Weather

Summer warmth similar to 1976 in some areas

Summer (June, July and August) 2013 across the UK has turned out to be the driest, warmest and sunniest since 2006, according to provisional Met Office data.

It’s a huge contrast from the awful weather of last summer which was the wettest for 100 years.

More interestingly from a local perspective are figures from Linton on Ouse in North Yorkshire.

They show that this summer was only fractionally less warm than the famous summer of 1976 with a mean temperature of 16.62C, compared with 16.66C recorded in 1976.

2006 (17.20C), 2003 (17.08C) and 1995 (16.75C) were all warmer than 2013 (16.62C) and 1976 (16.66C) at Linton on Ouse.

And the reason for the much better summer was the jet stream, which was much further north than in recent years.

Now we are, climatologically at least, in autumn, we shouldn’t give up on summer warmth just yet.

For a time this week, again thanks to the jet stream, summer should return to Yorkshire and Lincolnshire with temperatures on Wednesday approaching 80 degrees Fahrenheit in some eastern and southern parts of our region.

But that’s nothing compared with 2nd September 1906, when temperatures reached an incredible 35.6C (96.1F) at Bawtry in South Yorkshire.

To this day Bawtry still holds the record for the hottest September temperature anywhere in the UK.

Follow me on twitter @Hudsonweather

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 43. Posted by greensand

    on 9 Sept 2013 22:22

    41. QuaesoVeritas

    "RSS figures have been published:"

    Thanks QV, a little surprised after looking at Reynolds SSTs but they do confirm the "warm" NH and cool "SH".

    All interesting stuff, you never know one day I might get my long awaited fight between data providers. Don't have a favourite, but I do have a part ownership in one! I just have an inherent twitch when a data supplier cites a competitor as a means of verification. In business that would result in an immediate change of supplier.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 43: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 43: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 42. Posted by greensand

    on 9 Sept 2013 22:06

    40.newdwr54

    Many thanks for your vote DW!

    Also thanks for your comprehensive explanation of how effectively natural variations are controlling the rate of warming of our planet.

    I do hope we have been successful as it will be interesting to see if the Met Office expert reply is as comprehensive and informed as your "non-expert" view.

    As always only time will tell!

    PS, be careful you could end up being cited by the "Great Lew" - "So three natural negative forcings have conspired against one positive man-made forcing.."

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 42: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 42: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 41. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 9 Sept 2013 22:00

    Still no UAH, but RSS figures have been published:

    Global = 0.167c, compared to 0.222c last month and 0.254c Aug. 2012
    NH = 0.289c, compared to 0.236c last month and 0.338c Aug. 2012
    SH = 0.039c, compared to 0.207c last month and 0.165c Aug. 2012

    Interestingly, both +60 to +82.5 and -60 to -70 are up, the latter by a huge 1.2c, although obviously, it's only a 10 degree band.

    So far, it's not looking good for the late Roy Spencer publication date meaning an increase theory.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 41: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 41: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 40. Posted by newdwr54

    on 8 Sept 2013 10:54

    32. greensand

    I voted for your question too. Addressing your questions as a non-expert...

    1. Are global surface temperature records that show a 30 year rate of warming subject to a natural 60 year cycle?

    Apparently so; possibly due to a natural oscillation in the Pacific Ocean (PDO).

    2. If the cycle exists are we to see the rate of warming carrying on reducing for a further 20 years?

    That's what's happened in the past. However, if you look at the previous cycles, the respective troughs and peaks in each has been progressively higher (faster). So while the rate of warming may reduce for some time, this doesn't necessarily mean there will be a corresponding long term downturn in global temperatures. If you compare 30-year average PDO with 30-year average surface temperatures, it would appear that the influence of PDO may have waned: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/jisao-pdo/mean:360/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/mean:360

    3. If the cycle does not exist then just why is the rate of warming reducing?

    It's hard to explain the reduction in the rate of warming without invoking the negative phase of the PDO, in my opinion. Reduced solar output and short term ENSO fluctuations aren't sufficient to counteract enhanced greenhouse warming over such long timescales.

    4. If the cycle exists how does that effect our understanding of "climate sensitivity" on a multi cycle scale?

    The current negative phase of the PDO has coincided with a period of reduced solar output and a mostly negative phase of ENSO. So three natural negative forcings have conspired against one positive man-made forcing (enhanced greenhouse effect) over the past decade or so. Despite this, global temperatures have fallen very little, if at all, since 2000, and they show no real sign of imminent cooling in the near future. It appears that AGW has effectively off-set these combined negative forcings. So it seems that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is at least strong enough to offset natural forcings that have previously contributed to prolonged periods of cool global temperatures.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 40: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 40: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 39. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 8 Sept 2013 10:12

    Another way of looking at this is that 71% of the temperatures published on the 5th or after were increases, with only 14% decreases.
    On the other hand, of those published before the 5th, only 18% were increases and 82% decreases.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 39: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 39: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 38. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 8 Sept 2013 09:55

    #35.newdwr54

    "Here goes. Hopefully you can transfer this to a spreadsheet using 'text to columns' wizard. You may have to make the odd tweak due to formatting. Also, please point out any mistakes you find. (Note: this table is based on UAH v5.6 but only minor differences occur from v5.5 and none, I think, that altered the monthly change.)"

    Thanks, I managed to import the figures into excel.

    I have done a XY scattergraph of the data and there does seem to be a weak correlation between the delay in publication and the temperature change.
    Based on that, the formula = D x 0.0164 -0.08, where D is the day of publication.
    Using that anything later than the 5th would imply an increase in temperature and a publication on the 9th of September would imply an increase of about 0.07c.
    Of course, that is only on average, and since the correlation is only 0.41, not very reliable.
    In case anyone is worried, I am not really serious about this, but it is something to do while awaiting the figures!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 38: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 38: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 37. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 8 Sept 2013 09:30

    #34.newdwr54

    "As a matter of fact there is a slight warming trend, which surprised me."

    Just because there are more declines than rises, doesn't mean that there would be a cooling trend.

    It all depends on the size of those changes.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 37: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 37: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 36. Posted by ukpahonta

    on 8 Sept 2013 08:38

    #34 Newdwr54

    'As a matter of fact there is a slight warming trend'

    Only if you wish really hard, cross your fingers and toes and spin around twice before going to bed.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 36: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 36: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 35. Posted by newdwr54

    on 8 Sept 2013 07:19

    27. QuaesoVeritas

    Here goes. Hopefully you can transfer this to a spreadsheet using 'text to columns' wizard. You may have to make the odd tweak due to formatting. Also, please point out any mistakes you find. (Note: this table is based on UAH v5.6 but only minor differences occur from v5.5 and none, I think, that altered the monthly change.)

    Month/temp/change/date of posting

    Jul-10 0.36
    Aug-10 0.38 warmer 2
    Sep-10 0.45 warmer 5
    Oct-10 0.30 cooler 1
    Nov-10 0.24 cooler 3
    Dec-10 0.16 cooler 3
    Jan-11 0.02 cooler 2
    Feb-11 0.00 cooler 2
    Mar-11 -0.09 cooler 5
    Apr-11 0.08 warmer 10
    May-11 0.10 warmer 7
    Jun-11 0.26 warmer 7
    Jul-11 0.37 warmer 1
    Aug-11 0.31 cooler 2
    Sep-11 0.30 cooler 4
    Oct-11 0.09 cooler 3
    Nov-11 0.09 same 15
    Dec-11 0.07 cooler 3
    Jan-12 -0.14 cooler 2
    Feb-12 -0.13 warmer 2
    Mar-12 0.03 warmer 4
    Apr-12 0.23 warmer 9
    May-12 0.18 cooler 4
    Jun-12 0.25 warmer 6
    Jul-12 0.15 cooler 2
    Aug-12 0.21 warmer 6
    Sep-12 0.37 warmer 5
    Oct-12 0.37 same 6
    Nov-12 0.31 cooler 12
    Dec-12 0.24 cooler 3
    Jan-13 0.50 warmer 5
    Feb-13 0.21 cooler 4
    Mar-13 0.20 cooler 1
    Apr-13 0.11 cooler 3
    May-13 0.08 cooler 4
    Jun-13 0.30 warmer 9
    Jul-13 0.17 cooler 2

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 35: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 35: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 34. Posted by newdwr54

    on 8 Sept 2013 07:07

    26. ukpahonta

    "Is that a trend, more cooling than warming..... heh,heh,heh."

    As a matter of fact there is a slight warming trend, which surprised me.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 34: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 34: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next