December CET

[Nick L]

When do the Met Office usually update it? It's still on the 30th!

[James M]

When do the Met Office usually update it? It's still on the 30th!

I think when a new month or year starts you have wait until the 1st comes in, but before that it should be on here soon:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat

[kold weather]

Looking quite possible we finally have a month that is more then 1.5C below the average, does look increasingly likely that the temps will be the same or below that of December 2001 and we have a sub 10C year in the bag!

[D KARLSON]

Looking quite possible we finally have a month that is more then 1.5C below the average, does look increasingly likely that the temps will be the same or below that of December 2001 and we have a sub 10C year in the bag!

Case and point that this year has been a turning point in our waether

[Nick L]

Looking quite possible we finally have a month that is more then 1.5C below the average, does look increasingly likely that the temps will be the same or below that of December 2001 and we have a sub 10C year in the bag!

Are you on about December? We would need a huge downward correction to get 1.5c below average wouldn't we?

[West is Best]

Are you on about December? We would need a huge downward correction to get 1.5c below average wouldn't we?

Nick 3.6C is 1.5C below the 1971-2000 mean and 3.6C is the Manley figure. We think Hadley may well be at 3.6C or possibly even lower.

[Nick L]

Nick 3.6C is 1.5C below the 1971-2000 mean and 3.6C is the Manley figure. We think Hadley may well be at 3.6C or possibly even lower.

But according to the Met Office:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cet_info_mean.html

4.0 is 0.6 below average, implying that 3.1c is 1.5c below average. But am I right in thinking that the Met Office still use the well out of date 1961-90 average?

[Snowly does it]

But am I right in thinking that the Met Office still use the well out of date 1961-90 average?

yes, the MetO on this site (and generally) use the random 61-90 average which makes no sense at all. 3.6 is 1.5 below the most recent established average 71-00

[acbrixton]

But according to the Met Office:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cet_info_mean.html

4.0 is 0.6 below average, implying that 3.1c is 1.5c below average. But am I right in thinking that the Met Office still use the well out of date 1961-90 average?

Nick yes the UKMO still uses the 1961-1990 mean as a baseline in accordance with the World Meterological Organisation's convention. As to why the WMO still uses that baseline, I cannot say.

regards

ACB

[Nick L]

I reckon they do it to exaggerate global warming...

*Prepares for backlash*

[Optimus Prime]

Almost gurantee below 4.0c now. Period 26th-31st averages 1.3c according to the latest GFS. With the current CET at 4.5c, should be around 3.8, final adjustment of around 0.2c brings it down to 3.6c.

1.0c below 61-90 average

1.5c below 71-2000 average.

The last few days do have some fairly hard frosts and low maxima. -4c by night and no higher then 2c by day, that would certainly knock of 0.3c during the last 2 days.

0.7c drop spread out over 6 days is only a drop of 0.11c per day. Very doable if you ask me.

Has to be said...the GFS did remarkably well for temperatures during the cold spell at the end.

[Stratos Ferric]

yes, the MetO on this site (and generally) use the random 61-90 average which makes no sense at all. 3.6 is 1.5 below the most recent established average 71-00

It actually doesn't matter for comparative purposes so long as they always use the same baseline. For relative assessment a more recent average would be better, and when running my own analyses I continue to use my own thirty (or ten) year rolling average.

[Stratos Ferric]

Case and point that this year has been a turning point in our waether

I wouldn't be too hasty.

The ten year rolling for December peaked back in 1995, and the thirty year rolling in 2001.

This month, assuming a 3.7C finish, has come in 1.2C below the thirty year rolling. March 2006 came in at 1.6 below its rolling mark at the time. On the ten year basis it's 1.5C below the rolling mark, the coldest since 1996 (-2.2C), and the coldest winter third months since Feb 2006 (-1.6) and March 2006 (-2.1C). What is striking at present is the run of cold months: you have to go back to 1978/9 for a sequence of seven consecutive months below the rolling thirty year mean (though on that occasion the cumulative defecit was 7.5 degrees, coming off a much lower starting point than we were at last June [9.43 vs 10.07]; this time the sum defecit to date is 3.6 degrees). Assuming January comes in cold (almost certain, even at this early stage), we will be o a run of sustained relative cold not seen since 87/88...

...that's 1887-88, when - before we get TOO excited, there were 14 consecutive cold months.

[Duncan McAlister]

Where's Hadley's December figure then? Afraid of releasing a sub-10C CET? Conspiracy!

Joking BTW!

[cheeky_monkey]

I wouldn't be too hasty.

The ten year rolling for December peaked back in 1995, and the thirty year rolling in 2001.

This month, assuming a 3.7C finish, has come in 1.2C below the thirty year rolling. March 2006 came in at 1.6 below its rolling mark at the time. On the ten year basis it's 1.5C below the rolling mark, the coldest since 1996 (-2.2C), and the coldest winter third months since Feb 2006 (-1.6) and March 2006 (-2.1C). What is striking at present is the run of cold months: you have to go back to 1978/9 for a sequence of seven consecutive months below the rolling thirty year mean (though on that occasion the cumulative defecit was 7.5 degrees, coming off a much lower starting point than we were at last June [9.43 vs 10.07]; this time the sum defecit to date is 3.6 degrees). Assuming January comes in cold (almost certain, even at this early stage), we will be o a run of sustained relative cold not seen since 87/88...

...that's 1887-88, when - before we get TOO excited, there were 14 consecutive cold months.

like you say this year figures are starting from a higher mean therefore it should be easier to attain a colder than average month than in the past..and also most of those cold months have been marginally below so much so as to fall into the average catergory...if a month comes in -0.1c then to me that would be classed as an average month..there must be a tolerance of a plus and minus figure somewhere when puting a month into a catergory??..we have yet to see a run of months significantly below average say -1c.

[Stratos Ferric]

like you say this year figures are starting from a higher mean therefore it should be easier to attain a colder than average month than in the past..and also most of those cold months have been marginally below so much so as to fall into the average catergory...if a month comes in -0.1c then to me that would be classed as an average month..there must be a tolerance of a plus and minus figure somewhere when puting a month into a catergory??..we have yet to see a run of months significantly below average say -1c.

That's a good challenge. Setting the bar at, say, +/- 0.25C for the thirty year mark the pattern does change, because November only just sneaked under the running average. On that basis you have to go back to Nov 96 - Jan 97 for the last time we had three consecutive months under that mark: July 1993 started a five month run. Using +/- 0.5C for ten years July-Sept 2007 was the last three month cold run, and the July 1993 run was the last for five consecutive cold months.

[summer blizzard]

That's a good challenge. Setting the bar at, say, +/- 0.25C for the thirty year mark the pattern does change, because November only just sneaked under the running average. On that basis you have to go back to Nov 96 - Jan 97 for the last time we had three consecutive months under that mark: July 1993 started a five month run. Using +/- 0.5C for ten years July-Sept 2007 was the last three month cold run, and the July 1993 run was the last for five consecutive cold months.

Against the 1971-2000 mean, August was bang on average and November was above average.

[stormchaser1]

Question

Why did the Met Office say it was the 10th warmest year on record?? ok it might be the tenth warmest]

Why not say the Annual figure since 2006 has dropped by 0.87c [which to me looks as though the CET region has cooled rather than warmed\}

2006= 10.82c

2007= 10.48c

2008= 9.95c

Oops i might get some backlash from the GW camp now

nigel

[reef]

Question

Why did the Met Office say it was the 10th warmest year on record?? ok it might be the tenth warmest]

Why not say the Annual figure since 2006 has dropped by 0.87c [which to me looks as though the CET region has cooled rather than warmed\}

2006= 10.82c

2007= 10.48c

2008= 9.95c

Oops i might get some backlash from the GW camp now

nigel

Mainly because that is assuming that in a warming climate temperatures will be record breaking every year. After the record annual CET of 2006, it was probably odds on that 2007 would be cooler. That is especially the case when 2007/2008 saw the slide into La Nina territory.

While it certainly is suprising to reach a sub-10C annual CET (indications showed that the baseline was now possibly higher than this), it is still nothing more than a blip. If we record a few more 9.xx annual CETs in the next 10 years I might be inclined to believe it, but for now its nothing more than a small trough in a generally upward trend.

With regards to the Metoffice, they said 2008 was the 10th warmest globally. The anomoly was around 0.3C above average (1961-90), which is pretty close to what we recorded aswell. So really, we could have just been lucky this year, as in normal years these days the UK anomoly is usually more pronouced.

[stormchaser1]

Thanks Reef

The North East has also seen a decline in temperatures since 2002

2002= 9.06c

2003= 8.85c

2004= 8.83c

2005= 8.45c

2006= 8.89c

2007= 8.7c

2008= 8.31c

[West is Best]

Where's Hadley's December figure then? Afraid of releasing a sub-10C CET? Conspiracy! :huh:

Joking BTW!

The Met Office is all-but-called the Met Office and Climate Change nowadays so they have certainly nailed their colours to the mast. (The website is indeed called that now.) I doubt there's a conspiracy as such, but this run of continuing cooler conditions might be slightly embarassing in a way. A sub-10C year is quite notable nowadays.

I don't think there's much doubt now that we're in a cooling phase. The MetO are likely to link this I guess to La Nina and sunspots, though this begs the question of whether the whole darned thing isn't, and hasn't been, just a normal part of the earth's weather cycles. Sometimes it gets warm, and sometimes it gets cold. We don't need to invent extraneous causes beyond that ... Gradually as this point catches on in the face of the evidence of cooling conditions the climate change / AGW bandwagon will disappear into a siding never to be heard of again. Except in the BBC of course, who will probably take about three decades to catch up, by which time the rest of us will be talking about the next ice age. :-)

Edited January 3, 2009 by West is Best

[Optimus Prime]

There's always a background reason for a change to cold or mild. I think sunspot and Ocean temperatures play a large part in any slight cool down, a very slight cooldown we are experiencing at present.

Can't understand why the Metoffice haven't released their provisional figure yet. Last year they were quick.

[J10]

I'd wish they would hurry up.

[ukmoose]

There's always a background reason for a change to cold or mild. I think sunspot and Ocean temperatures play a large part in any slight cool down, a very slight cooldown we are experiencing at present.

Can't understand why the Metoffice haven't released their provisional figure yet. Last year they were quick.

Still on holiday

[Duncan McAlister]

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetdl1772on.dat

The daily data seems to have updated with the 31st coming in at a chilly -2.5C, but data from the 18th-23rd is missing. This was a mild spell so perhaps it could be upped a touch :lol: