Weather

What a nice change to be able to report a decent fine spell of weather as we begin summer (climatologically June, July and August), the first such warm settled spell in our area since the second half of May last year.

High pressure looks set to dominate into early next week, with light winds and spells of sunshine, although it won’t always be sunny; a weak cold front on Wednesday for example will make for cooler, cloudier conditions, especially in eastern areas.

The change to warmer, settled weather comes after a very cold spring.

According to the Met Office, spring ended up the coldest across the UK since 1962 – making it the 5th coldest since this modern data set began in 1910.

But as ever, the more interesting and meaningful comparison comes from the Central England Temperature (CET) series.

This is the world’s longest temperature data set, which stretches back to the mid-17th century.

According to Philip Eden, writing in the Sunday Telegraph, and who is a leading expert in this series, temperature levels this spring were around the same as those in the springs of 1962, 1951 and 1941.

But more interestingly, he says, according to the figures there has not been a significantly colder spring in the CET area since 1891.

But back to the welcome sunshine. With current indications suggesting less settled conditions developing towards the middle of the month, it may again be useful advice to enjoy it while it lasts.

Follow me on twitter @Hudsonweather

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 58. Posted by greensand

    on 10 Jun 2013 12:46

    QV, you might find the following from John Kennedy at the Met Office to be of interest:-

    "As a very rough approximation, you can think of HadCRUT as a weighted combination of CRUTEM and HadSST. What happened during the update was that a large amount of land data for January 2013 didn't get read in, effectively reducing the weight of CRUTEM in the mix. As the amount of land data falls, the weighted average tends towards that of HadSST. In the extreme case of "no land data", HadCRUT would be the same as HadSST. In January 2013, the HadSST average was lower than the CRUTEM average, so even though the CRUTEM average increased, the drop off in station data meant that it got a much smaller weight in the HadCRUT global average. The latter effect won out, so the average fell. When we fixed the bug and read in the full complement of data, the average went back up and behaved more like you would expect.

    The blending of HadSST and CRUTEM to give HadCRUT isn't quite that simple, but I think this is the effect you spotted."
    ============================

    I thought that this might be the case but needed clarification as it brings to mind further questions. The first being how to compare monthly numbers without a knowing what the weighting for each month is?

    From previous attempts to replicate HadCRUT3 from CRUTEM and HadSST I don't think that weighting changes due to station fall out will be significant but it might explain the odd "surprise"?

    All interesting stuff with other implications that need mulling over...

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 58: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 58: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 57. Posted by waikuku

    on 8 Jun 2013 19:50

    In answer to the question posed by Paul H . . ."Summer is here, but how long will it last?"

    On the basis that the reference is to UK, I would hazard a guess at the end of the day on 31 August for climatological purposes and/or around 21 September from a seasonal perspective.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 57: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 57: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 56. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 8 Jun 2013 14:00

    Delingpole got a sarcastic reaction when he pointed out that temperatures hand't increased since 1997, but strangely, nobody seemed to notice when Owen Paterson actually confirmed he was correct and agreed with a lot of what he said.
    Leanne Wood quoted the fake "97% of scientific opinion" claim.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 56: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 56: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 55. Posted by QuaesoVeritas

    on 8 Jun 2013 12:14

    Apparently today;s "Any Questions" on BBC R4, includes a discussion of climate change.
    The panel is made up of :
    Owen Paterson (secretary of state for the environment.
    James Delingpole
    Ann Clwyd MP
    Leanne Wood - Plaid Cymru leader

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 55: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 55: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 54. Posted by Ukip

    on 8 Jun 2013 06:58

    The UAF has dropped slightly, come the winter we will be back into the 1970's terrority. What ever happened to the hockey stick?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 54: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 54: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 53. Posted by ukpahonta

    on 7 Jun 2013 17:34

    #52 newdwr54

    I think we all know what you mean, this time at least :-)

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 53: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 53: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 52. Posted by newdwr54

    on 7 Jun 2013 16:54

    51. ukpahonta,

    When I finally did blurt it out I put SNN instead of SSN! Must be the heat.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 52: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 52: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 51. Posted by ukpahonta

    on 7 Jun 2013 15:07

    #50 newdwr54

    About as strong as the influence from CO2 then!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 51: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 51: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 50. Posted by newdwr54

    on 7 Jun 2013 14:35

    Re 48 and 49:

    Sorry about the above... the formatting mustn't let us use the 'fewer than' sign. So one final attempt:

    If such small ENSO forcing is sufficient to wipe out the effects of 8 years of continuous sub 100/mth SNNs, then the effects of reduced solar influence can't be very strong.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 50: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 50: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 49. Posted by newdwr54

    on 7 Jun 2013 14:31

    From 48 ... (I was going to say)...

    If such small ENSO forcing is sufficient to wipe out the effects of 8 years of continuous

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 49: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 49: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next