Met. Office Math

Britain’s weather gurus at the Meteorological Office (‘Met’) have an operating budget of £170 million, a £33 million super computer and just handed its people £12 million in bonuses.  Despite all that cash however, the forecasters cannot forecast reliably.

In typical government fashion, rather than identify and fix the problem, the Met spins in an effort to offset the enormous cost of crappy forecasting by attaching a ‘value’ to its contribution to the nation.  The Met values its contribution at over £260 million, an entirely fictional number derived from the perceived financial benefits of saving lives and property with accurate forecasting.  Hmm, see a problem?

The Met Office has no debit column for when they get it wrong, making their estimate of value as useless as the barbecue summer forecast.  Here’s the Met’s one-sided table:

All upside, all the time

The Met stacks the deck in its favor with a simple rule: If a forecast ‘saves’ a life, the Met. credits its ‘value to the nation’ account with £1.478 million. But if people die from weather related causes, the cause was probably ‘climate change’ which is totally not their fault, so they don’t take a hit for the corpse.  It’s Green Math and we’ve seen it before.

Three examples where the Met should have taken a debit:

The Met Office has a poor record of forecasting, most recently for the Summer 2009 debacle, but in the world of environmentalists, ability has nothing to do with credibility, so the Met feels perfectly able to predict global disaster 50 years into the future.

My advice, use one of these:

accurate and cheap

[ad#insert-large]

8 thoughts on “Met. Office Math”

  1. I haven’t seen one of those weather rocks in years. Outstanding.
    Hey, didn’t they say that the MET, for all the money and equipment is really only about 8 people?
    Even so, you’d think one could actually read isobars.

  2. I haven’t seen one of those weather rocks in years. Outstanding.
    Hey, didn’t they say that the MET, for all the money and equipment is really only about 8 people?
    Even so, you’d think one could actually read isobars.

Comments are closed.