Lyneham Addendum – demonstrating the solar panel effect with real numbers and exploding the Met Office myth of “Well Correlated”.

Aerial view of MOD Lyneham Solar Farm https://www.pv-tech.org/shell-to-become-single-off-taker-of-largest-solar-farm-in-england/

In my review of the Met Office weather station at Lyneham I emphasized the reality of heat island effects caused by the industrialisation of a formerly almost rural area by the construction of what was then the UK’s largest solar farm. Artificial Intelligence agreed with my postulation and referred to research proving that such solar farm construction would unquestionably elevate temperatures in their immediate vicinity.

Former professional auditor and invaluable assistant for data presentation to the Talkshop, Dave Woolcock, posed the simple question “does the data show warming since 2015?” Thus started an investigation that has led to some remarkable findings and conclusions.

The Lyneham solar farm has a capacity of ~69.8 MW, covers ~213 acres (86 ha) with over 160,000 panels, and was completed in 2015. The Met Office CEDA archive operates about 18 months in arrears with, at present, most recent data up to 31/12/2024. I put it to Dave that, whilst 10 years is not a climate averaging period, comparing the full 10 period data post installation period from 1/1/2015 to 31/12/2024 with the full 10 year period prior of 1/1/2005 to 31/12/2014, should indicate any “step change”.

Dave diligently set to work on a task that is not as straight forward as it may seem. Manually observed “climate stations” are typically observed once daily at 09:00 am. {n.b. The UK Meteorological Day is defined as running from 09:00 one day to 09:00 the next } . Maximum readings are traditionally attributed to the previous calendar day with minimums attributed to the calendar day on which the reading is taken. Comparing data from one year to the next is therefore quite straight forward.

Lyneham, however, had several readings taken per day as noted in the archives.

This is further complicated by the fact that the site has since been automated with a 21st century PRT/Data Logging system taking minute by minute reading being fitted inside a Victorian screening system. The modern Lyneham archives show two daily readings at 09:00 and at 21:00 and adjustments have to be made to account for which day the extremes actually occur. There are ramifications to this recording which I will clarify in a future post though I have previously raised this point most notably with regard to Cambridge sites.

Dave ran the comparison and forwarded the data to me, somewhat unsure if he had actually represented it correctly…..why? Well here is the Met Office’s Location Specific Long Term Climate Averages for Lyneham which allows comparison of the period 1960 to 1990 with that of 1990 to 2020.

The stand out points here are that over the 60 year period, annual maximum (T/max) is claimed to have risen from 12.97 °C to 13.92 °C an increment of 0.95 °C. Annual minimum (T/min) is claimed to have risen from 5.68 °C to 6.52 °C an increment of 0.84 °C.

Now, here is Dave’s first pass on annual daily T/avg (defined as T/max + T/min ÷ 2) for the decade post 2015 (Green) over pre-2015 decade (orange).

Not entirely conclusive but evidence of the post 2015 peaks being higher. So a change of parameters to compare both T/max and T/min separately.

Firstly T/min

Dave added the raw numbers behind this graph –

“and the arithmetic 10 year average tMin temps were:

Pre 2015:    6.45C

Post 2015:   7.00C    (0.55C uplift)  

visually 6 out of 10 summer peak minimums greater than before, 2 lower, 2 about the same

Moving onto T/max:

Very clearly the pre and post profiles are very different. As Dave added

“and the arithmetic 10 year average tMax temps were:

Pre 2015:    13.8CC

Post 2015:   14.5C    (0.7C uplift)  

visually 5 out of ten summer peaks higher than before and the rest about the same

we’ve lost some winter lows again“

At this point I ran to A1 for clarification and supplied GROK with a table of monthly figures from Dave which it converted into a seasonal format.

Monthly Temperature Averages (Pre vs Post)

Month	Avg of Max (Pre)	Avg of Max (Post)	Avg of Min (Pre)	Avg of Min (Post)	Diff tmax	Diff tmin
Jan	6.98	7.49	1.74	1.88	+0.51	+0.14
Feb	7.15	8.82	1.54	2.58	+1.67	+1.05
Mar	10.10	10.55	2.54	3.39	+0.46	+0.85
Apr	13.72	13.62	4.81	4.45	-0.10	-0.36
May	16.26	17.15	7.51	7.85	+0.89	+0.33
Jun	19.47	20.24	10.44	10.80	+0.76	+0.36
Jul	21.51	21.99	12.31	12.74	+0.49	+0.43
Aug	20.20	21.35	11.87	12.58	+1.15	+0.71
Sep	18.63	18.94	10.31	10.56	+0.31	+0.25
Oct	14.81	14.88	8.31	8.07	+0.07	-0.24
Nov	10.01	10.50	4.22	5.01	+0.49	+0.80
Dec	7.04	8.84	1.72	3.97	+1.81	+2.25

This was converted to;

Seasonal Temperature Averages – Lyneham (10-year means)

Season	Avg Max Pre	Avg Max Post	Avg Max Diff	Avg Min Pre	Avg Min Post	Avg Min Diff
Winter (Dec+Jan+Feb)	7.06	8.38	+1.33	1.67	2.81	+1.15
Spring (Mar+Apr+May)	13.36	13.77	+0.41	4.95	5.23	+0.28
Summer (Jun+Jul+Aug)	20.39	21.19	+0.80	11.54	12.04	+0.50
Autumn (Sep+Oct+Nov)	14.48	14.77	+0.29	7.61	7.88

The above numbers in seasonal form show a significant step change indeed. Meanwhile Dave then came up with an even more emphatic representation of the data by comparing every single day on a pre and post basis and adding in a moving trend. I must emphasize again this is verified original data freely supplied by the Met office with no adjustments, homogenisation nor “tampering” of any kind.

What the above is demonstrating, beyond any doubt, is an almost continuous and significant uplift in temperatures on a daily basis with only a few rare days (clustered around April and October) being fractionally (insignificantly so) lower.

A step change in temperature readings concurrent with the installation of the huge area of solar panels is proven. And note that the level of these 10 year increments dwarfs the concocted 60 year Met office homogenised/adjusted/ “well correlated” numbers.

As Grok A1 interpreted all these figures.

“Key Observations from the Seasonal/Daily Views

• Winter shows the largest warming in both maximum (+1.33°C) and minimum (+1.15°C) temperatures. This is driven especially by strong increases in December and February.
• Summer has the next strongest signal, particularly in daytime maxima (+0.80°C).
• Spring and Autumn show much smaller shifts, with autumn being the weakest overall.
• The pattern of stronger warming in the colder half of the year (especially minima) is consistent with suppressed nighttime cooling — a hallmark of local heat retention effects (e.g., from surfaces that absorb and re-radiate heat).

This seasonal aggregation makes the step-change around 2015 even clearer: the biggest impacts appear in winter, when solar panels (even when not generating much electricity in short winter days) can still influence the local energy balance through albedo changes, stored heat release, and reduced radiative cooling under calm conditions.“

This then lead me to the obvious issue of correlation…..or rather the spectacular impossibility of the Met Office claims of using “Well Correlated” stations to provide data for long closed sites and even pretending to use other sites to continue monthly figures for “historic stations“.

How is it possible for a weather station such as Lyneham to continue to be “Well Correlated” with anywhere else when its climatic parameters have undergone such a dramatic step change?

The answer to that question is very easily answered – it simply cannot………but facts like this rarely trouble the Met Office. Take a look at those nearby “Climate Averages Stations”

Firstly Marlborough – however good it may or may not have been is irrelevant given no readings have been taken there since 30/11/1996 i.e. almost 30 years ago. Cirencester is a manually observed weather station that has such an appalling observation standard that deriving annual means is an exercise in futility. Bath, Beechen Cliff School was at its best a very poor location and now sits under a buildings foundations and closed over 21 years ago in 2005.

This leaves Larkhill and another site modification that potentially makes Lyneham look almost trivial. Whoever at the Met Office deemed Larkhill a Class 4 site clearly has a sense of sick humour. Below is Larkhill in aerial imagery from 2002 surrounded by grass.

And here is Larkhill now, proudly sitting directly alongside 27,000 square feet of equestrian sand school.

GCSE/”O” Level science covers specific and latent heat of water and every gardener will know that free draining sand will both rapidly warm and cool – but apparantly such basic science is not the concern of Met Office climatologists or inspectors. As i stated in my original report, how bad does a CIMO Class 5 site have to be if Larkhill is adjudged to be better.

If time and inclination allows a comparison pre and post sand school installation could be done but in all reality only an incompetent person could argue such a change would have a minimal effect.

In summary what I feel Dave’s data presentation has demonstrated is that there are huge differences caused by the alterations to the Lyneham site. These types of changes are becoming increasingly common with solar farms now surrounding several weather stations and some of those even have double counted data for official government stats! Other sites have equally huge distorting factors from all manner of unacceptable siting issues.

That the Met office ignores all these blatantly obvious factors that riddle their network and even refuses to discuss them is indicative of an organisation that has ceased to be representing science and supports a false ideology in lieu.

My next post will reveal the Met office yet again refusing to answer a simple basic question – what are they so afraid of……the truth?

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2026/04/30/lyneham-addendum-demonstrating-the-solar-panel-effect-with-real-numbers-and-exploding-the-met-office-myth-of-well-correlated/