Even Radcliffe Observatory Is Only Class 4!
March 3, 2024
By Paul Homewood
Radcliffe Meteorological Station
To my surprise, even the weather station at Radcliffe Observatory in Oxford University appears on the Met Office’s station lists as a next to junk Class 4.
Radcliffe, of course, has long been regarded as a high quality site, despite the fact that it has been gradually surrounded by urban heat island effect over the years since it was founded in 1767:
It is worth recalling the WMO classifications:
Radcliffe is Class 4, because it is within 10 m of an artificial heat source, which would be that path and probably the wall as well.
31 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Well, the Radcliffe Observatory is right by the Iffley Road. This is no surprise to anyone who knows Oxford.
Woodstock Road, I think you mean.
And the site has been surrounded by busy urbanisation and construction for a long time. A surely undeniable heat island problem.
I think you seriously underestimate their denial capabilities….
One thing that always amuses me about Met Office sites is the names they give them to hide their real identity. This is “Shawbury” – sounds nice and rural doesn’t it!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2%B047'38.4%22N+2%C2%B039'46.8%22W/@52.794815,-2.6640622,170m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d52.794!4d-2.663?entry=ttu
Any idea where the actual weather station is ?
The small square compound at the end of the footpath in the centre of the image.
Lat/Long for the station: 51.761213, -1.264041
On Google Earth there is a street view from June 2015; grass is short all about and a large white temporary structure is there. That tent-like thing seems to come and go as can be seen using the historical images (small clock button).
A phone call to the Observatory could determine what it is.
When is it used and for how long at a time? Grass “footprint” shows when it is not there.
Thanks for that John - that is truly astonishing. Looked in detail on Google Earth Pro quite amazing.
A 25m x 15m construction can intermittently come and go within 5 metres of the station and the Met Office seems to think that’s okay up til now. Words fail me.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/51%C2%B045'40.4%22N+1%C2%B015'50.6%22W/@51.7612065,-1.264159,44m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d51.761213!4d-1.264041?entry=ttu
This is the intermittent building John has identified.
Looks like a Marque to me.
I have been to many weddings and birthday parties in such temporary marquees. Invariably, they are heated by gas burners of some sort or infra-red heaters. Each time a flap opens to allow a mildly drunk person to emerge and go pee, expensively heated air spews out. Until now, I never imagined that global warming was being monitored by the rhythm of my entries and exits.
If you use Google’s little walkabout man, I don’t know what he/she/they are called, you can see that it’s a marquee with tables and chairs for wining and dining visitors perhaps VIPs from the BBC? Presumably there for several weeks in summer.
But what is more surprising is that there’s a very large wall about 10ft high which to have been there a very long time.
All the Colleges have annual student Balls for which marquees are erected. Some then stay up to host summer schools etc over the holidays.
So on further study and more evidence I think we can all agree this is a Grade 1 + star crap site and makes the Met Office look even more of a joke.
With the new buildings and computer at Exeter they will be able to record the disgraceful readings to even higher precision and justify their computer games even more. GIGO paid for by my taxes!
Instead of being so negative, perhaps worth looking at the positive side of the site. Firstly the length of time over which measurements have been taken, the data is available on line for the complete duration, and not adjusted.
There is also the advantage that the site is in what has always been surrounded by an urban area, which has changed little over time. So although there is an influence over time from the UHI effect, it will be comparatively small.
A comparison of Oxford to CET shows a change in anomaly of 0.3C, mainly during the 1980s and 90s, which suggests this is the UHI as the CET data is adjusted, the Oxford data not.
A similar comparison to Heathrow gives an anomaly of 0.9C over Oxford, so a potential UHI of 1.2C. Of some 18 sites I looked at, only 2 showed less UHI and then only -0.1C, compared to CET, so we may have here a way to assess UHI at various sites.
One surprise is that the rise in UHI at Oxford was at a time when there was little in change in the surroundings. To me it suggests that there is another process being incorporated into what we are generally calling UHI. The change in heating from burning coal to burning gas, less particulates and fog from coal burning and the GHG effect of the water vapour emitted by the burning of gas.
One possible heating effect is caused by the increase in hours of sunlight in recent years which I believe is being caused by lack of atmospheric pollution as you mentioned. This is also recorded in the data from the Met Office site and available in the plots on their site. This must be skewing the temperature record in the UK, but I have seen no mention of it since I noticed it a year or so ago. There is definitely some sort of correlation between hours of sunlight and average temperature, nothing to do with CO2.
The sunlight/temperature correlations can be checked here.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-temperature-rainfall-and-sunshine-time-series
Oldbrew: thanks for giving the reference. It does not give the correlation, which would have been interesting. From looking at the individual graphs the correlation if any seems odd: summer mean temperatures show an obvious rising trend but no clear trend in sunshine. Winter shows a warming trend in line with that of sunshine. I would have expected the opposite: clearer skies in winter often lead to cooler rather than warmer weather. Opposite in summer.
There is no indication of how sunshine hours are calculated: could it be that the method of calculating does not relate to the clarity of the atmosphere, and hence the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface?
One other factor I find very important, and that is the relative humidity. On a clear night here in Latvia when the wind stills temperatures can fall rapidly, but dependent upon the relative humidity. With low relative humidity which is typical when the weather is dominated from the East (Russia) then a drop of over 20C is not unusual. But with weather dominated from the South west and the high relative humidity from passing over the Baltic sea, it may only drop a couple of degrees.
Taking an I/R reading of the sky goes below the lowest reading on my ‘gun’ (-60C) but with very high humidity it may be only a few degrees below surface temperature.
Being positive is all good and well but you’ve got to remember that the headlines don’t read “there’s been a bit of warming on poorly sited weather stations” but “England records hottest temperature ever!!!”
No headline from the Met Office and BBC down includes a single caveat and as Paul has reported many times complaints are like water off a ducks back.
This will be ignored by the taxpayer funded organisations until it goes away. POL has demonstrated the ease with which something can be ignored for 30 years and counting
“There is also the advantage that the site is in what has always been surrounded by an urban area, which has changed little over time.”
If you look on google earth pro a large building was constructed to the immediate north west under 15m away sometime around 2009/10. It includes air con exhausts on the roof. In addition to that there are the coming and goings of a long term marquee. I suggest the site has actually changed quite markedly in recent years.
Ray, I was referring to the area of Oxford in general, the area close to the city centre has remained largely unchanged over centuries.
The new building you refer to may have an effect but it is going to be negligible: the air con exhausts you refer to appear to be roof lights, but even if they were they would have no effect on the temperature measurements considering their height and distance away.
The proximity of the marquee, however, is an insult to the many diligent readers of the thermometers over the previous centuries that have come rain or shine made their recordings.
Thank you oldbrew. It is almost as if increased CO2 is leading to increased sunshine!
👍
Is anybody able to provide a link to the FOI response or the full list of stations with their classifications please.
In 1801 Oxford had a population of a little under 13,000, it’s now over 160,000 so it’s likely that the urban heat island effect has become more important over the years.
From Oxford Weather and Climate since 1767 by Stephen Burt, Tim Burt (2019)
“In conclusion, therefore and based on the Wallingford comparison, to answer our first question [What is the magnitude of Oxford’s urban heat island (UHI)], there is clear evidence that the Radcliffe Observatory site is slightly warmer by day than the surrounding countryside, by around 0.4 degC on average (including the expected lapse rate difference due to altitude difference), and is more marked during the summer months. By night, the difference is greater, around 1.0 degC (again including the expected lapse rate difference due to the altitude difference), also more marked in the summer months but less so than for the seasonal variation in daytime temperatures. Averaging the two, we can state that the current magnitude of Oxford’s urban heat island at the Radcliffe Observatory site averages about 0.7 degC.”
I’ve got the spreadsheet they sent.
I’ll email it to you
Publishable?
I would dearly love a copy too if available.
Thank you, that would be greatly appreciated.
Great work Paul, very forwardable!