Google can be a great aid to serendipity. Doing some Googling the other day I was surprised to find a couple of my images from How not to measure temperature, Part 42 being used by a company that sells thermal imaging equipment. The company, Thermographix, wrote quite a long essay claiming that the IPCC missed a component of global warming in their reports by not addressing the heat from buildings and land use change on surface temperatures.
While I don’t agree with some of the claims in the article, I thought it was worth reproducing here because I’ve been saying for some time that the MMTS electronic thermometer phased in by NOAA since the mid 1980’s has been picking up heat from buildings due to cable trenching issues placing them closer to buildings. For example this visible and IR photo set I snapped at the USHCN station in Perry, Oklahoma:
Perry OK, USHCN station of record. Downtown at the fire station. Visible and IR
In the photo above, taken looking SE, the wall of the fire station appears to have been warmed by the afternoon sun, because as you can see the shaded area on the left side of the IR photo, it is cooler. The issue is: how much will this heat the air in the vicinity of the thermometer?
Thermographix has lots of similar IR photos to illustrate how buildings and building materials display their heat. The report below is from their website at:
http://www.thermoguy.com/globalwarming-heatgain.html
UN, CANADA, U.S., STATES, CITIES, ECONOMY, ETC. MISSING CRITICAL DATA ON GLOBAL WARMING CAUSE
Buildings on the surface of the entire planet and in every country are designed with temperature considerations. We want to use as little energy as possible, not waste non-renewable resources, create as few GHG emissions as possible and not generate any heat atmospherically.
The emissions from burning fossil fuels are toxic, contain mercury and end up in our water, food and bodies. Emissions can promote acid rain and affect the ability to sustain life. We don’t want to waste fossil fuels because they can’t be renewed. We don’t want to create heat on the surface of the planet because that changes the weather formula. Weather is the interaction of cold air, warm air and water vapor. Creating heat on the surface of the planet will affect weather, climate, agriculture, pollinators(food source) employment, economy, health, etc.
All the laws are in place to achieve the above but the bottom line is the entire global process is signed off as compliant because every university, tech school and academia in the world teaches temperature considerations in a calculator. Hard to imagine all the sciences are blind to temperature except it is a reality. Our visible spectrum can’t see temperature until it is glowing red hot. The United Nations and their membership are discussing climate change but in fact are blind and missing critical data.
PICTURES OF A WEATHER STATION
The next 2 pictures are going to show you the tools used to collect weather information. Take a look at the advanced technologies used in weather stations.
Here is a close up of the weather station
This page is important information for you on buildings that is not available to you. Your home or commercial property is signed off as compliant and insured. Your realtor, inspector, builder, developer and government do not verify your building compliance. This is free information you need to consider if you are buying, building or renovating. If you are building “green” this will open your eyes as to what that really means. It will shock you to see how California & other areas are knocked off the electrical grid treating heat symptoms. Hard to believe all of the electricity generated is wasted on a symptom and being blamed on economy.
Buildings use energy differently in the winter than it does in the summer. This page is related to heat gain associated with building design and energy use. Heat loss and images showing energy waste related to heat loss can be seen at HEAT LOSS FROM BUILDINGS
The information on this page isn’t controversial, it is simply the evolution of temperature measurement out of the calculator so objectives can be seen instead of assumed. This information is the result of thousands of hours of the most advanced temperature research in the world and is being lectured internationally in educational programs for medical professionals.
Buildings are designed to fluctuate with atmospheric temperature so there isn’t a heat gain atmospherically and so there isn’t more heat generated than the building is designed, insulated or insured for. You can see the weather station above isn’t providing us with UV and solar radiation impact. This page is to see the impact of solar interaction with development.
This first image was taken at 5:20 AM and the temperature outside was 59 degrees F. The thermal image should show the building fluctuating with the atmospheric temperatures.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image for comparison to the 59 degree F outdoor temperature.
BEFORE SUNRISE
The house is fairly consistent with atmospheric temperatures before sunrise. You can see the concrete steps holding heat from the day before.
AFTER SUNRISE
The next image was taken 2 hours after sunrise. It is 7:30 AM and the temperature is 63 degrees F. In theory the building should be fluctuating with atmospheric temperature. Put your mouse over the picture to see the thermal image. Is the building heating the atmosphere?
Solar exposure on absorbent finishes has caused the building to generate extreme heat as high as 149 degrees F when it is 63 degrees F. Surface materials are all hotter than atmospheric temperature very early in the morning. That generated heat is heating the atmosphere as well as exceeding the design temperature of the building.
BRAND NEW CONSTRUCTION
When the first set of images were shown to building professionals they assumed that it was isolated to a few buildings. The previous images verified solar impact so we wanted to highlight the solar impact on new construction. The next picture shows roofs with and without shingles on buildings designed for a maximum of 92 degrees F or 33 degrees C.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The shingles are generating extreme heat the building isn’t designed, insulated or insured for very early in the morning.
FIRE RECONSTRUCTION
The building below is new fire reconstruction after a forest fire interfaced with this city. The building is designed for a maximum of 92 degrees F and it is a 59 degree F day. Is the building fluctuating with atmospheric temperature or exceeding design temperature?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The same UV that burns our skin has caused excitation of solar exposed finishes causing the building to generate heat. This is at 11:00 AM and you can see the shaded areas performance versus solar exposure. The building isn’t designed for the temperatures it is generating and it is heating the atmosphere.
FIRESTORM 2003 KELOWNA FIRE RECONSTRUCTION
Kelowna lost over 240 homes in the Firestorm 2003 where a forest fire interfaced with Kelowna. The reconstruction was the newest construction standards. The next image will show if the building exterior is absorbing the sun’s rays or generating heat that was then absorbed.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The reconstruction above shows the solar performance of different materials including shaded areas. All of the construction materials are exceeding the atmospheric temperature of 70 degrees F and the roof is close to 100 degrees F over atmospheric temperatures. This is warming the atmosphere and contributing to weather changes.
HOUSE PAINTED DARK COLORS
The next image was taken on a July day in 2002, 4 PM PST. The temperature is 95° F and the building is designed for 92° F. This 3 degree margin would be acceptable to accommodate those times of the year when it is marginally warmer. Observe the dark color of the siding, the lighter shingles, the tree and the fact there is foil over the windows. Covering the windows on the inside or outside is an attempt to stop the sun from coming through the windows and causing heat indoors.
Hold your mouse over the picture and the thermal image will appear. Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The wall is designed, insulated and insured for a maximum of 92 degrees F and in some areas it is 100 degrees over design temperature. The foil over the windows isn’t addressing the problem, the heat is coming through the walls that aren’t designed for the extreme temperatures. In 2005, this home added a window air conditioner and in 2007 they added 2 more window air conditioners to treat the indoor heat. The air conditioners requires the electrical generation of 1000s of watts per hour to treat the indoor heat symptom and the heat generated outside isn’t discussed. In areas where coal is used to generate the electricity there are mercury emissions as well as acid rain contributions.
NEW COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
The next building is new development where they have used dark absorbent finishes on the solar exposed sides of the building. It is 91 degrees F outside, is the building generating heat that exceeds the maximum temperature of 92 degrees F?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The new construction is generating heat 100 degrees F over design temperature. The building isn’t insulated for these temperatures and the generated heat is heating the atmosphere.
PLACE OF PRAYER
The next image is of a church on an 86 degree F Day. There are several types of finishes on the solar exposed side of the building. Observe the tree, grass, brick, shingles and the brown ducting on the roof. Put your mouse over the image and see if the building is functioning close to the atmospheric temperature of 86 degrees F or if the building is exceeding its maximum design temperature of 92 degrees F.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The building is generating extreme heat. Note the tree or grass is functioning within atmospheric temperatures and not imposing on the atmosphere. The building is designed for a maximum of 92 degrees F and the heat generated grossly exceeds 92 F so the heat transfers inside. The duct on the roof is the air conditioning treating the indoor heat symptoms. The air conditioning requires 1000s of watts per hour of wasted electrical generation.
ROW HOUSING
The next image is row housing, put your mouse over the picture and see the impact of solar radiation.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The trees and green space is much cooler than the absorbent building finishes. Landscaping and responsible paint finishes could deal with this heat problem, taller trees would provide shade cover with zero emissions. Eliminating the heat would eliminate atmospheric heat.
GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT
We have observed several different types of construction and the rule has been solar radiation is causing heat generation on buildings. The next image will show you a new development surrounded by trees. To make room for development, trees were cut down and the ground was scraped of everything living.
This image is significant in that it was taken to see a temperature image of development against the natural green space. Bigger cities would be performing the same except on a bigger scale. This upscale neighborhood employs the latest in environmentally friendly technologies. The homes use geo thermal ground source energy for the heating and cooling except energy consumption depends on the building design temperatures. This development is designed, insulated and insured for a maximum temperature of 92 degrees F. The temperature outside is 71 degrees F, is the development fluctuating with atmospheric temperature?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The development is twice atmospheric temperature and exceeding design temperatures in the morning. Due the indoor heat gain, portable air conditioning and other energy use is employed trying to cool the indoor temperature. Geo thermal isn’t being represented well.
DEVELOPMENT BESIDE ORCHARD
The next images were taken in May on a 70 degree F day. The picture shows an orchard beside a development. The orchard is considered a green space and would be our temperature objective for development. Put your mouse over the picture to see the temperatures associated with the area. Is the development generating heat atmospherically as well as heat the buildings aren’t designed, insulated or insured for?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The heat generated by the development is twice the temperature of the orchard. The orchard has since been removed and there is a new development with an environmental name being built right now. The new construction finishes will generate more heat.
NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
This new development is designed for a maximum of 92 degrees C and codes acknowledge there may be a few days where the temperature is slightly warmer. The temperature today is 94 degrees F and the development should be fluctuating with atmospheric temperatures. Look at the trees, grass, shade and green space compared to pavement and absorbent building finishes.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
Solar radiation with absorbent exterior finishes is generating extreme heat that exceeds the buildings design temperature. The building isn’t designed, insulated or insured for those extreme temperatures. We use air conditioning to react to a symptom. The heat generation atmospherically contributes to lower air pressure and changes the weather formula.
CUT BLOCK HEAT GENERATION
The cut block is an example of tree harvesting. You can see they have removed all of the trees and ground cover. Put your mouse over the next picture and see if there is solar impact by exposing the ground cover?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
Removing complete ground cover is generating heat in the cutblock. The heat is over twice atmospheric temperature and a heat gain atmospherically. Pine Beetles have devastated 50,000 sq. miles of BC Forests and the response has been clear cutting. Look at the heat of the cut block and imagine the heat generation of 50,000 sq. miles of dead forested area. The extreme heat generation will contribute to lower air pressure and changes the weather formula for the globe.
SOLAR IMPACT ON BUILDINGS IN COLD WEATHER
Solar exposure is year round and we wanted to see the effect of solar impact in the colder seasons. The next image was taken in October on a 44 degree day at 10:30 A.M. You can see different building finishes and the shade of the tree on the building in the front. Put your mouse over the picture and see the effect of shade as well as the thermal performance of different building finishes.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
You can clearly see the effect and importance of shade if you are going to finish your building in absorbent paints or material. The part of the building that is shaded is still cooler than atmospheric temperature. Exposed absorbent finishes are generating heat that is warming the atmosphere.
SOLAR RADIATION IMPACT ON BUILDINGS IN WINTER
To complete the seasonal impact of solar exposure required imaging building exteriors in the winter. Building exteriors should be fluctuating with atmospheric temperatures so there isn’t a heat gain atmospherically. Radiated heat would contribute to low air pressure and change weather.
Pine Beetles have devastated 50,000 acres of BC forests costing billions of dollars in BC alone. Scientists say it is the loss of freeze thaw cycles that is leading to more beetle infestation. Our imaging in the winter was to see the impact of solar expose. Canada is further away from the sun and the angle is lower so the UV index is lower.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The UV index is lower and this generated heat won’t require an air conditioning response. You can see the heat generated over the solar exposed side of the building versus the shaded side of the building. The building is generating over 140 degree F heat on a 48 degree day and contributes to low pressure changing weather.
MULTI FAMILY DWELLING
The next image is to show the thermal performance of brand new multi-family dwellings. Observe the solar exposed and shaded side temperatures.
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The siding and shingles are generating heat over 100 degrees F on a 48 degree day while the shaded side of the building shows the temperature without solar exposure. This is a heat gain atmospherically in the winter.
SOLAR EXPOSURE ON BUILDING FINISHES IN JUNE
The next images show 2 buildings on June 27, 2006. The one in the front is older and the one behind isn’t finished and has plywood on the exterior that will be covered with brown stucco. Observe the shade temperature and the piece of insulation that has been placed on the roof to see solar performance. The temperature at 10 AM is 84 degrees F; is the building fluctuating with atmospheric temperatures?
Spot temperatures have been placed on the thermal image.
The insulation and shade are cooler than atmospheric temperature while the solar exposed building material is generating 70 degrees F hotter than atmospheric temperature.
…
SUMMARY
Solar exposure is causing absorbent building exteriors to generate extreme heat the building isn’t designed, insulated or insured for. We are treating the symptoms with air conditioning, gigawatts of electricity waste, excessive GHG emissions including mercury, wasting non renewable resources and generating atmospheric heat close to boiling temperature.
Air conditioning is in fact refrigeration which is reported to deplete the ozone allowing more UV. We are using it in 100% of building applications in response to solar exposure.
California as well as other states and provinces are creating massive GHG emissions reacting to the symptoms while we blame the emissions on economy. During our information gathering, it was ironic to hear of the Governor of California meeting Branson, Tony Blair, environment groups, etc to discuss reducing emissions without losing economy. At the same time, California and other areas are producing massive GHG emissions as well as ozone depletion generating electricity to treat the symptoms of heat waves.
Canada and the world are calling for emission reduction immediately and the reality is we are installing air conditioning in every new building. It is impossible to develop effective policy when the science is lacking.
Environment Canada code for the reduction of refrigerants Environmental Code of Practice for Elimination of Fluorocarbon Emissions from Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems
Canadian Environment Minister Press Release in September, 2007. Canada Contributes to Major International Agreement to Protect the Ozone Layer and Tackle Climate Change
Heat impacts weather and we are generating extreme heat that in some cases reaches close to boiling temperature. That massive heat dump by every building in every city, state, province and country is unnaturally contributing to lowering air pressure which will change weather. Why are we worried about heat trapping gases in the atmosphere when we are generating heat close to boiling temperature on the surface of the planet?
EPA, METEOROLOGISTS AND ECONOMISTS MISSING TEMPERATURE DATA
It is assumed that buildings and development do not generate heat. Here is a link to information on urban heat islands from the EPA EPA on Urban Heat Islands!
Here is a link to a video clip from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Heat Island Effect EPA Video on Heat Island Effect.
We are reporting solar exposure as an unprecedented environmental emergency to authorities because we are treating the symptoms with ozone depletion, massive GHG emissions, electrical waste, acid rain, mercury emissions, etc. We are not discussing the extreme heat generated by buildings
Every state and city is looking for this information, they just couldn’t see it in a calculator. Here is a letter sent to the Western States & Provinces WESTERN CLIMATE INITIATIVE PARTNERS which include California, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Arizona, British Columbia and Manitoba telling them their buildings are exceeding their design temperature while they react to the symptoms with ozone depletion and massive GHG emissions. There has been no response to date while taxpayers are funding policy missing the required science.
The UN Meeting in Bali in 2007 missed critical data on climate change and building performance. Here is our press release.Press Release – UN MEETING IN BALI MISSING CRITICAL DATA ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That close up of the weather station showing a rain gauge made me wonder if, when they put in grass, whether they plan to make provision for watering the lawn.
http://www.greenthumblawnsharks.com/Sprinkler%20System.jpg
It would be consistent with their lack of concern for the location of the thermometers.
Seems more like badly-written hype than science. I don’t see any calibration targets in any of their photos. I suspect they used a radiometer and just took readings and believed them. Color me ultra-skeptical.
REPLY: As I mentioned in the article introduction, I don’t agree with some of the things said. However, my own experience with IR imaging parallels many of the visible and IR photographs seen here. While the commentary may not be the best, and there is if course error in any measurement made, the point I’m trying to illustrate, that we often see elevated temperatures near man-made structures and clearings that don’t happen in natural landscape seems to be well shown by the photography. – Anthony
“The UN Meeting in Bali in 2007 missed critical data on climate change and building performance. ”
Well, naturally. It’s not as if facts were on their agenda.
Also, this is very interesting, but what is the alternative? Are building materials and construction techniques available to deal with this? This is the only suggestion I saw of that in the article… “Landscaping and responsible paint finishes could deal with this heat problem, taller trees would provide shade cover with zero emissions.”
…looks like I might need to apologize to Dr.Chu for making fun of his “paint the roofs white” idea.
This seems odd…
http://www.thermoguy.com/images/urban_heat_generation_macs_store_thermal.jpg
Why are the building walls so hot, when the road asphalt is barely warm?
4years,
It’s probably early in the morning. Those photos should probably be time stamped.
Look at the original. There are long shadows, which means the sun is setting or rising. The ground probably is not getting much radiation, but the vertical wall is catching direct sun.
Whats the area of the planet covered by roads and buildings? 1%
The heat island effect from this is not going to have a measurable effect on climate.
De afforestation is another matter we are cutting down 7 million hectares a year nett. and in the last 200 years or so have lost 20% of the worlds forest cover reducing it to 4 billion hectares today.
There will be consequences from that.
http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/Forest/2006.htm
“after a forest fire interfaced with this city.” (Translated from the original Farsi by Korean immigrants living on Taiwan. )
Now that is truly an original way to look at it.
The grammar nazi in me is grimacing, wondering what became of all those dollars I contributed to the nation’s educational system.
Good thing Anthony’s images aren’t like, you know, copyrighted or anything, huh?
So, houses are causing global warming! They’re right, we should all live in caves 🙂
HasItBeen4YearsYet? (23:43:40) :
This seems odd…
http://www.thermoguy.com/images/urban_heat_generation_macs_store_thermal.jpg
Why are the building walls so hot, when the road asphalt is barely warm?
The series of pictures indicates in some places a demonstration of warmth shortly after sunrise. If you look at the non-IR picture you will see long shadows from the buildings near to the camera. Given the implication of “near sunrise” I would project that this is an East facing building that has had a few hours of sun on the walls, but the shadows have just retreated about 1/3 of the way across the street. Given the higher mass of the road (not a thin skin over insulation, but tons of mass) I would expect it to be heated less than the shell of the building in this context. The walls are also nearly flat on to the sun while the road is more oblique.
Painting buildings and roofs white works. Prior to massive A/C installations, many parts of the LA basin had white houses with white, red tile or light blue roofs. I have seen a historical picture of this era. Very pretty too! This is an example of the ‘classic’ Spanish style:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WattlesMansion02.jpg
and this is a church with a bluish roof:
http://www.oca.org/Images/Directory/photos/oca-we-tarsic.jpg
Since I have a family member who has issues with headaches when the A/C is on, I’ve developed a ‘defense in depth’ approach to heat. One of the most effective things was a roof sprinkler system (pvc pipe near peak, sprinkler heads to cover 80% of roof, duty cycle about 2 min on, 28 off or 58 off on cooler days). When first turned on during a hot day, very significant steam immediately rises…
Second most effective thing? “Drapes” of plastic tarp hung from the eaves from “cup hooks” turned into the rafter stubs. All the radiant heat stops at the tarp and just rises past the edge of the house.
Between these two, most of the time things are just dandy even without an AC running even on very hot days. (I also had “misters” under the eaves that worked very very well, hung from the same cup hooks that hold the christmas lights in winter and now hold the tarps. After adding the tarps, the misters were largely superfluous. ) Controlling radiant heat gain is far more important than anything else in keeping interior temperatures down.
BTW, the tarps are only on the parts that face east (about 1/2, the other half has a tree shading it) and south. North doesn’t matter and the garage covers much of the West. I planted fruit trees to shade the rest of the west face most of the time. B.T. (Before Tarps) I planted Jerusalem Artichokes near the East wall. Worked perfectly and took no maintenance to speak of. Up on time, down at end of season, mow, re-grows from roots next season, nearly indestructible and about 7 feet tall. Lasted 3 or 4 years. Then I got “free range bunnies”. MUNCH! Thus the tarps…
And I can testify due to walking on the roof barefoot to instal antennas and sprinklers that the temps this guy is reporting are not out of line. (His hype is, but not the data). Shingles get hot. Very hot. This may be “by design”.
The backside of composite shingles have a ‘tar band’. This softens / melts on a hot day and glues the top shingle to the one under it. This is to prevent wind lift from removing the shingles later… The directions that come with the shingles tell you not to install in cold / wind, but rather at a time when the sun can assure this ‘gluing’ happens. A call to a shingle maker would like give a melt temperature spec.
It would be interesting to get differential IR photos of the side facing away from the hot wall, as in the first picture up top and the side facing the hot wall. The delta Temp ought to be visible / measurable and would give a clear indication of the order of magnitude of any problem.
The problem with looking at land usage impact is that if you do, it accounts for a fairly large portion of the last century’s change. That reduces how much CO2 could be resposible for. Can’t be having that.
Lindsay H (01:13:10) :
Whats the area of the planet covered by roads and buildings? 1%
The heat island effect from this is not going to have a measurable effect on climate.
True for satellite averages. For surface measures the majority of detectors are in heat island regions as Anthony painstakingly records. So the effect is large.
Quote Lindsay H : “Whats the area of the planet covered by roads and buildings? 1%
The heat island effect from this is not going to have a measurable effect on climate.”
——————————-
Yes, but IF the majority of temperature measurements come from that 1% then the politicians can cause a major amount of destruction in response to the false data gained therefrom.
Quote Lindsay H : “De afforestation is another matter we are cutting down 7 million hectares a year nett. and in the last 200 years or so have lost 20% of the worlds forest cover reducing it to 4 billion hectares today.
There will be consequences from that.”
——————————————–
I agree Lindsay. I know it is not scientific, but as an experiment I used google earth and span the planet, closed my eyes and randomly stopping the planet I zoomed in on whichever location I had stopped the spin on. Finding somewhere with signs of human life was very very rare. Most of the time it was the ocean, occasionally I would land on desert or forest or mountains, but almost never on a city.
People who spend all their time in cities and travelling from one city to another by plane, can easily be fooled into believing that the earth has been massively effected by mankind. It has not as yet. Yes there are massive areas where there is massive pollution locally, but it is not a global issue, yet. As population grows, then the chemical waste we produce and the natural resources we consume are going to have an increasingly negative effect on our biosphere. We will eventually get to the point where the biosphere is incapable of adapting and recycling our damage to it fast enough to remain a viable biosphere for human inhabitation.
Before that happens we need to urgently establish the genuine threats to our biosphere and work tirelessly to eliminate those human based threats, in terms of ending and preventing chemical and genetic pollution of the biosphere. By genetic pollution, I refer to genetically modifications of organisms that are grown without sufficient safeguards to prevent artificial genetic alterations from “leaking” or “escaping” into nature. For example, there is some compelling evidence that genetically modified crops *might* be partially responsible for colony collapse disorder in bees.
We need to address the massive destruction of ancient forests and the massive chemical and genetic pollution before we start trying to create an artificial stasis of natural gasses in the atmosphere. (a stasis that has never occurred naturally at any time in the past). The whole unproven AGW distraction could be catastrophic for life on our planet over the coming centuries if it is allowed to take precedents over the REAL destruction happening in our biosphere…
So this is news?
I also have a black car and the AC doesn’t work at the moment.
Here in the UK we WANT this to happen for 10 months of the year.
What seems crazy is that the building design spec. is for 92ºF. This seems to show amazing ignorance on the part of the architects (or regualtors)(maybe they use computer models and don’t get out much). Then again maybe it’s just a case of doing it on the cheap.
Reinforces what the Anthony has been saying for ages now about UHI., though.
How much bailout/research grant money are these guys touting for, I wonder?
Houses keeping us warm! Whatever next?
I really think heat island effect could explain a large part of the global temperature anomaly.
Asphalt and houses represent 1% of the earth surface. This is not much but this tiny surface is radiating so much more than “natural” surfaces, that it could cause a temperature anomaly of less than a degree.
That’s not a large anomaly, but after all, that’s the anomaly we have now isn’t it?
IMO “global warming” is caused by natural change in climate (mostly from sun), and heat island effect (first it influences the measures, and it really causes an anomaly too)
And the best part… solutions exist!
IR reflecting coating, transparent, is already produced and can be added to asphalt and all coatings used in housings. Alternative pavement for pedestrians which store rain water like foam and keep cool under the sun exist too. etc…
I have an infrared thermometer — point it at something (a few inches or many feet away) and it tells the temperature (C or F). I spent some money for an accurate one. I use it around our rather large house (you don’t want to know our monthly heating bill) to check insulation, heating, cooling, etc.
I get similar results on outside surfaces in both winter and summer.
On a snowy, cloudless cold winter day, for example, the roof where sun hits it measures 35 to 40F hotter than the air and the shaded roof.
During the summer, the grass in the sun is cool. Nearby sidewalks, wooden decks are 30 to 40F hotter in the sun. Fun to watch the effect of a fast moving cloud shadow — the temperature drops substantially. Didn’t try the summer roof yet.
Disclaimer: Though the instrument is accurate, the measurements were random and infrequent — so, its unscientific.
Anyhow, its obvious that Urban Heat Island effect exists and can potentially have a huge effect — certainly enough to account for a degree or so of air temperature and maybe much more.
#1 – Quote Lindsay H : “De afforestation is another matter we are cutting down 7 million hectares a year nett. and in the last 200 years or so have lost 20% of the worlds forest cover reducing it to 4 billion hectares today.
There will be consequences from that.”
________________________________________________________________________
You mistakenly (sp?) assume when they (forrestry/lumber companies) cut down a tree, they just leave the plot & go find another area to cut. That is as correct as farmers harvesting a single field of grain then going to find another field to havest.
No, the companies own that land and they understand they have to re-plant the trees for them to re-grow to re-havest at a later date. Trees, like wheat, corn and other farm products, are a renewable resource when they are re-planted after harvesting, which they are. So, here in the US at least, the only ‘consequences from that’ will be more trees to soak up CO2, cool the atmosphere through evaprotranspiration, and provide jobs for lumber companies and products for people.
#2 – “Pine Beetles have devastated 50,000 sq. miles of BC Forests and the response has been clear cutting. Look at the heat of the cut block…”
________________________________________________________________
If the Pine Beetles are killing the forrests in BC, the forrested area of the dead trees is going to be hot whether or not the trees are there. The trees only provide the cooling effect if they are alive and the evaprotranspiration is in progress. Once the tree dies and stays in place, the green is gone and the tree surface becomes hot with the shining of the sun. So, whether the tree is there or not, that plot of land will be warmer than the surrounding ‘live’ area of forrest. Harvest the trees, make them into a usefull product & re-plant new trees in that area…duhhh.
Reguards,
Jeff
Some quick comments
1. Themography relies on receiving IR over a band of frequencies. The emissivity of the object therefore affects the temperature (set by the surface finish/coating). Note the MMTS case is 6C cooler than its post. Corrections for emissivity can be incorporated into the thermal camera, but for a complex picture this is infeasible for all surfaces
2. Reflective objects can reflect the temperature of the heat source or surrounding air/sky and therefore may have no correspondance to the bodies temperature
3. MMTS is at same temperature as shaded wall (noting 1 above)
4. MMTS screen prevents radiation from hot wall (and direct solar radiation) affecting internal air temp.
5 houses – (noting 1 and 2 above) radiation hitting house will be radiated/convected back if it is white or black – radiation in must equal radiation out)
6 A flat surface will receive the same radiation as a same xsectional area plant. The plant will use some energy for growth but will have a much greater surface area than the flat surface. i.e. there will be less watts/sq and therefore less temperature rise. A plant will transpire to cool also.
Mike
REPLY: Yes the idea of the shield is in fact to shield it from the IR coming from the wall. But the problem is not the IR itself, but the air heated by the IR emission from the wall, which I cannot photograph. The shield is designed to block IR and direct sunlight but allow free air passage. – Anthony
The photos feature many properties around Kelowna, in the Okanagan valley region of British Columbia Canada. This is a warm, dry region in a narrow north-south valley, approximately 50 degrees north latitude. Prevailing winds are light and from the west.
I think some commenters miss the point about the effect of nearby structures on temperature and measurement. Whether or not man-made surfaces affect the global heat balance is debatable and largely irrelevant. What matters is that the surfaces affect temperature MEASUREMENTS, which are limited in number and which purport to describe the state of the planet as a whole. If you measure temperatures only beside an anomalous source of heat, you will conclude that the world is heating up anomalously.
Roger Pielke Sr. diligently reminds us that land use change drives local climate climate change. Replacing a low albedo forest with higher albedo crops contributes to local cooling, not warming.
Save the planet? If you think you have to, CO2 should be the least of your worries.
“We are reporting solar exposure as an unprecedented environmental emergency to authorities because we are treating the symptoms with ozone depletion, massive GHG emissions, electrical waste, acid rain, mercury emissions, etc. We are not discussing the extreme heat generated by buildings”
Was it written on 1st April? This has to be a joke surely!!
The most interesting image to me is
http://www.thermoguy.com/images/before_sunrise_thermal.jpg . The morning air temp is 59.4F, the roof temp is 39.8F.
I’ve long thought it would be fun to take a different tack from the solar heating crowd and look into radiational cooling. I envision something like an aluminum spherical basin using about a third of the sphere’s surface pointing upwards. The surface would be painted with a high emissivity paint, e.g. a black that is black at infrared wavelengths, and everything mounted so that the cool surface would cool air underneath and store the cool in water or rocks for use during the next day. (Pedantically, the goal would be to radiate the heat stored in the thermal mass over night.)
I’m not sure what sort of practical covers might be useful to keep any wind out and allow IR out, perhaps a cylindrical wall with low mass and high reflectance surface would be adequate.
A conical basin would be easier to construct and probably work just as well.
It would have to deal with a little dew (add it to the thermal mass!). Alternative designs might emphasize collecting dew or use channels on a hillside to let cool air drain down to the thermal mass. My wife and I bought some south facing land on a New Hampshire mountainside last year, so it’s a tempting thing to play with.
I can’t resist these comments on the article’s text:
“The heat is over twice atmospheric temperature….” 41F to 92.7F. Grr. It’s a good thing he doesn’t use Celcius.
“The air conditioners requires the electrical generation of 1000s of watts per hour….” Arrghh! This engineer would rather hear Vogon poetry!
This post reminds me of how much energy could be conserved by using passive cooling and heating techniques that have been in the architectural knowlege base for decades. Aggressive conservation measures I believe would be the least disruptive first step toward curbing emissions and I don’t know why this isn’t being pushed hard. During the oil embargo of the ’70s lights were turned off at night at car dealerships, etc.
Ironically…..
thefordprefect (05:21:55) :
3. MMTS is at same temperature as shaded wall (noting 1 above)
4. MMTS screen prevents radiation from hot wall (and direct solar radiation) affecting internal air temp.
The wall is radiating the MMTS on the other side from the photos view point.
Anthony should have photographed the MMTS from the radiating wall. Better luck next time?
REPLY: Yes the idea of the shield is in fact to shield it from the IR coming from the wall. But the problem is not the IR itself, but the air heated by the IR emission from the wall, which I cannot photograph. The shield is designed to block IR and direct sunlight but allow free air passage. – Anthony
Ric Werme (05:40:30) :
worth a read:
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/22792
Evaporative cooling has been around for generations!