The Met Office have just released the third edition of their State of the UK Climate for 2016. I always find that this a strange time to publish such a document, why not by the end of January? But once you have taken a look at the 59 page document, you’ll see that it must take a lot of work to put it all together, and I am just being my old curmudgeonly self.
There’s an interesting correction at the foot of the article about CET, which as most of you know is something I like to talk about at length. I find it amazing how people scour the climate datasets to pick out a new extreme, be it high or low, this one’s no exception – decades that span 10 years but don’t start on a year that ends in a zero aren’t what I would call a decade. It’s time to see what the Collins dictionary definition of a decade is:
A decade is a period of ten years, especially one that begins with a year ending in 0, for example 1980 to 1989.
So they are strictly correct, but personally I still like to think of a decade as a period that starts with a year that is divisible by 10 without a remainder, as the Collins dictionary definition suggests it is. Anyway back to the correction, what they were initially said was that the period 2007-2016 was the warmest ‘decade’ in the whole series back to 1659. Obviously they noticed that something was wrong, and said it was incorrect. I wonder why they didn’t just delete the reference in the HTML? I was certainly late on this one and never saw the original.
Just out of interest, here is a centred 10 year moving average of monthly CET values since 1900 (fig 2), and as far as I can see, the warmest decade was the one from 1997 to the end of 2006, when the mean 10 year anomaly for the first time just exceeded +1.0°C, since then, Central England has cooled, until about 2012, when annual anomalies increased sharply again. I think the reason they corrected the original article could have been for a typo, because 2007-2016 and 1997-2006 are just ten years apart. They can always ask me to provide them with graphs, I have a graph of CET values to suit just about any occasion, and the bonus is that I work cheap.
Here for completeness is the full 10 year series of moving averages since 1659 (fig 3).
And finally the infographic that the graphics team have produced to advertise the publication of the 2016 report is a bad idea to my mind. I love a well designed infographics – you only have to look at my blog to see that – and I do realise climate statistics are not the most exciting things to try to visualise, but a clear well constructed table or graph is really all you should need. Most of us have moved on from kindergarten I would have hoped, but they may have been instructed to produce a simple infographic for politicians the like of Michael Gove to understand what’s going on.