Claim: 'climate change' caused more deaths in Stockholm – but it may be due to flawed methodology

This is one of those publications where I look at what was done in the paper and just shake my head in disbelief. For starters, according to the data listed in the SI, the supposed extra deaths due to climate change manifesting itself as increased summer temperatures came from model output; they didn’t actually have health services data/coroner data that showed causes of death. They simply assume the model output is valid. And there are other problems, such as their choice of temperature base period of 1900-1929 to compare against the study period of 1980-2009. See more at the end of the post, I need some reader assistance – Anthony

Press Release from Umeå University

Climate change increased the number of deaths

[2013-10-21] The increased temperatures caused by ongoing climate change in Stockholm, Sweden between 1980 and 2009 caused 300 more premature deaths than if the temperature increase did not take place. In Sweden as a whole, it would mean about 1,500 more premature deaths, according to a study from researchers at Umeå University published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Global warming does not only give a general increase in temperature, but it also increases the frequency, intensity and duration of heat waves. Previous studies have shown that these changes are associated with increased mortality, especially during extremely hot periods. It also speculated that mortality associated with extreme cold could decrease as a result of a warmer climate.

Researchers at the Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, conducted a study in which they examined the extent to which mortality associated with extreme temperatures occurred in Stockholm during the period 1980-2009. In order to assess what can be regarded as extreme temperatures, they compared temperature data from this period with the corresponding data for the period 1900 to 1929.

The study shows that the number of periods of extremely high temperatures increased significantly over the period 1980-2009, all of which contributed to about 300 more deaths during these heat waves than had been the case without climate change.

“Mortality associated with extreme heat during the relevant period was doubled, compared to if we had not had some climate change,” says Daniel Oudin Åström, PhD-student in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, who conducted the study.  “Furthermore, we saw that even though the winters have become milder, extremely cold periods occurred more often, which also contributed to a small increase in mortality during the winter.”

Although the increase in the number of deaths due to extreme temperature overall is quite small over a 30 year period, Daniel Oudin Åström emphasises that the current study only includes the Stockholm area. If the method had been used in the whole of Sweden, or Europe, the increase in the number of deaths would have been much larger. For Sweden as a whole, it is estimated that about 1,500 extra deaths due to climate change had occurred over the past 30 years.

In addition, the researchers only examined mortality in really extreme temperatures. Therefore, the number of premature deaths caused by less extreme temperatures is not included in the study.

Daniel Oudin Åström says that despite the long-standing debate about climate change, Swedes have not changed their attitude and willingness to protect themselves against extreme temperatures.

“The study findings do not suggest any adaptation of the Swedes when it comes to confronting the increasingly warmer climate, such as increased use of air conditioning in elderly housing,” says Daniel Oudin Åström. “It is probably because there is relatively little knowledge in regards to increased temperatures and heat waves on health.”

###

Here is the paper:

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2022.html

Attributing mortality from extreme temperatures to climate change in Stockholm, Sweden

Daniel Oudin Åström, Bertil Forsberg, Kristie L. Ebi & Joacim Rocklöv

Nature Climate Change (2013) doi:10.1038/nclimate2022 

Abstract:

A changing climate is increasing the frequency, intensity, duration and spatial extent of heat waves. These changes are associated with increased human mortality during heat extremes. At the other end of the temperature scale, it has been widely speculated that cold-related mortality could decrease in a warmer world. We aim to answer a key question; the extent to which mortality due to temperature extremes in Stockholm, Sweden during 1980–2009 can be attributed to climate change that has occurred since our reference period (1900–1929). Mortality from heat extremes in 1980–2009 was double what would have occurred without climate change. Although temperature shifted towards warmer temperatures in the winter season, cold extremes occurred more frequently, contributing to a small increase of mortality during the winter months. No evidence was found for adaptation over 1980–2009

===============================================================

More than a couple of things stand out that I’m looking into.

1. A paper they cite by Pat Michaels and Chipp Knappenberger found only one US city that had any mortality increase due to heat, and that was Seattle. Michaels opines that this was likely due to the city being such a cool climate that very little cooling infrastructure was in place in the city. This might also be true of the high latitude city of Stockholm.

2. A cursory check of climate data for Stockholm from NASA GISS shows that something curious happened around 1930. Notice the big step change then:

Stockholm_data_GISTEMP

Source: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=645024640000&dt=1&ds=12

Note also how much more variance there is after 1930. To me this looks like a classic station move signal, though it could be related to something as simple as a building going up/torn down nearby that affected wind patterns near the station. The fact that they use 1900-1929 as the base period for the model comparison is troubling, since it seems to be the coolest, least variable part of the station record.

Also, for some reason, GISS can’t seem to get data updated for Stockholm past 1994, even though the station continues to produce data. I’ve asked Dr. Gavin Schmidt about this, but he has ignored my request. Perhaps he’s too busy on Twitter to bother.

Waymarking notes of the station:

“When the observatory was renovated and extended in 1875 the thermometer was moved to a metal cage outside a window on the first floor. The current observation site, from 1960, is only about 10 metres away. These few small relocations make Stockholm’s long observation series one of the world’s absolute best. The high quality of the series has recently been documented in several scientific studies.”*

*From Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute SMHI website.

With it being supposedly “…one of the world’s absolute best.” you’d think NASA GISS would want to get current data for it. It’s a travesty they have not updated it since 1994:

Stockholm_GISTEMP

Source: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/find_station.cgi?dt=1&ds=12&name=stockholm

3. The authors cite the shift in temperature distribution during summer as being proof of more heat which would translate into greater mortality(see figure 2 below).

Figure 2: Temperature distribution of 2-day moving average of mean temperatures during summer months.

Temperature distribution of 2-day moving average of mean temperatures during summer months.

Grey distribution, 1900–1929; black distribution, 1980–2009.

Problem is, this data they are plugging into their mortality model appears to come from a single weather station, what I believe is the Stockholm Observatory, though they don’t actually name the station dataset in the paper that I’ve found. The Stockholm Observatory has all sorts of microsite issues that they have not accounted for, such as a brick building nearby and wind shading from rows of vegetation.

Stockholm_observatory_weather_station1

Image from Waymarking.com, taken July 30th, 2010 – more here

Here is the aerial view from Google Earth using the lat/lon provided by Waymarking.com You can see how wind sheltered the station is, especially during summer with all those broadleaf trees around it. One wonders what the site looked like in 1929 and if the weather station was in the same location.

stockholm_weather_station2

The microsite issues coupled with whatever happened in 1930 (which looks like a station move to me) could easily explain a good portion of summer month temperature increases from 1980-2009 compared to 1900-1929

4. There’s other cherry picking going on; they cite Stockholm as being representative of the changes in Sweden, yet study no other cities or stations to test that theory. They are using mean temperatures, rather than looking at Tmax. Mean temperatures are sensitive to effects of microsite bias which mostly show up in Tmin. If heat waves are really increasing in Stockholm, affecting mortality, it should show up in Tmax, yet they didn’t test for this that I can find.

I think this paper is seriously flawed because the authors assume the temperature data is “near perfect” and chose an inappropriate base period which exacerbates the comparison differential. Whether this is incompetence or cherry picking remains to be seen.

I’m working on locating metadata for a detailed history of the station in Stockholm to test out what I have observed, but I need help.

Anyone reading who is familiar with the station and the meteorological service there, I ask that you weigh in with a comment below. I need the help since I’m not well versed in Swedish. Any help will be appreciated.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

189 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 24, 2013 12:32 am

“In addition, the researchers only examined mortality in really extreme temperatures. Therefore, the number of premature deaths caused by less extreme temperatures is not included in the study.”
*
In other words, they’re gearing up for another, “It’s worse than we thought!”
I’m sure help with this will be along very quickly. This is getting ridiculous. Models coming up with a number is not data. Seriously, does the entire population have to rise up in anger for this to end? I know these alarmists can’t let go – and this is probably the closest they’ll get for a while to global domination (so I DO understand it) – but have they no sense of self-preservation? Do we have to prize power from their cold dead fingers? Really?!

Surfer Dave
October 24, 2013 12:37 am

I like the way they neatly cut out the other side of the situation by saying that even though the winters are milder, the “global warming” causes more intense cold and so winter mortality is up to!
Clearly that had a preconceived “answer” and have constructed their “research” to confirm it. I remember a British study from a few years ago that said that under a warmer climate there would be increased mortality in summer but the reduction in winter mortality was greater and the net result was fewer deaths overall from extreme temperatures

Alan Robertson
October 24, 2013 1:04 am

Compare this model output with the known tens of thousands of deaths in Great Britain which are attributed to attempts to mitigate climate change.

Niels
October 24, 2013 1:04 am

Why use GISS Temp? KNMI Climate Explorer is much better, and the full (non blended) Stockholm series from 1756-2011 is found here: http://climexp.knmi.nl/ecatemp.cgi?id=someone@somewhere&WMO=10&STATION=STOCKHOLM&extraargs=
Stockholm is NOT a representative station for Sweden. The variability in temperature in Stockholm is different from the stations in the north (eg. Haparanda) and the much more, humid and mild maritime influenced climate in the southwest of the country (eg. Gothenburg).

October 24, 2013 1:18 am

A thermometer moved to a metal cage outside an upstairs window in 1875?
In other words, you can disregard all readings from that one.

LdB
October 24, 2013 1:19 am

Perhaps we should give these climate pseudo-scientists a copy of Richard Feynman’s cargo cult speech to read (http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html)
Then get them to repeat the Manta “Correlation does not imply causation”
Seriously if this is the level Climate sciences has dropped to then it isn’t a science it’s a cult.
I have no problem if the pseudo-science whack jobs that wrote the paper used claims like
– “Given the statistical correlation we suggest there may be a link”
– “There is a strong indication that there may be a link”
– “We have a theory that there is a link between … ”
But no these pseudo-science whack jobs framed there paper to this question:
We aim to answer a key question; the extent to which mortality due to temperature extremes in Stockholm, Sweden during 1980–2009 can be attributed to climate change that has occurred since our reference period (1900–1929).
So where are the autopsy reports?
I can give you viable answers for the Correlation and just taking topical media stories of late
– People are drinking far more high sugar drinks
– People are eating a lot more McDonalds and there are more McDonalds stores
– People are stressed and working longer in summer because of the GFC
I am sure we could make a list of thousands if we really wanted to.
The whole point to Richard Feynman’s speech was to remind scientists they have an obligation to science integrity which these climate pseudo-scientists fail.

gopal panicker
October 24, 2013 1:20 am

life expectancy at birth in my home state of Kerala, India…is in the high seventies now…its much warmer than Sweden…i wonder why all the people are not dropping dead from the heat.

DirkH
October 24, 2013 1:36 am

Politically correct pseudoscience from the EU.
The rent seekers who get a lavish wage to occupy seats in formerly scientific institutions plunder the public purse and contribute to the downfall of Scandinavia.
It was a nice place when I visited Stockholm 14 years ago. Since that time the place has gone to hell. Looks like they’re bent on accelerating.

Gareth Phillips
October 24, 2013 1:37 am

Lord I could cringe. We on the warmist side do our best to spread the word that there is a problem in how we treat our environment and that humans are effecting climate change, and we are continually undermined by idiotic studies like this. Are you sure these guys are not working for the skeptic side of the climate debate?

Jimbo
October 24, 2013 1:55 am

The increased temperatures caused by ongoing climate change in Stockholm, Sweden between 1980 and 2009 caused 300 more premature deaths than if the temperature increase did not take place.

Are 300 extra deaths over almost 30 year statistically significant? Why did they choose 1900 to 1929? What if they chose 1910 to 1939?
When it’s warm during summer people are more likely to go out, drink alcohol and get into problems and sometimes meet their maker. As the world has warmed Sweden’s suicide rate has been declining, therefore global warming means fewer Swedish suicides? Hey, we are all allowed to speculate.

In Sweden as a whole, it would mean about 1,500 more premature deaths, according to a study from researchers at Umeå University…

Did it mean 1,500 more premature deaths in Sweden as a whole?
Grrrrrrr.

Magnus C
October 24, 2013 2:02 am

The official temperature record from Stockholm can be found here:
http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/temperatur/1.2847
The warm years are about as warm now as they were in the 1930-1940 period.

October 24, 2013 2:03 am

The climate is the same as it was before. There hasn’t been any deaths — none — because of the phantom climate change.
And by the way, I’ve previously commented here for us skeptics to branch out and bring the argument to mainstream and science sites. And I specifically called out phys.org as a site for us to join and be heard.
Guess what? Now Michael Mann is getting irked by skeptical comments on phys,org, and is clearly trying to get phys.org to join the likes of the LA Times in censoring skeptics.
M Mann tweeted: Wow–the comment thread on this @physorg_com #climatechange piece sure smells like #Koch: http://phys.org/news/2013-10-people-dont-high-climate.html
Interesting, MMann has picked on a thread that atypically does have more skeptics than warmists, but usually it’s the opposite. Now I say join the fight at phys.org and elsewhere. Mann is aware of the “damage” we are doing, so he is making a cowardly squawk. If they go ahead and admit that they cannot meet us one on one in argument, and instead employ Gestapo censorship tactics to silence the opposing point of view, then we’ve won, and we she should make a lot of noise about it. And there’s reason to continue to highlight the LA Times decision to silence skeptics. Ultimately, these type of censorship decisions will boomerang, as the public at large will realize the abhorrent hypocrisy of the supposed free but leftist press, and even more of a spotlight will be put on the astonishingly weak case presented by the fear mongering Chicken Littles.

Pethefin
October 24, 2013 2:03 am

The SMHI has three stations in Stockholm but I could not yet find any information on them before 1961, whereafter the data is available here:
http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/2.1102
unfortunately this service seems to be available on in Swedish. You can download either daily or monthly data (in the parameter window “dygnsvis” = daily). The station you are looking at seems to be this:
Klimatnummer: 9821
WMO-nummer: 2485
Latitud: 59.34 grader (dec)
Longitud: 18.06 grader (dec)
RakX: 6582250 m
RakY: 1627960 m
Nuv. stationshöjd: 44 m (meaning current station height)
I’ll look deeper into this when I have time…

Another Gareth
October 24, 2013 2:08 am

“One wonders what the site looked like in 1929 and if the weather station was in the same location.”
On the overhead view there is an open space to the North East of the site. According to this web page (and having used google to translate it) that open space had buildings on it in 1928. The page has an old photo and a more recently taken one showing the difference.
The building with a rotunda to the north of the site is Stockholm Public Library which was opened in 1928. Additional buildings were added to the library in the 30s and 50s.
The observatory and weather station are at the top of a hill. With the changes in buildings and open space around the bottom of the hill would this change the conditions at the top?

Lena Krantz
October 24, 2013 2:22 am

The data comes from a single station, in the “Observatiorielunden”. Here is the best site. You can download the entire series. Go to “Download” on the right side.
http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/temperatur/1.2847

Lena Krantz
October 24, 2013 2:28 am

Sorry, that would be go to “Ladda ner” on the right side.

N_C
October 24, 2013 2:29 am

Here you can see the city evolve by comparison of historical maps. The observatory is found in the green of the upper left corner of the map.
http://www.stockholmskallan.se/Jamfor-kartor/

petermue
October 24, 2013 2:33 am

And a graph of storks vs birth rate also shows a correlation.
Turns out there’s also a correlation between number of pirates and global temperature.
Seems like just another desperate call for MORE FUNDS!

Nik
October 24, 2013 2:35 am

I did not see any reference to the overall death rate of Sweden. That should be available in the official national statistics and would be the clearest indicator of “extra” deaths.
Most alarming is that these people will be unleashed on the world armed with PhDs.

Greg
October 24, 2013 2:35 am

For me , one of the most striking features of the GISS Stockholm is the 1939-1944 dip.
Is that a measure of the the local UHI effect in the city?
Swedan was a neutral country in WWII but was presumably still hit the stanglehold the war had on energy supplies.

wayne
October 24, 2013 2:38 am

Oh my god, there are people that are actually going to discuss this paper, analyze it.
The very maximum in Stockholm on their own charts in the dead of summer is near ≈27°C (≈80°F) and they are speaking of having “heat waves”, “extremely hot periods”, and more people assumed dying from a one or so Celsius increase over a century, from that? That 80°F, or their maximum summer temperature, is what I call the perfect comfortable temperature and I wish it was that year round.
I’m floored. I’m amazed. I’m shocked that anyone would do anything but immediately ridicule it and toss that peer-reviewed paper in the trash where it belongs along with the Nature journal that publishes such trash.
So they didn’t even check to find out what was causing the additional deaths, huh? Maybe for one portion crime.
Maybe since their median mid-summer temperature is 15°C (59°F) I would guess one fraction of the increase in deaths is people actually enjoying the abnormal summer warmth, drownings, boating accidents, motorcycle accidents, mountain climbing, etc, you know, taking risks instead of staying inside where it is warm and safe. Look at the dangerous things we do today compared to 80 years ago when it gets warm. We do drive now too, fast. Did they take this into account? Doubt it but it is pay-walled as usual and this paper is simply unadulterated propaganda as usual. I’ve got to save this one for the best perfect example.

October 24, 2013 2:44 am

Anthony
Have you tried http://rimfrost.no/ for Stockholm temperature?
See the graph here: http://www.sportsys.nu/klima/data/hovedsteder/stockholm.gif
Regards, Agust.

October 24, 2013 2:46 am

These researchers didn’t read the study of Keatinge e.a. which showed that cold related mortality is about 10 times stronger than heat related mortality. Moreover, the heat related extra mortality is compensated with a reduction in mortality in the months after the heat wave, but that is not the case for a cold snap. Thus the heat related mortality is mostly from people that would have died anyway a few weeks to a few months later:
http://www.bmj.com/content/321/7262/670 for Europe
and
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/155/1/80.abstract for the USA

Jimbo
October 24, 2013 2:47 am

Is that a tarmac road next to the weather station?
Is it just possible that they looked at other periods to compare? Is it possible that when they looked they could not find what they were looking for and shifted for their preferred period? Is it possible they began their study looking or the global warming increased death link? Perish the thought, I am 100% confident whey did none of the above. / HEAVY SARC.

Morgan in Sweden
October 24, 2013 2:48 am

I happen to live in Stockholm and Observatorielunden (As seen in the picture above) is the classic site and there are some really old records from this site, but it has been moved several times in the past. I have a report done by Moberg about the temperature records from this site. It is a lot of guesswork. This is from the report:
“During 1756-1875 the thermometer was hung in the free air outside a north-facing
window on the second floor of the old astronomical observatory building in
Stockholm. No detailed description is available on this site.
During 1876-1960 the thermometer was placed outside a north-facing window
on the first floor of the old astronomical observatory building in Stockholm.
A window-screeen was in use since 1878.
During 1961- summer 2006 the thermometer was placed in a SMHI-screen
(Stevenson-type screen) about ten metres north-east of the former position.
Since summer 2006, a platinum resistance thermometer in a modern cylindrical
screen close to the SMHI-screen replaced the mercury thermometer in the
SMHI-screen.”
In modern time the Stockholm temperature is reported from Stockholm-Bromma airport, not Observatorielunden. BTW Stockholm-Bromma Airport did open in 1930 and that might be the reason why there is a change in 1930.
The clame is of course preposterous. There are very few days each year in Stockholm when the temperature reaches 30 degree C. In 2013 there were none. Above 25 is also rare, a few days each year, this summer maybe 5 days might have been less.

1 2 3 8