Friday, December 26, 2014

Friday Stuff

2014 is not going to be the warmest year in the records. Cowtan & Way's December anomaly will need to be +0.92 C or greater for that to happen, when the year-to-date average is +0.61 C. November was 0.57 C, the 11th warmest November sine 1850.

You can't extol Cowtan & Way on the one hand (which many people are now using in papers), while pointing to GISS or HadCRUT4 with the other because it shows a record year. 2010 will remain the hottest year.

The Guardian: "Wind, solar and other renewable power capacity grew at its strongest ever pace last year [2013] and now produces 22% of the world's electricity, the International Energy Agency a new report."

Previous world numbers were 18% in 2007 and 21% in 2012.

Wind & Solar = 77% Of New US Electricity Generating Capacity In November.


Anonymous said...

Cowtan & Way "hybrid" version is arguably more accurate for recent tends. In that record, 2014 may well and up tied with 2010.

It's also worth noting that 2014 was overall no more than ENSO-neutral (especially considering the typical 3-4 month lag of surface temperature variation behind ENSO).

But I do agree that HadCrut4 and NOAA are flawed and should be depecrated until they are fixed.

Toby said...

Professor John Abraham reckons 2014 will be the warmest ever in the NOAA records - but not in GISS.

It is all much of a muchness - it looks like 2014 will almost certainly be 2nd in the GISS record.

Dano said...

As for 2010, all 3 together (now 4-ish) will tell the tale.

BTW, David, good time to:

o revisit David Rose hole

o RSS "cool bias".



Jon said...

Of course, the anything-but-AGW crowd doesn't have the option of extolling Cowtan and Way without giving up on their beloved pause. They've got little choice but to pretend satellite data is the gold standard, clearly and obviously better than surface temperature observations, studiously ignoring how much UAH and RSS have diverged in recent years.

Victor Venema said...

For this question Cowtan & Way "hybrid" version is clearly the best. However, I would not say that HadCrut4 and NOAA are flawed, you should just know the limitations of these datasets, like for all datasets you use. The inhomogeneity from using no satellite data in the past and suddenly using them for the last few decades may be a problem for other questions.