Some supporting research conducted at New York City follows the news item below. h/t to WUWT reader Phil (not the grouchy one) -A

Heat islands: Cities heat quickly, cool slowly
By DEEPTI HAJELA
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) — Hot town, summer in the city? No kidding.
The high temperatures blanketing the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions of the country are making many people miserable, but those in New York City, Philadelphia and other dense, built-up areas are getting hit with the heat in a way their counterparts in suburbs and rural areas aren’t.
Cities absorb more solar energy during the day and are slower to release it after the sun sets, making for uncomfortable nights and no real relief from the heat. And because they haven’t cooled down as much overnight, mornings are warmer and the thermometer goes right back up when the sun starts beating down the next day.
Scientists have known for years about so-called heat islands, urban areas that are hotter than the less-developed areas around them.
Cities are just “not well designed to release that summertime heat,” said William Solecki, geography professor at Hunter College and director of the City University of New York’s Institute for Sustainable Cities.
The lack of nighttime relief can make the daytime high temperatures even more difficult for people to take as the days pass and the heat continues, he said.
That’s “where you start to have real problems, if your body’s not cooling down,” Solecki said. “You’re not getting that break.”
Deaths blamed on the heat included a 92-year-old Philadelphia woman whose body was found Monday and a homeless woman found lying next to a car Sunday in suburban Detroit.
The heat-islands effect is significant in the East because “we have a large population living in heavily built-up areas with lots of concrete and lots of steel, good absorbers of heat,” National Weather Service spokesman Sean Potter said.
full story here at Tampa Bay Online
=================================================
Here is some supporting research from NASA (not NASA GISS).
Keeping New York City “Cool” is the Job of NASA’s “Heat Seekers”
Jan. 30, 2006
The “heat is on” in New York City, whether it’s summer or winter. This is due to a phenomenon called the urban heat island effect that causes air temperatures in New York City and other major cities to be warmer than in neighboring suburbs and rural areas. And, in a big city, warmer air temperatures can impact air quality, public health and the demand for energy.
Image to right: A thermal satellite image of New York City captured by NASA’s Landsat satellite on August 14, 2002 at 10:30 a.m., shows the locations of the warmest air temperatures as seen in red. The blue indicates areas with cooler air temperatures. Click on image to enlarge. Credit: NASA
Recently, several innovative approaches developed by scientists, public officials, environmental activists, community organizations and others have been put in place to take a bite out of the Big Apple’s temperature problem. NASA researchers, using NASA satellite observations, weather pattern data and computer models, have recently assessed how well those strategies are working. Their study results will be discussed during the 2006 American Meteorological Society’s annual meeting in Atlanta, Ga., Jan. 29 through Feb. 2.
“We need to help public officials find the most successful ways to reduce the heat island effect in New York. With ever-increasing urban populations around the world, the heat island effect will become even more significant in the future,” said Stuart Gaffin, an associate research scientist at Columbia University, New York, and a co-author of the new NASA study. “The summertime impacts are especially intense with the deterioration of air quality, because higher air temperatures increase ozone. That has health effects for everyone. We also run an increased risk of major heat waves and blackouts as the heat island effect raises demand for electricity.”
In cities, the urban heat island effect is caused by the large number of buildings, sidewalks and other non-natural surfaces that limit the amount of land covered with vegetation like grass and trees. Land surfaces with vegetation offer high moisture levels that cool the air when the moisture evaporates from soil and plants.
Image to left: This image indicates case study areas in New York City used in the NASA study, and weather stations. Click on image to enlarge. Credit: NASA
In large cities, land surfaces with vegetation are relatively few and are replaced by non-reflective, water-resistant surfaces such as asphalt, tar and building materials that absorb most of the sun’s radiation. These surfaces hinder the natural cooling that would otherwise take effect with the evaporation of moisture from surfaces with vegetation. The urban heat island occurrence is particularly pronounced during summer heat waves and at night when wind speeds are low and sea breezes are light. During these times, New York City’s air temperatures can rise 7.2 degrees F higher than in surrounding areas.
In the recent project, NASA researchers set out to recommend ways to reduce the urban heat island effect in New York City. They looked at strategies such as promoting light-colored surfaces such as roofs and pavements that reflect sunlight, planting “urban forests” and creating “living roofs” on top of buildings where sturdy vegetation can be planted and thrive. Using a regional climate computer model, the researchers wanted to calculate how these strategies lower the city’s surface and close-to-surface air temperatures and what the consequences of these strategies would be on New York’s energy system, air quality and the health of its residents.
The researchers conducted a city-wide case study over the summer of 2002 to measure changes in air temperatures. They also used six smaller case studies during the same period in places like Lower Manhattan, the Bronx’s Fordham section, Brooklyn’s Crown Heights section and the Maspeth section of Queens. The areas were chosen for the different ways land is used and their nearness to areas with high electrical use. They also had warmer-than-average near-surface air temperatures called “hot spots” and boasted available spaces to test ways to reduce the urban heat island effect.
“We found that vegetation is a powerful cooling mechanism. It appears to be the most effective tool to reduce surface temperatures,” Gaffin said. “Another effective approach is a man-made approach to cooling by making very bright, high albedo, or reflected light, on roof tops. These light-colored surfaces, best made using white coatings, reflect the sun’s light and thereby, its heat. Interestingly, more area is available to create the lighter surfaces than to add vegetation in a city such as New York.”
This project is being conducted by and funded by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). For more information on the NYSERDA’s Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation, andProtection (EMEP) project, please visit on the Web: http://www.nyserda.org/programs/Environment/EMEP/project/6681_25/6681_25_pwp.asp.
Reference
Rosenzweig, C., W. Solecki, L. Parshall, S. Gaffin, B. Lynn, R. Goldberg, J. Cox, and S. Hodges 2006. Mitigating New York City’s heat island with urban forestry, living roofs, and light surfaces. Presentation at 86th American Meteorological Society Annual Meeting, Jan. 31, 2006, Atlanta, Georgia.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We weren’t so lucky. Yesterday, our paper talked about the heat wave and couldn’t stop themselves from quoting Michael Mann, who is God to them. Of course Mann played up the global warming thing and said that this is just a “taste” of things to come.
Wow Anthony – your message has got across. Instead of global warming warnings, journalists are acknowledging and explaining the urban heat island effect. Congratulations on changing the discourse – a scientific triumph for you!
REPLY: Thanks but I doubt it, if Seth Borenstein had been assigned to the story, it would have been far different. -A
Okay, but I tend to see a lot of commentary about the failure of climate scientists whenever it’s cold (“Climate Skeptic”) and generally news coverage to that effect.
Wouldn’t it be great if we all just played fair and admitted that weather is different than climate…
Well I don’t disagree with the heating part of it; but hot things do not cool slower than cold things; so nyet on their slow nightime cooling theory.
The trouble is most of those city buildings run their Temperature control systems all the time; and you often find those buildings with their lights on all night.
The building I am working in right now; has both the heating and the air conditioning running all the time.
If they let those office buildings cool down at night; like they would of their own accord; it simply takes too long to bring them up to the normal level in the morning; so they simply don’t let them cool down.
A very few office buildings have intelligent window designs. A good example is the Monsanto “Gold Brick” building in the suburbs of St Louis Mo (out by the Airport); which has gold plated windows; that reflect heat from the outside of the glass.
Too many buildings simply use absorptive tinted glass, which means the glass itself gets hot; and then reradiates inside the building.
But those buildings in the big cities cool slowly because they don’t let them cool.
Joe Romms hates this. Too much truth. His histrionics outburst ommitted the cold weather in San Diego. Even in the plains, large areas are wet and very cool.
The southwest should be only hot and dry.
I have a deck on the west side. In the evening i can feel the heat coming off the brick and imagine what it is like with huge buildings that soak up heat from the sun.
When I drive from the city to the country in the afternoon, my car thermometer drops 4-8 degrees.
Zilla – howdy stranger, you must be new around these parts otherwise you might have seen the phrase “weather is not climate” used a bit, because most folks contributing realise that this is indeed the case and articulate it regularly. By your standards then, we must be a pretty fair-minded bunch – it is great that you have realised it.
Over here in England the weather forecasters are too fond of saying that temperatures will ‘reach a high of….’ meaning that the highest temperature will be, say 28C, in London which is one of the biggest heat sinks of all. Look at the rest of the UK and you’ll see that temperatures are anything up to 5C less.
George,
You say hot things don’t cool more slowly than cooler things, but that’s only true in one sense and not the one which is being talked about. It’s true that a hot object will release more heat and thus cool more than a cooler object, but the question at hand is how soon a given object will cool to a certain temperature (one that is comfortable to humans in this case.) For this question the answer is that a hot object will take longer than a cooler one to reach a given temperature.
Your other points have some validity, but if you work the numbers you’ll likely find the majority of excess heat at night in a city is from more difficult path heat must take to escape from the city rather than absorbing windows or AC venting.
We are approaching the first 90 F. weather in NE Oregon, like the Rattlers in the high rimrock shedding their skins, the Warmists will wiggle from under their wet rock,
and start bleating:Gaia! Algore! Saaave us!….
From Prof. Ross McKitrick’s (University of Guelph) “Response to Independent Climate Change Email Review”:
(http://1488276005495550431-a-1802744773732722657-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/rossmckitrick/McKitrick_ICCER_response1.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7crFNFaDa4re2gBSL1SQzWkUz0CI3-orUA0UrpbzeodWqfMnMzS1279TBIUsZEgqO0CIG8TX_r-IqxVxqmGufJt6JtNISAXg480BiB43I8yjBPaMly4FzvwW7gMWsgZsPlPuZM7HoF25YiG2KmCStTiqyTQwvM62gv7qx-nLPioYWB5wDhsqjrgoraMuuVHXyP-EDUYC0YG6su0tXLtedY7sE1Q54w%3D%3D&attredirects=0)
From Prof. McKitrick’s response (2nd hollow bullet point on page 2):
From the Muir Russell report (http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf) on page 72, paragraphs 12 and 13:
From the Muir Russell report, Footnote 7 on page 72:
It’s July 8th. Yesterday, we turned on the furnace again. I’m wearing my fleece-lined jacket when I go out. Where is all this Global Warming when we need it? It’s a travesty…
Can someone please ask the native Americans how hot it was on Manhattan during the MWP?
George, no!!
Well, what you say may be true, I’m no physicist, but I’ll be dammed if I can get my house cooled off at night this week. With daytime highs of 35C (feels like 43), and nighttime lows of 24C, my bedroom was at 31C last night as I lay there panting like a St. Bernard. I find that my house temperature goes up a 1C step for everyday of a heatwave, and simply does not cool down until the big heat ends (sorry for the metric system folks 🙂
Zilla said at 10:04 am
Wouldn’t it be great if we all just played fair and admitted that weather is different than climate… and:
Peter Plail said at 10:15 am
…“weather is not climate” …
Peter, yes we are a “pretty fair-minded bunch” and that phrase is thrown in a lot around here – but that doesn’t make it correct AND that is different than the phrase “weather is different than climate” which phraseology wise IS technically correct but I’m sure is not Zilla’s meaning.
“Climate” is the term we have agreed on to mean the summarization of “weather” over a period of time and generally over a broader area than what we identify for weather. They are “different” ONLY in that “weather” is what is happening right now all over the world! “Climate” does not happen! The sum of weather (climate) changes ONLY when the weather over the defined period and area changes! “Climate” does not exist. Climate is a figment of the human imagination and if we fall into the AGW trap of thinking it is something differant, something that actually does exist, something “different” from weather, we weaken our position. Without weather there is no climate. Without climate – – well, look out the window…..
They are now skiing Australia. Go there if you want to escape the summer heat. Anyone? Buller, Buller?
http://www.mtbuller.com.au/Winter/Snow-Report/Snowcams
If cities heat quickly and cool slowly they are predestined to be used as solarthermal power plants.
Australia video snow report;
http://www.mtbuller.com.au/video/MtBuller-daily-video.html
Have we heard from Phil Jones on this? Has he called in to explain that, according to his gold plated research, there is no significant urban heat island effect? I just cannot wait to read or hear what he has to say.
Again, from the “weather is not climate” department:
Also, note that official readings apparently only started at the airport during the 1940’s. Before then the station was closer in to Buffalo and Lake Erie (so I’ve heard).
No mention of global warming but a complete acknowledgement of the Urban Heat Island effect.
I know, I know — the models already compensate for UHI. But do the model compensate correctly? We may never know since the raw data isn’t available.
A bit of trivia: In the Southwest US, people sometimes paint their roofs white to avoid absorbing as much heat. A number of years ago, in a neighborhood near an airport, people were asked to paint their roofs black, because the white roofs reflected too much light and made flying more dangerous. We should be careful of employing simplistic widespread solutions to a problem, because they can very easily lead to something else becoming a problem. The alligators don’t always take kindly to draining the swamp.
Dont worry, Yesterday CNN countered this story with their own, adding in global warming.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/07/stone.city.heat.wave/index.html
What’s weird is — we found when putting instruments on the moon back when, the moon and other bodies behaved much the same way — The moon rocks absorbed the heat from the sun during the daylight phase, and gave it up slowly when it got dark. It was as if the rocks stored the heat and released it slowly. It’s a wonder no one has figured that part out. But — Either the moon has a greenhouse, with no atmosphere, or there was something wrong with greenhouse theory — turns out it was a broke theory.
Using the Stefan-Boltmann equations NASA proved there was no such thing as greenhouse effect, very much like what the recent research of Dr Richard Lindzen concluded. Rocks, water and soil store heat, strange as that may be.
There is no better solar heat collector than an asphalt parking lot.
Everybody fights to park alongside the one little ornamental shrub for shade.
Your car seat will burn you.
Pets or kids can not be left in the car.
I’m so glad we have NASA to keep us up to date on these things- my observations were done without satellites or surcharges, so obviously they’re not pee revue.
Will they soon tell us that moslems invented the Garkad Tree?
Well, in the Pacific Northwest it just turned warm after the July 4th long weekend. Up til then, it has been cool and rainy almost constantly since January! Earlier in the winter we were reading all the regular “low snow-pack” stories, predictably tied to “Globaloney”, but now the reservoirs are full and the snowpack in the West in general is above normal. Hardly a peep about it.
Making lemonade out of lemons, weatherwise, I have been baiting my favorite Globaloney-fearmonger at work. She shut up about it for a while, as she complained on and on about the winter lasting into June! And every time she complained I just looked at her and smiled – she knew exactly what I was thinking, so she started doing her complaining out of my hearing – the plan worked! I’ll bet after a week of warm weather, she will be back to her old Gore-worshiping self, though!