It’s Hot But Don’t Blame Global Warming
By Cynthia Barnett – 2/1/2009
FloridaTrend Magazine
Morton D. Winsberg fell in love with Florida more than 50
years ago, but the Illinois-born geographer never quite got used to the dog days
of summer.
In recent years, the Florida State University professor emeritus and author
of a book called “Florida Weather” began wondering: Is global climate change
making Florida’s hot season longer and hotter? With help from geography students
and researchers at FSU’s Population Center and Florida Climate Center, Winsberg
and co-author Melanie Simmons gathered and analyzed temperature data from 57
Florida weather stations going back six decades.
Their research showed that the hot season in Florida has gotten a lot hotter
— and longer — in some places, but not at all in others. The change, however, is
unrelated to global warming, the increase in the average temperature of the
earth’s atmosphere. Rather, they found, it’s a function of the lesser-known
phenomenon of local warming. The analysis “shows that weather can be very
local,” says Winsberg, “and also that weather can be a function of population
growth.”
Winsberg found the most notable climate changes along the state’s
southeastern coast, where development and wetlands drainage have been heaviest.
In most areas he analyzed, the heat is getting more intense. Of the 57 weather
stations, 49 saw an increase in the number of days with an average temperature
of 80 degrees. When it came to the length of the hot season, the biggest
increase was in Hialeah, with a 72-day increase, followed by Miami, with a
45-day increase.
Neither the intensity of the heat nor the increasing number of hotter days
was related to water temperatures in the Atlantic and Gulf, a fact that
surprised Winsberg. The heat trends also weren’t consistent across the state. In
fact, some areas, notably in the northeast part of the state, saw a shorter hot
season and a decrease in the number of dog days.
That evidence leads Winsberg and FSU meteorologists to blame the hot spots on
local land-use changes that accentuate the urban “heat-island” effect — the
pools of heat that large, dense concentrations of people produce in their local
climates. Cutting down trees, draining wetlands and pouring concrete all make a
place hotter, as anyone who’s walked across an asphalt parking lot on a summer
day knows, Winsberg says.
|
Geographer Morton Winsberg’s research suggests that local land-use changes — urban development and draining wetlands — may be contributing more to local climate change than global warming. [Photo: Jeffrey Camp] Contagious Energy Geographer Morton Winsberg retired a decade ago, but you wouldn’t know if from his teaching load, his research output and the hours he spends on the Florida State University campus. At 78, Winsberg no longer worries about getting his work published or being recognized by fellow academics. He had even been teaching Latin American and Florida geography at FSU for free until last year, when FSU put him back on the payroll. Winsberg is happy taking advantage of office space, grad students and GIS equipment so he can keep digging into weather and other interests. “I don’t play golf,” he explains. “I prefer to play with aggregate data.” Winsberg spent his career traveling the globe and writing about 100 research papers on topics as diverse as Jewish agricultural colonization in Argentina and Irish suburbanization in Boston, Chicago and New York. His favorite trip: Backpacking across northern Spain, following a medieval pilgrimage route to Santiago de Compostela, reputed to be the burial site of St. James. Winsberg says he dreaded becoming the sort of retiree “who kept up with the world via “I wanted to keep feeling useful and to be useful,” Winsberg says. He passed up royalties from his “Florida Weather” book so it would be more affordable ($16.95 at upf.com). In addition to his work on weather, his post-retirement writings include the book “Atlas of Race, Ancestry, and Religion in 21st-Century Florida.” He is currently researching the locations of megachurches, particularly those within metropolitan areas. Colleagues say he’s the only “emeritus” professor they know who spends as much time on campus as he did before retiring. “I’ve never talked to Mort about weather when he was not extremely excited about it,” says Melissa Griffin, Florida’s assistant climatologist. “He has this energy that flows out of him, seeps out of him, and other people catch it.” |
On a regional level, state climatologist David Zierden says, historical
records show that southeastern Alabama, Georgia and north and central Florida
have not experienced steady warming, but rather relatively warm periods, such as
the 1930s through the 1950s, followed by relatively cool periods, such as the
1960s through the 1980s.
|
State climatologist David Zierden says Winsberg’s data bolsters his belief, backed up by other Florida studies, that climate changes driven by land use ‘are as important or more important in Florida than what has happened here to date due to greenhouse gases.’ [Photo: Ray Stanyard] |
Heavily drained or developed areas bucked those trends, however. The most
dramatic example in Winsberg’s study is the difference between Belle Glade, in a
part of the Everglades drained for sugar production, and undeveloped Everglades
City. Since 1950, Belle Glade has seen a 32% increase in its number of dog days,
while Everglades City has seen a 3% decrease. The transformation of swampland
around Belle Glade to farmland appears to have caused a significant rise in
temperatures. “The draining of the Everglades and the upturning of all that
black soil has really changed the local climate in that area,” says Zierden.
The idea of local climate change may seem contrarian at a time when
scientists and policy-makers focus on global warming and its causes, primarily
the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
But Florida’s top global warming scientists, including Harold Wanless, chairman
of geological sciences at the University of Miami, agree that greenhouse gases
don’t seem to be impacting Florida’s temperatures. When it comes to global
warming, Wanless says, sea-level rise — caused by warming elsewhere,
particularly the Arctic — is the chief threat to Florida. Wanless predicts
Florida’s seas will rise three to five feet by century’s end.
As state and national policy-makers work to mitigate damages from the rising
seas, Winsberg says he hopes local officials and Floridians will use his data to
think more wisely about land-use changes and wetlands drainage.
“People just dread when the hot season begins, and they are so relieved when
it’s over,” says Winsberg. “We don’t want to extend the suffering.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks Anthony,
I really like this entry. I ate it up! I enjoyed seeing his work presented. I love to see ideas that have come from real data and not hypothesis.
I wish I had to money to finance a documentary about the Urban Heat Island effect. This man would be in it!!
Anthony, anyone,
Is there a publication out there that looked at temperature trends globally or over large areas using data captured only with rural sensors compared with data captured only with urban sensors ?
Would that not settle the issue of UHI effect ?
François
REPLY: I’m working on one, but I think Joe D’Aleo touched on it recently also at ICECAP – Anthony
I may be oversimplifying, so the other writers here may correct me, but two things occur to me when I look at the map.
Every hypothesis must be testable. If the earth has been consistently warming for the past 60 years, it would seem that none of Florida should have a shorter hot season. (except for perhaps a small outlier or two), but not on the scale on the map.
If the urban heating affect is true, I should be able to pick out the areas of greatest urbanization during the 60 years. So far that test seems to pass.
Willem de Rode (09:46:30) :
“Some commenters ask me how it would be possible that population-growth induced weather changes can become a global problem. More than half of the global surface is water and so unpopulated. And even on the landpart the humans are concentrated on rather small areas ? Thus any problem associated with that can never be global ?
I think that is a very short-sighted vision. If any problems are associated with population growth they will be best sensible in these extreme dense populated zones. These area’s are spread over the whole globe, but that doesn’t matter. The consequenses of the weather changes will be felt by most of the humans because they live in these problem-areas.
Thus I think it is couting angels on a needlepoint to get involved in a discussion whether the article describes a global phenomenon of local wether changes or not.
The article describes very clearly a antropogenic induced warming that could influence weatherpatters all over the globe. And the consequences could be very negative for the humans, wherever they are on the world.
So stop chasing phantoms by insulting CO2 of this warming. Stop fooling ourselfes by trying to make ourselfs believe that it is not a global phenomenon. Just let minimize the impact of human presence on this earth. We all, the all globe, would benefit from it”.
Willem de Rode,
You have some very confused ideas which you are now projecting on the people who have made a serious attempt to provide you with a reasonable response.
Willem de Rode (09:46:30) :
So stop chasing phantoms by insulting CO2 of this warming. Stop fooling ourselfes by trying to make ourselfs believe that it is not a global phenomenon. Just let minimize the impact of human presence on this earth. We all, the all globe, would benefit from it.
Are you not getting this? If CO2 is “the problem” then governments get to control every aspect of human life since access to cheap energy is the foundation of our prosperity. AGW proponents are too short on specifics and hide under the skirts of “concensus” for me to consider their arguments valid. This blog is a great place to see where AGW theories may not be perfectly aligned with reality. This particular posting shows that 1st order effects on temperature are decidedly not global in nature.
1. LOCAL does not equal GLOBAL. Even if the entire state of Florida showed cooling, it still would mean nothing wrt GLOBAL climate. Had he the same data for the globe, he might have something to say. Oh, wait, they DO! They DO check global temps! And, gosh, the Pacific was so cool this past year it brought down the otherwise high temps on land to show a GLOBAL average cooling.
2. Here’s my local climate: Very mild winters and relatively dry summers where it used to be very cold winters (Look up Chosun Reservoir, Korean War) and very wet summers (monsoon).
3. Here’s the most important local climate: Arctic anomalously warm this winter. http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
January 2009 average extent compared to past Januaries
While parts of North America have been in the icy grips of an unusually cold and snowy winter recently, the Arctic has been downright balmy compared to past winters.
These warmer-than-normal temperatures mean that the sea ice in the Arctic is looking pretty anemic, despite the winter season…
…”It’s warm everywhere in the Arctic. It’s anomalously warm,” said Julienne Stroeve, of the National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Boulder, Colo.
Both December and January have been abnormally warm months, which impacts the cyclical re-freezing of sea ice over the years, because these are “two crucial ice-growing months,” Stroeve told LiveScience.
Damn those heat islands to hell and back, i tell you!
3b. Ice extent in the Arctic and Antarctic below long-term trends, with the Arctic just slightly above record lows for this time if year.
Where the HELL are they hiding those HEAT ISLANDS????????
Gee… what happened to record ice equal to 1979??????
4. Pray tell, where is the study?
4b. Has it been published and peer reviewed? No?
5. Love that graphic!!! Way to lay it all out so it’s clear as mud!! Mixing lower by -8 with higher by +8? Now that’s honesty for you!
5b. Look at the ranges:
-9 to -infinity
-8 to + 8 = 16 days (shucks, minus 8 = + 8! Everyone knows that!)
+9 to +25 = 16
+16 to +24 = 8
26 to 34 = 8
34 to infinity
The mixing of -8 to plus 8 is really dishonest. (Of course. we expect nothing less from liars, do we? No, we don’t.) Virtually all of the purple area could show warming, so roughly a 1/4 more of the area of the state could be showing warming.
6. Cities are human creations. If they are heating the planet, it would STILL be anthropogenic.
7. How much of this cooling is due to the high number of hurricanes Florida and the Gulf Coast have experienced in recent years?
You people are ridiculous.
WHERE IS YOUR SCIENCE? WHERE IS YOUR PEER-REVIEWED, GLOBAL, SCIENCE?
REPLY: And where is your courage “ccpo”? This man has the courage to investigate and publish under his own name, you are like so many others who criticize from the shadows while doing nothing of value on your own. At least have the courage to put your name behind your words. -Anthony Watts
It appears that the length of the hot season may correlate to some extent with the bright lights as seen from space. (how’s that for un-scientific language…correlate to some extent!)
This referenceshows the Earth at night.
And per Sean’s suggestion on air conditioners, very true for warming any area with an A/C. Most electric power eventually turns to heat, whether from line loss, light bulbs, electric motors, or resistance heating such as electric stoves and ovens. The more inefficient the motor, the more heat is produced. Thus, urban heat islands also are heated by electric power usage and not only by solar thermal absorption.
Roger E. Sowell
Marina del Rey, California
(was in Sacramento today where there was pea-sized hail mixed with rain!)
JEFF aLBERTS, [snip] Gray is not a climate scientist.
William M. “Bill” Gray (born 1929) is a pioneer in the science of forecasting hurricanes.[1] In 1952 he received a B.S. degree in geography from George Washington University, and in 1959 a M.S. in meteorology from the University of Chicago, where he went on to earn a Ph.D. in geophysical sciences in 1964.
While Hansen is not degreed in climatology, his area of specialty is directly concerned with transfer of energy in atmospheres, which is what the greenhouse effect is: Hansen was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1996 for his “development of pioneering radiative transfer models and studies of planetary atmospheres;
Both cites via Wiki.
Reply: Second warning ~ charles the moderator
tone down the anger
[snip]
I would still be interested in your response.
If you’ve the fortitude.
Cheers
P.S. No anger or name calling.
Reply: Sure. You follow rules and instructions of the blog and moderators or your posts don’t see the light of day. This is a moderated site. Hiding behind a Korean proxy server may keep you anonymous, but it doesn’t help your posts get through. EOM ~ charles the moderator.
Hmmm….. I wonder if anyone has studied the effects of tree cover absorbing sunlight on atmospheric temperature. Seems interesting. Would the trees absorb the energy from the sunlight and prevent warming?
Ohioholic (21:38:46) :
In the 1974 Ice Age scare, people claimed “all” it would take was for the snow to not completely melt some year. Soon after hearing that I flew across the country and saw lots of dark evergreens sticking out above the snow and concluded it would be difficult for snow not to melt.
Similarly, trees are spreading into the tundra and may be a positive feedback, see
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/33383/title/Forest_invades_tundra
The sea surface temperatures in the Gulf coast of Florida have been falling for the last 50 years. More details on Florida’s non-warming climate can be found at: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_FloridaUSA.htm
There are many dynamics in this ecosystem that we call the biosphere. Unfortunately, sometimes so many that it confuses even the best of researchers, writers and of course, their critics. I don’t see in Winsbergs work any attempt to discredit the theory of Global Warming as it applies to the planet, although I could see how people could construe or rather misconstrue what is being said in any number of ways. The title of the article states “but don’t blame global warming”. Its catchy and does a good job of invoking the critics and proponents, both of Global Warming theory and heat island theory, both of which are accepted scientific models which are as Winsberg correctly shows, independent of one another. The explanation of “heat island” effect is relatively simple for the layman to understand compared to global warming.
I would argue though that localized temperature affects global temperature. I have stated that the drivers behind increases in each act independently of one another but that is not to say that they don’t affect one another. Moderation of temperatures in marine localities are also localized phenomena. And as Alan Cheetham states above “Surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico have been falling” which would consequently cool coastal areas, once again indepently of, but affected by both the “heat island and global warming” that is happening concurrently.
Everything is related, even things acting independently do so in relation to the conditions and systems in which they operate. When you mix it all the climate models and theories together with solar flares and changing ocean currents you’ve got a synergistic soup that in which it is easy to stir in a dash of confusion. It can then be served up as fodder by those who would like to distract society from their pursuit of profit withuot regard for society or the health of the planet. My only argument with Cynthia Barnets article is that as an aside, it does little to clarify that Global Warming is a reality.
Much of the Global Warming debate has angered me over the past couple decades because the complexity of the issue is enough reason for many to argue for continuation of the “status quo”, in regards to curbing our cosumption and digestion of the earth. Hopefully their are enough enlightened individuals to lead society out of gluttony and into a happier, healthier future for the inhabitants of our home.
Dougsplace.wordpress.com
Related article: http://dougsplace.wordpress.com/2007/12/18/climate-change-and-global-wwwhats-that-now/
ccpo (20:03:29) :
It’s all natural cycles.
It will not take long before you will see the former weather patterns with cold winters returning to Korea.
Doug McColl (08:08:55) :
—
No.
The so-called “theories” of global warming you evidently admire are NOT correct, the proposed draconian “solutions” demanded by the AGW extremists only serve to advance the budgets and social agenda’s of those whose budgets and profits stem STRICTLY from their scare tactics and exaggerations to the general public through a thoroughly propagandized press.