Friday, March 23, 2012

2797.txt

date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:07:14 +0100 (BST)
from: David Lister <D.ListeratXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Fwd: Re: Hughes, NIWA & CRU (fwd)
to: t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk

<x-flowed>
Tim,

This is the original e-mail re NZ series that came to me via Phil. I
think that I produced new versions of the Tmean archive files around
11/10/06. I have attached the reformatted series from NZ. The raw data
are also attached. I can be far more specific if you need more info. For
example, I usually generate a monthly differences file between new and old
versions wherever there is overlap. I could probably find this but it
does not tell you if a new station is added or if new blocks are added
outside of the previous period of coverage.

Cheers

David

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:43:41 +0100
From: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
To: d.listeratXYZxyz.ac.uk
Subject: Fwd: Re: Hughes, NIWA & CRU


David,
Just received these from NIWA in NZ. Can you go about replacing what we
have for NZ? First get these sites into the correct format for the big file
(up to 1990) and I'll merge them in at some point. Second replace what
we have in the 1991 onwards file with this lot.
This is all just mean T. There isn't a rush for this, but useful to do
for
the time Harry needs the files.

Cheers
Phil

> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:06:53 +1200
> From: Jim Salinger <j.salingeratXYZxyza.co.nz>
> Reply-To: j.salingeratXYZxyza.co.nz
> Organization: NIWA
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719)
> To: j.renwickatXYZxyza.co.nz
> CC: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, David Wratt <d.wratt@niwa.co.nz>,
> b.mullan@niwa.co.nz, m.hollis@niwa.co.nz
> Subject: Re: Hughes, NIWA & CRU
> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2
> (clam.niwa.co.nz [192.168.16.8]); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:06:55 +1200 (NZST)
> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 192.168.16.8
> X-UEA-Spam-Score: 0.0
> X-UEA-Spam-Level: /
> X-UEA-Spam-Flag: NO
>
> Hello All
>
> Attached please find a .csv file containing various New Zealand series which
> have been corrected for Phil. There is still the odd collywobble in them
> though particularly Auckland for 1861 and 1862 (too warm).
>
> Now - various information that might assist you all:
>
> Kaitaia - this is the observatory, but has two sites
>
> Auckland - current site Mangere, but includes four other sites prior to 1959
> (Albert Park, Museum, Domain, Albert Barracks)
>
> New Plymouth Airport - prior to 1944 three other sites
>
> Gisborne Airport - from 1937, town site in early days
>
> Napier - rural site from 1982, four other sites prior
>
> Wellington - other sites prior to Kelburn in 1928 which many have commented
> on
>
> Hokitika Airport - present site from 1963, two other sites prior
>
> Christchurch - I have used a corrected Lincoln record, as the long
> Christchurch record had some 'urban warming' in it
>
> Invercargill Airport - prior to 1940 various town sites
>
> Dunedin - prior to 1947 other sites rather than Musselburgh - six of them
> from 1853
>
> So, at this point not sure what has gone into the KNMI series but if these
> are simply appended records then, given the different sites and hilliness of
> NZ towns there will be temperature changes between sites.
>
> Cheers
>
> Other Jim
>
> Jim Renwick wrote:
>> Hi all:
>> A little more, in response to Phil's mail overnight - and thanks for
>> re-sending the data Phil, which I have now looked at.
>>
>>> A few things. The CRU station data aren't on the Climate Explorer web
>>> site.
>> Right, but Hughes made it fairly clear in his mail that he had taken
>> data from CE at KNMI, so I did the same to see if I could duplicate his
>> analysis. Some of the data look a bit suspicious - from both sources, at
>> times.
>>
>>> I don't know which set of station data are there, nor where they come
>>> from - probably from WWR. They may come from CRU, but we've not
>>> released our station data for years - certainly not up to 2002. I
>>> would need to do some comparisons with what you got from the Dutch
>>> site and what I sent you earlier (reattached). The Climate Explorer
>>> site may have GISS/NCDC station data? Our NZ station data have
>>> applied adjustments to Wellington, Hokitika and Dunedin. These could
>>> likely be better.
>> OK - I ran the same very simple analysis of the CRU station data, and
>> what I got from the CE station data, as attached. I have kept the CRU
>> island stations (Campbell, Chathams, Raoul) out of the NZ average
>> calculations - though I just noted that Chathams is one of the CE station
>> included in my average there, whoops.
>> Anyway, comparing like stations, I see that both CE and CRU have very
>> similar-looking time series for Auckland, Wellington, Hokitika, Dunedin,
>> and Chatham Is, fairly similar for Christchurch, and different for
>> Invercargill. Perhaps Jim S or Brett would like to comment on which is
>> "correct"?
>>
>>> With Hughes choosing the region 35-45S by 170-180E, he will have
>>> missed off Dunedin and Invercargill. The 3 boxes with land data are
>>> 1835, 1836 and 1907. Because of the grid spacing Dunedin and
>>> Invercargill fall in separate boxes 1978 and 1979.
>> Not from the CE station data, though. Dunedin and Invercargill get
>> through.
>>
>>> To do the comparisons that you have you need to omit the v versions.
>>> CRUTEM2 and CRUTEM3 should be much the same. The only reasons that I
>>> can think of to explain the differences between 2 and 3 is slight
>>> differences in the normals used. 3 was a bit laxer in its normals
>>> requirements and may have used more of the 1961-90 WMO normals.
>> Right - 2 and 3 seem similar, and the v versions (variance adjustments)
>> do not change things much.
>>
>>> HadCRUT2 and HadCRUT3 bring the SST anomalies in. There is more of a
>>> difference between these (see Rayner et al., 2006 in JGR).
>>>
>>> Rayner, N.A., et al., 2006: Improved analyses of changes and
>>> uncertainties in sea surface temperature measured in situ since the
>>> mid-nineteenth century: the HadSST2 dataset. J. Climate, 19, 446-469.
>> Yes - quite a bit of extra work between 2 and 3 there. And again, the
>> stronger warming trend when oceans are included.
>>
>>> The simplest thing to do to solve this issue, would be for you to
>>> send me your adjusted station temperature data and then I can replace
>>> them in the next version. We will be updating with extensive back
>>> data early 2007.
>> Fine - I'll leave Jim S to respond to this (and maybe give me the latest
>> version too).
>> I hope we can at least sort out the NZ data satisfactorily for CRU (and
>> others as appropriate). I wish you luck with data from other parts of
>> the globe!!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jim
>
>
>

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
</x-flowed>

Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\New_Zealand Stations.csv"

Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\nz_reform.tmp"

No comments:

Post a Comment