Friday, April 27, 2012

3563.txt

date: Fri Apr 3 13:57:09 2009
from: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Re: Final version of agenda?
to: Tom Wigley <wigleyatXYZxyzr.edu>

Tom,
The wheel is often forgotten after a few years!
Also, for some reason, people think that if work was done ages ago, it
must be out of date.
I wrote the paper for two reasons:
1. To show that for London, the temperature in the centre is not getting any higher
than in rural areas. Used much more data than anyone else. I did have to get some
data digitized. I could use the St. James's Park record in the global T calculations.
It wouldn't make any difference anyway, but the combination is with anomalies.
Even people I used to think were good, think all city records are affected and shouldn't
be used.
2. There is a widespread belief that in the future, the temperatures in London will
rise even higher than the increase elsewhere in SE England. I don't know where this
comes from, but almost everyone who says they have thought about it thinks so.
The HC have run RCMs for Europe with cities in with an urban tiling scheme to try
to simulate a city. They also add excess heat (25 and 50 w/m-2) in over the city. When the
comparisons are done properly, there is no significant difference between squares in the
centre
and on the periphery. The HC always show the effect on conducive days!
City centres will pass certain thresholds more regularly than rural areas, but that is
all.
Many people still think that if someone shows an 8 deg C difference on a single
day or even at a single hour between a city centre site and a rural one, this is the size
of the UHI!
I know it's stupid, but I keep hearing this.
I just wanted something for idiots like this to read.
Cheers
Phil
At 13:30 03/04/2009, you wrote:

Phil,
Do you remember the paper Peter Brimblecombe wrote in the late 1970s
explaining that the clean air act was not effective because the main
reductions in pollution were because industry moved out of London?
Seems similar to the Weather paper mentioned below. Re-inventing the
wheel?
Tom.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Phil Jones wrote:

Ben,
UEA is being very supportive. We need a meeting to respond - it just takes time.
We are now going to have to write a 2 page context letter to go to the Information
Commissioner's Office (ICO) to explain what IPCC is, how it works, the drafts and
their comments and responses - and where these can be accessed. This will
all go them once we have an officer assigned.
We have emails from all on Ch 6 saying they don't want their emails to Keith/Tim
sent on, so this should be enough. The detail that Holland wants is in some
of these emails and the attachments, which are parts (or the whole) of Ch 6 in
word documents. If we're forced to send these, then we'll send hard copies, so
he can't see who changed what - which you can in tracker.
One odd thing with the ICO is that in order for them to assess the complaint,
they need to see all. We're trying the above with a few examples to circumvent this.
If they want to see everything, then they decide to uphold the original UEA decision,
the ICO can then be asked for the material by Holland! Seems a bizarre situation.
We're claiming we can't comply on several issues. One of these is that if we do,
then we'll be ignored by IPCC when it comes to future IPCC CLA/LA assignments.
It wouldn't just be UEA, but would then apply to anyone working in the UK. The
clause relates to compliance affecting international relations!
The whole FOI was set up by government principally for government depts. The
ICO generally finds for the complainant, but there are numerous cases where
the government dept ignores the decision. The new department of Justice is
the principal dept to ignore FOI decisions!
Universities have been dragged in as they are public bodies. At UEA we've had to
fill in returns for 2 years saying what we do each term (% teaching, research, admin
etc).
UEA has had a request from the unions for this information and UEA has refused.
This has also been appealed and the ICO are dealing with this as well!
On the RMS/IJC issue, I spoke to the Chief Exec of the RMS yesterday. Their
publications committee is due to meet soon. I've said I'd be happy to talk to the
head of this (who is at Reading), but the view seems to be that things will not change.
They seem fully aware of who they are dealing with at CA. Paul Hardaker (who is the
RMS Chief Exec) has spoken to Glenn.
The RMS appointed a new editor of Weather in Jan. I submitted a paper on the UHI
of London and how it hasn't got any worse for Central London since 1900 (it has
at LHR though). Anyway, I've dealt with numerous editors over the years, but dealing
with this person was the worst experience ever. It turns out I'm not alone, everyone
who has submitted this year has responded to the RMS. Wiley's who publish all
the RMS journals can't deal with the person. So Paul has another difficult issue to
deal with! The person has no idea how to deal with authors. It turns out he's
never written a paper himself, so never had reviewer's comments!
Paper was accepted earlier this week, so I'm now a bit happier.
Cheers
Phil
At 04:11 03/04/2009, Ben Santer wrote:

Dear Phil,
It's great that we've finally sorted the agenda out - what a relief! I'll try to send it
out tomorrow. Probably the simplest thing to do is to send it to every invitee on the
original mailing list, and not just to those who have accepted or failed to reply.
Given the time difference between Boulder and the U.K., I'm not sure if it's worth our
while to check into the video link to the U.K. What do you think?
I'm very sorry to hear about the problems that David Holland is causing you. I'm hoping
that UEA is providing you with strong support. Please let me know if there's anything I
can do from over here. I'd be very happy to write a letter to the University, supporting
your decision not to release emails to Mr. Holland.
Have a safe trip to D.C. I get in late on Sunday afternoon. I finished my "Tribute to
Larry" presentation, but I'm still working hard on the "History and Future of D&A
Research". I suspect I won't have this second presentation finished until late on Sunday
evening.
With best regards,
Ben
Phil Jones wrote:

Ben,
Glad that Malcolm is able to come. I've sent on Malcolm's acceptance to
Keith here. Agenda looks good and having all
- reception/dinner as well at NCAR will enable all to discuss/mingle, whatever.
Let's hope the long June day is sunny.
Would seem as though you can send this out to all those who've said they can
come and to those who've not responded so far.
We just need to decide if the video link is possible. The 7/8 hr time difference
with the UK/Europe means that any here will likely not stay beyond the mid-afternoon.
See you on Monday!
Cheers
Phil
PS talking of McIntyre, Keith, Tim and I have a meeting with the FOI people here at
UEA later today. A UK person (David Holland) has appealed UEA's refusal to send emails
about who said what/changed what re Ch 6 of AR4. We have emails from all on Ch 6 saying
that they don't want their emails sent on, so don't think there are any grounds.
Holland
is trying also on EIR (Environmental Information Regulations) as well as FOI. He also
included emails from Caspar Ammann and Mike Mann as well. Will let you know
Monday what happens.
The whole thing is a pain. The FOI person sent all the correspondence yesterday -
~ 25 emails, including the UEA responses each time. Has been going on since March 2008!
At 01:27 02/04/2009, Ben Santer wrote:

Dear Lisa,
Your edited version of the agenda looks great to me. I'm happy with all the changes
you've made.
I fully approve of having the dinner at NCAR.
Incidentally, I'll be meeting Anjuli Bamzai at next week's Climate Change Prediction
Program meeting in Washington D.C., and at that time I'll try to clarify the most
efficient way of using my DOE Fellowship money to cover the Symposium expenses.
Regarding the musical entertainment - Karl Taylor and I had something specific in mind.
Karl is currently writing some form of musical tribute to Tom (I don't want to give too
much away here!) Karl and I both play the guitar, and have provided similar "musical
interludes" in the past (e.g., at Larry Gates' retirement dinner). So we would not need
to make arrangements with an outside venue to cover the musical entertainment. It would
be very helpful, however, if we could borrow two guitars for the evening - this would
mean that we wouldn't have to lug our own guitars from Livermore to Boulder.
With best regards,
Ben
Lisa Butler wrote:

Ben,
I'm attaching a version here with my info (Wigley_Agenda10-LB).
Feel free to use or toss, as you wish -- my stuff is trivial, but here is what I've
done:
1) Formatting: I changed the margins and spacing so it would all fit on one page. Just
my personal preference. Disregard if you think it looks too crowded.
2) Heading: I just made it a little more formal, added location info.
3) Nit picking: added "noon" after 12:00; added "p.m." after 12:30; added a bit of info
re lunch; corrected spelling of "Griffith" (Palutikof).
That's it for now, but if we can get a consensus on the dinner we can add that location
too (just say "at NCAR" since I still need to tie down Tree Plaza vs. Cafe). ****Does
anyone object to having it at NCAR? Speak now or forever hold your peace!****
I think the reception and dinner schedules are fine. Especially the reception -- I find
that people start to get antsy after about 45 minutes. If we are going to hold the
dinner at NCAR I think I will extend the dinner reservation to 9:30 p.m. or 10:00 p.m.
(depending on entertainment), just to be on the safe side.
Also, a new question from me: do you have something specific in mind for the live music
or should I be shopping for it? I didn't realize we were going to have music, but if we
are, I think it's another reason to have the dinner at NCAR, rather than having to make
arrangements with an outside venue to accommodate our entertainment.
Best,
Lisa
Ben Santer wrote:

Many thanks, Lisa!
Best regards,
Ben
Lisa Butler wrote:

Ben, I do have a couple of comments, a few informational items you may want to add. I'm
working on it now and will get back to you shortly.
Thanks,
Lisa
Ben Santer wrote:

Dear Tom, Phil, and Lisa,
Here is the complete agenda, with all speakers now confirmed. Is there anything you
would like me to change before I send this out to the meeting participants? Lisa, should
we say anything about the location of the reception? Do the times look right for the
reception (45 minutes) and the dinner (90 minutes)?
With best regards,
Ben
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin D. Santer
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
P.O. Box 808, Mail Stop L-103
Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A.
Tel: (925) 422-3840
FAX: (925) 422-7675
email: santer1atXYZxyzl.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin D. Santer
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
P.O. Box 808, Mail Stop L-103
Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A.
Tel: (925) 422-3840
FAX: (925) 422-7675
email: santer1atXYZxyzl.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin D. Santer
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
P.O. Box 808, Mail Stop L-103
Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A.
Tel: (925) 422-3840
FAX: (925) 422-7675
email: santer1atXYZxyzl.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

No comments:

Post a Comment