than February.  This indicates cloudless skies and low humidity.  There is a little early morning fog or mist as indicated by small wiggles in IR irradiance, but not enough to affect diffuse irradiance.  IR irradiance again peaks in mid afternoon.

Figure 12:  IR Irradiance for July 2017

rocky IR july 17

Due to less direct irradiance, cooler temperatures, and lower humidity, IR irradiance is much lower than in February, and rarely exceeds 400 W/sq.m.  IR fluctuates less in clear dry conditions.   Again, IR is reflected in minima:

Figure 13:  Minima for July 2017

Tmin July 17

Figure 14:  Direct Irradiance for July 2017

rocky direct july 17

Note that direct irradiance is not much less than in February, even for being soon after aphelion: it is the sun’s lower angle in the sky that makes most of the difference.  The clear dry days on the 20th and 21st have the highest irradiance.

The next plots are for December, around summer solstice and close to perihelion, when days are typically hot and sultry.

Figure 15:  Irradiance for December 2017

rocky all dec 17

The first four days, and the 9th, were cloudy, with rain on 3rd and 4th, as you can see from the horizontal irradiance.  On the remaining days irradiance was close to 1000 W/sq.m.

Figure 16:  IR Irradiance for December 2017

rocky IR dec 17

Heavy cloud, swept in from the Coral Sea, on the first four days, and hotter maxima on the last two, pushed IR well above 400W/sq.m.

And the plot for minima:

Figure 17:  Minima for December 2017

Tmin Dec 17

Last one!

Figure 18:  Direct Irradiance for December 2017

rocky direct dec 17

You will notice that with the sun virtually directly overhead around noon each day (from 1.56 degrees from zenith on 1st December to 0.01 degrees from zenith on Christmas Day), sun tracking direct irradiance is almost the same as the horizontal irradiance.

What have I learnt?  The variability of solar exposure, which is strongly affected by what’s in the atmosphere: dust, smoke, gaseous water, liquid water (clouds); as well as time of year and time of day.  The extent that downwards infra-red irradiance, which is an indicator of atmospheric temperature, is increased by daytime surface temperature and also very noticeably by clouds, and decreased by lower humidity.  How IR strongly influences minima- the greenhouse effect.

Nothing new probably, but I hope you found it as interesting as I did.

Finally:  why, oh why, can’t the Bureau make one minute temperature data freely available, and why does it persist with one second temperature readings rather than the mean over the previous minute, which it calculates with solar exposure?

My next post will look at different factors influencing temperature, including solar exposure.