Posted on 09/22/2016 7:13:02 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
A new study from USGS by Keven Gallo and George Xian verifies what we’ve already learned and published on via the Surface Stations project; that concrete and asphalt (aka impervious surfaces) have increased near weather stations that are used to monitor climate. In this case, it is the much studied USHCN, that climate network I presented a poster on at AGU 2015.
What is most important about this paper is that it quantifies the percentage of stations that have had increased amounts of impervious surface area getting closer to the stations. As I have long since maintained, such things act as heat sinks, which increase the night-time temperature when they released the stored energy from the sun that was absorbed during the day as infrared, warming the air near the thermometer, and thus biasing the minimum temperature upwards.
In this study, they have observed over 32% of the USHCN stations exhibited an increase in impervious surface area of ⩾20% between 2001 and 2011. When the 1000 m radius associated with each station was examined, over 52% (over 600) of the stations exhibited an increase in ISA of ⩾20% within at least 1% of the grid cells within that radius.
What this suggests, is that like Las Vegas, which has had huge infrastructure boosts in the last 50 years, that the minimum temperature is creeping upwards, and that biases the mean temperature used to look for the “global warming signal”. NOAA would do well to remove stations that have been encroached upon like this, but they stubbornly hold onto this flawed data, insisting they can “adjust” it to be accurate. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
Duh, everyone knew that years ago.
That’s what I thought.
This was exposed years ago.
How did this administration ever let that report out?
It unsettles the settled science.
Heresy.
It took two government paid scientists to figure out that a thermometer above a concrete slab may not be completely accurate.
Now add in the fact we know they placed temp sensors in some very awful places, like next to heat exchangers and next to exhaust vents and such, and you can see how the “data” has been deliberately manipulated.
Just stand on asphalt in the summer
This little known fact is kept little known.
Captain Obvious.
There is NO positive correlation between education and common-sense (of course this has been known for EONS!)
Not only that, those blokes purposely put those sensors in unusually hot places.
It used to be adjusted for in the datasets.
Makes sense to me. In the city you can feel more heat radiating from the ground than you do in the country, and you will see all the small front lawns surrounded by concrete all brown in the summer, but drive out to the country and you’ll see the front 3-5 acre lawns looking pretty good that same time of year
everything the gubbint touches it wrecks
School children understand that.
How does “adjustment” even happen without a quintessential begging of the question (i.e. no solution to the set of equations)?
I believe there are many other factors as well...
One I recall right off the bat - there are standards for construction of a station, including what to paint it with.
The standard was oil-based paint, and the standard was changed at some point to latex paint. Turns out that change has a heat effect change as well... and, naturally, in the direction you’d expect if you wanted your stations to report higher temperatures over time. The phase-in of the paint change was gradual, as stations needed new coats of paint, or new stations get worked into the system, thus the overall increase in temperature was moderated (easier to hide, and portray as the glowbull warming they wanted).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.