date: Thu Oct 22 15:26:14 2009
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
subject: RE: 2009 preliminary data on average global temperature deviations
to: Ricardo Fernandez <Ricardo.Fernandez@eea.europa.eu>

    OK
    Phil
   At 14:50 22/10/2009, you wrote:

     Thanks Phil,
     Perhaps you can send a copy of your paper when published?
     Cheers
     Ricardo
       ___________________________________________________________________________________

     From: Phil Jones [[1]mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk]
     Sent: 22 October 2009 15:02
     To: Ricardo Fernandez
     Subject: RE: 2009 preliminary data on average global temperature deviations

      Ricardo,
          The stations in the Arctic are much the same in the CRU, GISS and NCDC analyses.
     Differences in gridding are a factor as well, but the infilling that NCDC (NOAA) do is
     beginning to have an effect in the Arctic.
      In this region, we don't do any infilling, so if a box has no data then it stays
     missing. Infilling gives you  more boxes, which generally have higher T anomalies than
     the average of the rest of the hemisphere, so leads to the NCDC/NOAA analysis appearing
     warmer.
        The way we calculate the globe is an important factor. We use for the globe the
     average of the two hemispheres. NCDC and GISS calculate as one domain. Even with
     infilling NCDC still has some gaps in the SH, so this biases the globe to the NH.
        I'm involved in a paper coming out soon looking at ERA-INTERIM. This is the newest
     Reanalysis that covers the period from 1989-2008. If you sample this where CRU has data
     over land, the agreement is amazingly good. As ERA-INTERIM is complete, you can sample
     all NH and SH areas where there is land. This shows slightly more warmer than CRU,
     mainly for the NH. When these extra areas are mapped it is mostly coming from the Arctic
     and Siberia.
       You are right that the lower slope for GISS is due to their large boxes. Their numbers
     look larger , as most people forget that their base period is 1951-80.
      Cheers
      Phil

     At 12:32 22/10/2009, Ricardo Fernandez wrote:
     Hello Phil,
     I read an article in Le Monde yesterday where according to Stefan Rahmstof (university
     of Postdam) the main difference between the warming observed in GISS and Hadley is that
     you do not cover the Artic. I was surprised by this. You publish documentation about the
     network of stations used in the calculation of (land) surface temperature
     [2]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/landstations/ and there are several stations above
     66 degrees N. Am I missing something?
     I also thought the differences between CRU, GISS, but also NOAA, were mainly due to
     methods and gridding techniques: e.g. you calculate the global anomaly by averaging the
     two hemispheres, thus giving more weight (i.e. than if you averaged all grids) to the
     poorly covered and colder Southern Hemisphere. It was also my understanding that over
     the long run there is a lower slope coefficient for GISS because their method provides
     estimates for empty grid boxes when at least one station falls within a 1200 Km radius
     of an unsampled box, which is common e.g. in Antarctica, where warming has been lower
     than in other areas since the 1970s. You do not provide estimates for unsampled grids.
     Ricardo
     ________________________________________
     Ricardo Fernandez
     Analyst
     Air and Climate Change Mitigation
     European Environment Agency
     Kongens Nytorv 6
     1050 Copenhagen K
     Denmark
     [3]ricardo.fernandez@eea.europa.eu
       ___________________________________________________________________________________

     From: Phil Jones [ [4]mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk]
     Sent: 14 October 2009 14:52
     To: Ricardo Fernandez; Barbara.BACIGALUPI@ec.europa.eu
     Cc: André Jol; a.ogden@uea.ac.uk
     Subject: RE: 2009 preliminary data on average global temperature deviations

      Ricardo,
        Thanks!
      Phil
     At 13:35 14/10/2009, Ricardo Fernandez wrote:
     Dear Barbara,

     Further to Phils email, I attach the chart based on the latest HadCRU3 data - as in
     previous years. The estimate of the mean anomaly for 2009 is based on the available 8
     months (January-August).  The (smoothed) global mean temperature for 2009 would then be
     0.75 Celsius (rounded i.e. 0.8) above pre-industrial levels (using 10-year moving
     averages and relative to the period 1850-1899). I can send 3 more updates (including
     September, October and November) before the December anomaly is available from CRUs
     website. I should be able to send you the final chart sometime in January.

     Ricardo
     ________________________________________
     Ricardo Fernandez
     Analyst
     Air and Climate Change Mitigation
     European Environment Agency
     Kongens Nytorv 6
     1050 Copenhagen K
     Denmark
     Tel: +45 3336 7270 / +45 23646514 (mobile)
     Fax: +45 3336 7151
     [5]ricardo.fernandez@eea.europa.eu
       ___________________________________________________________________________________

     From: Phil Jones [ [6]mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk]
     Sent: 14 October 2009 14:22
     To: Barbara.BACIGALUPI@ec.europa.eu; Ricardo Fernandez
     Cc: André Jol; a.ogden@uea.ac.uk
     Subject: Re: 2009 preliminary data on average global temperature deviations

      Barbara and Ricardo,
         The current value is +0.43 deg C above the 1961-90 level. This is for 2009 including
     August.
      This would make 2009 the 7th warmest year behind in order 1998, 2005, 2002, 2003, 2004
     and 2006.
      The El Nino event is making the second half of the year warmer though, so it may yet
     pass 2004 and 2006
      and possibly 2003. It just depends....   Only 1998 and 2005 stand out from the rest.
      Cheers
      Phil
     At 13:31 08/10/2009, Barbara.BACIGALUPI@ec.europa.eu wrote:
     Dear Ricardo and Phil,
     We are currently working on the next (2009) version of the Environment Policy Review,
     and therefore updating all information.
     Please find the EPR 2008 available on:
     [7]http://ec.europa.eu/environment/policyreview.htm
     Please look at indicator 1.1 of the annex.
     Do you have (preliminary) 2009 data for global temperature?  I could not find any
     information or press release available on: [8]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/
     Thank you.
     Kind regards,
     Barbara
     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


   Prof. Phil Jones
   Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
   School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
   University of East Anglia
   Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
   NR4 7TJ
   UK
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------