Saturday, April 30, 2011
Arkansas - the homogenized data results
Unfortunately I still do not have access to the CDIAC server showing the information on the USHCN sites in Arkansas, so as I discussed last time I have obtained the information from the surface stations site and then downloaded the various station temperatures from the GISS site. Unfortunately this does not include the TOBS data, only that homogenized before being published. There are some problems with that homogenization, which really requires both sets of data to illustrate, but I’ll leave that for now, just to do an initial review of the Arkansas initial data set, and to look at the population data.
There are only 15 USHCN stations, and one GISS station (Fort Smith) on the list, so that the initial work was not that demanding.
Fort Smith GISS temperatures
The difference between the GISS station and the average of the USHCN curves uses the same data set as in the rest of the series:
Difference between the GISS temperature and the average of the homogenized station data for the USHCN stations in Arkansas
The shape of the curve seems to show an increasing difference through about 1948, and then a decline since that time. Given the switch in some series to only using data after 1948 this is slightly curious.
Turning to the overall change in temperature of the state over the century, and now using the homogenized data (hence the purple) rather than the TOBS raw data, the line still does not show very much of an increase over the past century.
Average temperature change in Arkansas over the past 115 years.
The temperature has been increasing at the rate of some 0.05 deg F per century, which is not a lot.
Arkansas is some 260 miles by 240 miles in size running from roughly 89.6 deg to 94.7 deg W in Longitude, and 33 deg to 36.5 deg N in Latitude. The highest point is at 839 m, and the lowest is at 16.7 m, with the average elevation of the state being at 198 m. The average USHCN station is at 176 m, and the GISS station is at 134 m.
Checking the populations, that of Rohwer is too small for citi-data, so I used zip area code to find 77. Fort Smith (the site of the GISS station) has the largest population of the stations.
Looking at the effects of the geography on the temperatures, beginning with the effect of Latitude.
Effect of latitude on temperature in Arkansas
There is the usual strong correlation, whereas with Longitude:
Effect of longitude on temperature in Arkansas
As has been discussed before, any correlation is likely an artifact reflecting changes in elevation.
Effect of elevation on station temperature in Arkansas
When one looks at the effect of population, using the homogenized data, rather than the TOBS data, then there is sensibly no effect of population, in fact such correlation as exists is negative.
Effect of population on temperature in Arkansas after the data has been homogenized.
There are only 15 USHCN stations, and one GISS station (Fort Smith) on the list, so that the initial work was not that demanding.
Fort Smith GISS temperatures
The difference between the GISS station and the average of the USHCN curves uses the same data set as in the rest of the series:
Difference between the GISS temperature and the average of the homogenized station data for the USHCN stations in Arkansas
The shape of the curve seems to show an increasing difference through about 1948, and then a decline since that time. Given the switch in some series to only using data after 1948 this is slightly curious.
Turning to the overall change in temperature of the state over the century, and now using the homogenized data (hence the purple) rather than the TOBS raw data, the line still does not show very much of an increase over the past century.
Average temperature change in Arkansas over the past 115 years.
The temperature has been increasing at the rate of some 0.05 deg F per century, which is not a lot.
Arkansas is some 260 miles by 240 miles in size running from roughly 89.6 deg to 94.7 deg W in Longitude, and 33 deg to 36.5 deg N in Latitude. The highest point is at 839 m, and the lowest is at 16.7 m, with the average elevation of the state being at 198 m. The average USHCN station is at 176 m, and the GISS station is at 134 m.
Checking the populations, that of Rohwer is too small for citi-data, so I used zip area code to find 77. Fort Smith (the site of the GISS station) has the largest population of the stations.
Looking at the effects of the geography on the temperatures, beginning with the effect of Latitude.
Effect of latitude on temperature in Arkansas
There is the usual strong correlation, whereas with Longitude:
Effect of longitude on temperature in Arkansas
As has been discussed before, any correlation is likely an artifact reflecting changes in elevation.
Effect of elevation on station temperature in Arkansas
When one looks at the effect of population, using the homogenized data, rather than the TOBS data, then there is sensibly no effect of population, in fact such correlation as exists is negative.
Effect of population on temperature in Arkansas after the data has been homogenized.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteNice collection of gifts and so lovely Gift idea. thanks for sharing these lovely ideas.cheapest way to transfer money abroad
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing this useable article - I really increase your acquisition.it is really very bioinformatic post for young people, and hope they will enjoy well after reading this post.wooden bow ties
ReplyDeleteI feel that every words you put on this article is always meaningful. That's just great!Lipo battery
ReplyDeleteIts like you read my mind! You seem to know so much about this,like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you could do with some pics to drive the message home a bit, but other than that, this is great blog this.totes for cheap
ReplyDeletewe feel strongly happy to read more on this topic. If possible would you mind updating your blog with some more additional information.construction loan draws
ReplyDeleteHere, I do not really consider it will work.cement tile
ReplyDeleteIt is the job of our industry leaders and congressional champions to tell the truth about the need of our current policy for the food security for our nation.Panama commercial rental
ReplyDeleteThese facts are amazing. I was searching for at least 5 weak and I didn’t get the perfect answer. But after all I found from your site. Thanks for posting such an interesting topic.tree pruning Suffolk County
ReplyDeleteGood Day,
ReplyDeleteAre you looking for Storage Tanks In Rotterdam? Houston? Then worry no more SOVREDMET LOGISTIC COMPANY got you covered. Contact us Now on email address: ackermanbarnhardt@gmail.com
SOVREDMET LOGISTIC COMPANY are pleased to bring to your notice that we have Tanks available for lease. Our Tank Farm have durable and reliable tanks storage facilities at Rotterdam, and Houston. Our tank farm is a Crude/Petroleum reservoir with high storage capacities located in all ports in Netherlands (Rotterdam). Our Team of competent experts are always interested in giving you one of the best services and total product security guaranteeing your satisfaction and securing our values. Contact us today for our services and have your products in safe custody.
Please contact us via our official email address: ackermanbarnhardt@gmail.com
Thank you