|
Post by carnyx on Feb 7, 2011 14:38:32 GMT 1
Louise
Then why do Tramps gravitate to Cities?
But more seriously, we are talking about the heat-storage effects of brick and concrete, etc. And so, in terms of local air temperature, it is the night-time air temperatures that will show an increase.
And even more seriously, could you consider the essential difference beween the AGW effect of increasing numbers of buildings/roads .. and the AGW effect of increasing CO2?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 7, 2011 14:45:15 GMT 1
"The difference between ideal rural sites compared to urban sites in temperature trends has been very small"
Not according to young Peter and his dad, louise.
|
|
|
Post by louise on Feb 7, 2011 14:48:45 GMT 1
I should imagine that there are very many reasons why tramps gravitate to cities including the availability of begging opportunities, food scraps to be found, availability of their own particular brain-numbing drug (prescription, illegal or alcohol), places to shelter from rain, etc.
The link I posted showed that several studies have looked at the temperature change in both rural and urban areas and have found these to be similar.
Rather than thinking things through as if 'common sense' tells us something, I have found that common sense can frequently be wrong and so I go for empirical evidence - i.e. measurements.
As for your latter point, increasing urbanisation that leads to warmer air temperatures then leads to an atmosphere than can hold more water vapour - a powerful greenhouse gas.
The simple answer is that there is no simple answer.
One cannot isolate effects such as deforestation, increasing amount of concrete, increase in CO2 emissions and global temperatures as if these were unrelated.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 7, 2011 15:26:59 GMT 1
"One cannot isolate effects such as deforestation, increasing amount of concrete, increase in CO2 emissions and global temperatures as if these were unrelated."
Well spotted, Louise!
So why is CO2 supposedly the main villain of the piece? Why the stress on human CO2 emissions reduction instead of recognition of other anthropogenic impacts on regional climate like land-use change, irrigation, aircraft con-trails and airborn soot from the developing world?
And, of course, the elephant in the room, population growth which aggravates every other effect?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 9, 2011 20:47:45 GMT 1
I spoke somewhat prophetically, it seems, when I said "the elephant in the room, population growth which aggravates every other effect" in the last post. Coincidentally, today I happened upon a nice piece of research by Frank Lansner about a purported relationship between the rate of population growth and a measure of UHI effect which Frank has calculated by subtracting the satellite measured temperatures (lower) from the surface station measurements (higher) over the same geographical areas. His tentative finding is that areas of fastest population growth demonstrate the largest UHI effect. Very interesting and (to me at least) not at all surprising! Read the full article here joannenova.com.au/2011/02/the-urban-heat-island-effect-could-africa-be-more-affected-than-the-us/#more-13225
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 9, 2011 20:50:22 GMT 1
I spoke somewhat prophetically, it seems, when I said "the elephant in the room, population growth which aggravates every other effect" in the last post. Coincidentally, today I happened upon a nice piece of research by Frank Lansner about a purported relationship between the annual rate of population growth and the UHI effect which Frank has calculated by subtracting satellite measured temperatures (lower) from surface station measurements (higher) over the same geographical areas. His tentative finding is that throughout the world areas with a faster rate of annual population growth demonstrate a greater UHI effect. Very interesting and (to me at least) not at all surprising! Read the full article here joannenova.com.au/2011/02/the-urban-heat-island-effect-could-africa-be-more-affected-than-the-us/#more-13225I think this topic deserves a new thread all to itself!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 2, 2011 23:08:40 GMT 1
Image of London't Heat Island Effect Urban heat island (surface temperature) map of London, UK, September 16, 2003 Image from Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) .
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 2, 2011 23:14:10 GMT 1
cesa.asu.edu/urban-systems/100-cities-project/historyThe original 100 Cities Project, also referred to as the Urban Environmental Monitoring (UEM) project, at Arizona State University (ASU) was initiated by ASTER Team Member Dr. Philip R. Christensen to collect and analyze daytime and nighttime ASTER imagery over 100 urban centers. ASTER (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) is an imaging instrument flying on Terra, a satellite launched in December 1999 as part of NASA's Earth Observing System. The major results of the project to date include the development of knowledge-based and object-oriented land use/land cover (LULC) classification algorithms that are generally applicable to all urban centers; quantification of the structure of the Phoenix urban landscape using spatial metrics; and investigation of correlations between a high-resolution LULC classification derived from ASTER and coarse resolution biophysical measurements obtained from the MODIS sensor in urban areas. Collaborations with scientists in such diverse urban centers as Berlin, Germany; Chiang Mai, Thailand; and Delhi, India have provided access to resources such as ASTER and Landsat data for research projects and student training, and the project has provided data used by numerous researchers and students at ASU. The 100 Cities Project has also sought to understand how urban remote sensing can best be utilized with both researchers and practitioners in developing urban models, planning, and policy formulation. We are growing our international network of researchers and practitioners with a goal to be a significant provider of urban remote sensing images, processes, and models and provide outreach and education. more......
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 2, 2011 23:42:15 GMT 1
Warwick Hughes neatly demonstrates how GISS uses UHI data to exagerrate the "adjusted" temperature TREND. GISS illustrating typical urban T data with a step due to outward site move – after adjustment – now with UHI warmed trend "built in". See how the cooling effect of a move out to the suburbs is then used to adjust PREVIOUS data downwards thus creating a spurious trend. We all know that the warmist climatologusts claim the TREND is the only important thing about temperatures, don't we? You betcha! More here www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=753I have always said that UHI was being passed off as CO2 induced warming and I am more than ever convinced this is the case. The majority of the 1000 or so stations used to calculate Global Mean Temp are located in urban areas or at airports. Draw your own conclusions why.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 2, 2011 23:59:19 GMT 1
BillyBob says: April 2, 2011 at 1:07 pm Heathrow weather station has bright sunshine hours up over 220 hours per year. I suspect thats because of the cleaning up of the air. Decade Sunshine Hours Total 1960s – 14555.7 1970s – 15118.6 1980s – 15264.4 1990s – 16801.9 2000s – 16776.8 www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/stationdata/heathrowdata.txt2300 extra hours of sunshine from the 1960s to the 1990s/2000s. That is a huge jump in energy from the sun.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 3, 2011 0:18:03 GMT 1
Wayne says: April 2, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Daytime summer temperatures are minimally affected by UHI, it is the winter nighttime temperatures where urban heat manifests itself the greatest. There is too much energy from the sun present on hot summer days. But in cold winter days and nights that urban heating really takes it toll on the anomalies.
|
|
|
Post by louise on Apr 9, 2011 11:51:20 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on Apr 9, 2011 17:20:52 GMT 1
Evidently. such a paper is worthless. Why are you giving us a heads up on such a piece of detritus?
|
|
|
Post by louise on Apr 9, 2011 18:34:02 GMT 1
Evidently. such a paper is worthless. Why are you giving us a heads up on such a piece of detritus? I thought that readers here would be interested in a paper shortly to be published by the owner of the world's best science blog. wattsupwiththat.com/I'd be interested in why you think "Evodently such a paper is worthless" - I believe that it is in the final stages of peer review and will soon be published in a recognised science journal.
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on Apr 9, 2011 19:14:08 GMT 1
The worth of a paper doesn't reside in its authorship. I mean it's worthless because by its own admission it doesn't say anything. If you can extract anything substantive from this abstract that it does say, I'll argue against it, using equivocations stated by that same abstract. I don't care whether such arguments can be used for or against the AGW case. What's urgently required is solid data and sound well-reasoned argument. This abstract condemns the paper it's summarising on both counts.
|
|