Home/BlogMetop-C Satellite Added to Our Processing
With this update, we have added Metop-C to our processing, so along with Metop-B we are back to having two satellites in the processing stream. The Metop-C data record begins in July of 2019. Like Metop-B, Metop-C was designed to use fuel to maintain its orbital altitude and inclination, so (until fuel reserves are depleted) there is no diurnal drift adjustment needed. Metop-B is beginning to show some drift in the last year or so, but it’s too little at this point to worry about any diurnal drift correction.
The Version 6.1 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for November, 2024 was +0.64 deg. C departure from the 1991-2020 mean, down from the October, 2024 anomaly of +0.75 deg. C.
The Version 6.1 global area-averaged temperature trend (January 1979 through November 2024) remains at +0.15 deg/ C/decade (+0.21 C/decade over land, +0.13 C/decade over oceans).
The following table lists various regional Version 6.1 LT departures from the 30-year (1991-2020) average for the last 23 months (record highs are in red). Note the tropics have cooled by 0.72 deg. C in the last 8 months, consistent with the onset of La Nina conditions.
| YEAR | MO | GLOBE | NHEM. | SHEM. | TROPIC | USA48 | ARCTIC | AUST |
| 2023 | Jan | -0.06 | +0.07 | -0.19 | -0.41 | +0.14 | -0.10 | -0.45 |
| 2023 | Feb | +0.07 | +0.13 | +0.01 | -0.13 | +0.64 | -0.26 | +0.11 |
| 2023 | Mar | +0.18 | +0.22 | +0.14 | -0.17 | -1.36 | +0.15 | +0.58 |
| 2023 | Apr | +0.12 | +0.04 | +0.20 | -0.09 | -0.40 | +0.47 | +0.41 |
| 2023 | May | +0.28 | +0.16 | +0.41 | +0.32 | +0.37 | +0.52 | +0.10 |
| 2023 | June | +0.30 | +0.33 | +0.28 | +0.51 | -0.55 | +0.29 | +0.20 |
| 2023 | July | +0.56 | +0.59 | +0.54 | +0.83 | +0.28 | +0.79 | +1.42 |
| 2023 | Aug | +0.61 | +0.77 | +0.45 | +0.78 | +0.71 | +1.49 | +1.30 |
| 2023 | Sep | +0.80 | +0.84 | +0.76 | +0.82 | +0.25 | +1.11 | +1.17 |
| 2023 | Oct | +0.79 | +0.85 | +0.72 | +0.85 | +0.83 | +0.81 | +0.57 |
| 2023 | Nov | +0.77 | +0.87 | +0.67 | +0.87 | +0.50 | +1.08 | +0.29 |
| 2023 | Dec | +0.75 | +0.92 | +0.57 | +1.01 | +1.22 | +0.31 | +0.70 |
| 2024 | Jan | +0.80 | +1.02 | +0.58 | +1.20 | -0.19 | +0.40 | +1.12 |
| 2024 | Feb | +0.88 | +0.95 | +0.81 | +1.17 | +1.31 | +0.86 | +1.16 |
| 2024 | Mar | +0.88 | +0.96 | +0.80 | +1.26 | +0.22 | +1.05 | +1.34 |
| 2024 | Apr | +0.94 | +1.12 | +0.77 | +1.15 | +0.86 | +0.88 | +0.54 |
| 2024 | May | +0.78 | +0.77 | +0.78 | +1.20 | +0.05 | +0.22 | +0.53 |
| 2024 | June | +0.69 | +0.78 | +0.60 | +0.85 | +1.37 | +0.64 | +0.91 |
| 2024 | July | +0.74 | +0.86 | +0.62 | +0.97 | +0.44 | +0.56 | -0.06 |
| 2024 | Aug | +0.76 | +0.82 | +0.70 | +0.75 | +0.41 | +0.88 | +1.75 |
| 2024 | Sep | +0.81 | +1.04 | +0.58 | +0.82 | +1.32 | +1.48 | +0.98 |
| 2024 | Oct | +0.75 | +0.89 | +0.61 | +0.64 | +1.90 | +0.81 | +1.09 |
| 2024 | Nov | +0.64 | +0.88 | +0.41 | +0.54 | +1.12 | +0.79 | +1.00 |
The full UAH Global Temperature Report, along with the LT global gridpoint anomaly image for November, 2024, and a more detailed analysis by John Christy, should be available within the next several days here.
The monthly anomalies for various regions for the four deep layers we monitor from satellites will be available in the next several days at the following locations:
Is the Metop-C data now included from 2019, or just from this month? There are very small differences between the anomalies published this month, but only about 0.01 or 0.02C.
Assuming no big changes prior to 2023, this is the second warmest November. Ten warmest Novembers in UAH history are
2023 0.77
2024 0.64
2019 0.42
2020 0.40
2016 0.34
2017 0.22
2015 0.21
2009 0.14
1990 0.12
2018 0.12
My projection for the year rises slightly to +0.765 +/- 0.055C, and it’s even more certain that 2024 will be the warmest on record, beating 2023 by at least 0.3C. December would have to be -3.5C for the record not to be beaten, so I think it’s a fairly safe bet.
https://i.imgur.com/L5bJBER.png
Metop-C data are included since July 2019.
Thanks. I think it’s quite reassuring that adding an additional satellite has so little effect.
We begin the descent down the slide. In a few months, we will reach the negative anomalies.
Surely global warming has truly stopped this time.
For at least the next five years or even beyond.
My sunspot model predicted that warming stopped in 2016 and that GST will decline slightly until at least 2030. Other models I’m working on show that warming will resume ~2050 and will peak ~2100. Then it’s on to the next cool period in 2400.
Here’s the spreadsheet version of the sunspot-based model described on my github page.
https://localartist.org/media/SunspotPredictionExcel.xlsx
” In a few months, we will reach the negative anomalies. ”
And?
Anomalies are departures from an arbitrary chosen period: currently, 1991-2020.
A few years ago, the period was 1981-2010; as the absolute temperatures were cooler than those in 1991-2020, the older anomalies were higher by 0.14 C on average.
And even longer ago (around 2010, if I well recall), the period was 1979-1998, showing even lower temperatures than for 1981-2010.
Hence, the anomalies of the current absolute data but computed wrt 1979-1998 are even higher, about 0.20 C:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZxaTF5NPsaEOGapZKxngrAwvjQrFxgzS/view
*
P.S. I generate now graphs using Encapsulated Postscript.
Negative anomalies make alarmism more implausible, right?
No. Negative or positive values by themselves are irrelevant to degree of change. They are referenced to a semi-arbitrary baseline. Move the baseline up by 2 degrees C and every anomaly will be negative, but the warming trend will be completely unchanged.
” Negative anomalies make alarmism more implausible, right? ”
By posting this poor nonsense, you confirm that you didn’t even understand what I wrote above, namely that anomalies are arbitrary values 100% depending on the reference period they were computed out:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZxaTF5NPsaEOGapZKxngrAwvjQrFxgzS/view
You don’t understand how anomalies actually are obtained, do you?
Here are the absolute values of both anomaly series you see in the graph above:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T8pZ260c43-lzC-WZ4GI_oogyb-jHMvg/view
Think about it.
Phew, I’m glad the temperatures always go down so fast after an el Nino.
Temperatures will drop even further with the help of La Nina that is about to begin.
No doubt. And I have no statistical analysis to determine that this peak was unusually wide. But it FEELS exceptional, doesn’t it? The biggest drop after an el Nino in the UAH record is after the 1998 el Nino – a shade over one full degree Kelvin. It’s a small sample, so anything we infer from it has to be taken with a pinch of salt, but if the same drop were to happen now it would JUST make it into the negative range. I’d hazard that it won’t drop that far this time, and that the moving average will not make it below zero at all now. We’ll know in a few months.
Assuming UAH continues in the same vein, eventually today’s anomalies will be negative just from the decadal change of baseline.
The water wapor from Honga Tunga is about to dissapear from the atmosphere now, so we will likey see a huge drop in the temperatures the next months and years.
And which observational water vapour data did you examine to corroborate that view?
A new small or large ice age is on its way if establishment takes place below minus one degree Celsius, according to my interpretation of the technical analysis.
Please translate from Swedish if you want to read.
Alvar Nyen, technical analyst for 30 years, Sweden, Scandinavia
https://alvarnyren.wixsite.com/aidtrade/post/mina-klimatmodeller-54
You should change permission rights on your site:
” Error: Forbidden
Your client does not have permission to get URL /aidtrade/post/mina-klimatmodeller-54 from this server. ”
*
Anyway: are you aware of the fact that even when using the current, quite low anomalies wrt 1991-2020, the least anomaly since start in 1978 12 was
1984 9 -0.67 (C)
i.e. 40 years ago
and that we still have a warming trend of 0.15 C / decade, which will at best go down to 0.13, when the end of HTE’s alleged warming and la Nina’s expected cooling will add?
You’re such a clown, blindly assuming those numbers are completely accurate without even mentioning a margin of error.
Krokodile
You are even less than a clown: you are a coward.
Simply because when you write:
” blindly assuming those numbers are completely accurate without even mentioning a margin of error. ”
you don’t even have the balls to address this claim to the blog’s owner, who – despite having been asked for years ago already – never was willing to add this ‘margin of error’ to his monthly reports:
vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.1/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.1.txt
Do you see the trend line at the end, krokodile?
*
Personally, I always add the standard error when posting trend comparisons, unless I’m replying to a comment where adding that information simply doesn’t make sense.
*
For you: the trend info as I wish it to be published by Roy Spencer since years, e.g. for the Globe since Dec 1978, in C / decade:
0.1519 ± 0.0063
*
Are YOU, krokodile, able to post such information? If so, why don’t you, instead of keeping polemic?
*
By the way, since when have you been posting here? I don’t see any “red krokodile says:” before this fall of 2024. Why?
“0.1519 0.0063”
You think standard error is accuracy?
” You think standard error is accuracy? ”
Stop boring me with your superficial blah blah, krokodile.
You were the one who mentioned ‘margin of error’.
*
Try to learn about margin of error, standard error and confidence interval – and leave me in peace.
https://www.usu.edu/math/schneit/StatsStuff/Inference/confidenceintervals.html
You NEVER actually used any of these concepts at any moment in your life, and merely replicate stuff you picked up out of some contrarian blog.
Global
https://climatedatablog.wordpress.com/2024/12/03/uah-mean-and-median-global-for-nov-2024/
Tropics
https://climatedatablog.wordpress.com/2024/12/03/uah-mean-and-median-tropics-for-nov-2024/
November is marginally lower than anything in the last 15 months, but still higher than any other reading except for 2 of the peak months in 2016 during the Godzilla El Nino. The mystery and the drama continues.
The reduction by around 0.1 C is pretty inconclusive. It’s possible this is purely a reaction to the end of El Nino and movement into La Nina conditions. If so, that means the Hunga Tonga warming effect is still strong with no signs of letting up.
The water vapor image in the upper troposphere seems to agree with this view. No obvious changes this year.
https://acd-ext.gsfc.nasa.gov/Data_services/met/qbo/h2o_MLS_vLAT_tap_75S-75N_146hPa.png
OTOH, this change could be a sign the Hunga Tonga effect is starting to wane. It will likely take a couple more months before we know.
That is an interesting theory. Why did the effect take more than a year to start, or show any effect, and then show a very strong effect over just few months?
Tim, the eruption also put a lot of SO2 into the atmosphere. This is a cooling gas. The combination of La Nina with this gas balanced the warming effect of the water vapor and cloud reductions.
Since the SO2 is a heavier gas its effect peaked after about a year. As it faded away in early 2023 we also moved from La Nina into El Nino. That’s what caused the warming to take off that summer.
All speculation. Lacking quantitative predictions, this is just guesswork.
test
aha…global cooling is upon us.
Yet again. Surely THIS time it won’t be so temporary?
How low do you expect it will go? And for how long?
“The… anomaly for November, 2024 was +0.64 deg. C … down from the October, 2024 anomaly of +0.75 deg. C.”
Indeed.
It did feel a tad chillier out there the past month.
Of course, just +0.64C. Why actually not take the latest observation as baseline? SO 0C anomaly and then everybody can be happy we are back to normal after experiencing a little ice age in the 80’s.
Let’s base it on simple science, say the Kelvin scale. Roughly translating, last month’s anomaly was 288.79 C above the gold standard baseline of absolute zero.
There, no more arbitrary baselines.
Some people still seem to link the recent temperature peak in the lower troposphere to the Hunga Tonga eruption.
It was told that the injection of 150 Mt of water vapor into the stratosphere would result there in a temperature drop perceptible down to its lower layer (LS), what in turn would cause a corresponding temperature increase in the lower troposphere (LT) above us.
*
Let’s compare the two. It is best to separate the hemispheres, as they often experience anomalies in opposite directions during the same month, which then cancel each other out.
1. LS vs. LT in the NH
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Uf95ZYz7czGH5ygBrml0_z496YMFkXHo/view
2. LS vs. LT in the SH
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aj7q0u3y07zZAkE68tSVSlWBxN84BD9T/view
*
If we now look at the huge peaks in LS corresponding to the relatively small drops in LT (El Chichon 1982 and Pinatubo 1991), and compare these two eruptions with HTE in 2022, we see nothing the like.
Sources: Roy Spencer’s monthly zonal reports for LT and LS
So want to agree that
https://acd-ext.gsfc.nasa.gov/Data_services/met/qbo/h2o_MLS_vLAT_tap_75S-75N_146hPa.png
is real?
It’s real and it corroborates the the 150 MtH20 estimate for the additional water vapor. To put this into perspective since the HT eruption about 10,000 MtCO2 has been added to the stratosphere.
Why is there no extra h2O in 2022 and 2023, and then suddenly it appears in mid 2024?
test