AGW to reach…"The Edge of Wetness"…

Johnny Carson of the Tonight Show used to do a schtick called “The Edge of Wetness” which was a parody of a soap opera called “The Edge of Night

It was he first thing that went through my mind after reading this press release citing a new worry about wet bulb temperature. Apparently it’s not just the heat, but the humidity too.

Researchers find future temperatures could exceed livable limits

This map shows the maximum wet-bulb temperatures reached in a climate model from a high carbon dioxide emissions future climate scenario with a global-mean temperature 12 degrees Celsius (21 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than 2007. The white land areas exceed the wet-bulb limit at which researchers calculated humans would experience a potentially lethal level of heat stress. (Purdue University graphic/Matthew Huber)

Download image

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

Researchers for the first time have calculated the highest tolerable “wet-bulb” temperature and found that this temperature could be exceeded for the first time in human history in future climate scenarios if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate.

Wet-bulb temperature is equivalent to what is felt when wet skin is exposed to moving air. It includes temperature and atmospheric humidity and is measured by covering a standard thermometer bulb with a wetted cloth and fully ventilating it.

The researchers calculated that humans and most mammals, which have internal body temperatures near 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, will experience a potentially lethal level of heat stress at wet-bulb temperature above 95 degrees sustained for six hours or more, said Matthew Huber, the Purdue professor of earth and atmospheric sciences who co-authored the paper that will be published in Thursday’s (May 6) issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“Although areas of the world regularly see temperatures above 100 degrees, really high wet-bulb temperatures are rare,” Huber said. “This is because the hottest areas normally have low humidity, like the ‘dry heat’ referred to in Arizona. When it is dry, we are able to cool our bodies through perspiration and can remain fairly comfortable. The highest wet-bulb temperatures ever recorded were in places like Saudi Arabia near the coast where winds occasionally bring extremely hot, humid ocean air over hot land leading to unbearably stifling conditions, which fortunately are short-lived today.”

The study did not provide new evaluations of the likelihood of future climate scenarios, but explored the impacts of warming. The challenges presented by the future climate scenarios are daunting in their scale and severity, he said.

“Whole countries would intermittently be subject to severe heat stress requiring large-scale adaptation efforts,” Huber said. “One can imagine that such efforts, for example the wider adoption of air conditioning, would cause the power requirements to soar, and the affordability of such approaches is in question for much of the Third World that would bear the brunt of these impacts. In addition, the livestock on which we rely would still be exposed, and it would make any form of outside work hazardous.”

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change central estimates of business-as-usual warming by 2100 are seven degrees Fahrenheit, eventual warming of 25 degrees is feasible, he said.

“We found that a warming of 12 degrees Fahrenheit would cause some areas of the world to surpass the wet-bulb temperature limit, and a 21-degree warming would put half of the world’s population in an uninhabitable environment,” Huber said. “When it comes to evaluating the risk of carbon emissions, such worst-case scenarios need to be taken into account. It’s the difference between a game of roulette and playing Russian roulette with a pistol. Sometimes the stakes are too high, even if there is only a small chance of losing.”

Steven Sherwood, the professor at the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, Australia, who is the paper’s lead author, said prolonged wet-bulb temperatures above 95 degrees would be intolerable after a matter of hours.

“The wet-bulb limit is basically the point at which one would overheat even if they were naked in the shade, soaking wet and standing in front of a large fan,” Sherwood said. “Although we are very unlikely to reach such temperatures this century, they could happen in the next.”

Humans at rest generate about 100 watts of energy from metabolic activity. Wet-bulb temperature estimates provide upper limits on the ability of people to cool themselves by sweating and otherwise dissipating this heat, he said. In order for the heat dissipation process to work, the surrounding air must be cooler than the skin, which must be cooler than the core body temperature. The cooler skin is then able to absorb excess heat from the core and release it into the environment. If the wet-bulb temperature is warmer than the temperature of the skin, metabolic heat cannot be released and potentially dangerous overheating can ensue depending on the magnitude and duration of the heat stress.

The National Science Foundation-funded research investigated the long-term implications of sustained greenhouse gas emissions on climate extremes. The team used climate models to compare the peak wet-bulb temperatures to the global temperatures for various climate simulations and found that the peak wet-bulb temperature rises approximately 1 degree Centigrade for every degree Centigrade increase in tropical mean temperature.

Huber did the climate modeling on supercomputers operated by Information Technology at Purdue (ITaP), Purdue’s central information technology organization. Sherwood performed the wet-bulb calculations.

“These temperatures haven’t been seen during the existence of hominids, but they did occur about 50 million years ago, and it is a legitimate possibility that the Earth could see such temperatures again,” Huber said. “If we consider these worst-case scenarios early enough, perhaps we can do something to address the risk through mitigation or new technological advancements that will allow us to adapt.”

Writers: Elizabeth K. Gardner, 765-494-2081, ekgardner@purdue.edu

Greg Kline, 765-494-8167, gkline@purdue.edu

Sources: Matthew Huber, 765-494-9531, huberm@purdue.edu

Steven Sherwood, +61 (2) 9385 8960, s.sherwood@unsw.edu.au

Related Web site:

Matthew Huber’s Climate Dynamics Prediction Laboratory

ABSTRACT

An Adaptability Limit to Climate Change Due to Heat Stress

Steven C. Sherwood, Matthew Huber

Despite the uncertainty in future climate change impacts, it is often assumed that humans would be able to adapt to any possible warming. Here we argue that heat stress imposes a robust upper limit to such adaptation. Peak heat stress, quantified by the wet-bulb temperature Tw, is surprisingly similar across diverse climates today. Tw never exceeds 31C. Any exceedence of 35C for extended periods should induce hyperthermia in humans and other mammals, as dissipation of metabolic heat becomes impossible. While this never happens now, it would begin to occur with global-mean warming of about 7C, calling the habitability of some regions into question. With 11-12C warming, such regions would spread to encompass the majority of the human population as currently distributed. Eventual warmings of 12C are possible from fossil fuel burning. One implication is that recent estimates of the costs of unmitigated climate change are too low unless the range of possible warming can somehow be narrowed. Heat stress also may help explain trends in the mammalian fossil record.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

225 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
AC
May 4, 2010 10:15 pm

“12 degrees warmer Celsius”
“Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming”
I haven’t stopped laughing.

Bulldust
May 4, 2010 10:21 pm

Didn’t Purdue used to be a decent school?

rbateman
May 4, 2010 10:21 pm

A scary, nightmarish ‘what if’ Venus heat scenario.
Great for Hollywood. Forget Monster Horror movies, say hello to Manster Horror movies.
Right now, the Earth does not show this. For the N. Hemisphere, below normal temps from China/Eastern Siberia all the way across the Pacific to the US, most of Canada, half of the N. Atlantic and into Europe proper. Most of S. America. and a good portion of central/north Africa, Indochina as well all forecast below normal.
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp1.html
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp2.html
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp4.html
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp5.html
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp10.html
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp8.html
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
Venus-like conditions on Earth? Not today, anyway.

Richard Sharpe
May 4, 2010 10:24 pm

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

My my, such certainty. Did they give us some probabilities, like the IPCC does?
Mind if I laugh now?

KimW
May 4, 2010 10:29 pm

Well, if you truly believed in the Great God CO2, temperatures ‘could’ exceed a certain limit, and while these temperatures have not been seen in the last 3 – 5 million years -age of hominoids – they could. They really really could, if you twisted those inputs into a climate model really hard and wished upon a star and set parameters not seen for 50 million years and then took the 6 sigma extremes in several hundred runs. I certainly do not deny that a climate model ‘could’ show that. Problem is, that even the IPCC in its glory days never thought this was plausible.
I think this group failed to ask about the effects of a similar but negative temperature extreme – say one that parked 2 km of ice over Europe and North America, but that would require a dollop of common sense, logic and reasoning. Colour me unimpressed, unconvinced and an unbeliever in the Great God CO2.

kwik
May 4, 2010 10:36 pm

Hey Sherwood!
No time for any more simulations now! Sell your computer and emigrate north!
Its worst case!
Its imminent!
Its robust!
go, go, go!

May 4, 2010 10:42 pm

“”The team used climate models to compare the peak wet-bulb temperatures to the global temperatures for various climate simulations and found that the peak wet-bulb temperature rises approximately 1 degree Centigrade for every degree Centigrade increase in tropical mean temperature.””
Wet bulb temperatures are the dew point of the air, no more no less.
Due to rapid convection and resulting downpours, like we had in Memphis this last week, way before the dew point gets any where near what, these faulty models conjure up, it just can’t happen unless we suspend the laws of thermodynamics and normal convective trends as evening comes and the atmospheric temps drops below this high dew point, as it swings 15F to 25F degrees from day to night. Insuring that the high levels of moisture ( suggested in the models output) cannot in reality exist in large areas or for long periods of time.
They hope the “Man on the street” will be ignorant enough to not know that “dew point = wet bulb temp”. Most farmers still have wet / dry bulb thermometers tacked to a sturdy barn wall some where to figure when to test cut wheat, or use with the barometer to know when to cut hay, plant seeds, and cultivate.
This is just another fictitious way of presenting unreal data, so it will sound possible and scary (to the supposed ignorant masses). When are they going to realize the general public, either knows at least as much as they (the team) do and most of the time more, some times a whole lot more.
Willis’ thermostatic moisture balance mechanism will have done itz job way before “Wet bulb temps” rise above the night time surface lows, having rained out the days before when elevated by convective heating to cloud forming heights where the temperatures are close to freezing, giving rise to rapid precipitation events like we had this last week. Flash floods are more of a possible outcome of “high wet bulb temps”, than a build up to life threatening excess humidity.
In Tennessee and Kentucky nobody died of the heat and humidity before the rains.

D. King
May 4, 2010 10:42 pm

“…could be exceeded for the first time in human history”
Oh no, it’s worse than we thought… again.

Iren
May 4, 2010 10:48 pm

How do they come up with this drivel. My respect for universities abates by the day.

May 4, 2010 10:55 pm

That’s nothing. In a few billion years or so the sun will expand to engulf the earth. Now That’s REAL global warming.

Paul R
May 4, 2010 10:56 pm

“The wet-bulb limit is basically the point at which one would overheat even if they were naked in the shade, soaking wet and standing in front of a large fan,” Sherwood said.
I think It’s at this point that the person should stop being silly and go inside into the airconditioning, and put some pants on for gods sake.

Martin Brumby
May 4, 2010 10:57 pm

And these “scientists” get paid for this kind of stuff? This is what we COULD expect in coming centuries?
I’ve just run my computer programme (for free!) and it tells me I COULD make mad, passionate love to Gwyneth Paltrow tonight!
Don’t think she needs to worry too much, though 🙁

P.G. Sharrow
May 4, 2010 10:57 pm

This is what happens when you educate people beyond their intelligence and then give them computers to help them think! GIGO

jorgekafkazar
May 4, 2010 10:58 pm

My BS detector just pegged, bent the needle, and scared my budgie to death when it went off. My instinct says the atmosphere can’t hold that much water without forming mammoth circulation cells that will move heat into space by the teraBTU. Besides, that water has to be in the ocean so it can give Big Al his fabulous 20 meter sea level rise. It’s already spoken for.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
May 4, 2010 11:01 pm

*groan* “Bad wording” headache coming on…

In order for the heat dissipation process to work, the surrounding air must be cooler than the skin, which must be cooler than the core body temperature.

The surrounding air can be warmer than the skin, what matters is the humidity is less than 100% so evaporation can take place.

The cooler skin is then able to absorb excess heat from the core and release it into the environment.

Because as we all know the human body is a homogeneous lump of gelatinous material with the core heat transferring to the outer layers. Sorry, that’s not how it works, we have an active pumping system moving a working fluid that continuously circulates the heat. Plus we also frequently shed heat during respiration, which somehow is not mentioned. Do you think they worried about dogs overheating due to not enough heat being removed by sweating?

Dr A Burns
May 4, 2010 11:07 pm

It would have been far simpler and more realistic to check out the temperatures and humidities to which humans have adjusted in tropical rain forests. Of course such an obvious study would have missed out on climate change research grants.

Ray
May 4, 2010 11:12 pm

The west coast will still be comfortable…
Heat… humidity… now add wind in there and the earth will turn into a convection oven! This is great, those pesky huMann beings will roast faster.

Tom S
May 4, 2010 11:17 pm

Perhaps I am mistaken, but growing up in south florida, I recall many of days with temps well over 95 and humity levels.. well they are always high. I played all sorts of sports and don’t recall dropping dead from heat.
Besides, since when is 12 or omfg 25 degrees a “reasonable” estimate?? Even the ipcc isn’t predicting that.

Michael in Sydney
May 4, 2010 11:20 pm

I know I know, but somebody was bound to say it …
“It’s worse than we thought!”
Sorry.

L
May 4, 2010 11:21 pm

Lemme see here… fifty million years ago, the dinosaurs had left and what had replaced them as the major actors on center stage. Why, mammals, I believe…

May 4, 2010 11:22 pm

What a bunch of lightweights.
It’s so humid here in Houston, we get dew on the grill when we barbeque brisket.

Doug in Seattle
May 4, 2010 11:29 pm

You gotta give them credit for the sheer brass of their imaginary PlayStation worlds.

DCC
May 4, 2010 11:42 pm

Outrageous! And zero mention of the fact that high humidity, by definition, requires much more heat input to raise temperature than does low humidity. That’s why the temperature in Houston rarely exceeds 100 F when temperatures in west Texas are 115 F or more (the west Texas record was 120 F in 1936.)
21 F greater than 2007! 121 F (plus) just isn’t going to happen in Houston. (Besides, we have air conditioning and stay indoors when it gets hot 🙂
When will the nonsense stop?

Leon Brozyna
May 4, 2010 11:42 pm

There you have it, brought to you under the auspices of climate science, yet another demonstration of the incredible depths of stupidity to which mankind is capable of sinking.
Maybe I’d best get a set of tarot cards to find out what the future holds for me.
Can’t do much worse than all the computer models which were in complete agreement that we were going to have a very soggy Sunday here in Bufffalo, except … nary a drop, till this Tuesday morning’s stray thunderstorm woke me with a clap of thunder and a need to reset a couple digital clocks. And Monday morning we got yet another dose of the predictive powers of these climate high priests, when they once again warned of dense fog, after the area was socked in. (Psssst … guys – when the lake’s temp is in the mid-40’s and the air moving over that large body of water has a dew point in the mid-50’s, you don’t need to wait for a computer model to tell you about the potential for fog forming downwind. Heck, you might even beat the computer!! Now there’s a shocking thought for you. Having a thought without a computer model telling you what to think.)
And then these con artists try to attack the mark by claiming that their climate forecasts (aka projections) differ from weather forecasts. Son — your climate is a sum of thirty years of weather and if you keep getting your weather forecasts wrong, your climate models aren’t too far behind.
Or we can listen to some really smart guys, like Dr. S. Hawking, whose latest rant was to warn about contacting ET, that they might swarm us like locusts and strip the planet of resources … oh wait, I’m sorry, that story’s already been done by Hollywood about 14 years ago — it was called Independence Day.

P.F.
May 4, 2010 11:44 pm

The scariest aspect to this article is that there are ignorant dolts out there that will take these computer modeled scenarios as real predictive data. Too many of them will not have heard, nor understand, the scientific axiom: All computer models are wrong; some are useful.
And what did they mean by “for the first time in human history.” When, in their minds, did human history begin — with the first appearance of anatomically modern humans around 195,000 ybp; with the advent of agriculture 8,000 years ago? The former period encompasses sea level swings of 130 m. Seems humans have been rather adaptable to endure such climate variation.
I’d love to have an opportunity to debate these authors and explore their general knowledge of the paleoclimate.

1 2 3 9
Verified by MonsterInsights